BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard

Subject: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 01:51 PM

I would like to get all of your opinions on the plight of Jonathan Pollard, a man who was tried and convicted as an American but was sentenced and punished as a Jew. Pollard was convicted for espionage. He spied for Israel, a friend and ally of the United States. He pleaded guilty in exchange for a lighter sentence, but after a secret memorandum from Casper Weinberger, the judge threw out the deal and sentenced Pollard to a life prison term in solitary confinement. By contrast, people who have spied for the Soviet Union, an enemy of the United states (such as the Walkers), were allowed to walk free after serving only 10 years. Pollard, who has already served 20 years can not get access to the documents needed to appeal his sentence, even though his new lawyers have top security clearance. Do you think this is fair ? SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 02:24 PM

If Israel is our friend and ally, why is she spying on us?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 02:25 PM

I believe that he should have been sentenced and punished as an American. I think it is disgusting that the US let the Israelis grant him citizenship and take him out of the country. If Justice is to be served it will be by punishing the Walkers more, not Pollard less. Giving secrets to a so called ally, is much more worse than giving them to an enemy. We can't have every analyst second guessing their supierors. How could we stop someone from giving secrets to the Saudis, The Egyptians or any of our other allies? If that happens should the spying government be allowed to take the person under their wing and start working on his early release? Special treatment for Israel is wrong and it should stop immediately. Low level analysts have no business deciding what information another country is allowed to have. It is cowardly and foolish to allow so called allies to try to make heroes and martyrs of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 02:58 PM

Jack the Sailor,

I'm afraid that your ignorance of this case has been blinded by your attitude toward Israel.

I believe that he should have been sentenced and punished as an American. I think it is disgusting that the US let the Israelis grant him citizenship and take him out of the country.

Last time I checked, North Carolina was in the United States, not in Israel. Pollard has never been taken out of the country. He's in solitary confinement in the federal prison in Butner, NC.

Special treatment for Israel is wrong and it should stop immediately.

Israel is certainly not receiving any "special treatment" in this case. If anything, as Rabbi Zeller pointed out, Pollard's spying on behalf of Israel, has been dealt with in a much harsher manner than what has been done by spies out to damage the US.

BTW, allies spy on each other all the time. We spy on Canada, Great Britain, Israel, etc. It's part of the realpolitik of the post-WWII world. In most cases, when a spy is caught in another country, he or she is sent home. A typical sentence in a case like this is 3-10 years in prison. Not life.

Pollard's big sin was not that he was spying. The information that he passed to Israel was not terribly significant, or at all harmful to the US. Pollard's big sin is that he's a Jewish American.

The extreme punishment that was dealt to Pollard was to prove to people like you that, despite the close relationship we have with Israel, they receive NO special consideration.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rapparee
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 03:00 PM

Rabbi, I respect you and your learning.

I lived for sixteen years in South Bend, Indiana, where Pollard's father, Morris (an emeritus professor of biology), ran the Lobund Laboratory. Morris Pollard has worked for his son's release or, at least, a reduction to his sentence upon the same premise you make. Morris Pollard is a very, very nice and educated man.

While I cannot support injustice, neither can I support treason. Betraying the secrets of a country, whether or not you are a citizen of that country, is treason to the country you betray. It doesn't matter if the country you supply the secrets TO is a friend or foe.

J. Pollard was entrusted with certain secrets. He supplied those secrets, of his own free will, to Israel. He was convicted of that, and in my opinion his conviction was just and as I read your post you do not dispute that (neither does Morris Pollard).

Whether or not his sentence was just is a different story. If the punishment meted out to the Walkers was less than that given to Pollard, there is injustice. I suggest that the Walkers' punishment be the same as Pollard's.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 03:14 PM

I'm having some difficulty figuring out how this boils down to his being Jewish. Caspar Weinberger's father was Jewish, and Ruth Ginsberg, who is Jewish, was one of the Supreme Court Justices who upheld the sentance when it was appealed. Are you sure there aren't some other factors contributing to the severity of his sentance?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 03:41 PM

I'm afraid that your ignorance of this case has been blinded by your attitude toward Israel.

No, my "ignorance" is in the small details and comes from Rabbi-Sol's assretation that he was being "punished as a jew". And from Pottard's website which seems to be blaming the Sharon governmnet for his confinement.

Does it matter whether he is in Tel Aviv or Tennessee? Previous Israeli governments have had the gall to request his release. They have made him a citizen and offer him haven upon his release. No doubt he will be treated as a hero if he is ever free in Israel. Forget justice, for a moment, think of harm it would do for US security if this were allowed to happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 03:43 PM

tried and convicted as an American but was sentenced and punished as a Jew.

Please explain this Rabbi-Sol.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 03:59 PM

From this quote from Ariel Sharon in Pollard's website, I get the impression that the reason Pollard is still in jail is because the US wants Israel to return the documents and information Pollard stole from the US and gave to Israel, but Israel refuses to do so. My guess is that if Israel would return the stolen materials, Pollard would probably have his sentence reduced.

SHARON: "This is the worst problem. To tell the truth, it did not have to be handled this way. I can only say that it happened many years ago. At the time I had nothing whatsoever to do with the affair. It happened when I was no longer the Minister of Defense. I opposed commissioning an official investigation in Israel, but they told me that we had already promised [the US] that we would have one. Afterwards there was a discussion [in the Cabinet] and the idea came up about returning the documents. I was opposed and I said that we are sealing his fate to at least a life sentence. I don't want to say at this time what the other responses were, even from our own [Likud] people, because I do not want to cause any further pain."

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 04:39 PM

Carol and Jack: If Jonathan Pollard was spying for any friendly nation other than Israel, let us say Great Britian, Canada, Australia, or Ireland and his name was let's say, Murphy instead of Pollard, I don't think the 2 of you would even be on this thread now.
The fact that a person's father is Jewish does not automaticaly make him Jewish. Jewish law states that the deciding factor is matrilineal descent, not patrilinial. Therefore since his mother was not Jewish, neither is he. If Casper Weinberger was indeed Jewish I am sure that the Saudi Royal family would not have had such lucrative dealings with the Bechtel Corporation that he is such a prominent part of, much like Cheney is with Haliburton. Weinberger is in fact despised as an avowed anti-semite in the Jewish community. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who is Jewish was never involved in the case, because it never got higher than the district court level. The fact that Pollard's inept original lawyer never appealed the sentence in the first place is what caused the statute of limitations to kick in and precluded any further appeals. No one is arguing that Pollard was innocent. Everyone, including his own father, agrees that he was guilty of the crime and deserved to be punished. The question is; Should his punishment be more harsh than someone like Walker who spied for the Soviet Union, which at that time was an avowed enemy of the United States? The other question is; Why did the US government renege on a guilty plea deal, based solely on the basis of a secret memorandum by Casper Weinberger that Pollard's attorneys were not allowed to see and defend him against? This is the same Casper Weinberger who a little while later had his own serious legal problems with the Government and had to pay a heavy fine. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 04:51 PM

He betrayed a trust. Let him rot.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 04:55 PM

Walker did the same thing, for an enemy nation. Why should he be walking around a free man ? SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:03 PM

Good question. Does one injustice justify another?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:07 PM

This is America in which I believe the operative phrase is "Equal Justice Under The Law". If Walker was still in prison serving life, I would not even have contemplated starting this thread. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:31 PM

I made a mistake in my first post to this thread when I said, "a typical sentence in a case like this is 3-10 years in prison. Not life."

I've since done some more checking and have found that a typical sentence for such an offence is actually 2-4 years.

Other than Pollard, the stiffest sentence ever handed out for spying on behalf of a friendly country was to Steven Lalas, who spied for Greece. He got 14 years.

Michael Schwartz spied for Saudi Arabia. He was discharged from the Navy with no time served.

Peter Lee spied for China. He got 1 year in a halfway house.

Samuel Morrison spied for Great Britain. He was sentenced to 2 years and was released after 3 months.

Philip Selden spied for El Salvador. He got 2 years.

Steven Baba spied for South Africa. He got an 8 year sentence that was reduced to 2 and was released after 5 months.

Sharon Scrange spied for Ghana. Her 5 year sentence was reduced to 2 years and she was released after 8 months.

Jean Baynes spied for the Phillipines. She was sentenced to 41 months and was relaesed after 15 months.

Abdul Kader Helmy spied for Egypt. He got 4 years and was released after 2.

Geneva Jones spied for Liberia and got a 37 month sentence.

Frederick Hamilton spied for Ecuador and also got 37 months.

Joseph Brown and Michael Allen both spied for the Phillipines and got 6 and 8 years respectively.

Robert Kim spied for South Korea. He got 9 years and was released after 7.

Thomas Dolce spied for South Africa and got 10 years. He was released after 5.

The maximum sentence for Pollard's offense is now 10 years. He's already served double that amount of time.

And how about Albert Sombolay. He spied for Iraq during the first Gulf War. He got 19 years. Pollard has already served longer than that.

As the Rabbi said. Nobody is saying that Pollard was innocent. However, justice demands a sentence that is proportionate to the crime. By any stretch of the imagination, Pollard has done his time and paid his debt to society.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:32 PM

Rabbi Sol, If Jonathan Pollard was spying for any friendly nation other than Israel, let us say Great Britian, Canada, Australia, or Ireland and his name was let's say, Murphy instead of Pollard, I don't think anyone would have started a thread about it here in the Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:35 PM

Well CarolC, as I pointed out, spying for Great Britain results in a 2 year sentence and release after 3 months. That's the unjust difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:42 PM

Like I said before, it looks like Pollard is still strategically usefull to the US government. That is, if the quote attributed to Ariel Sharon in Pollard's own website is accurate. Considering the fact that he put the security of this country in jeopardy with his actions, if he can be of service to the US government now in any way whatsoever, I think he should do it. Why won't Israel return the stolen materials to the US? Maybe your energies would be better spent if you were to try to persuade Ariel Sharon to return the stolen materials. Indeed, as a loyal US citizen, that should be your first priority.

On the subject of Ginsberg and the Supreme Court, I'm having a lot of trouble finding any sort of coherent narrative of what has actually taken place. I'm turning up all kinds of conflicting information in the sites I'm encountering on the subject, even among those who are in support of Pollard. One of these sites said that his appeal had reached the Supreme Court, but I'll be darned if I can figure out which of the sites is giving accurate information.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rapparee
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:50 PM

Perhaps the sentencing phase should be reopened in Pollard's case. Or, better still, in the other cases.

Unless...are there perhaps some underlying reasons that it shouldn't be? For instance, are there things Pollard passed on which were much, much more sensitive than was brought out in the trial?

IF he should he be released, I don't think he should be allowed to leave the US.

From my perspective, it wouldn't matter WHO you were spying for. Treason is treason.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:55 PM

BTW, in that Sharon interview, Pollard's wife was theorizing about why nobody in Israel has made any effort to get him released. She was saying that the usual response for the government of Israel is to make requests, write letters, and even send delegations to the US on behalf of the agent who is captured. She said that the government of Israel has done none of those things.

She thinks that the members of the Israeli government who were involved with Pollard during the time when he was committing espionage against the US are still in power (Sharon included), and that they don't want him free because they are trying to cover up their own involvement. She said they even tried to pay him off to the tune of two million dollars to leave them alone about it. This is Pollard's wife we're talking about here.

PM Sharon's "Cheap Shot" - An Interview With Esther Pollard

Sharon search in Pollard's website

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 05:57 PM

carolc and her consort are always oh so predictable. when it comes to islamist terrorists vs. the usa, we are the evil ones. in the case of a jew or israel, they are patriotic americans. take anything they say with not a grain, but a huge shaker, of salt. carolc and her consort are prime examples of the modern anti-semites who hide behind their opposition to israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 06:04 PM

He was never allowed any appeal whatsoever. There was recently another hearing in District Court (not a higher one) to try to get his new attorneys who have top security clearance access to the accusatory documents. This was denied by the judge. A new motion is now being prepared to argue that his original attorney acted incompetently in his failure to appeal the harsher sentence, before the statutory limit. This too is not expected to meet with much success. Many Jewish organizations are appealing to President Bush to commute Pollard's sentence to time already served. There is a feeling that Bush might try to use this as a pawn to garner the Jewish vote in the upcoming election. Four years ago there was hope that then President Clinton would issue a pardon. However, you all know the story. Pollard was a poor man and Mark Rich had the greenbacks to back up his case. It was a no brainer as far as Clinton was concerned. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 06:07 PM

Ok, here's the deal, GUEST. I'm just really sick and tired of people trying to use the Mudcat to foment hatred towards whole groups of people, whether those people would happend to be Muslims, Arabs, people in the US who are not Jewish (like, for instance the targets of this thread), and, yes, even Jews. Fortunately for me, any time someone starts a thread that is started for the purpose of fomenting hatred toward Jews here in the Mudcat, it is promptly deleted (as it should be). Unfortunately, the threads that are started to foment hatred toward certain other groups are usually not deleted.

BTW, I have also spoken up agains anti-Semitism when the need has arisen here in the Mudcat, and I will continue to do so as needed.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 06:13 PM

Carol. Who are the targets that you are referring to ? My sole purpose in starting this thread was to discuss an issue of equal justice under the law or the lack thereof. I had no targets in mind. I merely asked for opinions on this particular issue. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 06:27 PM

It's really difficult for us to have opinions when the facts of the case are so difficult to pin down. And when I posted in this thread, trying to help figure out what some of the cause and effect might be, you said that I wouldn't have posted to this thread if it wasn't about a Jew.

I'm having tremendous difficulty attributing Pollard's situation to anti-Semitism in the US. That just makes no sense at all in today's political climate. And for me to think so does not in any way make me anti-Semitic.

And I've got to say, of all of the issues that I post about here in the Mudcat, even when my views are highly controversial (as they frequently are), it is on subjects like this one that I recieve the most personal abuse from people who disagree with me. So yeah, it starts to look like hate-mongering after a while.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 06:35 PM

My Sabbath is fast approaching and I must go off line now until 10 PM tomorrow night. I expect that this thread will have grown considerably by then, and I look forward to a further discussion of the issues in this case. Shabbat Shalom    SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 06:37 PM

Have a good Sabbath Rabbi Sol.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 07:01 PM

Rabbi Sol:   I have learned----anything relating to Israel sets of a feeding frenzy from the Alabama activists aka Carol C , Jack the Sailor . I guess they just sail into frenzies leaving rational discussion in the sailor's wake.

Give up.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 07:12 PM

Bill H, your post is exactly the kind of personal abuse I was refering to in my last post to the Rabbi.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 07:13 PM

Correction: second to last post.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Little Brother
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 07:26 PM

I think that he shouild at least be given a chance to appeal which has been denied him due to mistakes made by his previous attorney. Also one of the secrets he revealed to the Israelis was the nuclear reactor being built by the Iraquis which the Israelis later blew up. Can you imagine if they had nuclear capabilities. The US had that information why didn't they act on it themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 07:49 PM

Well, Carol at least give me credit for alliteration and nice analogies given that you have opened yourself up for exactly that type of response given that the ship's rudder is in the center position and will never change course.

I sure do hope one of you does ply the waters or the humor is lost and misplaced.

You will also note that I no longer can reply to any of your comments seriously---humor, many times, puts things into perspective for people.


By the way---Little Brother makes a point since I had seen a play about the Pollard case a while back.   Probably lost on Carol and We Sail The Ocean Blue---or other nautical screen names. Anti semitism was never the issue. Fairness in sentencing and covering up our own espionage errors was.

Anchors aweigh.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 08:12 PM

Bill H, on no other subject is a reponse that differs from the one expected by the one who starts the thread subject to as much dirision, condescension, and even hatred as on the subject of Israel when people question the dominant orthodoxy. I speak my mind freely on other subjects and I don't experience this sort of phenomenon. I attribute it to a need for people like you to control the debate, and to not allow any dissenting opinions to be presented.

People accuse me of dominating these discussions, but all I do is present information and opinions on the subject matter. I don't resort to personal abuse against those who disagree with me. In any argument, it takes two to tango. The one who resorts to personal abuse is the one who is trying to control the debate. Sorry if you don't like people challenging your need for dominance. Tough luck as they say.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 08:45 PM

I am not dominating---as you say. Merely observing what seems to set you off.   This seems to be your favored topic---I, for one, find this topic not more important or interesting than others. But your name does seem to dominate it in the most dogmatic way. One has to wonder why---though another poster did say---and I should have listened---you wear everyone one down.

Have you figured out yet that your popularity and insights are not considered all that significant?   

Once again---anchors aweigh as I sail off to avoid irrational confrontation and polemical diatribes by you and the captain of the good ship that you both seem to inhabit in the area of our dear Southland.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,Lyle
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 08:45 PM

CarolC:

This may not mean much to you, because we don't know each other, and I doubt we ever will. I've been watching mudcat grow from its inception, and was part of the predecessor groups that eventually became Mudcat, so I have been watching things here for a long, long time. There are several reasons that I seldom post, none of which are important here.

I know you only through your posts. With some I agree, with many I am neutral, and with some I RESPECTFULLY disagree. Regardless of how I feel about your posts, I have ALWAY found them to be much more reasoned than about 98% of the posts here, and the reasons for what you believe has always been given. But much like this thread, you get stones thrown your way far too often from posters who do not exhibit your logical arguments and certainly demonstrate an inferior intelligence to yours. Far too often those who are the meanest in their demeanor toward you remind me of the screaming "news" shows on Fox or the radio shows like Rush L, while your posts are like the calm, reasoned approach of PBS.

Keep up the great posting you do. There is at least one old timer who greatly admires you!

Lyle

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 08:48 PM

The thing I appreciate about Rabbi Sol is that he doesn't ever get into that name-calling crap, or labelling anyone who disagrees him with that phony "anti-semitic" label. I wish that the hate squad would use him as a role model.

I'd rather assume that what's involved in this case wasn't actually anything to do with the US legal system being anti-Jewish, but rather that's there's been some kind of horse-trading involved. Maybe there wasn't any US spy being held by Israel for an undercover exchange.

A dirty business anyway. And barbaric.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 08:59 PM

McG of H; Good point. Exactly what I was trying to say---

Lyle: Carol C is her own version of Limbaugh and/or Fox News. Diatribes galore----not a bad title for a program---she should go on TV with it. Can I get an agent's commission for thinking up the title?


Bill H.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 09:08 PM

This seems to be your favored topic

No, actually I don't enjoy this topic at all. I have no opinion on the subject of whether or not Pollard should be released, but I do have some pretty big problems with the assertion made in the opening post that Pollard is being treated unjustly just because he is Jewish. And I have an even bigger problem with the idea that it is not permissable for anyone to question the assertions that have been made in the opening post.

And I really dislike the threads on the subject of the Middle East, Arabs, Muslims, and Israel. I'd really appreciate an opportunity to just have some fun in here for a change. But threads that target whole groups of people take a lot of the fun out of the Mudcat for me. I have difficulty just sitting by watching while people are promoting hatred. Makes it diffucult for me to feel good about myself if I do that.

Thank you for your kind words, GUEST,Lyle.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,A Mudcat observer
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 09:32 PM

I really dislike the threads on the subject of the Middle East, Arabs, Muslims, and Israel. I'd really appreciate an opportunity to just have some fun in here for a change.

Have a look at any of the threads that you claim to dislike so much. You, or you in tandem with Jack the Sailor, dominante every single one of them. You give the strong impression that you are consumed by a crusade. Without you and Jack, most of those threads would come and go much quicker. This thread is no exception, you and Jack are responsible for almost half the posts.

And frankly, there have been many occasions when you have instigated the nastiness by such tactics as comparing people who disagree with your to Nazis.

If you dislike the threads, don't perpetuate them. If you want to have an opportunity to just have some fun, then take it. I assume that researching and posting on the subject of the Middle East at Mudcat is not a full time job for which you're getting a huge salary. So nobody's forcing you to spend all of your time consumed by an obsession to counter every last post of a pro-Israeli nature.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 09:35 PM

i've noticed that, sooner or later, every thread that starts out about israel or palestine eventually ends up being about carolc.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 09:44 PM

GUEST,A Mudcat Observer, have you also noticed that I have never started a single thread on any of those subjects (with the exception of one continuation thread because someone asked me to as a favor). If I was really on a crusade, I would be starting threads to express my opinions about those subjects several times a week as others do here. But I would much rather see them disappear from the Mudcat altogether, deleted just like the threads that incite hatred towards Jews.

It's the people who start the hate-mongering threads who are on the crusade.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,A Mudcat observer
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 10:21 PM

Near as I can observe, there have been three recent threads that touch on The Middle East.

This one, which Rabbi-Sol started about a prison sentence for a Jewish man in the United States that seems disporportionate to his crime. No hate-mongering.

A second thread, started by a guest, about an Arab newspaper editorial calling for Arafat, a corrupt politician, to resign. No hate-mongering.

A third thread, started by Amos, that drew attention to an essay by an Israeli professor who was critical of Moslems who are silent while other Moslems, of the Hamas and Al-Qaieda variety, have murdered thousands in the name of Islam. That is not hate-mongering, that is calling attention to a very real problem in the world today. And there are leading Moslem intellectuals, Irshad Manji comes to mind, who have made exactly the same point.

In more than one thread, I've seen you attack Sharon as a Nazi and criminal, you condemn Israel for electing him as their leader. And
yet you don't condemn Arafat for his long history as a terrorist and defend him as the elected leader of the Palestinians and make the point that it is only the Palestinians who have the right to choose their leader. Well, if that's true for the Palestinians, then its true for the Israelis as well.

You have often said that the Israelis are committing genocide and ethnic cleansing. That is a hate-mongering lie.

I feel very sorry for you and the fact that you do not recognize yoyr obsession for what it is.

That's all I've to say to you. I will not fall into the trap of a long argument with you. As others have observed, you just wear people down with your obsessiveness. That's it for me. I'm outta here. As Ryan Seacrest might say, "Mudcat observer, out!"

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 10:57 PM

Well, GUEST,A Mudcat Observer, I disagree with you on the nature of the threads in question and the posts contained within them, as well as your assesment of my posts and the accuracy of the information I present. But I imageine you knew I would do that.

So instead of trying to engage in a back and forth debate on our disagreements in those regards, I'll just quote Israel Shahak instead:

Any form of racism, discrimination and xenophobia becomes more potent and politically influential if it is taken for granted by the society which indulges in it. This is especially so if its discussion is prohibited, either formally or by tacit agreement.

Racism, discrimination, and hate speach against Arabs and Muslims is so taken for granted here in the US, people don't even see it when it's right there in front of their eyes. And if anyone tries to bring it up, they are castigated and even abused for doing so.

This thread started to became the traing wreck it is when JtS and I were accused of posting to it just because the spy in question was Jewish. And implied accusation of anti-Semitism if ever I saw one.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 11:20 PM

This thread started to become the train wreck that it is when Jack the Sailor introduced his ignorance and hatred in post #3:

"I think it is disgusting that the US let the Israelis grant him citizenship and take him out of the country...Special treatment for Israel is wrong and it should stop immediately."

As Alonzo quickly pointed out, Jack was lying when he said the US allowed Israel to take him out of the country.

Jack the Sailor was lying when he said the US allowed the Israelis to grant Pollard citizenship. The US has no say in what any other country chooses to make its criteria for citizenship.

Jack the Sailor was lying when he said Israel was receiving special treatment. In fact, it's been shown that Pollard (Israel's not the criminal here, Pollard is) has been treated much more harshly in this matter than any other person convicted of a similar crime.

Jack the Sailor's hate-mongering in this thread have been blatant.

And then there's this whopper that came from you:

"Maybe your energies would be better spent if you were to try to persuade Ariel Sharon to return the stolen materials. Indeed, as a loyal US citizen, that should be your first priority."

Your hate-mongering implication is that an American's loyalty is suspect because he thinks that Pollard's sentence is unjust. Talk about McCarthyism, you reek of it. Furthermore, there's an assumption in your suggestion that as an American Jew, the Rabbi has some sort of in with Ariel Sharon. There's more than a hint of anti-Semitism in that implication.

You and Jack are real pieces of work.


Why should any American's loyalty have one in the US have persuading

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jul 04 - 11:53 PM

GUEST, you need to try to understand that most people don't really know anything about the Pollard case. In fact, on one site I was looking in, they said that one of the major news outlets had done a survey and found that the vast majority of people who knew anything about the case at all thought Pollard was spying on Russia rather than on the US. Most of the websites that have any information at all on the subject are not what one would consider objective, and most of them contain conflicting information. It's not hatred that causes people to be confused by this issue. It's a lack of non-conflicting sources of information.

All of the information I posted in this thread about the Pollard case (and most of the informaion JtS was working with about it), comes from POLLARD'S OWN WEBSITE (and Rabbi Sol's initial post). Including the information about Israel not being willing to return the stolen goods. If you have a problem with it, take it up with Mr. Pollard. This includes the information that Pollard got the life sentance because Israel isn't willing to return the stolen goods. And if anyone has a problem with the US government holding Pollard for that reason, their loyalty to this country should be called into question.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 12:00 AM

maybe some should gather up what carolc and jack the sailor have had to say about the us government, about president bush and other leaders, and print it up and send copies to homeland security and the fbi. then we'll see who's "loyal" and who's not.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 12:05 AM

"Pollard's own website," CarolC. The guy's been in solitary confinement since long before Al Gore invented the web. They don't let inmates in solitary have websites. Just another of your lies and distortions.

Oh! You mean a website in support of Pollard. That's something entirely different than "Pollard's own website."

Good night Carol. Give Jack a kiss for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 12:39 AM

Rabbi-Sol, an US citizen comes on here and accuses the government of this country of Anti semitism.

So are you saying the government of the US has locked up this man and punished him cruely and unusually because Caspar Weinberger, whose father was a Jew, hates Jews so much that he has singled out this one man for special punishment?

There couldn't be another reason? Maybe one that has to do with national security? Come on people!!?? Sorry Rabbi-sol this story just does not pass my smell test.

As a Rabbi, I understand your desire to stick up for Jews, but I don't like to see that applied to traitors. Especially traitors who spy for Israel. The apperance of conflict of interest does Mr. Pollard no good and it also reinforces negative stereotypes.

I think that having the government of Israel and all of these Jewish groups screaming for his release is probably not doing him any favor, the message sent to other potential spies would be disasterous. Maybe if y'all would let up, and maybe condemn him for spying on your own home country, maybe promise not to give him a parade, you might give him and the government a chance to work things out.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 12:41 AM

Isn't someone here to delete things like this?

From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 12:00 AM

maybe some should gather up what carolc and jack the sailor have had to say about the us government, about president bush and other leaders, and print it up and send copies to homeland security and the fbi. then we'll see who's "loyal" and who's not.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 12:51 AM

Justice for Jonathan Pollard: The official Website authorized by Jonathan & Esther Pollard (http://www.jonathanpollard.org/)

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 08:58 AM

I think that having the government of Israel and all of these Jewish groups screaming for his release is probably not doing him any favor

Is it possible for Jack the Sailor to ever say anything about Israel without wrapping it in his hate-mongering lies? Obviously not.

If Jack the Sailor ever reads the links that Mrs. Jack the Sailor posts, he would know that the government of Israel has never done a thing to pursue Pollard's release.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 09:21 AM

Rabbi-Sol asked for opinions on Mr. Pollard and his situation.

While I rarely agree with CarolC's perspectives on anything regarding the Middle East, I respect her right to have them...and the rights of others, named or otherwise. to agree or disagree. However, and without bothering to count, I believe that this discussion now has far more entries attacking her opinions and her sources, and her responses to these attacks, than it does about Pollard. Is it conceivable that we could respect the attempt by a member to solicit opinions on a topic that is clearly important to him and others, and put the bullshit aside?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 11:05 AM

Interesting to see CarolC and Jack the Sailor standing firm in their support for the Reagan Administration strategy of Middle East politics dictated then, as now in Republican circles, by the agenda of the oil administration. Remember who Reagan's VP was? W's daddy, of course.

Under the previous Carter Administration, we brokered a peace between Israel and Egypt. Peace making, was never on the agenda of the Reublicans. Not under Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Daddy Bush or W. Rather, the agenda of the oil industry has been firmly in control.

The out-of-whack sentence in the Pollard case was part of the Republican/oil industry agenda to show oil countries like Iraq (Saadam Hussein was an ally of the Reagan Administration)and Saudi Arabia (then, as now, the Saudis and Bushes are inextricably linked) that they, and their oil, not Israel, were the priority. Do you think that the Republicans cared an iota about the Jewish vote? Not with Jews always voting 80-90% for Democratic, rather than Republican
candidates.

As for Weinberger's role. The Jewishness of his father was never a factor in his life. Greed, power and money were always his motivations. Look where he ended up, Bechtel Corporation, a company in bed with the Bushes, the Saudi royal family and the Bin Laden family.

While Weinberger was the point man who squashed the judge in the Pollard affair, most of the dirty work was done by Pat Buchannan. Anyone who knows anything about American politics knows that Buchannan is as blatant an anti-Semite who has risen to the corridors of power in the past 50 years.

The major result of Pollard's espionage on behalf of Israel was the information that Israel needed to take out Iraq's nuclear bomb factory. Given how things have played out between Iraq and America in the years since, the Israelis did the world a major favor with that strike.

The only democratic president to hold power in the years since the Pollard imprisonment has been Bill Clinton. Clinton was the only president since Carter to seriously pursue a peace agenda in the Middle East and it can be assumed that he avoided pardoning Pollard because it would upset the delicate negotiations that he was pursuing. At the end of his term, many thought that Clinton would go ahead and pardon Pollard. However, by that time, things in that administration had become so cynical that it was money that did the talking (look up the Mark Rich case).

What it all boils down to is that the sentence handed down in the Pollard case was dictated by the extreme right wing agenda of the oil industry and their Republican puppets; the same people now firmly in control of the White House. The same people responsible for the first Gulf War under Daddy Bush. The same people responsible for what's happening now in Iraq. That's the agenda that CarolC and Jack the Sailor have been defending in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 11:39 AM

This opinion piece in the Jewish Media Resources website makes the exact same point that JtS was making in his 24 Jul 04 - 12:39 AM post:

Better free than a hero

by Jonathan Rosenblum
Jerusalem Post

"...Those who prefer to keep the focus exclusively on the goal of securing Pollard's release have frequently incurred the wrath of the activist core. As an example, one dedicated Pollard supporter recently ridiculed HaModia for "worrying excessively about possible charges of dual loyalty." The paper's crime? At the end of a long article detailing the procedural and substantive injustices in the Pollard case, its columnist concluded, "This article does not intend to glorify or even condone Pollard's crime. Anyone who works for an organization like the [United States] Navy undertakes to consider only the interests of the United States."

But the Pollard case does raise issues of "dual loyalty" – just ask any Jew working in American intelligence about the stares he or she was subjected to after the case broke. And American Jews are entitled to be concerned about that issue. Pollard has repeatedly insisted that he did what did out of profound love for Israel, not out of any venal financial motives. Likely Pollard was convinced that none of the information he handed Israel could damage American interests, but still his motivation was his love of Israel...

...Too often Pollard's supporters have shown a preference for emotionally satisfying symbolic gestures and harangues to building a larger coalition of support. At a Jerusalem rally two weeks ago, his attorney called him a symbol of America's consistent failure to honor promises. What is the point of remarks calculated to infuriate the president of the United States, the one person who has the power to free Pollard from jail?

Jonathan Pollard's dwindling band of intense supporters must ask themselves: Would we rather have him free or hailed as a hero? Let's hope they choose freedom."

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 12:28 PM

Artbrooks,

Thanks for the support, I guess, I've been careful to try to stick to what I think is the point. Thank you for recognizing that this discussion is about opinions on Pollard and not about some weird, arbitrary definition of "Antisemitism" from anonymous guests.

I was giving my gut reation, the Pollard case does not concern me. To be frank if Rabbi-Sol had not accused the Government of antisemitism, I wouldn't have bothered. The US government has gone out on a limb for Israel so many times. How many votes in the UN have essentially been the entire body against the US and Israeli, Israel should thank God every day fro the US's veto. The US is giving Israel enormous amounts of military aid and more financial aid than any other country. To accuse the government of "trying as an American and punishing as a Jew", is, to say the least, worthy of note.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rapparee
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 10:38 PM

What would have been the result, I wonder, if Israel had captured someone spying ON Israel FOR the US? Say, an Arab-American or a Muslim?

I'm quite serious, and I'm trying to make the situation analogous.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 11:26 PM

Haven't you been following the International News Rap?

The Jewish guy who released the secret info in the 1970's that Israel had a Nuclear Weapons program was released from jail a while ago, but is not free to leave Israel even though he has converted to Christianity, and wants to seek political asylum in the USA.

Hmmmm.... waiting to see if he would make it into this thread....

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 24 Jul 04 - 11:40 PM

Hi Jack, The Sabbath is over and I am back on line. I did not accuse the U.S. Government of anti-semitism. I accused one man, Casper Weinberger of exerting undue influence on what is supposed to be an INDEPENDENT judiciary system. A deal was struck for Pollard to plead guilty and get a specific determinate sentence. Enter, Casper Weinberger representing the Executive branch of the government (as well as the Saudi oil cartel), with a secret memorandum to Judge Aubrey Robinson and presto, the deal does a vanishing act and Pollard is given a life sentence. And no one is ever allowed to see what was in that secret memorandum because it is classified information. For all we know, it could have been a check from Bechtel or the Saudi government payable to the judge for 1 million dollars. Why would Pollard have pleaded guilty in the first place if he was going to get a life sentence anyhow ? He would have nothing to lose by going to trial. A previous poster mentioned the fact that an individual who spied for Iraq during the first Gulf War got only 19 years. Pollard has already served 20 years of a life sentence. Is that the equal justice under the law as mandated by our Constitution ? And should the fact that I am questioning the fairness of the sentencing proceedings in this case (which I have every right to do as an American citizen), bring my own loyalty to our USA into question simply because Pollard & I both happen to be Jewish ? SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 10:25 AM

Where does Jack the Sailor get off questioning anyone's loyalty to the USA? He's a Canadian who married his way into the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 10:46 AM

Can someone please explain to me how giving Pollard a life sentance and keeping him in jail (or for treating him any differently than any other American caught spying against the US) serves the oil interests and the Republican party?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rapparee
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 10:56 AM

GUEST, everyone in North America is an immigrant from somewhere else....

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 11:48 AM

Rabbi-Sol

For all we know, it could have been a check from Bechtel or the Saudi government payable to the judge for 1 million dollars.

Not you taking your hyperbole to ridiculous lengths. All it had to be was a note to the judge saying that Pollard, is a continuing threat to US security and a recommendation for a maximum sentence.


You said

tried and convicted as an American but was sentenced and punished as a Jew

That seems like an inditment of a lot more than Weinburger. You have yet to explain this statement.

Why would Pollard have pleaded guilty in the first place if he was going to get a life sentence anyhow ?

For all we know the FBI pointed out the harm that he was doing to his own country and he felt genuine remorse. While we are speculating wildly, for all we know he was shown the bodies of Americans killed by Mossad because of information he had given Israel. I don't believe that is what happened, my point is that it is pointless to agrue wild specuations.

Rabbi-Sol, I have not brought your loyalty into question, I have pointed out the appearance of divided loyalty. It appears that you are defending this man, and are attacking your government because he spied for Israel. I am a Canadian working toward citizenship in the USA, If an American were caught spying for Canada, I'd be ashamed and angry at the Canadian goverment for taking the information. I'd be angry at the US if they did not prosecuting him fully. Friends and allies should be held to a higher standard. They shouldn't be taking the benefits of alliance on one hand and use spying and dirty tricks on the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 03:38 PM

So what you are saying in effect Jack, is that someone who spies for a friend and ally, deserves a much harsher sentence than one who spies for an avowed enemy of the USA, because they have to be held to higher standard. The fact that that country was Israel and not another friendly nation does not enter into the equation at all. Is that an accurate statement of your position in this matter ? SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 04:03 PM

Rabbi-Sol, Why don't you explain your position before you take such an interest in mine.

Why are you trying to defend a traitor to your country? Why are you trying to excuse what he has done when, in fact you have no knowledge of the magnitude of his crime? Why are you not condemning Israel for turning citizens against their own country?

What I'm saying.
I'm pretty convinced that he was sentenced harshly because he did more damage than the other people you mentioned. Judges are given that kind of leeway and they can rely on government officals to decide. What I am also saying is that, if Jewish groups are successful in gaing his early release that will do further damage to the security and reputation of the US.

I'm saying that

"tried and convicted as an American but was sentenced and punished as a Jew."

Seems like a provocative and ignorant thing to say. I'm waiting for you to explain it or retract it.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 05:00 PM

From what I have heard, the information that Pollard passed on to Israel was information that Israel was supposed to get anyhow as a matter of course, due to an arrangement that they had with the USA. It specificaly dealt with the nuclear reactor that Sadaam had built at Osiris,which constituted a direct threat to Israel. For some reason or other, Pollard saw that this information was deliberately being witheld and not being transmitted to Israel in a timely manner as it was supposed to have been. He took it upon himself to transmit this material on his own, knowing that he broke the law and ready to accept the consequences of his actions when he was caught. He felt that Israel was in imminent danger of a nuclear holocaust, knowing the type of a person Sadaam was. Apparently he was right, because the Israeli Air Force acted immediately and took out the reactor in a heroic surprise attack. Not only did this save Jewish lives in Israel, but it also saved American lives as well. Imagine what would have happened had Iraq been allowed to develop these atomic weapons. They definitely would have used them in the first Gulf War when they launched scud missles against Israel as well as against American troops stationed in Saudi Arabia. Pollard did not do it for money. He felt that he was saving lives, and was ready to go to prison if necessary. However, he never imagined a life sentence, especially after agreeing to a plea arrangement with the prosecution. When Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King broke laws that they felt were unjust, they later became heros. They were never branded a traitors except by those bigoted KKK sympathizers and white supremecists. The question of why Pollard's superiors did not want him to transmit the information can be answered in one word: OIL. Casper Weinberger and his cohorts were so scared of the Arabs shutting off the petroleum spigot, that they witheld this information, knowing full well what Israel would do once they obtained it. When the Arab & Communist dominated UN condemmed Israel for this heroic attack on the reactor, Weinberger (Becthtel Corp.), promised the Saudis and the rest of the Arab world that "Pollard The Jew", would be punished as harshly as was within his power to do so. That is why I am saying that Pollard was tried as an American but punished as a Jew. If Pollard were released, there is no way that he could further damage the security or reputation of the United States. I doubt very much that the CIA would re-hire him and give him the same access to sensitive and classified information that he once had. He would probably go to Israel and live out the remainder of his life in peace and quiet. If you ask where I got this information from ? I personally know Rabbis and other officials of Jewish organizations who visit Pollard in prison on a regular basis. This is the story as he tells it to them.
SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 05:14 PM

Can you provide some sources for your information, Rabbi Sol, so we can have a look at it ourselves? That's pretty standard procedure in serious discussions here in the Mudcat.

I saw some articles from Jewish organizations that put forth the argument that Pollard was responsible, himself, for the way he was treated because he tried to circumvent the justice system by trying win his case through the court of public opinion. Thay said that he had tried to make himself out to be a hero and was courting hero status among Jews in the US and especially in Israel, and that this created a very delicate situation for those who are trying to preserve the integrity of the US intelligence agencies.

I also just finished reading an article about Mordechai Vanunu, and his assertion that he was, and is being treated unjustly by the government of Israel because he has converted to Christianity. Personally, I don't think his being a Christian has anything at all to do with how he is treated by the government of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 05:25 PM

Oops. Looks like I missed the last part of your post. I have difficulty reading posts that aren't broken up into paragraph size segments. My eyesight is not as good as I would like it to be.

We only have your say so that what you say is true, Rabbi Sol. That is not considered sufficient documentation for you to be taken seriously in a discussion of this sort here in the Mudcat. And also, the website for Justice for Jonathan Pollard that is "officially authorized" by Pollard and his wife is not in agreement with what you have said he is saying to the Rabbis with whom you are aquainted.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 05:36 PM

One thing I would particularly like to see is documentation for this quote from you:

When the Arab & Communist dominated UN condemmed Israel for this heroic attack on the reactor, Weinberger (Becthtel Corp.), promised the Saudis and the rest of the Arab world that "Pollard The Jew", would be punished as harshly as was within his power to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 05:41 PM

So he made a major policy decision on behalf of the US government and Israel committed an act of war because of it?

You are saying that Israel intends to treat him as a patriot and hero once he gets out. Makes sense, they want the next guy in his position to betray the US on Israels behalf. You are saying that is OK to betray your country for Israel. You are saying its just a calculated risk, that he should be punished the same as the guy who sold some secrets fro money. I say the fitting pubishment is the one that discourages the next person in his position from doing the same.

I say let him rot.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 05:53 PM

Carol; Much of what I have said was widely reported in " The Jewish Press" which is published weekly in Brooklyn, N.Y. It is the most widely read publication in the Orthodox Jewish community, worlwide.
Unfortunately, I never saved the articles because at the time I read them, I never imagined myself having to discuss these issues on a public forum such as Mudcat. However, they do have a website which is www.thejewishpress.com. If you e-mail the editor, I am sure he will be happy to supply you with the article about Pollard where the allegation against Weinberger was published that was quoted above.
SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 06:04 PM

Jack. He made the decision on behalf of himself. He did not make it or pretend to make it on behalf of the U.S, Government, and Israel new that quite well when they received that information. Also, I did not say that Israel intends to treat him as a hero and give him a ticker tape parade when he gets out, if he ever does. That would only serve to aggrevate relations between the USA and Israel; something that Israel can ill afford at the moment. Quite the contrary. They would see to it that he remained in obscurity which is the way he wants it as well. Any type of long prison sentence is a deterrent to a future act. Especially one served in solitary confinement. A strong message has been sent and received with a lesson well learned. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 06:21 PM

Judges are given that kind of leeway and they can rely on government officals to decide.

That is wrong. In democracies, government officials are not supposed to exert secret influence on judges when they impose sentences in specific cases.

One of the consequences of Weinberger's undue influence in the Pollard case, and the resulting sentence that was far out porportion to the crime, is that Congress enacted legislation setting the maximum penalty for that crime at 10 years; half of what Pollard has already served. Unfortunately, for Pollard, there is no provision for retroactivity when penalties are revised after a specific case.

Despite everything that transpired in this case, I don't think you'll find too many Americans, even pacifists who abhor the Iraq wars enacted by both Bushes, who are sorry that the Israelis destroyed Saadam's nuclear capabilities. That action made this planet a much safer place than it otherwise would have been.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 06:31 PM

I'll send them an e-mail, but I would like to see this information coming from more than just one source. As I've said before, there is a lot of conflicting information coming from many different sources, even the ones that are in support of Mr. Pollard.

I've done a Google search on "Pollard the Jew" and if you look, you'll see that in the nine hits that come up, there is no mention in any of the of Mr. Weinberger having said anything like what you have quoted him as saying.

I also did a Google search using the key words "Pollard the Jew" "Caspar Weinberger" and as you can see, the two hits that come up are from the official Pollard site, and even they don't mention this language coming from Caspar Weinberger.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 06:59 PM

As I said before Carol, had I known that I was going to be having this discussion a year ago, I would have saved the articles for reference. However, a Prophet I am not. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 07:28 PM

Very Briefly. Pollard's sentence is totally out of proprotion with the crime. So was the Rosenberg's---but that is fodder for another thread dealing with a different time and temperment in our land and a judge who (Jewish) did not want to show any favoritism---and more.

None of us are privy to the inner workings of our government, let alone those of other nations (read--Israel). Suffice it to say, though, the destruction of the Iraqi reactor was welcomed by the U S and I can only assume other nations and brethren of the "mad dog".

I would suggest that the destruction of said reactor brought the world more security from nuclear destruction than Geo. W's ill advised and self serving attack on Iraq---which seems to have only exasperated an already bad situation.   I think the hostages, the terror alerts, and the home nations to the hostages will attest to that.


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 07:35 PM

One other thing---this will be my only post on this thread. Getting into anything with Carol C and spouse is a study in futility dealing with people who seem to find the computer climate better than the great outdoor climate since they are always in front of it (computer) it seems. In addition to never seeing any other point of view but their own---and then spouting it as if they real legal beagles.

I loved that line about "serious discussion on Mudcat". A regular legal scholar. Truly, the calling in life of "inquisitor general" would really have been a great thing for you.



Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 07:41 PM

Bill H, I still don't have an opinion on what should happen to Mr. Pollard. I am attempting to form an opinion on what should happen to Mr. Pollard, based on the information I find about his case. I'm a bit perplexed as to why someone as "rational" as you consider yourself to be would have a problem with this.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,Yes, I am a Cunning Ham, I am
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 08:02 PM

I say let him rot.

-Jack the Sailor

I still don't have an opinion on what should happen to Mr. Pollard.

-CarolC

And we all thought that Jack and Carol saw eye to eye on such things.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 08:07 PM

It will be resolved on Valentine's Day.

Fogive me---I could not resist one last post--that was great.
Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 08:52 PM

Oh what the hell---one last post--check this out: This should take up some of Carol and The Nautical man's time.

The Facts of the Pollard Case
Click here to go directly to related articles and sub pages below.
See also Information on the Pollard Case.
Jonathan Pollard was a civilian American Naval intelligence analyst. In the mid 1980's (circa 1983-1984), Pollard discovered that information vital to Israel's security was being deliberately withheld by certain elements within the U.S. national security establishment.

Israel was legally entitled to this vital security information according to a 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the two countries.

The information being withheld from Israel included Syrian, Iraqi, Libyan and Iranian nuclear, chemical, and biological warfare capabilities - being developed for use against Israel. It also included information on ballistic missile development by these countries and information on planned terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian targets.

When Pollard discovered this suppression of information and asked his superiors about it, he was told to "mind his own business", and that "Jews get nervous talking about poison gas; they don't need to know."
He also learned that the objective of cutting off the flow of information to Israel was to severely curtail Israel's ability to act independently in defense of her own interests.


Pollard was painfully aware that Israeli lives were being put in jeopardy as a result of this undeclared intelligence embargo. He did everything he possibly could to stop this covert policy and to have the legal flow of information to Israel restored. When his efforts met no success, he began to give the information to Israel directly.

Jonathan Pollard was an ideologue, not a mercenary. The FBI concluded after nine months of polygraphing that Pollard acted for ideological reasons only, not for profit. This fact was recognized by the sentencing judge who declined to fine Pollard. (See the addendum for further details.)
Furthermore, on May 11, 1998, Israel formally acknowledged Jonathan Pollard had been a bona fide Israeli agent. This fact wiped out any remaining doubt about Jonathan Pollard's motives. Being an official agent is, by definition, the polar opposite of being a mercenary.


In 1985, his actions were discovered by the U.S. government. His instructions from Israel were to seek refuge in the Israeli embassy in Washington. When Pollard and his former wife sought refuge there, they were at first received and then summarily thrown out into the waiting arms of the FBI.

Jonathan Pollard never had a trial. At the request of both the U.S. and Israeli governments, he entered into a plea agreement, which spared both governments a long, difficult, expensive and potentially embarrassing trial.

Jonathan Pollard fulfilled his end of the plea agreement, cooperating fully with the prosecution.

Nevertheless, Pollard received a life sentence and a recommendation that he never be paroled - in complete violation of the plea agreement he had reached with the government.

Jonathan Pollard was never indicted for harming the United States.

Jonathan Pollard was never indicted for compromising codes, agents, or war plans.

Jonathan Pollard was never charged with treason. [Legally, treason is a charge that is only applicable when one spies for an enemy state in time of war.]

Jonathan Pollard was indicted on only one charge: one count of passing classified information to an ally, without intent to harm the United States.

Prior to sentencing, then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger delivered a 46-page classified memorandum to the sentencing judge. Since then, neither Pollard nor any of his cleared attorneys have ever been allowed to access the memorandum to challenge the false charges it contains-a clear violation of Pollard's constitutional rights.

The day before sentencing, Weinberger delivered a four-page supplemental memorandum to the sentencing judge. In it, he falsely accused Pollard of treason. Also in the supplemental memorandum, Weinberger advocated a life sentence in clear violation of Pollard's plea agreement. The implication that follows from Weinberger's false characterization of Pollard's offense as "treason" is that the country Pollard served, Israel, is an enemy state.


Pollard was shown the supplemental Weinberger memorandum only once, just moments before sentencing - hardly adequate time to prepare an appropriate defense to rebut the false accusations in it.

No one else in the history of the United States has ever received a life sentence for passing classified information to an ally - only Jonathan Pollard. The median sentence for this offense is two to four years. Even agents who have committed far more serious offenses on behalf of hostile nations have not received such a harsh sentence.

Pollard's attorney never appealed from the life sentence. The time to file for such an appeal was within ten days of sentencing. Years later, with a different attorney, Pollard filed a habeas corpus challenge to the sentence.
The Court of Appeals, in a two-to-one decision, rejected the challenge, largely on procedural grounds.

The majority placed heavy emphasis on the failure to appeal from the life sentence in a timely manner, and on the resulting far heavier burden faced by Pollard in seeking to challenge the sentence via habeas corpus. [Note: "Habeas corpus" is a procedure by which an incarcerated person may bring a court challenge to the legality of his or her incarceration - often long after the underlying case has been concluded.]

In a dissenting opinion, Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Williams called the case "a fundamental miscarriage of justice," and wrote that he would have ordered that Pollard's sentence be vacated.


In November 1995, Israel granted Jonathan Pollard Israeli citizenship. The official presentation took place in January of 1996. This publicly signaled to the U.S. Israel's willingness to accept full responsibility for Pollard.

U.S. government sources falsely accuse Pollard in the media of passing "rooms full of classified information" and "hundreds of thousands of documents" to Israel. This volume of information is an absurdity! Pollard would have needed to make numerous "drops" using a moving van to have transferred such a large volume of information. In actual fact, Jonathan Pollard made a grand total of eleven "drops" to the Israelis, using only a small briefcase to hold the documents.

The government used an insidious formula to exaggerate the volume of information that Jonathan Pollard passed to Israel. The formula was: if only one page or a single sentence of a document was passed to the Israelis, it was counted as if the whole document had been transmitted. Even referenced documents and sources were counted as having been transmitted in toto. Using this calculation, a single page could be counted as 50 hard-bound 500 page volumes!

There is no Mr. "X".
The CIA claim that another highly-placed spy in the U.S. had to exist in order to give Jonathan Pollard his highly specific tasking orders is a complete fabrication. To understand how Pollard was tasked by Israel to secure specific documents, see: Was there another U.S. spy tasking Pollard? - Mr. 'X' Exposed.


On May 12, 1998 , in the same statement in which the Government of Israel publicly acknowledged Jonathan Pollard as an Israeli agent, it accepted full responsibility for him, and indicated its commitment to securing his release and repatriation to Israel.

Jonathan Pollard has repeatedly expressed his remorse publicly and in private letters to the President and others. He regrets having broken the law, and is sorry he did not find a legal means to act upon his concerns for Israel. (See Remorse Page.)

Jonathan Pollard has been openly linked to the Middle East Peace Process since 1995.
The Israeli government recognized long ago that Jonathan's sentence was unjust, that the documents he delivered to Israel did not remotely cause the damage that the prosecution claimed but never proved. As a result of this recognition, various Israeli administrations have negotiated, as a matter of basic fairness, to secure Jonathan's release.

Since 1995, within the context of the peace process, the US has repeatedly exploited the plight of Jonathan Pollard to extract heavy concessions from Israel.

However despite express promises made by the United States to Israel, Jonathan Pollard remains in jail.


It was the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin who, in 1995, first began openly to negotiate for Jonathan's release as part of the peace process.
Although President Clinton promised Prime Minister Rabin that he would release Jonathan as part of a Middle East peace settlement, the President refused to honor his promise after Rabin was assassinated.


Rabin's successor, Prime Minister Shimon Peres, continued to link Jonathan to the peace process, and even went so far as to include a spy swap proposal as part of the deal for Pollard's release.

The Wye Plantation summit is a prime example of U.S. exploitation of Jonathan Pollard.
Both before and again during the Wye summit negotiations in the fall of 1998, President Clinton promised to release Jonathan Pollard. Pollard was the deal-maker at Wye which enabled the accords to be completed.


At the last minute, with the eyes of the world focused on the Wye Accords signing ceremony which was about to take place in Washington, Clinton reneged on Pollard's release, creating a storm of negative publicity for Israel.

How the Wye fiasco came about:
In September, 1998, just before the mid-term Congressional elections, President Clinton (who at the time was facing impeachment hearings and in need of a foreign policy PR victory) asked Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to attend a three-way summit with the Palestinians at Wye River, Maryland.

Clinton knew that a successful summit at Wye just before the Congressional elections would be good not only for his image, but would also reap great political benefits for the Democrats in their bid to regain control of Congress. As an inducement to Netanyahu, Clinton promised to release Jonathan Pollard within the context of the summit.

Understanding the value of Jonathan Pollard for his own re-election bid, and needing him as a sweetener to sell any kind of "peace" deal to the Israeli people, Netanyahu ignored the entreaties of Republican friends like Newt Gingrich and agreed to attend the summit. (Gingrich would later repay Netanyahu by leading the Republican charge of slander and lies against Jonathan Pollard.)


Once the Wye summit was underway, Clinton quickly "forgot" his promise to free Jonathan Pollard and there was little Netanyahu could do.

Talks at Wye broke down over the release of Palestinian murderers with Jewish blood on their hands and over Israel's request for the extradition of Ghazi Jabali, the chief of Police in Gaza who was wanted for his role in planning and executing terrorist attacks in Israel.

To break the stalemate, the Palestinians suggested Jonathan Pollard as the solution. They proposed that Pollard be sold to Netanyahu once again: the US would give Jonathan to Israel in return for Israel's freeing of hundreds of Palestinian terrorists and immunity for Ghazi Jabali.

The US and Israel agreed to the Palestinian plan to swap Pollard for terrorists and murderers.
President Clinton personally worked out the details of the deal in a late-night private session with a Palestinian and an Israeli representative.


According to the deal, Prime Minister Netanyahu was to receive a side letter from President Clinton the next morning (one of approximately 30 side letters the Americans had promised) guaranteeing Pollard's release for November 11, 1998, one week after the US House elections.
The Pollard negotiation was the deal-maker at Wye which allowed the summit to be successfully wrapped up and a signing ceremony to be planned for the next morning in Washington, on Friday October 23, 1998.


Only hours before the signing ceremony, P.M. Netanyahu received all of the American side-letters that had been promised to him, except one - the one guaranteeing the release of Jonathan Pollard.
Netanyahu threatened not to attend the signing ceremony unless he got the Pollard side letter. Clinton said, "Trust me." Netanyahu, knowing he was about to be double-crossed by Clinton over Pollard for the second time, refused.

Netanyahu demanded that in the absence of a side letter of guarantee, Pollard should be freed into his custody immediately, or no signing ceremony. Arik Sharon supported Netanyahu and they threatened to leave Wye without signing the accords.


In order to take the pressure off of President Clinton, CIA chief George Tenet quickly leaked the news of Pollard's imminent release to the media in a deliberate - and ultimately successful - attempt to torpedo the deal.
He sent emissaries to Capitol Hill to hold emergency meetings with leading Senators and Congressmen to enlist their support in publicly denouncing Pollard's release. Many lies were told by the CIA emissaries about Jonathan Pollard to convince the legislators to act swiftly and in unison. Believing the lies, the legislators complied and began an unprecedented series of public actions to prevent the release of Jonathan Pollard.


Meanwhile at Wye, under heavy pressure and still fearful that Netanyahu would not back down, Clinton quickly negotiated a private fall-back position with Netanyahu: Clinton would publicly promise to do a "speedy review"of the Pollard Case and he would use that review to free Pollard a few months later, parallel to the release of the 750 Palestinian terrorists who were part of the price Israel had agreed to pay for Pollard.
Under heavy public pressure and betrayed by his own Minister of Defense, Yitzhak Mordecai*, who closed ranks with Clinton, Netanyahu folded and accepted this private deal. The signing ceremony was held in Washington as scheduled. *(Mordecai himself is now on trial in Israel in 2001 for sexual assault.)


Netanyahu's capitulation at Wye, the public spectacle of his being brought to heel by the Americans, and the lopsided deal he brought home from Wye now that Pollard was no longer perceived to be a part of it, would shortly cost him his premiership.

After Wye, the White House falsely accused Netanyahu of having injected Pollard into the Wye summit at the last moment.
However, eye witnesses to the Pollard deal at Wye, including the Israeli and the Palestinian who had negotiated the deal with Clinton and the former Israeli Cabinet Secretary, all later contradicted the White House version of events and affirmed that President Clinton had committed himself to the release of Jonathan Pollard as an integral part of the Wye Accords.


Note: Prime Minister Netanyahu was the first prime minster of Israel to agree to free Palestinian terrorists with Jewish blood on their hands. That is the price the Americans demanded for Pollard at Wye. To this day, this represents a keen embarrassment for Netanyahu and his party, even more so since he did not receive Pollard but the Palestinian murders were released nonetheless. That is why no official source from the Netanyahu government ever wants to publicly admit to it. They keep the details to a minimum, but all concur that Pollard's freedom was bought and paid for by "concessions"at Wye.

When Netanyahu returned to Israel after Wye, he created a firestorm of publicity by releasing 200 Palestinian common criminals from Israeli prisons.
The Palestinians were outraged, and insisted that these common criminals were not the prisoners that they had bargained for at Wye. The Americans angrily protested. Netanyahu reminded the Americans that the Wye Accords do not specify exactly which prisoners Israel must release. Critics wondered if the Prime Minister had lost his mind to antagonize the Americans this way.

Only those close to Prime Minister Netanyahu understood that this was Netanyahu's private, pointed reminder to Bill Clinton that if he was thinking of double-crossing him yet a third time over Pollard, he should think again. No Pollard, no release for the Palestinian murderers and terrorists.

Unfortunately for Jonathan Pollard, Netanyahu's government fell before he was able to act on this.


In a meeting with Netanyahu right after his electoral defeat in the Spring of 1999, Jonathan Pollard's wife, Esther, received assurances from the former prime minister that the new prime minister, Ehud Barak, had been fully briefed about what had been agreed to at Wye and about the fall-back position; that is to say, Israel had yet to free the 750 terrorists with blood on their hands and was still supposed to receive Pollard home in a "parallel gesture" from President Clinton.

Not long after Barak took office, the 750 Palestinian murderers and terrorists walked out of prison as free men. Jonathan Pollard remained in his American jail cell.

In an attempt to justify Clinton's reneging at Wye, a story was leaked to the press that George Tenet, a Clinton appointee, had threatened to resign as head of the CIA if Pollard were released.
The story, though not logical, sounded plausible and it became popular to cite the opposition of the American Intelligence community as the reason Clinton did not honor his commitment at Wye to free Pollard.

This was soon exposed as the lame excuse it was when Clinton freed a group of unrepentant FALN terrorists in the fall of 1999, in an attempt to improve his wife's popularity with New York State's Hispanic community in her election bid for the Senate. (See Senate Race Page.)

To this day, the same lame excuse continues to be used to justify the unjustifiable failure of Clinton to honor his commitment.


In September of 1999, despite strenuous opposition from all of his government advisors and agencies, President Clinton freed 14 unrepentant Puerto Rican terrorists, members of the FALN, charged with bank robbery and various acts of terrorism, including over 130 bombings in the US, and the deaths of American police officers.
Clinton ignored a solid wall of opposition from the Justice, Intelligence and Defense departments and Congress, invoked his powers of executive clemency and set the FALN terrorists free. In doing so, he unequivocally put the lie to the notion that any government agency might tie his hands or influence his decision in matters of clemency. (See FALN Page and Clemency Page.)


More than two years elapsed after Wye. President Clinton did no review. Jonathan Pollard remained in prison while the US continued to extract Israeli concessions for his release.

Those who still believed the myth that it was the American Intelligence Community that was tying the hands of President Clinton, also clung to the belief he would finally honor his many promises to release Jonathan Pollard - including the commitment he had made at Wye - at the end of his term, when he could do so without fear of political reprisal.

Beginning in 1991 Rabbi Mordecai Eliyahu, the former Chief Rabbi of Israel, and Jonathan's rabbi, offered himself to the U.S. Justice Department as Jonathan's guarantor. The offer was ignored.
Rabbi Eliyahu repeated the same offer every year after that in private letters to President Clinton.

Every offer went unacknowledged until the fall of 2000, when Esther Pollard received a letter from the White House indicating that the President was aware of the former chief Rabbi's offer and that it would be part of the President's consideration in reaching a final decision on her husband's case.


President Clinton never kept his promises.
When he left office in January 2001, Jonathan Pollard was not included among those that to whom Clinton granted clemency:

in spite of his repeated express commitments to Israel to free Pollard in return for numerous heavy concessions
in spite of his commitment to free Pollard as an integral part if the Wye Accords
in spite of the appeals of the Jewish community, and
in spite of the gross injustices of the Pollard case which include:
a grossly disproportionate sentence
a broken plea agreement
use of secret evidence
a false charge of treason
ineffective assistance of counsel
ex parte communication between prosecutors and judge
a lack of due process
a sentencing procedure infected by false allegations and lies
On his last day in office, Clinton granted clemency to 140 people. Many who received executive clemency had been convicted of very serious offenses, including murder, robbery and drug dealing. Some of those pardoned had served no prison time at all before being pardoned. Among those pardoned were Clinton's brother, and a former head of the CIA. (See Clemency Page.)


In September of 2000, Jonathan Pollard's attorneys, Eliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman, filed a motion in the US District Court of Columbia to vacate his sentence.
The motion, supported by documentation, presents a compelling and very disturbing picture of serious government misconduct that went unchecked by Mr. Pollard's then-counsel. As a result of that misconduct, and as a result of his attorney's ineffectiveness Jonathan Pollard was sentenced to life in prison on the basis of false allegations, and under circumstances that violated his plea agreement. (See Legal Doc: Declaration of Jonathan Jay Pollard In Support of Motion for Resentencing. See also Legal Doc: Memorandum of Law in Support of Jonathan Jay Pollard's § 2255 Motion for Resentencing.)


Since he was sentenced in 1987, none of Jonathan Pollard's security-cleared attorneys have been able to see the classified portions of the docket in order to challenge them in a court of law or to defend him in a clemency proceeding.
In September of 2000, Jonathan Pollard's attorneys filed a separate motion requesting that attorney Eliot Lauer be allowed access to the secret portions of the Pollard court docket. (See Legal Doc: Motion to Unseal the Pollard Record.)


On January 12, 2001, Chief Judge Norma Holloway Johnson denied the attorneys' request to allow Eliot Lauer access to the complete Pollard docket, upholding the government's claim that Lauer's seeing the secret portion of the record poses a risk to American national security.
Both Lauer and Semmelman hold TOP SECRET level security clearances, which they obtained from the Justice Department in order to be eligible to see their client's full record.

A motion for reconsideration was filed January 18, 2001. (See Legal Doc: Motion for Reconsideration of Court Order.)


Amicus briefs supporting Jonathan's new legal cases have been filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, as well as by top American legal authorities. (See Amici Briefs on the Court Case Page.)

Five Prime Ministers of Israel and three Presidents of Israel have requested Jonathan Pollard's release from the United States. Israel has pledged to be responsible for its agent who has served many years in prison under harsh conditions, and who has fully and repeatedly expressed his remorse. (See Remorse Page.)
Between close friends and strong allies, that ought to be enough.

On November 21, 2003, Jonathan Pollard entered the 19th year of his life sentence, with no end in sight.


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 08:55 PM

Rabbi-Sol,

You have expressed your opinion, I have expressed mine. I remain unconvinced that Weinberger is an antisemite. I find it amazing that you seem so convinced but have no current evidence for such a serious accusation. I honestly think that the Jewish leaders speaking for Pollard is putting the government in an akward position. It is certianly sending the wrong message to members of your community who are in government service.

Zilch, it is not a matter of influence. It is a matter of sentencing recommendation. Influential people speak at parole hearings and such every day. Who would be in a better position to speak on sentecing of a spy than a senior official?

To the rest of you. Why all the namecalling? Do you think that Insult is a substute for thought?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 09:07 PM

Bill H

You've been nothing but a jerk. As usual you've presented nothing new. I'll not be wasting any more time on you or you feeble insults.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 09:37 PM

I remain unconvinced that Weinberger is an antisemite.

while jack the sailor remains unconvinced that weinberger is an anti-semite, there are many who are convinced, based on the consistency of his posts in this and other threads, that jack the sailor is himself, an anti-semite.

good on you bill hahn, good on you rabbi-sol, good on you alonzo m. zilch, and good on any others who stand up to the dales' hate-mongering.

as for carolc's claim that she doesn't have an opinion on what should happen to pollard, i noticed that her nose really grew when she wrote that line.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 10:55 PM

Rabbi Sol, I've sent an e-mail to the Editor of The Jewish Press. I did an internal search in their website and nothing turned up, but maybe the Editor will have something for me.

Bill H, I see that the copy/past job you did was from the "officially authorised" Jonathan and Esther Pollard website. That's the very same website I posted quotes from and a link to earlier in this thread, in which Esther Pollard accuses several members of the government of Israel of sabotaging Pollard's case because, according to Mrs. Pollard, they have things to hide that Jonathan's release could bring to light. Can you please explain these descrepancies with the same site, coming from Jonathan Pollard's own wife?

Can anyone tell me what Senator Leiberman's response was to the request from NY State Senator Seymour Lachman for Senator Leiberman to support the Dec. 6, 2000 ACLU Amicus brief requesting that the classified materials be made available to Pollard's attorneys?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 11:26 PM

Senator Lieberman was so interested in his own ambitions of seeking national office, that he distanced himself from Pollard on purpose. He did not want to soil his image by giving even the slightest hint of impropriety in order to curry favor with those who would accuse him of dual loyalty. He even went so far as making a false statement of Jewish law on the Larry King show. He stated that intermarriage between Jews & Gentiles was permitted by Jewish Law. That is an absolute false statement. Marrying out of the faith is a cardinal sin according to Jewish Law and is absolutely prohibited. These two factors caused a tremendous backlash in the Orthodox Jewish community, and resulted in many more votes for the Bush-Cheney ticket then they would have normally garnered. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 11:45 PM

What is the punishment for marrying out of the faith?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 25 Jul 04 - 11:55 PM

Excommunication. In addition, the family observes the same mourning ritual for the offending member just as if he (or she) had passed away. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 07:52 AM

Rabbi-Sol,

As I'm sure you know, the intermarriage rate in the US is approaching 50% and, I've never heard of anyone in recent generations being excommunicated. My understanding of Jewish law is that the door is always open. You may recall that Bob Dylan converted to Christianity in the late-1970s, but was welcomed back to the fold by Lubavitchers several years later. It seems to me that accepting Jesus Christ as your personal saviour would be as serious, if not more so, than intermarrying.

And, of course, all denominations in Judaism have conversion programs for potential spouses of Jews.

I've also not known any families, in this day and age, who have sat Shiva for someone who has intermarried.

Of course, my personal experience is as a Reconstructionist who was raised in Conservative Judaism. However, I do have friends and relatives who are Orthodox (my personal experience with the ultra-Orthodox is from a distance).

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 08:53 AM

Remind me to tell my wife that she is officially dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 01:16 PM

Here's the contents of my e-mail to the editor of The Jewish Press...


"I am engaging in an on-line discussion with an aquaintance of mine. He wrote this:

"When the Arab & Communist dominated UN condemmed Israel for this heroic attack on the reactor, Weinberger (Becthtel Corp.), promised the Saudis and the rest of the Arab world that "Pollard The Jew", would be punished as harshly as was within his power to do so."

...and I asked him if he could provide some documentation for this kind of language coming from Caspar Weinberger. He said he read it in your publication, that he no longer has the issue in which he read it, and he suggested that I ask via e-mail if someone in your organization can provide documentation for this quote."

Here is the response I got just a few minutes ago from The Jewish Press:

"He's mistaken. It's a historical impossibility. The reactor was bombed in 1981 -- before Pollard even began spying. (Which of course dispels the myth in certain circles that Pollard's information helped the Israelis bomb the reactor.) In any event, Pollard was arrested in 1985, so Weinberger could not have made the statement as quoted. Finally, although Weinberger was not what one would call a friend of Israel, there is absolutely no evidence that he ever made such crude anti-Semitic comments.

If this individual did see it in The Jewish Press (and I doubt he did), it would have been not in a news story but in an opinion column that escaped proper editorial scrutiny at the time. But I repeat -- Pollard did not have anything to do with the reactor, his spying began a couple of years later and he was arrested four years after the reactor incident. And to attribute such a remark to Weinberger is highly irresponsible.

Please call me with any further questions at 718-330-1100, ext. 271."
Jason Maoz
Senior Editor


I now have an opinion on this issue, and I'll start working on my post about it right away.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 01:32 PM

In my posting at 6:21 PM yesterday, I said:

Despite everything that transpired in this case, I don't think you'll find too many Americans, even pacifists who abhor the Iraq wars enacted by both Bushes, who are sorry that the Israelis destroyed Saadam's nuclear capabilities. That action made this planet a much safer place than it otherwise would have been.

I stand by what I said in that paragraph, however, in view of CarolC's last posting, I would like to make a clarification. Other than it being in a posting that was discussing Weinberger's undue influence on the judge in the Pollard case, I did not link Israel's bombing of Iraq's nuclear facility with the Pollard case. No link should be implied.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Wolfgang
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 01:45 PM

Why all the namecalling? Do you think that Insult is a substute for thought?

Bill H

You've been nothing but a jerk. (Jack the Sailor)

Jack,
to see the last two sentences by you one directly after the other has given my my Mudcat laugh of the week.

I don't like to see that applied to traitors. Especially traitors who spy for Israel (Jack the Sailor, my emphasis)

Why 'especially'?
Carol, you do not have to look far when you are out for spotting discriminatory language.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 01:52 PM

Rabbi Sol asked for opinions. Here is mine...

I think Pollard should probably be released. But I also think that people should stop trying to promote him as a hero. I think that as long as Pollard and others continue to promote him this way (in his "officially authorised" website, as well as many other websites, and posts to this thread), he poses a threat because of the kind of message that is sent to other people in the intelligence community who might want to consider spying for other cuntries against their own country.

I think Pollard is his own worst enemy, along with his wife, and all of the groups who are trying to promote him as a hero. I agree with the opinion piece I posted earlier that suggested that if people really want to see Pollard released, they need to stop engaging in the kind of bellicose and shrill language that we have seen here in this thread and in many of the websites that purport to call for his release.

I think there is a high probability that Pollard has been and is being used as a political football, not only by the US government, but also by the Israeli government as well as many of the groups who are so stridently throwing around accusations that Pollard is being treated unjustly just because he is a Jew.

I think that any accusations that Pollard is being treated unjustly just because he is a Jew are scurrilous and inflamitory, and I agree with Mr Maoz (editor at The Jewish Press) that such language is highly irresponsible.

I think Pollard probably should be released, but you all are doing far more damage to his case then good. If you guys really want to see him get released, you ought to support the people who are quietly working behind the scenes to secure his release, and stop using him as your own political football.

BTW, I base most of my opinion that he should probably be released on the fact that the ACLU was willing to act on his behalf.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:04 PM

Carol, you do not have to look far when you are out for spotting discriminatory language.

Wolfgang, why not wait for him to answer your question before you make a statement like this to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,Yes, I am a Cunning Ham, I am
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:04 PM

So, CarolC, what do you say to the guy in this thread who been saying that spying for Israel is worse than spying for our enemies, the guy who says about Pollard, "let him rot."

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:07 PM

Why Wolfgang,

I'm not substituting insult for thought. I was simply telling Bill H, why I wasn't responding to him. I guess, If I were perfect, like you, I'd be able to tolerate all of the insults that my wife and I have been subjected to on this thread without reaction. I'm not perfect. My esteem for Rabbi-Sol has increased with each exchange with him. Other participants in this thread have tried my patience to near its end.

YES Especially Israel. If you were reading to try to understand my meaning instead of scanning to find things to laugh at, then you might have noticed the idea I have put forth in this thread several times that as a supposedly close ally as the number one recipient of US military aid then Israel should be held to a higher standard. That's what I believe and if you find it funny, laugh away.

Lets get this straight, you are condemning me for being insulting while you laugh at me in an obviously self-righteous manner. Keep that up Wolfgang, you are bound to make friends and influence people that way.   LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:12 PM

So, CarolC, what do you say to the guy in this thread who been saying that spying for Israel is worse than spying for our enemies, the guy who says about Pollard, "let him rot."

Are you talking about artbrooks, GUEST,Yes, I am a Cunning Ham, I am?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:17 PM

People seem to be conveniently not noticing that JtS said he would consider an American spying for JtS' own country, Canada, to be as serious as an American spying for Israel. This is hardly discriminatory. His point is that friends should be held to a higher standard.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,Yes, I am a Cunning Ham, I am
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:18 PM

No, please refer to the post of 25 Jul 04 - 05:41 PM.

Although, feel free to respond to the same comment from artbrooks.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,Yes, I am a Cunning Ham, I am
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:22 PM

People seem to be conveniently not noticing that JtS said he would consider an American spying for JtS' own country, Canada, to be as serious as an American spying for Israel. This is hardly discriminatory. His point is that friends should be held to a higher standard.

Then Jack the Sailor doesn't believe in the principle of equality before the law. I don't know about where he comes from, but that's SUPPOSED to be the cornerstone of the AMERICAN justice system.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:22 PM

I think that Pollard is being made a martyr and the term antisemite is being thrown around way too much. I think Rabbi-Sol should renounce what he said about "Sentenced as a Jew" and should in future should only make such accusations if he is prepared to back it up much better than he has in this case.

Pollard and his supporters seem to be playing chicken with the US athorities whereby they are trying to have their spies and free them to.

If Pollard is released, it should be on parole, the terms of the parople being that he should not be able to accept any reward of any kind from Israel, and that he and the Israeli government, both condemn his actions. He should not be allowed to migrate to Israel.

If Pollard, the government of Israel and the prominent Jewish groups do not back off then I am prepared to believe that Mr. Pollard has learned nothing from his incarceration, that potential spies have received no clear message of deterrance and that he should stay in prison until such time as he clearly renounces what he has done.

"Let him rot" was a euphamism, hopefully you now understand what I meant.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:28 PM

If Pollard, the government of Israel and the prominent Jewish groups do not back off then I am prepared to believe that Mr. Pollard has learned nothing from his incarceration, that potential spies have received no clear message of deterrance and that he should stay in prison until such time as he clearly renounces what he has done.

Just what "government of Israel and prominent Jewish groups" are you talking about? The lobbying on behalf of Pollard seems to be a largely grassroots effort in which those lobbying on his behalf are decrying the fact that prominent Jewish organizations and the Israeli government have not been involved in lobbying on behalf of Pollard.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:35 PM

Equality before the law? LOL Each case should be decided on its own merits, sentencing should be for deterence and rehabilitation. Pollard and would be Pollards are obviously neither rehabilitated nor deterred. That's the difference between a mercenary and an ideologue. The ideologue needs more punishment to be deterred, the ideologue may never be rehabilitated.

You people are defending Pollard as having done the right thing. No low level analyst is given the authority to interpret "memorandums of understanding" with foreign governments on their own. It is an act of betrayal for them to do so. It was an act of betrayal for Israel to accept. A true ally might have turned him in to the US authorities for even trying to betray his own country. Pollard has to accept the consequences of this betrayal, so does Israel, so do promenant Jewish groups.

Until then I say let him rot. (please note I am not advocating actual, physical rotting, It is an expression meaning let him continue his sentence.)

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:40 PM

Israel has granted him citizenship. Promanent is a relative term. In any case Israel should denouce what he has done and return the materials he stole. He should renounce what he has done and not be allowed to profit from his crime.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:40 PM

Again, you're harping on "prominet Jewish groups."

Which prominent Jewish groups are you talking about? Or is that some sort of code that you use?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:47 PM

GUEST,Yes, I am a Cunning Ham, I am, I don't think you understand the principle of equality before the law. The law does not specify how long people should have to serve for the crime of espionage. If the US determined that an American who spies against the US on behalf of a "friend and ally" posess a greater security threat than someone who does it for an enemy nation, they would make their decisions about how to deal with such people on that basis.

And when people go around saying things like "Pollard was only spying on a 'friend and ally', they give the appearance of suggesting that it's not as bad to spy on the US on behalf of a country that is a 'friend and ally', as it is to spy on behalf of an enemy. I can see how the intelligence community could see this as constituting an increased security threat.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:49 PM

Based on your last posting that crossed with mine, I will assume that "prominent Jewish groups" is some sort of code that you use.

"Prominent" is not a "relative term." My dictionary offers two meanings:

1) Projecting outward or upward from a line or surface; protuberant.

2) Widely known; eminent.

In the context that you use the word, it is, obviously, # 2.

Let me rephrase the question to you in words that may be more understandable: What WIDELY KNOWN or EMINENT Jewish groups are you talking about?

If you're talking about a grassroots effort by Pollard's family, friends and supporters, that does not meet anyone's standard of widely known, eminent, or prominent.

In other words, you are using thinly veiled code to advance your agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:52 PM

Just what "government of Israel and prominent Jewish groups" are you talking about?

Do a Google search on "Jonathan Pollard" and you can see for yourself. The people in question include Benjamin Netanyahu.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 02:55 PM

BTW, I don't think those of you who are trying to set traps for JtS to stumble into are helping Pollard's cause any, either. Why not just let it drop and try to help Pollard by supporting the people who are tyrying to secure his release quietly behind the scenes?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 03:01 PM

forget it zilch. you can't argue with an anti-semitic hate monger like jack.

i have learned something in this thread. i always thought that carolc was the really nasty one in that pair. she comes off as relatively reasonable and balanced in comparison to her vicious hate-mongering husband.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Wolfgang
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 03:02 PM

"Let him rot" was a euphamism (Jack the Sailor)

euphemism: the substitution of an agreeable or inoffensive expression for for one that may offend (Websters)

I'm curious, Jack, what would you have said if you had not used this unoffensive expression?

Jack, you make assumptions about me that are totally wrong. I make a lot of errors and I like to laugh about myself. I do not scan what I read for laughs I sometimes stumble upon it (even when rereading what I have written).

And I thought it was completely clear that I had laughed about the first quote. If you cannot laugh about yourself when you see the two sentences in juxtaposition, I'm sorry for you.

With the second quote from you I was completely serious. I do not consider it laughing matter if one country is singled out for different treatment by a word like 'especially'. You just could have explained it instead of firing off insults.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 03:04 PM

oh, and carol, you should know that what goes on at the mudcat forum will never have any effect on any decisions that are made in the pollard case or in anything at all pertaining to the conflict between israel and the palestinian terrorists.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 03:06 PM

forget it wolfgang. you can't reason with an anti-semitic hate monger like jack the sailor.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 03:38 PM

Sorry not euphamism,
how about "expression".

I've explained "especially" more than enough times for you to get my intended meaning. The level of betrayal is higher. The potential for abuse greater. If you disagree with my opinion then we'll just have to disagree.

Yes I do see some humour in the juxtaposition of the two sentences. But I don't in the context of the whole thread and in the context of a couple of other threads where the same few people have been liberal with their insults and short on reason. Here again, I fear we are destined to disagree. That's why I accused you of scanning.

I suggest that the next time you "stumble" upon such "humour" you try to consider the context before you share it. If you don't see any justification for calling someone a jerk when he tried to question my marriage,when he deliberately and pointedly tried to distract us with a huge cut and paste which added nothing new, then again, we will just have to disagree.

Wolfgang, honestly, I thought better of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 04:38 PM

Wolgang:   Your post re: Jack The Sailor and the juxtapositioning of his comments were right on----I was thinking the same thing. When you have no response refer to name calling---not even a clever insult. Clever insults and witty ripostes are always appreciated.

So, I suppose, as the old joke goes after much haranguing about something the recipient of the harangue (me) says to the haranguer (Jack/sailor) ---does that mean you won't be coming over to help me anymore?

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:23 PM

Carol, I regards to the Jewish Press, as the editor said, It could have been written in an opinion column and they do have many of those columns. Another publication where I get much of my information from is "The Jewish Voice And Opinion" which is published in Englewood, N.J. (Bill H's back yard). I may have seen it there. The Editor is Susan L. Rosenbluth and she can be e-mailed at
susan@jewishvoiceandopinion The same question to her as you posed to The Jewish Press may yield a different result. It's worth a try.
SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:32 PM

Jack, In your post, you stated that a true friend and ally of the USA would have turned Pollard over to the authorites immediately. Well, that is exactly what Israel did. If you read Bill H's post that was culled from Pollard's website, you will see that when Pollard sought refuge in the Israeli Embassy, he was turned away, right in to the waiting arms of the FBI who were outside to take him into custody. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:38 PM

Bill H,

If you do ever say anthing witty please be sure to point it out. I'll leave it to anyone reading this thread to decide who has been the "haranguer" (sic) and who has reacted.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:45 PM

Wit is in the eye (ear) of the beholder---it may well be that you have not found the humor in some of my comments about yourself and the charming ( Iam sure) spouse. Now the word "jerk"---do enlighten me as to what is witty about that---perhaps you used it as in the term "I am jerking your chain"---looks like I succeeded.

Witty enough for you?

Bill H

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:47 PM

On the subject of intermarriage, yes, the liberal branches of Judaism such as Reconstructionist, Reform & Conservative have a more liberal attitude and policy towards it. However, I am a strictly Orthodox Jew (complete with long beard and yarmulke), and am bound by strict Torah law. That means Excommunication and sitting shiva for the offending family member. As far as Bob Dylan goes, he was born a Jew and in the eyes of Torah law will always remain one, no matter how many gallons of holy water he has been baptised with. For the record, he did go to Lubavitch for a while to return to his roots. He then attended a Yeshiva in Far Rockaway, Queens, N.Y. under the leadership of Rabbi Freifeld, with the intention of becoming Orthodox.
However that proved to be short lived, as he has now once again become a "born again" Christian. But in the eyes of Torah law, he remains and will always be a Jew. The same holds true for Cardinal Lustiger of France SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:47 PM

Rabbi-Sol,

Perhaps they should have turned him instead of gratefully accepting the fruits of his crime? Before he was caught redhanded? As it was they turned him in when he was no longer usefull. That's little more than a gesture.

Rabbi-Sol

Are seriously asking Carol to do your research for you a second time? I am happy to stipulate that you are sincere. If choose to supply more sources to back your assertions, we'll ba happy to read what you post. If not, lets just leave things as they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:55 PM

And we're still waiting, Jack the Sailor, for you to tell us who are those "prominent Jewish groups" that you repeatedly mentioned.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 05:59 PM

Rabbi-Sol,

You say that Dylan has returned to Christianity. My information is that you are incorrect about that. He has become very private about his practices, but I do know that he attended High Holiday services in recent years.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 06:05 PM

Bill H.

Please try to understand this for your own good and self-awareness. I was not trying to be witty, I was dismissing your rantings as the words of a "jerk". Now that I have cleared up this unfortunate misunderstanding, I shall return to ignoring you, unless someone I respect, like Wolfgang, speaks up again.

Rabbi-Sol

I'm a little confused. If Dylan converts to Christianity he is still a Jew but if a Jew marries a Christian and does not convert then he is no longer a Jew and is excommunicated and mourned as dead?

So do I have this right?
If Dylan were to marry, say Anne Coulter, then he would be excommunicated and treated as dead? But if he subsequently divorced her then he would be able to then attend a Yeshiva and metaphorically be brought back to life?

I'm not trying to be disrespectfull of your beliefs. I used Anne Coulter as an example because to add some levity, but not to ridicule you or your beliefs,

The serious questions are how is coversion differenet from intermarriage? and what happens in the case of divorce?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 06:07 PM

How recently ? SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 06:26 PM

The excommunicated person is shunned by the greater community, but still remains Jewish. If they were to divorce the person of the other faith, they would be restored to the full privileges that they enjoyed prior to the marriage. Any children resulting from that union would be considered whatever the faith of the mother was. We Jews do not actively seek converts to our religion. In fact, we are told to discourage potential converts 3 times. If they still persist in wanting to become Jewish we can then accept them. However, that conversion must be done by a properly recognized Rabbinical tribunal & can not be done for an alterior motive, such as wanting to marry a Jewish spouse. The conversion must be strictly for the sake of the religion. Men must undergo circumcision and women must undergo immersion in a Mikvah (ritual bath). Once the person is properly converted, there is no problem with intermarriage. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 06:34 PM

Jack/Sailor---I know you were not trying to be witty. Probably something you are incapable of give your attempt at humor in the Coulter post.

            It was I who, sadly, tried to do something witty by using your word "jerk" in a better context than you managed. Yours was that of one who could not find a better riposte.

            Please do continue to ignore me since it seems that since I landed on this alien planet you are one of the few people that have not been able to comprehend my alien postings. I must, truly, learn the local language rather than speaking in the terms used in the faraway sphere in the universe from whence I come. Kryptonite has not helped me whatsoever. Neither has Lysol. Perhaps I will try Thesaurus.

Bill H

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 06:44 PM

Bill H, you are actually quite funny, but not at all in the way that you think.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 06:44 PM

Grandma's Lysol has never failed before. You are just not scrubbing hard enough Bill.

Let's hear it loud and strong for Grandma's Lysol!!!
Good for everything around the place!!!
For your clothes, and dirty dishes,
For your hands, and for your face!!!

Oh!!! Clap your hands!!!


Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 06:56 PM

ROBIN: I love it---will surely try once again.

Carol C: Thank you. Now---as to reading my mind---in what way do I think? You have a hell of an opening here for a really great comment---and, hopefully, I can reply to add some levity to this discussion that is going back to the place from whence I came---nowhere.

Bill H

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 08:01 PM

With all due respect, Rabbi-Sol, the interpretation of Jewish law and customs around issues of intermarriage, may reflect your own ulta-Orthdox community, but they do not reflect the reality of modern Judaism -- Modern Orthodox, Conservative, Reconstuctionist and Refirm -- as practiced by the vast majority of Jews in the world today.

Excommunication, sitting Shiva for someone who intermarries, it doesn't happen in the modern world.

As you probably well know, the vast majority of conversions occur specifically because a Jew and his or her non-Jewish partner have decided to have a Jewish home and raise their children as Jews. Walk into the conversion classes at almost any synagogue in America, and virtually every student is engaged to a Jew.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 09:04 PM

Alonzo; There are still some of us who practice our religion the good old fashioned way, as God meant it to be. We can not bend the Torah to fit the modern world or the 21st century idea of political correctness. In our orthodox enclave of Monsey, N.Y. there are no such things as conversion classes. Yes, there are converts, even in my own family, and I am proud of how righteous they are. But is more of a one on one situation rather than a mass classroom spectacle. But in every situation, the person was already a fully & properly converted Jew BEFORE meeting their prospective spouse, not vice versa. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 10:24 PM

So Pollard is the only person sitting in jail in the United States who shouldn't be?

Such a shame Leonard Peltier isn't a Jew- maybe his plight would get more press?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 10:41 PM

Actually, I have more sympathy for Mordechai Vanunu - he told the world about what could have been a very deadly secret, just like some Germans did in the late 30's/early 40's. And it's interesting that while trying to deny that what he said was true, they want to make an example of him for doing what he did for altruistic reasons. Lots of similarity, just on the other side of the fence...

Robin

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Alonzo M. Zilch (inactive)
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 11:02 PM

So Pollard is the only person sitting in jail in the United States who shouldn't be?

Such a shame Leonard Peltier isn't a Jew- maybe his plight would get more press?

Greg F.,

Whether or not that was your intention, your comment is deeply offensive and its implications are recognizably anti-Semitic.

The Leonard Peltier case has had more prominence in the mainstream media than that of Jonathan Pollard.

Try doing Google searchs with each of their names in quotation marks. "Leonard Peltier" gets 54,300 hits. "Jonathan Pollard" gets 18,600.

Do a NEWS search at Google and "Leonard Peltier" gets 25 hits, most of them from mainstream media.

Do a NEWS search on "Jonathan Pollard" and you get 30 hits, 21 of which come from Jewish or Arab media outlets, and 3 of which are for other Jonathan Pollards.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Metchosin
Date: 26 Jul 04 - 11:05 PM

come now Foolestroupe, they did let Vanunu out of jail after 18 years, although he's not allowed to talk to anyone and he can't leave to country. He's still a very dangerous man according to court reckoning and they are worried he just might spill some more secrets about imaginary stuff that they don't have any secrets about.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 27 Jul 04 - 05:38 AM

Well Metchosin,

I suppose there's no answer to that! But as far as The Israelis are concerned, that's 'Just Us' for you!

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Jul 04 - 09:02 AM

Lonzo:

Bullshit.

Thanks for confirming my point.

May I suggest you seek professional help?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 04 - 10:31 AM

actually greg f. zilch was quite nice about and assumed you probably didn't recognize your bigotry forwhat it was.

he didn't conform your point. he proved just the opposite.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 27 Jul 04 - 01:05 PM

Also, if memory serves me correctly, Pollard's guilty plea was supposed to provide leniency for his then wife Anne. Instead, they threw the book at her also. I believe that she served 7 years of a 15 year sentence and was let out early because she was in poor health & suffered from ulcerative colitis. Jonathan gave Anne a Get (Jewish Divorce), when it became apparent that he would have to spend the rest of his life in prison. This way she would be free to marry someone else and raise a family. Pollards present wife, Esther,is a woman who became interested in his plight and married him while he was in prison. Rabbi Avi Weiss of Riverdale, Bronx, NY, a well known Jewish activist performed the ceremony in prison. Of course, the marriage has yet to be consummated and may never be as long as Pollard remains incarcerated. I have brought up this point just to present the human side of the issue. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,Maotzz
Date: 10 Aug 04 - 04:34 PM

Okay, Imagine, if you would, dire circumstances, having just come from driving through Canada, I know this is a difficult scenario to imagine, but walk with me here for a bit, to illustrate a point.

North Korea has missles pointed to Canada. USA intelligence has information about these missles. Mr. Murphy, (a name stolen from prior posts by CarolC) has duel citizenship with USA and Canada. He has come across this information. The missles are poised, and Mr. Murphy knows that time is of the essence, (he also knows about beaurocracy of the US government).

So, rather than see one of his beloved countries destroyed, he siphons information to the affected country, to alert them allowing action to be taken.

Now, seriously, wouldn't he be considered a hero by Canadians? Even if caught and imprisoned in USA?

Just a thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Aug 04 - 04:39 PM

That one just won't fly. North Korea wouldn't do that because Canada is a nice country that knows how to mind its own business and let other countries alone to live thier lives in peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 10 Aug 04 - 04:43 PM

Another missed point, Carol C---or at best turned to serve your purpose.

Bill H

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Aug 04 - 04:47 PM

Not at all, Bill H. If the GUEST can some up with an example that might possibly make some sense, I'll answer it in kind.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Aug 04 - 04:48 PM

...anyway, the GUEST is just CarolC baiting, and I don't really feel like playing that game right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Aug 04 - 04:48 PM

No, CarolC. North Korea wouldn't do that because Canada has a treaty with the US that says if anyone did that, the US would blow them away.

Let's be honest here.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Metchosin
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 02:28 AM

Speaking of Canada, I do wish that MOSSAD would quit forging and using their fake Canadian passports to do their stuff. It makes their legitimate use for real Canadian citizens damned dangerous.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 08:03 AM

They're using New Zealand passports now. The NZ Govt has a couple of agents that they caught, on trial right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 09:55 AM

Saddam Hussein`s friend Oliver North along with his terrorist friends used forged Irish passports.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 10:40 AM

No, CarolC. North Korea wouldn't do that because Canada has a treaty with the US that says if anyone did that, the US would blow them away.

Well then why would the US be concerned about North Korea posing a threat to the US? Our ability to blow them away ought to be just as effective as a deterrent to the North Koreans attacking us as it would be for them attacking Canada.

The fact is that North Korea has no reason to want to attack Canada.

As far as the perception of Pollard as a hero is concerned, the issue is how this perception effects the intelligence agencies in the US, not how this perception effects people like me. The fact is that as long as the perception of Pollard as a hero figure causes the intelligence agencies to see Pollard as a threat to security, this perception will harm Pollard's case for getting released. This is a reality over which I have no control.

Here's a hypothetical that I can get behind:

Daniel Ellsberg is a hero to me. If he had been made to serve a lengthy sentence in prison and I was trying to promote him to the public as a hero, and if there were people who were working behind the scenes to get him released and they said that people like me who were trying to promote him to the public as a hero were hurting their efforts and making Ellsberg's life more difficult, I would just shut up about it and let them do their work.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Wolfgang
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 12:57 PM

(off topic:) My poor students hate Ellsberg nearly as much as they hate Allais.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 01:02 PM

Why do they hate him, Wolfgang?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Wolfgang
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 03:25 PM

DECISION-MAKING MODELS COMPARED

In the neoclassical paradigm, choices are intended as results of a computational process which maximizes the expected utility of outcomes that are weighted by their probabilities. As well known, 15"If a totally new image is to come into being, however, there must be sensitivity to internal messages, the image itself must be sensitive to change , must be unstable, and it must include a value image which places high value on trials, experiments, and the trying of new things" (Boulding 1956, p.94).
this approach involves an axiomatic concept of rationality, according to which rationality is a behavioural rule and consists of selecting that strategy which best solves the maximization problem. Mathematical foundations of this theory, that we define as "traditional"16, were provided by von Neumann and Morgestern (1944), Debreu (1959), Arrow (1963). With the label "non traditional" we rather identify those branches of decision theory that have been developed as an alternative to the neoclassical one, both starting from experimental research programs and in relation to Herbert Simon's work and legacy. The neoclassical approach to choice processes has been challenged on empirical grounds since the axioms of expected utility theory were found to be systematically violated in Allais's (1953) and Ellsberg's experiments. The major contribution to this field of investigation came from Kahneman and Tversky's work on heuristics (1973, 1974) which led to Prospect Theory (1979). A starting point of this model is the detection of systematic departures from instrumental rationality in experimental situations, while the inclusion of perception among the basic ingredients of choice and the consequent relevance of frame in orienting the decision maker's behaviour are of great theoretical importance. (copied from somewhere in the web)

They hate him for when they hear his name they know that now the discussion starts to be mathematical. Most of them hate that.

Ellsberg is famous in the decision theory literature and one finding even bears his name, something most scientists never accomplish.

Yes that's the very same Ellsberg who later became famous outside of his field of research. Sometimes I ask a very good student whether (s)he has ever heard the name Ellsberg outside of their required reading in decision theory. I still wait for the first positive response. They are just too young I guess.

Wolfgang (I said it was off topic)

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Once Famous
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:09 PM

Cool thread.   A lot of people find Jack CunnilingusHam just as anti-semetic and anti-Israel as I do. They should let this nut be a citizen?

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 04:46 PM

CarolC has already agreed in a previous post on this very same thread, that since the ACLU has taken up Pollard's cause, his harsh life sentence sould be given a second look by a Federal judge. That is all that anyone is asking. This is one point where Jack & Carol do not agree. Jack wants him to rot in jail no matter what, because the country he spied for was Israel. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 06:09 PM

Jack wants him to rot in jail no matter what, because the country he spied for was Israel.

Rabbi-Sol that is a lie and I find it offensive. It is you who are are saying that he is in jail because he spied for Israel. Reread your first post and try to tell me otherwise.

What I want is for anyone who spies for any country to rot in jail and for anyone who spies for a so called ally to be held to a higher standard.

Rabbi-Sol If his name was Murphy instead of Pollard, and he offered information to Canada, I would expect the Canadian govenernment to imediately turn him in to the US authorities. I would want to see him proscecuted to the full exent of the law. Prosecuted because he is a traitor to his own country and traitors cannot be trusted. If it came down to trusting a responsible governments official over that of an admitted traitor. That is one of the few cases where I would be more inclined to trust the government official. Who is to say a traitor would not offer the same information to a third country?

It is apparant that many of you are speaking out on behalf of this man because he spied for Israel, some more of you are just baiting Carol and me. If Pollard had spied for any other country this thread would have died off long ago.

Do you think what I have said in this thread makes me an anti-semite Rabbi-Sol? Would you like for us to go through this thread looking at what you and I have both said and analyze which statements smack of bigotry and which do not? I understand your passion to defend your people, including Pollard. My point of view is that we should punish all spies, including Pollard. The two points of view put us at odds, but it doesn't make either of us a bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: pdq
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 10:29 PM

...this will ruffle some feathers...



This article appears in the Aug. 31, 2001 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.

Israeli Spies: 'Mega Was Not
An Agent; Mega Was the Boss'
by Jeffrey Steinberg

For a brief period of time in early 1997, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Security Agency engaged in a frantic mole hunt for an Israeli spy, believed to be operating inside the highest levels of the Clinton Administration national security establishment. By the time the mole hunt was made public--in a May 7, 1997 Washington Post leak--the hunt had been abruptly ended, and for all intents and purposes, the story disappeared from the news within a matter of days.

According to the Post account, in January 1997, the National Security Agency (NSA) had intercepted a phone conversation between an Israeli official at the embassy in Washington, and Danny Yatom, the head of the Mossad, Israel's foreign intelligence service. The official sought permission from the spy boss to "go to Mega" in order to obtain a copy of a confidential letter that had been sent by then-U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher to Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat, concerning U.S. assurances about a recently negotiated agreement for an Israeli military withdrawal from the Hebron area in the West Bank. Yatom, according to the NSA intercept, rejected the request, admonishing his agent, "This is not something we use Mega for."

The idea that the Israeli government was running another spy operation inside the U.S. national security establishment created a tremendous stir. The Washington Post, in its May 7, 1997 leak, had reported, "One official with knowledge of the FBI investigation into the identity of Mega cautioned that much remained unknown. But the official said that if it turned out that a senior U.S. official was passing sensitive information to Israeli authorities, it could prove more serious than the espionage case involving Jonathan Jay Pollard, a former Navy analyst who was convicted in 1986 of selling U.S. military intelligence documents to Israel."

To this day, the Pollard affair is a hot-button issue inside the U.S. intelligence community. At the time of Pollard's arrest in November 1985, it was known that the Navy analyst had been "tasked" to obtain specific U.S. military intelligence secrets, by someone much higher up in the U.S. intelligence community. To this day, the hunt for "Mr. X," Pollard's inside controller, continues. In 1986, EIR had revealed the existence of not merely a "Mr. X," but an "X Committee," made up of nearly a dozen top-level Pentagon and National Security Council officials, all suspected of having been part of the Pollard spy network.

Given the seriousness of the Mega security breach, the abrupt shutdown of the mole hunt naturally prompted some wild speculation about the circumstances under which the search for Mega was abandoned. In March 1999, British author Gordon Thomas released a book, Gideon's Spies, which alleged that Israel had blackmailed the Clinton Administration, with the threat to release tapped telephone conversations between the President and Monica Lewinsky, to force Washington to abandon the Mega hunt. Indeed, in her testimony before independent counsel Kenneth Starr, Lewinsky had reported that the President had warned her, on March 29, 1997, at the height of the Mega hunt, that he suspected the White House telephones were being tapped by agents of an unnamed foreign country.

Years later, it was revealed that the White House communications system had been overhauled and modernized during the early Clinton era, and one of the main outside contractors involved in the project was an Israeli firm, Amdocs. According to a May 2000 story in Insight magazine, Amdocs employees would have had nearly unfettered access to White House telephone lines and other super-sensitive communications equipment. However, the nature of the request from the Mossad man in Washington to Yatom—to obtain a confidential State Department document—rules out the possibility that Mega was an electronic eavesdropping source.

Mega-Suspects

Even though the Mega hunt was formally called off, still in some U.S. intelligence quarters, the effort to unearth the suspected Israeli spy cell apparently continued. In September 2000, a CIA team of counterintelligence specialists arrived in Israel, after U.S. Ambassador Martin Indyk had his security clearances temporarily lifted. Ostensibly, Indyk had breached security guidelines by bringing classified U.S. government documents to his residence in Tel Aviv. But it later was revealed that the CIA probe was triggered by an August 2000 unauthorized meeting between Indyk and the former head of the Mossad, Ephraim Halevy, which the ambassador had never reported back to Washington.

If there were anyone in the Clinton Administration's political hierarchy who was a prime candidate to be the Israeli spy Mega, it was Indyk. A British-born Australian citizen, Indyk had been Australia's top Mideast security official in the late 1970s, as deputy director of current Mideast intelligence at the Australian Office of National Assessments, the equivalent of the U.S. National Security Council. But, Indyk abruptly quit the post after just ten months, prompting speculation that he had come under suspicion of spying for Israel (he had lived in Israel while completing his dissertation on "The Power of the Weak: The Ability of Israel and Egypt to Resist the Policies of their Super-Power Patrons"). According to British journalist Kevin Dowling, Indyk next surfaced in Israel, as a "media consultant" to Israel's Likud Prime Ministers, Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir.

In 1982, Indyk came to America, ostensibly on a six-month sabbatical from his duties with the Office of the Israeli Prime Minister. Based out of Cornell University, Indyk formed a research department for the America-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the "official" Israeli lobby in the United States. Within a year, AIPAC had ponied up $100,000 to Indyk to hive off the research unit as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). Pro-Israel luminaries in Washington, including former Vice President Walter Mondale, former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Alexander Haig, and former United Nations Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick, were among the initiating members of WINEP's advisory board, according to Dowling's Sept. 27, 2000 account of the Indyk counterintelligence probe.

Indyk's "six-month sabbatical" never ended, but it was not until 1987 that the Australian got his first green card, permitting him to work in the United States. Indyk was made a U.S. citizen on Jan. 12, 1993—just eight days before he was appointed to the incoming Clinton Administration's National Security Council (NSC) staff as Senior Director for Near East and South Asian Affairs. Indyk had already been an informal Mideast policy adviser to President George H.W. Bush, at the initiative of Dennis Ross, Bush's Assistant Secretary of State, previously a deputy to Indyk at WINEP. At the time of the Mega hunt, Indyk had Ross' old job as Assistant Secretary of State for the Near East.

Another prime suspect in the Mega mole hunt was Leon Fuerth, Vice President Albert Gore's national security adviser, and another well-known pro-Likud fanatic. The Washington Post, in a 1998 profile of Fuerth, reported that he was suspected by U.S. intelligence officials of passing sensitive U.S. policy information to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Likud), a passionate, personal enemy of President Clinton, who was suspected of activating the Mega spy operation.

Also on the Mega list of suspects inside the Clinton national security apparatus was Richard Clarke, the National Security Council "counterterrorism czar," who was fired from the State Department and brought onto the Bush Administration NSC in 1992, after he was accused by the State Department's Inspector General of concealing illegal Israeli arms sales to China.

The Purloined Letter Principle

While all of the above-mentioned Bush- and Clinton-era national security operatives may have been, indeed, secretly, or not-so-secretly passing critical American policy papers and classified documents to the Likud faction in Israel; and, while then-Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his Mossad mandarins may have been attempting to blackmail the President, there is a much simpler answer to the Mega puzzle: Mega was not a deep mole inside the White House. Mega was a far more visible, far more powerful entity, known among its several dozen members as "the Mega Group."

The existence of the Mega Group came to light, almost exactly a year after the Washington Post revealed that the mole hunt was under way. Yet, the story of the Mega Group, which appeared in the Wall Street Journal on May 4, 1998, made no mention of espionage, and did not mention the Mossad, the CIA, or Monica Lewinsky, even in passing. Despite that, the Mega Group precisely fits the story of the illusive mole hunt, in a manner that has profound policy implications to this day, as President George W. Bush struggles to avoid an outbreak of war in the Middle East, which would have devastating consequences for the entire planet.

Under the innocent headline, "Titans of Industry Join Forces To Work for Jewish Philanthropy," Wall Street Journal staff reporter Lisa Miller reported on an April 1998 gathering of some 20 Jewish billionaires, at the Manhattan apartment of hedge-fund manager Michael Steinhardt. That gathering involved some of the most powerful names in the Jewish lobby in America, starting with Edgar Bronfman, the chairman of the World Jewish Congress. Others included: Charles Bronfman, Edgar's brother and a top executive of the family's flagship Seagrams Corp.; Leslie Wexler of Limited, Inc.; Charles Schusterman, chairman of Samson Investment Co. of Tulsa, Oklahoma; Harvey "Bud" Meyerhoff, a fabulously wealthy and powerful Baltimore real estate magnate; Laurence Tisch, chairman of Loews Corp.; Max Fisher, the Detroit oil magnate and Republican Party powerhouse; bagel magnate Max Lender; and Leonard Abramson, the founder of U.S. Healthcare.

According to the Journal account, the Mega Group was founded in 1991 by Wexler and Charles Bronfman, to add greater clout to the Israeli lobby, by establishing an informal, but all-powerful policymaking group, able to deploy billions of dollars in "charitable" funds for the maximum effect on U.S. policy toward Israel, the Mideast, and other issues of paramount importance to the Jewish megabillionaires. The Mega Group convenes twice a year, for two-day sessions, where, behind closed doors, the members make life-and-death decisions, affecting U.S. policy. Membership is by invitation only; the meetings are secret (the Wall Street Journal story was the only coverage to ever appear in the U.S. media about the existence of the Mega Group, before the publication of this EIR account); and the members each kick in $30,000 in annual dues, to cover "operating expenses" for the twice-yearly sessions.

Charles Bronfman reflected the Mega Group's propensity for secrecy, when he told the Journal's Lisa Miller, "From the beginning we didn't want to be seen as a threat to anybody. And that still pertains. We don't want to be seen as the Sanhedrin," a reference to the highest court of the ancient Jews. "We don't want to be looked at crooked." Charles' far more sinister and slick brother, Edgar, tried to dismiss the activities of the Mega Group, telling Miller, "We want to make it cool to be Jewish."

Not So Cool

But then, a March 13, 2001 dispatch by the Jewish Telegraph Agency revealed that the Mega Group is more than a loose bunch of Jewish billionaires out to do good. The JTA reported that newly installed Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was about to launch a two-pronged propaganda offensive inside the United States, aimed at winning American support for his plans to overturn the Mideast peace process. First, the JTA revealed, the Sharon government announced that it was hiring two U.S. public relations firms—Rubenstein Associates and Morris, Carrick and Guma—to peddle the Israeli government "spin" inside the U.S. media and in policymaking circles in New York and Washington.

The JTA wire continued, "More controversially, a handful of Jewish mega-donors has created a think-tank they hope will generate long-term strategies for presenting Israel in a favorable light."

The new think-tank, Emet (the Hebrew word for "truth"), JTA reported, is the collective brain-child of Leonard Abramson, Edgar Bronfman, and Michael Steinhardt—three of the leading Mega Group members (JTA made no mention of Mega). The Mega Group is expected to kick in $7 million to launch the new organization, with the Israeli Foreign Ministry also pledged to pony up $1 million in startup cash. But, lest there be any confusion about who's in charge at Emet, JTA revealed that "the group consulted with [Malcolm] Hoelein, [Abe] Foxman and other Jewish activists—and only then notified Israel's Foreign Ministry, Foxman said." Hoelein, the executive vice president of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, is a fanatical backer of the Sharon war-drive, a view he shared with the just-retired president of the group, Ronald Lauder, a big Sharon financial backer who met with Sharon in September 2000—just before the latter staged his provocation at the Islamic holy sites on the Temple Mount/al-Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem, triggering the ongoing violence.

The Emet project has been criticized inside Israel, by Foreign Ministry officials and peace activists alike. As JTA reported, "Some Foreign Ministry officials grumbled that American Jews were poaching on their turf. Not surprisingly, they would prefer that any extra money be funneled to the ministry's efforts.... Israel's left appeared concerned that hawkish American Jews will use Emet to push a hard-line approach to the peace process." Steinhardt, Bronfman, and Abramson refused to talk about the project. But the enthusiastic endorsement for Emet from Morton Klein, president of the hawkish Zionist Organization of America, is strong confirmation that the outfit will peddle Sharon's war line. As EIR reported recently, Klein led a delegation of right-wing Zionists and evangelical Christians in a White House meeting, where they threatened a Presidential representative with a cutoff of support, if Bush attempted to interfere in Sharon's war schemes (see Anton Chaitkin, "Temple Mount Fanatics Seek To Blackmail Bush," EIR Aug. 24, 2001).

The Power of Money

The Mega Group story came full circle on May 5, 2001, with the publication of a story in an obscure Israeli online publication, Media Monitors Network, by writer Israel Shamir. Shamir noted, with no lack of irony, the meeting of the Mega Group, which had taken place the previous day at the Manhattan mansion of Edgar Bronfman.

Shamir first described a meeting he had recently had with a Vermont-based psychoanalyst, the nephew of Israel's first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion. The nephew prided himself on the fact that his closest friends were Palestinians, and that he rejected the idea of a Jewish "tribal" identity, preferring to view all human beings as brethren.

Shamir observed, "That is the last thing the bosses want. I would not be amazed if they discussed it yesterday, when they met in the Edgar Bronfman mansion in Manhattan. The head of the World Jewish Congress hosted a meeting of the 50 richest and most powerful Jews of the U.S. and Canada. There was no press coverage, no limelight, just a few lines in the newspapers.... They agreed to launch a PR program under the Orwellian codename of 'Truth' with the purpose of influencing American public opinion regarding Israeli policies."

Shamir continued, "The megabucks call themselves 'Mega group.' This name appeared in the media a couple of years ago, as a name for the secret Israeli mole in the upper reaches of the U.S. establishment. It came up in an overheard phone conversation, later denied by the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C. The newshounds and spook watchers got it wrong. 'Mega' was not an agent, Mega was the boss."

With some bitterness, Shamir wrote, "Megabucks influence us, even more than they influence the U.S. Our politicians are as weak and corrupt as America's and they are easier to swing. Even relative small-timers can cause eruption and bloodshed, like the California bingo-parlor owner [Irving] Moskowitz, who pushed our ex-prime minister Netanyahu to open the tunnel under the Haram al Sharif.... The Megabucks can buy Israel with their spare change. If they wish, we would have peace in Palestine today. But they are not interested in Israel per se.... Megabucks care for themselves, and they need Israel in order to keep the American Jews together, supporting them. That is why they do not mind bloodshed in Palestine, and even a bloody regional war does not scare them."

Shamir concluded: "In my opinion, Megabucks, rather than forces of Caballa, move the events in the Middle East. It is not magic, just money—but a lot of money. They do not rule America or Israel, but they exercise a lot of influence. Fifty multibillionaires united in one framework present a very real force in the world."

Of course, Shamir does not have the picture precisely right. The Bronfman-centered Mega Group is but one component of an insane and desperate element within the transatlantic financial establishment that is now pressing for a "Clash of Civilizations," as a means of responding to the collapse of their global financial empire, and the threat of a new set of Eurasia-centered cooperative arrangements among nations supplanting their power. But, as far as the Mega puzzle is concerned, Shamir has solved the mystery.

No wonder Mossad boss Yatom scolded his Washington-based underling with the warning, "This is not something we use Mega for."

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 11:27 PM

It is no secret that some of the richest Jews here in the USA and Canada have gotten together to help Israel. The Arabs with all their oil money and clout have been influencing American foreign policy for years. That is O.K. But when rich Jews get together to do the same thing, it is somehow looked upon with suspicion. Espionage ? Come on now. Give us a break. This garbage is reminiscent of classical anti-semitism (Blood Libels, Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion, Etc.). Just because something appears in print does not mean that people have to show their ingorance by believing it. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Amergin
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 11:38 PM

A hanging is a good thing for spies...

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: GUEST,Maotz
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 11:41 PM

oky dokey I see that I managed to veer everyone off topic, was not my intention. I actually thought it was an example that would make varying view points clear to everyone, guess not.
I'm sorry, Carol that you took my post personally, Yes, I borrowed the name "Murphy" from you, didn't realize that entailed "baiting". Didn't realize you'd be so sensitive about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 11:51 PM

Rabbi-Sol

I'm with you about this particular article. It's kinda nutty. But this thing that you said tickled me.

The Arabs with all their oil money and clout have been influencing American foreign policy for years. That is O.K.

I don't think it is OK. I don't thing either is OK. Have you seen Farenheit 9/11? Michael Moore, at least, doesn't think that Arab influence is OK. I'm tired of rich folks of all kinds buying governments and influence.

By the way, you and a few others here throw around that term "anti-semitism" quite a bit. Its starting to become old and sound rather shrill. Is it possible to oppose or be concerned about anything Israel or "rich Jews" do and not be labeled an anti-semite? Can't a person just be "anti-traitor" or just be against having a bunch of rich people who happen to be Jews try to involve us in Israel's problems?

I'm not Martin Gibson. I don't have to hate you to disagree with you. In fact I like you even though we disagree.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Aug 04 - 11:52 PM

No, Guest,Maotz. It was not I who brought poor Mr. Murphy into this discussion on this thread. I was merely quoting someone else. Verbatim, in fact. I copied and pasted directly from the other person's post.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 12:15 AM

Jack: Unfortunately, politics in the USA is all about money. I agree with you. It should not be that way. It is the lobbyists that are influencing policy, not you or I. When was the last time a POOR man was elected President of the United States ? Not since old Abe Lincoln came out of the wilderness. My point being, if the Arabs do it, we Jews have to do it as well. Money talks and the brown stuff walks. Until we can rectify this injustice, we are all forced to play the game. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 03:44 PM

My point is that it is dispicable for both to be working with foreign governments against the interests of US citizens. By your logic it is OK for wealthly Arabs to do it because wealthy Jews do it. You should be speaking against both.

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: Rabbi-Sol
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 05:02 PM

I am against all foreign as well as domestic special interest groups using monetary incentives to influence our elected representatives, who are supposed to be working for us, the people who elected them. Take for example the pharmacutical giants. They are exerting extreme pressure on Bush and other government officials to ban the importation of prescription medicines from Canada. As a senior citizen, I have to take many expensive meds and if I did not have a Canadian source for them I could not afford them. But firms such as Pfizer are lobbying strongly to stop these imports, irrespective of the will of the majority. As I said before it's all about money, and it stinks. SOL ZELLER

Subject: RE: BS: Justice For Jonathan Pollard
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 05:17 PM

I definitely agree with your 12 Aug 04 - 05:02 PM post, Rabbi Sol. 100 percent.