soc.women

On Sep 6, 8:16 pm, NefeshBarYochai wrote:
> I nominate Jonathon Pollard for President of the United States of
> America

No way he is a spy. Milgobne Nibner no such thing. NefeshBarYochai do
not know what this means Yiddish Hebrew? What does it mean. A name of
somebody?

Jonathan Jay Pollard (born August 7, 1954 in South Bend, Indiana) is a
convicted Israeli spy and a former United States Naval civilian
intelligence analyst. Pollard waived the right to trial in return for
restrictions on sentencing, pleaded guilty and was convicted on one
count of spying for Israel,[1] receiving a life sentence in 1986 with
a recommendation against parole. Israel publicly denied that
PollarEspionage
Exactly what information he gave to Israel has still not been
officially revealed. According to Pollard, he gave only information
regarding Iraq's missile threats to Israel.[4] Press reports cited a
secret 46-page memorandum, which Pollard and his attorneys were
allowed to view [5] , provided to the judge by Secretary of Defense
Caspar Weinberger, which described Pollard's spying as including,
among other things, obtaining and copying the latest version of Radio-
Signal Notations, a 10-volume manual detailing America's global
electronic surveillance network[6][7]

With regards to friendly nations spying on each other, Pollard
supporters cite the 1983 statement by Senator David Durenberger,
former head of the . Senate Intelligence Committee. Durenberger
claimed, while speaking to a Jewish group, that the CIA had turned an
officer in the Israel Defence Forces, and that he had been an active
source during the 1982 Lebanon War.[8][9]

d was an Israeli spy until 1998, when he was granted Israeli
citizenship.[2] He was incarcerated at the federal penitentiary in
Marion, Illinois in solitary confinement for seven years, then
transferred to Butner Federal Correctional Institution in North
Carolina.[3]Pollard had, in the meantime, begun plea discussions with
the government. He sought to plead guilty both to minimize his chances
of receiving a life sentence and to enable Anne Pollard to plead as
well, which the government was otherwise unwilling to let her do. The
government, however, was prepared to offer Pollard a plea agreement
only after Pollard consented to assist the government in its damage
assessment and submitted to polygraph examinations and interviews with
FBI agents and Department of Justice attorneys. Accordingly, over a
period of several months, Pollard cooperated with the government
investigation, and in late May of 1986, the government offered him a
plea agreement, which he accepted.

By the terms of that agreement, Pollard was bound to plead guilty to
one count of conspiracy to deliver national defense information to a
foreign government [10], which carried a maximum prison term of life,
and to cooperate fully with the government's ongoing investigation. He
promised not to disseminate any information concerning his crimes
without submitting to pre-clearance by the Director of Naval
Intelligence. His agreement further provided that failure by Anne
Pollard to adhere to the terms of her agreement entitled the
government to void his agreement, and her agreement contained a mirror-
image provision.

In return for Pollard's plea, the government promised not to charge
him with additional crimes, entered into a plea agreement with Anne
Pollard, and made several specific representations that are very much
at issue in this case. The critical provisions are paragraphs 4(a) and
4(b) of the agreement, in which the government "agreed as follows":

(a) When [Pollard] appears before the Court for sentencing for the
offense to which he has agreed to plead guilty, the Government will
bring to the Court's attention the nature, extent and value of his
cooperation and testimony. Because of the classified nature of the
information Mr. Pollard has provided to the Government, it is
understood that particular representations concerning his cooperation
may have to be made to the Court in camera. In general, however, the
Government has agreed to represent that the information Mr. Pollard
has provided is of considerable value to the Government's damage
assessment analysis, its investigation of this criminal case, and the
enforcement of the espionage laws.
(b) Notwithstanding Mr. Pollard's cooperation, at the time of
sentencing the Government will recommend that the Court impose a
sentence of a substantial period of incarceration and a monetary fine.
The Government retains full right of allocution at all times
concerning the facts and circumstances of the offenses committed by
Mr. Pollard, and will be free to correct any misstatements of fact at
the time of sentencing, including representations of the defendant and
his counsel in regard to the nature and extent of Mr. Pollard's
cooperation. Moreover, Mr. Pollard understands that, while the Court
may take his cooperation into account in determining whether or not to
impose a sentence of life imprisonment, this agreement cannot and does
not limit the court's discretion to impose the maximum sentence.
[citation needed]
On June 4, 1986 Jonathan Pollard pled guilty to one count of
conspiracy to deliver national defense information to a foreign
government. Before sentencing, and in violation of the plea agreement,
Pollard and his wife Anne gave defiant media interviews in which they
defended their spying, and attempted to rally American Jews to their
cause. In a 60 Minutes interview, Anne said, "I feel my husband and I
did what we were expected to do, and what our moral obligation was as
Jews, what our moral obligation was as human beings, and I have no
regrets about that" [6]. Three weeks before his sentencing, Wolf
Blitzer, at the time a Jerusalem Post correspondent, conducted a jail-
cell interview with Pollard and penned an article which also ran in
the Washington Post headlined, "Pollard: Not A Bumbler, but Israel's
Master Spy." published on February 15, 1987.[11] Pollard told Blitzer
about some of the information he provided the Israelis: reconnaissance
satellite photography of Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
headquarters in Tunisia, specific capabilities of Libya's air
defenses, and "the pick of . intelligence about Arab and Islamic
conventional and unconventional military activity, from Morocco to
Pakistan and every country in between. This included both 'friendly'
and 'unfriendly' Arab countries."

The breaking of the plea agreement (in which Pollard swore not to
disclose classified material he obtained while working for the Navy
and swore not to "provide information for purposes of publication or
dissemination," unless it was reviewed by the director of naval
intelligence) remains one possible reason for Pollard to remain in
prison despite a change in US. parole laws.[12]

Before sentencing, as noted above, Secretary of Defense Caspar
Weinberger delivered a 46-page classified memorandum to the sentencing
judge. According to a pro-Pollard ACLU amicus brief [13], Wolf Blitzer
[14], former . District Court Judge George N. Leighton (see below)
and even Pollard's own website [15] the contents of the memo were
shown to Pollard's attorneys at the time. On the day before
sentencing, Weinberger delivered a supplemental four-page memorandum
to the judge. Pollard and his attorneys were showed the supplemental
memorandum only briefly before sentencing. Pollard alleges that, in
the memorandum, Weinberger accused him of treason and suggested a
lifetime prison sentence.

Pollard never faced treason charges and was convicted within the
boundaries of the charge he pled guilty to, although many speculate
that the Weinberger memorandum outlined (and the classified memorandum
to the judge detailed) treasonous activities by Pollard, due to the
overwhelming assertion by US defense and intelligence officials that
Pollard should stay imprisoned for life.

The primary investigator in the Pollard case, Ron Olive, stated in his
2006 book 'Capturing Jonathan Pollard', that Pollard offered
classified material to four other countries besides Israel, including
Pakistan. Seven former US Secretaries of Defense have written
petitions to keep Pollard imprisoned for life, and CIA chief Tenet
threatened to resign when the issue of releasing Pollard was put
forwPollard was sentenced to life in prison on one count of espionage.
Pollard and his supporters protested that this was a sentence
unprecedented for espionage committed for an ally, and was in
violation of his plea agreement. However, the prosecutor complied with
the plea agreement and asked for "only a substantial number of years
in prison;" Judge Aubrey Robinson Jr. imposed the life sentence after
hearing of the statements of the Secretary of Defense, the Director of
Central Intelligence, and other . government officials (plea
agreements are not binding upon judges).[17] Pollard's attorney then
failed to file his appeal within the mandated ten-day period after
sentencing. In 1987, Pollard began his life sentence, which he is
still serving. Pollard's wife, Anne, was sentenced to five years in
prison but was released after three and a half years due to health
problems.

In United States of America v. Jonathan Jay Pollard [18] 1990 .
Dist. LEXIS 11844, Pollard's attorney filed a motion to withdraw the
plea, among other things. The motion was denied. Several parts of the
plea agreement are mentioned in the appeal, United States of America
v=2E Jonathan Jay Pollard 295 . App. . 7; 959 1011; 1992 .
App. LEXIS 4695. The appeal was also denied. Several years later, with
a different attorney, Pollard filed a Habeas Corpus petition. A panel
of the . Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
ruled two-to-one to deny Pollard's petition, primarily due to the
failure of Pollard's original attorneys to file his appeal in a timely
manner. The dissenting judge, Judge Stephen Williams, stated that
"because the government's breach of the plea agreement was a
fundamental miscarriage of justice requiring relief under 28 .C. =A7
2255, I dissent."[19]

ard by the Clinton administration.[16]


The Israeli government has paid for at least two of Pollard's trial
attorneys-Richard A. Hibey and Hamilton Philip Fox III-and has
repeatedly asked for his release.[6] Israeli leaders often raise the
Pollard case in discussions with . officials, including Presidents
Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.[6] In 1998, Israel admitted in a
statement from then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Pollard had
been an Israeli spy. "One of the first things we said at (the 1998 Wye
River conference)", recalled Netanyahu in an interview, "was that if
we signed an agreement with Arafat, I expected a pardon for Pollard".
[6] However, President Clinton declined to release Pollard.

The latest Israeli request for Pollard's release made in New York on
September 14, 2005 was again declined by President Bush. A request on
Pollard's behalf that he be designated a Prisoner of Zion was rejected
by the High Court of Justice of Israel on January 16, 2006. Another
appeal for intervention on Pollard's behalf was rejected by the High
Court on June 8, 's supporters argue that his sentence was
excessive: "The median sentence for the offense Pollard committed -
one count of passing non-injurious classified information to an ally -
is two to four years" [20]. Although Pollard pled guilty as part of a
plea bargain, he was shown no leniency and was given the maximum
sentence. Pollard was never charged, indicted or convicted of treason.

Pollard maintains that he provided only information that, at the time,
he believed was vital to Israeli security and that was being withheld
by The Pentagon, in violation of a 1983 Memorandum of Understanding
between the two countries regarding the sharing of vital security
intelligence. According to Pollard, this included data on Soviet arms
shipments to Syria, Iraqi and Syrian chemical weapons, the Pakistani
atomic bomb project, and Libyan air defense systems [21]

Since then, however, he has publicly expressed remorse for operating
outside the law:

"Unfortunately, I failed to appreciate the fact that such concerns did
not justify my indifference to the law." (Pollard's public letter of
remorse of June 6, 1991, addressed to his parents but published widely
in newspapers)[7]
and

"I realize that no matter what my motives may have been, I did not
have the right to violate the law. ... I have also made it very clear
that I do not consider myself to be a "hero" and would prefer that
people simply see me as someone who made a terrible mistake and who
has paid dearly for my mistake. Please accept this as my unconditional
statement of heartfelt remorse for my actions." (Pollard's public
letter of remorse of May 26, 1996, addressed to President Bill
Clinton).[citation needed]
In recent years, others have argued that Pollard's punishment is too
harsh. Caspar Weinberger, who was the driving force behind Pollard's
life sentence, has stated that the case was a minor problem made much
larger than it really was. In an interview in 2002, [22] Weinberger
was asked why he had omitted all mention of Pollard in his memoirs.
Weinberger replied, "Because it was, in a sense, a very minor matter
but made very important." Asked to elaborate, Weinberger repeated, "As
I say, the Pollard matter was comparatively minor. It was made far
bigger than its actual importance."[23]

Eric Margolis alleges that Pollard's spying may have led to the
capture and execution of CIA spies in the Eastern Bloc after Israel
forwarded Pollard's information to the Soviet Union [24]. John Loftus
argues that Pollard did not have access to agent lists and that Israel
would have had no reason to disclose such names to the Soviet Union,
even if it had them [25]. Loftus believes that the exposure of the CIA
agents actually resulted from the ongoing activities of top CIA
official Aldrich Ames, arrested in February 1994, and FBI Special
Agent Robert Hanssen, arrested in February 2001. Their activities were
exposed only after Pollard's conviction.
In July 2005, the . Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit rejected Pollard's latest appeal. Pollard had sought a new
trial on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, and he
sought to receive classified documents pertinent to his new lawyers'
efforts in preparing a clemency petition. The Court of Appeals
rejected both arguments, however, and Pollard remains imprisoned. On
February 10, 2006, lawyers for Pollard filed an appeal with the United
States Supreme Court to attempt to gain access to the classified
documents. The brief was based on the notion that the separation of
powers doctrine is a flexible doctrine that does not dictate the
complete separation of the three branches of Government from one
another. The Court of Appeals violated this principle in asserting sua
sponte that the judiciary has no jurisdiction over the classified
documents due to the fact that access was for the ultimate purpose of
clemency, an executive function. In fact, the President's clemency
power would be wholly unaffected by successor counsel's access to the
classified documents, and the classified documents were sealed under
protective order, a judicial tool. The Supreme Court denied this
appeal on March 20, 2006.

The courts have been criticized for denying Pollard's current
attorneys' access to the sentencing memorandum. In a 2002 letter to
IMRA, former . District Court Judge George N. Leighton wrote:

"At the time Mr. Pollard was sentenced in March of 1987, the court
placed under seal approximately forty pages of material filed in the
court's docket. These included portions of a declaration by then-
Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, and portions of pre-sentencing
memoranda submitted to the court by the government as well as by the
defense. The materials were sealed because the government said they
contained classified information, some of which could affect national
security if disclosed inappropriately.... Mr. Pollard and his attorney
at the time were permitted to read the sealed pages before sentencing.
However, despite the provision in the protective order for future
access, no attorney representing Mr. Pollard has been permitted to see
these pages since 1987. While this denial of access has severely
hampered the efforts of Mr. Pollard's new attorneys to secure justice
for their client, it has proved convenient for his adversaries. For
years, adversaries have exploited the sealed pages to generate
political opposition to relief for Mr. Pollard by spreading, in the
press, rumors and outright falsehoods. Since the accusations floated
in the media are nowhere to be found in the open court file, they
would either be substantiated in the sealed pages, or not at all. As
no one representing Mr. Pollard has been allowed access to the sealed
pages, Mr. Pollard's adversaries have had unbridled license to spread
falsehoods with virtually no risk of contradiction... 'The
government's conduct in this case is highly disturbing."[citation

In the spring of 2007, Larry Dub, Pollard's pro bono lawyer in Israel,
suggested anti-semitism was behind the long sentence, saying: "There
are others who have committed the exact same crime, and they received
2-4 years in prison, but when it came to Pollard, they felt that it
was time to teach the Jews a lesson" [26]