JONATHAN POLLARD

WHY POLLARD WON'T COMPROMISE ON THE TRUTH

Dear Limor,

Allow me to preface with my thanks and my profound apology. I am deeply grateful for your on-going support and for the commitment of Prime Minister Netanyahu to securing my release.

I am profoundly sorry if in any of my recent words or deeds you have found reason to take offense. As you surely realize, no offense was ever intended to you, to the Government, to the Prime Minister and certainly not to the Likud Party itself. Limor, I feel certain that if you allow me to review the facts with you, you will see that your anger is being directed at the wrong target.

1) Limor, the only hope I have of getting out of prison is if the Government of Israel tells the truth. The truth is that I was an agent of the Government of Israel in a sanctioned operation.

This is not about your honor, or about mine.

It is simply the only way that the Americans will ever release me.

Why? As long as Israel goes on lying about her role in the affair, the United States will go on lying about its reasons for keeping me here.

2) The government's offer to recognize me as an agent in a rogue operation was a disingenuous attempt to appease public opinion.

It is the American administration that needs convincing, not public opinion.

And since the American administration knows full well that this is not the truth, that it was not a rogue operation, all that Israel is doing is to antagonize them even more.

3) If the Israeli Government took flack for this bogus offer of recognition in the media, please remember

a) the strong public reaction occurred because the government is still not telling the truth

b) it was your own attorney Shimon Stein whose office leaked this story to the press. All I did was to react to the news. And I reacted as any person would react to a life-threatening lie.

4) Stein did not deal honorably with us.

a) His divide-and-conquer tactics destroyed our trust

b) Stein insisted on confidentiality and then blatantly broke confidentiality.

c) Stein's office was responsible for leaking that bogus offer of recognition

Experience has taught me not to deal with people who prove themselves to be untrustworthy. For that reason I have instructed my attorney not to deal with Stein.

5) With regard to yesterday's fiasco about the proposed letter to the US, please consider the following points:

a) My wife tried desperately to avoid talking to the media. She placed an urgent call to Dani Naveh, who did not accept her phone call. She explained the urgency of her call, and was promised that Naveh would call her back shortly. The call from Naveh never came, but the calls from the media did.

b) My first letter to Naveh was an attempt to work quietly and cooperatively with the government on this initiative precisely to ensure that it would succeed and not only secure my release, but also bring honor to the Prime Minister and to the Government.

c) Right after I sent my letter to Naveh, I learned that the text of the proposed letter to the President had already been set.

d) Once again I appealed privately to Dani Naveh by having my wife call him and by sending him a memo. Both appeals brought no response.

e )Again the story was leaked to the media by someone inside the government. Again we had no choice but to respond.

Limor, this whole fiasco could have been avoided if we had been consulted about the text of this letter. Forgive me Limor , but it is my neck that is in the noose, and the longer I sit in prison the tighter the noose is getting.

Also, please bear in mind Limor that that the original outcry against this letter came from your own Likud government minister Arik Sharon.

Had the letter acknowledged the truth, neither Arik Sharon nor I would have had any occasion to cry out in dismay.

6) It is apparent to us that the Prime Minister has honorable intentions and that this Government is sincere in its desire to see me home.

If this government wishes to succeed where all previous governments have failed, it must not continue the same mistakes as its predecessors or continue the same policy of implausible deniability.

For example, consider the text of the letter that the Prime Minister proposed to send to Mr. Clinton. :

What exactly did the Government attempt to accomplish by saying in this letter that there was no disagreement with the US on the harshness of my sentence or my cruel and unusual punishment?

As you are well aware Limor, no one in the history of the United States has ever gotten a life sentence for spying for an ally. The most recent cases got 0 years (Schwartz), and 1 year in a halfway house (Lee), respectively. The most eminent judges and lawyers have repeatedly gone on record calling my sentence "grossly disproportionate".

Only the Government of Israel, so fearful of offending the United States, endorses the lie that my punishment was somehow supposed to fit the crime. Why then should the US let me go?

The proposed text of the letter, gave the US every justification for continuing to keep me and not a single new reason to free me.

If the Government of Israel were to provide the US with the basis for freeing me, by:

a) acknowledging responsibility for me as an agent

b) acknowledging that this was a sanctioned operation

c) reassuring the US not only of my remorse but of Israel's apologies as well

d) acknowledging that the sentence I received has been much harsher than is usual and that it is time to let me go and that Israel's 50th anniversary would be a fitting time to do so.

e) offering to guarantee any conditions that the US might stipulate for my release and guaranteeing my good conduct

-then all of the old excuses that the US uses to keep me here would no longer be valid. Essentially the old excuses could not stand in the light of truth.

The US needs a way out of this dilemma just as much as Israel does.

As I told Minister Yishai, in our recent visit, fifty years ago our fight for independence was the struggle for physical independence from those powers that physically overwhelmed and controlled us. This Yom Ha'atzmaoot, the struggle is for our psychological independence, to break the bonds of fear that tie us to "the Empire" in ways that are self-destructive.

Limor, in seeking my release, both you and Yuli have shown an unwavering commitment to truth. If the Prime Minister will lead the cabinet down the same courageous path that the two of you have pointed out, we cannot fail and I will be home very soon.

Please Limor, direct your anger at the lies. Direct it at the fear that keeps those lies going. Direct it at the evil that keeps me here. But for Heaven's Sake, don't direct it at me - the one who 13 years later is still paying the price for the all the lies.

I dream of being with my brothers and sisters, this year, in our own land on Independence Day.

I dream of standing with you and Yuli and paying respect to the courageous individuals who took the initiative to bring this ordeal to an end.

I can see myself embracing our Prime Minister and thanking him publicly for the courage and leadership he has shown to make my freedom possible.

That is my dream. Now it is up to the Prime Minister and the Government, to make that dream come true.

You can do it. I know you can.

Yours truly,

Jonathan

c.c. Larry Dub Esq., Prime Minister Netanyahu, Relevant Cabinet Ministers, Cabinet Sec. Naveh

Pollard Rejects Bogus Government Offer

Pollard stated,

"I did not spend 13 years in prison in order to endorse a lie. The truth must come out, so that I may be freed. The truth is simple and clear: I was an Israeli agent employed by the LAKAM branch of Intelligence in an operation that was fully sanctioned by the Government of Israel. Anything less than that is a distortion of the truth that is counterproductive to the goal of securing my release."

Comparison of Pollard's Sentence With Others

Pollard's life sentence is also disproportionate even when compared to the sentences of those who committed far more serious offences by spying for enemy nations.

Table I: American Allies

• Jonathan Pollard is the only person in the history of the United States to receive a life sentence for spying for an American ally.
• On November 21, 1997, Pollard entered the 13th year of his life sentence, with no end in sight.
• The maximum sentence today for such an offence is 10 years.
• The median sentence for this offence is 2 to 4 years.

Name	Country Spied For	Sentence	Time Served Before Release
Jonathan Pollard	Israel	Life
Michael Schwartz	Saudi Arabia	0 years	0 years
Peter Lee	China	1 year in halfway house
Samual Morrison	Great Britain	2 years	3 months
Steven Baba	South Africa	2 years	5 months
Sharon Scranage	Ghana	2 years	8 months
Jean Baynes	Phillipines	3.5 years	1.4 years
Abdul Kader Helmy	Egypt	3.8 years	2 years
Geneva Jones	Africa	5.2 years
Joseph Brown	Phillipines	5.9 years
Michael Allen	Phillipines	8 years
Robert Kim	South Korea	9 years
Thomas Dolce	South Africa	10 years	5.2 years
Steven Lalas	Greece	14 years

_{Time served before release is shown where known. Other cases of early release exist.}

Table II: American Enemies

Name	Country Spied For	Sentence	Time Served Before Release
James Wood	Soviet Union	2 years
Sahag Dedyan	Soviet Union	3 years
Randy Jeffries	Soviet Union	3-9 years
Brian Horton	Soviet Union	6 years
William Bell	Poland	8 years
Alfred Zoho	East Germany	8 years
Nikolay Ogarodnikova	Soviet Union	8 years
Francis X. Pizzo	Soviet Union	10 years
Daniel Richardson	Soviet Union	10 years
Ernst Forbich	East Germany	15 years
William Whalen	Soviet Union	15 years
Edwin Moore	Soviet Union	15 years
Troung Dinh Ung	North Vietnam	15 years
Ronald Humphrey	North Vietnam	15 years
Robert Lipka	Soviet Union	18 years
David Barnett	Soviet Union	18 years
Svetlana Ogarodnikova	Soviet Union	18 years
Albert Sombolay	Iraq & Jordan	19 years
Richard Miller	Soviet Union	20 years	6 years
Sarkis Paskallan	Soviet Union	22 years
Harold Nicholson	Soviet Union	23 years
Clayton Lonetree	Soviet Union	25 years	9 years
Michael Walker	Soviet Union	25 years
Bruce Ott	Soviet Union	25 years
Earl Pitts	Soviet Union	27 years
H.W. Boachanhaupi	Soviet Union	30 years
Roderick Ramsay	Hungary & Czechoslovakia	36 years
James Hall	Soviet Union & East Germany	40 years
Christopher Boyce	Soviet Union	40 years
William Kampiles	Soviet Union	40 years	19 years
Veldik Enger	Soviet Union	50 years
R.P. Charnyayev	Soviet Union	50 years
Marian Zacharski	Poland	Life	4 years
Aldrich Ames	Soviet Union	Life

_{Time served before release is shown where known. Other cases of early release exist.}

Aldrich Ames: A Case In Point

Aldrich Ames' treatment was far more benign, and (except for a relatively short period of time during debriefing) did not include the rigours of long years of solitary; nor was he ever subjected to the harsh conditions of "K" Unit at Marion - even though his offence was far more serious.

Updated Mar. 31, 1998

SOURCE:The official Web Site authorized by Jonathan and Esther Pollard.

JONATHAN POLLARD NEWS RELEASE

B'nai Brith President: "Pollard Potential Dreyfus II"

Jerusalem, March 6, 1998, Kol Yisroel Israel Radio today reported that following his March 5,1998 prison visit with Jonathan Pollard, B'nai Brith International President Tommy Baer spoke to Kol Yisroel Washington Reporter Chaim Zissovitch. According to Kol Yisroel radio reports today, Mr. Baer declared that it is time for the US to release Pollard and return him to Israel. Mr. Baer indicated that Pollard's life sentence is unprecedented and that failure on the part of the US to release him now would turn this case into another Dreyfus Case.

The Alfred Dreyfus Case represents the historical epitome of the perversion of the law for anti-semitic purposes. Dreyfus spent 12 years incarcerated on Devil's Island until Emile Zola's famous treatise "J'accuse" ("I accuse") galvanized the support necessary to bring about Dreyfus' release. 1997 was the 100th anniversary of the Dreyfus case.

B'nai Brith's American Press Release on the Visit follows:

For Immediate Release March 6, 1998.

B'NAI B'RITH PRESIDENT MEETS WITH JONATHAN JAY POLLARD FOR FIRST TIME AND PLEDGES TO RALLY SUPPORT FOR HIS RELEASE ON HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) -- March 6, 1998--

B'nai B'rith International President Tommy P. Baer met for the first time yesterday with Jonathan Jay Pollard who is serving a life sentence for spying on behalf of Israel. Baer said that B'nai B'rith "absolutely does not condone what Pollard did, but he has served longer than any individual convicted of the same crime. He has paid his debt to society."

"Mr. Pollard has made a clear statement of remorse for his misdeeds," said Baer who met with the former U.S. Naval intelligence analyst for more than 1 1/2 hours yesterday at the federal correction facility in Butner, North Carolina.

Baer pledged to rally support among American Jewish organizations on Pollard's behalf. "It is time," said Baer,"for the organized Jewish community in the United States to speak out on the basis of humanitarian concern and compassion for Mr. Pollard."

Pollard, who is serving a life sentence and has been incarcerated for 13 years, told Baer: "I am not a hero or a martyr and I object to any such characterizations."

B'nai B'rith has several times repeated its call for Pollard's sentence to be commuted to time already served, while consistently expressing its strong disapproval of his betrayal the trust placed in him. Most recently in 1996 B'nai B'rith delegates voted at its biennial convention to call upon President Clinton to commute the sentence on humanitarian grounds.

"I am not seeking exoneration and I do not claim my acts to have been justified," Pollard said.

It was Baer's observation that "Pollard's mental state is good, but that he suffers from several health problems."

74% Say ISRAEL SHOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR POLLARD'S SPYING

A Gallup Poll commissioned by IMRA, Independent Media Review & Analysis, on March 3rd finds that close to 74% of adult Israeli Jews believe that the Government of Israel should publicly take responsibility for Jonathan Pollard's spying activities on Israel's behalf. Support for this position was similar across the political spectrum. The survey found that support for a public declaration was higher among women (77.0%) than men (70.7%).

This Monday, Israel's Supreme Court postponed hearing Jonathan Pollard's petition that Israel admit he acted as Israel's agent for another 60 days. Esther Pollard, Jonathan Pollard's wife, told IMRA that Pollard's lawyers accepted the additional delay after the judges made it clear that if they rejected the request the petition would be rejected.

The following are the results of a poll of a representative sample of 500 Israeli Jews age 18 years and over by Gallup (Israel) on the evening of March 3, 1998. The results have a statistical error of +/- 4.4 percentage points.

Jonathan Pollard has been serving 13 years in an American prison for spying for Israel. While Israel gave the US evidence which lead to Pollard's conviction, Israel has refused to officially take responsibility for Pollard's spying activity for Israel. In your opinion, should Israel officially take responsibility for Pollard's spying for Israel?

                           Yes    No     Don't know  Refuse Reply
Total Population:         73.8%  15.5%     10.2%       0.5%
Voted for Peres           74.6%  16.5%      8.1%       0.9%
Voted for Netanyahu       75.8%  13.0%     10.8%       0.4%
Male                      70.7%  18.8%     10.2%       0.3%
Female                    77.0%  12.2%     10.1%       0.7%

ESTHER POLLARD REACTS TO GOVERNMENT REPLY

IMRA interviewed Jonathan Pollard's wife, Esther, in English, on March 1, 1998:

IMRA: You have just received a copy of the Israeli government's reply to the Supreme Court regarding your husband's petition that Israel recognize that he was an Israeli agent. Let's go through the government's reply :

The first claim of the government is that since the last hearing there were meetings between the representative of Jonathan Pollard and the Deputy Director for Special Services in the Ministry of Defense in which matters which could help Jonathan's future were discussed.

Pollard: During the entire 60 day delay the government showed a complete lack of serious intent and absolutely no honest initiative.

There were exactly 2 meetings. These were housekeeping type introductory meetings. The government canceled the rest of the meetings and did not respond to phone calls or faxes and was generally evasive.

Pollard: This is imaginative nonsense. It is another stalling tactic. An empty gesture.

This is committee number three. This committee, like its predecessors, is nothing but a smoke screen. Eventually the smoke clears and Jonathan is still in prison.

Please note that it did not take a committee to free the Masha'al Affair agents or the Swiss Affair agent.

Pollard: The two trips of ministers were not government initiatives. I also note that the Minister of Communication's visit was marred by criticism of the visit from Israel's Foreign Ministry. And this was followed by the very public cancellation of Treasury Minister Ne'eman's visit - a move which was very damaging, especially when you consider that Ne'eman found the time to meet many others during his visit to America.

As for the Rubenstein visit, it was a self-serving sham. Rubenstein used Jonathan's name as a "sweetener" in the Israeli press when he met with Reno about the murderer Sheinbeim, not about Pollard. This hurt Jonathan rather than helped him.

Pollard: The Government of Israel hasn't launched even the most simple initiative. Israel has not made it clear to its friends and supporters in America that it considers the release of Pollard to be an Israeli priority.

Pollard: This is a farce and a sham. This conclusion has nothing to do with the rest of the Israeli Government's arguments. Moreover, the entire response does not address a single point in our petition to the Supreme Court.

Pollard: I spoke with Jonathan on the phone and he told me that: 'In the best case scenario, the Supreme Court will live up to its highest ideals and we will learn about the integrity of the Supreme Court.

In the worse case scenario, the Supreme Court will live down to our lowest expectations, sacrificing truth for political expedience, and in that case as well we will be learning about the integrity of the Supreme Court.

In either case, what we, the People of Israel, will be learning about is the integrity of the Supreme Court. We all know the truth. Now we wait to see how the Supreme Court will deal with it.'

INTERVIEW WITH ESTHER POLLARD BEFORE SUPREME COURT HEARING

IMRA interviewed Jonathan Pollard's wife, Esther, in English, on February 27: IMRA: You are back in Israel for the court case. When is the hearing?

Pollard: Monday March 2nd.

Pollard: You will laugh, but we are asking the Israeli Government to recognize Jonathan as an agent. That is a key to freeing him.

Pollard: Israel has never officially accepted responsibility for Jonathan or for the operation he was involved in. Thirteen years later, Israel's continued denial of responsibility still angers the Americans. They have no interest in freeing Jonathan as long as Israel refuses to accept full responsibility.

Let me give it to you in the simplest possible analogy: You steal the cookies from the cookie jar. You come back and not only do you not admit to stealing the cookies, but you have the chutzpah to ask for the cookie jar as well.

Pollard: Again, Israel officially denies that he was an Israeli agent. The contradictions between Israel's official position and its actions has reached such ludicrous proportions that at this point Israel is in a bind.

Legally Israel cannot deny that he was an agent. Not just because of the ministerial visits, and his Israeli citizenship, but there are so many indications that he was in fact an agent.

Even just the ongoing involvement of Israel for the last 13 years in his situation. There are many ways that Israel has committed itself and has shown that it is intimately involved in this and can't be separated out. But, nevertheless, Israel has formally denied official responsibility for 13 years - which doesn't fool anyone.

Pollard: No. No one has even attempted to rationalize or explain the grossly incompetent approach that has been taken by Israel. There is no logic to it. It is stupid. It is totally stupid.

Pollard: When we applied for citizenship I was told by government ministers at the time that 'we can't give him citizenship because that would be tantamount to admitting that we sent him.' Because that was the basis on which he had the right to demand citizenship. In the end we had to go to court to fight for it and Israel couldn't deny it to him.

On what basis did Israel give Jonathan citizenship? On the basis of the fact that anyone who serves the security interests of the state has an automatic right to citizenship when the operation ends. The fact that Jonathan had already been given an official Israeli passport in the name of Danny Cohen during his operation, established beyond any doubt his bona fides.

So Israel could not refuse the request and the Supreme Court ordered them to show cause. They were given thirty days and they couldn't show cause. So instead Israel did a quick about-face and gave Jonathan the citizenship.

Unfortunately, they granted the citizenship with an attitutde that said 'OK, fine, we are giving him citizenship but this doesn't mean anything. We admit to nothing.'

In other words, rather than using the citizenship at that point as their tool for saying 'OK he is one of ours, now we take responsibility, send him home.' they said 'here is your citizenship. Aren't we nice. Good-bye.'

Pollard; Yes. They asked for a 6 month delay. They were granted a 60 day delay to resolve the case out of court.

Pollard: The delay was used only as a stalling tactic. In the entire 60 day period we saw no sign of serious intent or honest initiative.

If day 59 had come and it was clear that everything was in progress and proceeding, then we would have no interest to go back into court on day 60. We got to day 60 where they had literally avoided any meaningful action on the case. Avoided undertaking the most minimal of initiatives. The whole thing was an exercise in evasion.

Pollard: An easy one? The State of Israel, in accomplishing any important initiative in the United States, first engages AIPAC. With the support of AIPAC Israel then gets the necessary meetings on Capitol Hill and the proper exposure. AIPAC also helps Israel to engage the American Jewish leadership.

It doesn't matter if we are talking about advancing the peace process or selling any Israeli idea. This is standard practice. In 13 years AIPAC has never been engaged by the Israeli Government on the Pollard case. in 13 years, the American Jewish leadership have never once heard for the Israeli Government 'this is a national priority, we'd like your support on this.'

Another example of an easy initiative: Israel simply had to go to the money people in the Jewish community who fund the Clinton Government. All that Israel had to do was to say to them 'we could use you support on this. You don't even have to threaten not to sign the checks. Just remind the President that releasing Pollard is a priority of the Government of Israel that you support.'

Now how hard are those things?

Pollard: No. Not at all.

I would like to point out that the news reports are out that the Mossad agent in Switzerland is going to be released in a matter of a few weeks.

Now, on the one hand you have an agent in Switzerland whose release is arranged in days. You also have the Mashaal affair agents who's release was arranged within a few days and they were home in a week and a half.

On the other hand, you have another Israeli agent, Jonathan Pollard, who has been sitting in an American prison for thirteen years with absolutely no end in sight. No efforts are being made to secure his release.

Pollard: The new committee? All it is is theater. Window dressing.

Our experience with having new committees - and there have been three of them so far - is that every committee until now has been a smoke screen. And when the smoke clears, Jonathan is still in prison.

What the government has shown us in the past few weeks, both in the Masha'al affair and now in Switzerland, is that when they take responsibility and they do what they have to do they are able to bring an agent home almost immediately. It doesn't take thirteen years and a dozen failed committees.

Pollard: The point that people are forgetting is why Jonathan is sitting in prison in the first place.

America blindsided Israel thirteen years ago. by withholding vital security information that was owed to Israel according to the terms of a 1983 security agreement between the two countries.

Bottom line: Jonathan Pollard is the man who warned Israel about the poison gas and nuclear threat from Iraq. Just a short while ago, everyone in Israel was in the streets standing in line and waiting to get gas masks. And they were buying up kilometers of plastic sheeting to make sealed rooms. Where did we get this notion of sealed rooms from anyway? When did we switch over from thinking about bomb shelters to thinking about sealed rooms? Do you know when exactly? It actually started five years before the Gulf War when Jonathan handed over the information to Israel about what Iraq was preparing.

This was specifically Jonathan's contribution to Israel: getting Israel ready with sealed rooms. And here we were again, standing in the streets again seven years later doing the same thing. And the man who warned Israel about the poison gas threat and the rocket threat to Israel is rotting in an American prison. What exactly is going on here?

Pollard: Edelstein understood that there had been a massive injustice. He met Jonathan. He expected a wild crazy man who would be angry and bitter and attack him and instead he met this very intelligent, very pure soul, a very reasoned, very calm, very up-to-date person who was very knowledgeable about Israel. And he was overwhelmed.

Edelstein is an honest man. He could not understand why Jonathan would even be sitting there. I think that he believed that he would go back to Israel and call the right people and they could all get together and get this thing done.

From what I understand, Minister Edelstein did make those phone calls when he got back to Israel. He was both shocked and deeply distressed, we are told, that he received such deeply apathetic indifferent or downright hostile responses from many of the people in power that he contacted.

If anything, Edelstein is now running into the same garbage we have been fighting for the past thirteen years. People saying publicly that they are concerned about Jonathan yet behind the scenes sabotaging us.

Pollard: There aren't any nefarious deep dark reasons. Jonathan is not a threat to anyone.

Let me put it to you this way: If you could pick up Jonathan by the scruff of the neck and drop him into Bibi's office today, Bibi would look up and say 'Hi, welcome.' I have no doubt about that. What I do see is that neither he nor the government is willing to invest any political capital whatsoever in freeing Jonathan.

The Mossad is anything but a help. The fact that Jonathan's operation was necessary was a great embarrassment to the Mossad, because they were supposed to have very close contacts with the Americans and very good relations. The information that Jonathan provided showed that that simply wasn't the case. And it was a great embarrassment to the Mossad. Therefore, they were not and are not prepared to make any effort to secure his release.

As far as the political echelon is concerned, those people with direct involvement in the affair, right up to the Prime Minster's Office, felt it would be more comfortable for them to just remove themselves and become invisible. There was this whole 'quiet diplomacy' movement for many many years whose whole effort was dedicated to shutting Jonathan down and keeping the whole thing quiet and not making waves. I think that they simply hoped that eventually the whole thing would die down a bit and the Americans would one days quietly return him.

But Jonathan is far too useful to the Americans to simply give him up. And they are not going to give him up unless there is a very clear demand and unless a price is paid.

As Larry [Dub the attorney] likes to say, the first installment is the truth - 'he is ours. Give him back.'

Pollard: Think of how twisted it is. They are saying 'give him back. Not because he is ours, and not because we admit to anything. But give him back.'

Well how serious are you about getting him if you aren't even willing to admit that he was yours?

There is a real legal problem here also. And the problem belongs entirely to Mr. Netanyahu and his government. And the problem is: either Jonathan was an Israeli agent and if he was, they have a legal liability to him and they must bring him home at once. Or, he was innocent of the charges and he wasn't Israel's spy, and so not only has he been falsely accused - so has Israel. In that case it is up to Israel to clear his name, and Israel's at the same time.

But Israel cannot keep denying responsibility while at the same time sending ministers to visit Jonathan and in the same breath insisting that Jonathan doesn't belong to them. It doesn't make any sense.

Pollard: All the Prime Minister has to do is state it in a letter to Bill Clinton: 'He is ours, give him to us. We accept full responsibility.'

In the same way, could they get this agent out of Switzerland if they denied responsibility for the operation?

Pollard: No. The other thing that you have to remember about Jonathan's case is not only did Israel throw him out of the embassy, not only did Israel abandon him, Israel also betrayed him. Israel handed over to the Americans all of the documents with Jonathan's fingerprints on them in order to incriminate him. In the history of espionage no other nation has done that.

Now it's thirteen years later and it's public knowledge that this was done. When is somebody going to take responsibility? When is the Prime Minister is doing to take responsibility and say: 'Enough. This thing has gone on too long. It needs to be resolved.'?

Pollard: No. It can be done without great fanfare. If there were a modicum of seriousness in the Prime Minister's Office all he has to do is sit down with the President of the United States and say: 'This is it. The Pollard issue can't go on anymore.' And begin to negotiate. Everything in Washington has a price.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has the authority and the U.S. contacts. as well as access to the finest team of Israeli advisors in our intelligence and defense departments. He has the ability to personally short cut through the whole process and to secure Jonathan's immediate release virtually overnight.

Pollard: The Prime Minister has recently demonstrated in both the Masha'al Affair and the Swiss affair that when the Government of Israel is determined to return an agent home, he takes immediate and decisive steps to secure the objective and the release of the Israeli agent swiftly follows with minimal delay. For him to do anything less than that in Jonathan's case can only indicate a lack of honest intent on the part of the government.

Pollard: There has been no negotiations over Jonathan. America want to hold him because he is useful. And Israel doesn't particularly want him. So its a very neat thing.

Israel's only problem is trying to silence the loud voices calling in Israel and America for Jonathan's release.

Pollard: We have been through massive propaganda campaigns trying to either destroy my credibility and/or Jonathan's credibility or sanity. But these campaigns just don't work.

When you meet Jonathan, and thank God more people are meeting him, or when you even hear him, he is so clear and he is so absolutely pure and brilliant. He is so full of a love for the land and the people of Israel that you have to be overwhelmed by him. There is no bitterness. It is the most amazing thing. Here is somebody who should be full of hatred and instead his beloved land and people are everything to him.

Just before I returned to Israel this time he told me to remember that he didn't do this for any political establishment or organization. This was for the people of Israel. His people.

Pollard: The interesting thing is that I have been told over and over again by various ministers in different governments that 'you have my support not because I am a nice guy but rather you have my support because of what Jonathan did for us. He did very much for us.'

I remember one Justice Minster how said to me 'I have the clearances and I have seen the documents that Jonathan shared with us and we owe him for years to come.' So on the one hand they can say that and the very same minister said that 'we could never acknowledge that we sent him.'

The trouble is that the game is wearing thin.

Pollard: Why? Because after 60 days you have to file again for a hearing and until they gave us a new hearing date, four months had passed.

Pollard: Yes, they have had 120 days. And my understanding is that they want a further delay. Our attorney was recently asked by the government's attorney to drop the case. 'Why would we want to drop the case?' Dub asked. He was told 'because there is a new committee.'

That is ludicrous!

Pollard: It really depends on how the court rules. They could order the government to show cause for not admitting he is an agent. They issued a show cause order in the previous case.

If Israel admits that Jonathan is an Israeli agent the liability issue is clear. Legally Israel must then assume full responsibility for securing Jonathan's immediate release - and I do mean immediate.

Pollard: Wherever I go in Israel I meet people who come up to me and tell me 'tell Jonathan we are with him and we are crossing our fingers for you - its a terrible thing what the government has done to him, the government has to do something, etc.'

Why do the people relate so strongly to Jonathan? Because here every man is a soldier and knows very well that he could easily be in Jonathan's position. This case is simply too important in its implications to the average citizen. A social contract exists between the government and its citizens and when the government fails to honor this social contract it puts every Israeli soldier in jeopardy.

Pollard: No. These were Mossad agents. Most soldiers don't belong to the Mossad. The Mossad will pull out their own, with full government support. That is what we saw In the Masha'al Affair and more recently in the Swiss affair.

The average soldier has to rely on the government to come to his rescue, just the way that Jonathan Pollard did. That is why it is critical that the government's behavior in the Pollard case be rectified. The average soldier and the average citizen needs to be reassured that we are not all expendable - that the government will honor its social contract with us. Securing Jonathan Pollard's release is essential to that reassurance.

Pollard: What will the Supreme Court do? It would be a tragedy for them to play another delay game. If thirteen years hasn't been enough time for the Government for Israel to relate to this case with the necessary degree of seriousness, then asking for another delay - another two months which will turn into another four months - would be a tragedy.

Pollard lawyer: Truth could embarrass government

By HERB KEINON

JERUSALEM (December 19) - Jonathan Pollard's well publicized rebuke of Foreign Minister David Levy was not directed at Levy personally, but at the Foreign Ministry in general, his Jerusalem lawyer, Larry Dub, said yesterday.

"For 13 years Jonathan is sitting in prison, about an hour from Washington, and nobody from the embassy has seen fit to visit him, ask he if wants a bar of soap, a newspaper, anything," Dub said. "It takes ministers from Jerusalem to come and visit. It seems kind of strange."

During a meeting with Communications Minister Limor Livnat on Wednesday, Pollard - angry at reports that the Foreign Ministry was discouraging Israeli officials from visiting him - likened Levy to the "idiot" who built the bridge that collapsed at the Maccabiah Games last summer.

Dub said that recent visits by Livnat and Absorption Minister Yuli Edelstein to Pollard in prison, as well as a letter to Pollard sent by Labor and Social Affairs Minister Eli Yishai, are not indicative of any policy change on the Pollard affair, but were done at the ministers' initiative. Livnat also brought a letter to Pollard from Prime Minister Binyamin Netanayhu.

Dub alleged that the government is lying by saying that it has to work quietly to obtain Pollard's release, that Pollard was part of a rogue spy operation, and that he has never expressed remorse.

The government, Dub maintained, still has not claimed responsibility for Pollard.

Pollard, a former US navy analyst, was arrested in November 1985 and sentenced later to life in prison for spying for Israel.

A petition is pending before the High Court of Justice which seeks to force the government to recognize Pollard as an Israeli agent. The three-justice panel has scheduled another session on the petition for next month.

Dub said he is convinced Pollard will not win freedom until Israel publicly recognizes that he worked as an agent for the government.

A Foreign Ministry official said yesterday that although its policy has been to try and win Pollard's release through "quiet channels," away from media attention, the ministry is not opposed to high-profile meetings with Pollard.

Following the visits by Edelstein and Livnat, the official said, it is safe to assume that Pollard's prison in North Carolina will become a pilgrimage site for other Israeli dignitaries. "We have no objections," the official said.

In a recorded conversation released by his wife in October, Pollard alleged Israel's policy toward him was "burying me alive."

"They [Israel] want me here for as long as they [the US authorities] bloody well keep me here. If I die here, the truth will die with me," Pollard added at the time.

Dub contended there are officials in the Foreign and Defense ministries who would end up with "egg on their faces" if lies about the affair were ever exposed.

© Jerusalem Post

POLLARD ISSUE FINALLY GETS GOVT ATTENTION

For the first time in 12 years, an Israeli government appears prepared to tackle the issue of Jonathan Pollard, the former US navy officer jailed for life for spying for Israel.

Minister of Communications Limor Livnat this week became the second Israeli minister to visit Pollard in his South Carolina prison cell in a fortnight. Earlier this month, the Israeli Knesset made a public appeal for his release. And Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has also sent Pollard a handwritten letter --the first personal contact from an Israeli leader the spy has received.

Pollard, an Israeli citizen, told Livnat and journalists who accompanied her that he wanted to "come home".

"I would like to say to everyone- that I am one of you. I worked for you..."

He also criticised Foreign Minister David Levy, who has always advocated an approach of not making much public ado about Pollard's plight.

A former US Navy analyst, Pollard, 43, is serving a life sentence for passing US military secrets to Israel. Israeli leaders over the years have denied he was a sanctioned agent.

President Bill Clinton rejected a clemency plea by Pollard in 1996, citing the enormity of his crime, his lack of remorse and the damage he caused to US security. Pollard's supporters have retorted that he gave Israel critical information the US should not have been withholding from an ally, and have pointed to other men convicted in the US for spying for enemy nations, who have received considerably lighter sentences.

KNESSET CALLS FOR RELEASE OF 'ISRAELI SPY' POLLARD

After serving 12 years in US maximum-security facilities for spying for Israel, Jonathan Pollard has succeeded in unifying the Knesset, which yesterday made a public appeal for his release,.

Deputy Defence Minister Silvan Shalom said that too little had been done on Pollard's behalf over the past 12 years, and behind the scenes efforts to have him freed had not been successful. Now, Silvan stated, the time was right to speak openly and call for US authorities to pardon Pollard.

Minister of Absorption Yuli Edelstein, who recently became the first minister ever to have visited Pollard, said he was hopeful that Pollard would join him in celebrating Israel's 50th anniversary.

Since Edelstein visited Pollard in his South Carolina prison cell, interest in his plight has been renewed. Next week, Communications Minister Limor Livnat is planning to visit him during her trip to the US.

A former US Navy analyst, Pollard, 43, is serving a life sentence for passing US military secrets to Israel. Israeli leaders over the years have denied he was a sanctioned agent.

President Bill Clinton rejected a clemency plea by Pollard in 1996, citing the enormity of his crime, his lack of remorse and the damage he caused to US security. Pollard's supporters have retorted that he gave Israel critical information the US should not have been withholding from an ally, and have pointed to other men convicted in the US for spying for enemy nations, who have received considerably lighter sentences.

DAMAGE, DUPLICITY - AND JUSTICE

Even in the icy world of international espionage, it is still somewhat startling that "equal justice under law" is little more than a palsied proverb.

Consider these three cases of law and perfidy:

* From November 1992 to September 1994, U.S. Navy Lt. Commander Michael Schwartz delivered secret American defense information to Saudi Arabia. Schwartz was indicted for violating various federal statutes as well as the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He pleaded guilty, and was given an "other than honorable" discharge from the Navy. No fine, no prison - and no comment.

In fact the government is remarkably mum about Mr. Schwartz. Neither the Clinton Administration nor the Pentagon will disclose any information concerning his case - nor, apparently, has the Senate Intelligence Committee shown even a modicum of curiosity. Was any formal protest ever lodged against the Saudis? Do they continue to recruit American spies with impunity? Have they returned (or acknowledged) the stolen documents? Inquiring minds may want to know, but they're not going to find out by asking the Navy or the White House. Or could it be that the United States fears offending its oil-rich ally - much the same way as during the Persian Gulf War when it ordered our soldiers to risk their lives defending the richest Arab monarchy, but not to celebrate Christmas on Saudi soil?

* In 1986, Major Yosef Amit, who served in elite intelligence units of the Israel Defense Forces, was arrested at his home in Haifa and charged with providing classified military information to the United States. An Israeli court found him guilty and sentenced him to twelve years in prison. But in October of 1993 Amit was pardoned by Israeli President Ezer Weizman, and set free.

Few Americans would know anything about Amit were it not for the fair-mindedness of Senator David Durenberger. In 1987 the former chairman of the Senate's Select Committee on Intelligence disclosed that the United States had "changed the rules" by using "an Israeli to spy on Israel, and he got caught." he was referring to Amit, but nothing ever came of his comment save for a scathing rebuke of Durenberger by then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger.

This was not the only recent case of Americans spying on Israel. In the past ten years at least two Americans on academic and industrial exchange programs have also been caught gathering secrets - one from the nuclear research center in Nahal Soreq (south of Tel Aviv), the other at a state-owned weapons development company in Haifa. Israel's response? Simply to ask both agents to leave the country at once.

Where is Schwartz now? Amit? The American scientists? Neither the American nor Israeli governments seem to know, at least not according to the Pentagon and the IDF.

* There is no such problem with Jonathan Pollard, whose whereabouts everyone knows. Pollard is the former Navy intelligence analyst who was arrested in 1985 and charged with passing classified information to Israel. The federal prosecutor engineered a plea agreement under which he would seek leniency in exchange for cooperation - then (after the defendant pleaded guilty) promptly reneged on his promises.

The judge not only ignored the plea agreement, but solicited a secret memorandum from Weinberger that offered up all sorts of speculative evidence and specters of unprecedented treachery. Neither Pollard nor his lawyers were ever able to challenge the last-minute charges proffered against him. Weinberger called him one of the worst traitors in history; the judge sentenced him to life in prison; the duplicitous prosecutor recommended that Pollard never be paroled.

And indeed he hasn't, already having served thirteen years of by far the harshest sentence ever meted out for a similar offense. Where is Schwartz, who gave American secrets to the Saudis? OrAmit, who gave Israeli secrets to the United States? The U.S. and Israel know the full and precise extent of the damage done by the two of them - and that the damage done by Pollard was paltry in comparison. In thirteen years not one stance has surfaced (or documented in the Victim Impact Statement authored by his prosecutors) of any actual harm caused by Pollard.

Why have these three been treated so differently? All we know is what we've seen. The U.S. Government - which expressed official outrage at Israel's "arrogance" and "ingratitude" in the Pollard case - has handled the Saudi-Schwartz situation with kid gloves and virtual silence. The Government of Israel - which for twelve years had claimed that Pollard was part of a rogue operation, but has now been forced by its own Supreme Court to acknowledge that he was formally and officially an agent of Lakam (an ultra-secret intelligence unit of the Ministry of Defense) - has sent back American spies with barely a slap on their wrists.

Why are these cases different? Because, we can reasonably surmise, of the causes being pursued.

With the Saudis, it's petro-politics: Oil among allies is a powerful balm for soothing the slights that come with the territory in the world of international intrigue and espionage. With the Israelis, a different standard is at work. There is ample reason to believe that Weinberger and his minions exploited Pollard for two purposes: to call into question the "dual loyalty" of American Jews, and to put Israel in its place as a strategic but beholden ally. Saudi Arabia's oil, after all, is much more marketable than Israel's democratic pragmatism; the Jewish State's chutzpah is somehow deemed more galling than that of the morally bankrupt House of Saud.

What's the difference between Amit and Schwartz on the one hand, and Pollard (the lone spy of the three who was caught out in the cold, and has been kept there) on the other?

Only that "equal justice under law" does not apply - nor does the damage done matter - when there are greater political "causes" to pursue.

Kenneth Lasson is a law professor at the University of Baltimore.

Justice for Jonathan Pollard
Tel 416-781-3571 Fax 416- 781-3166 Email pollard@cpol.com
Web Site: http://www.interlog.com/~abrooke/jp

Pollard to Edelstein: Bring me home

By MARILYN HENRY

NEW YORK (November 25) - In an historic meeting yesterday, convicted spy Jonathan Pollard asked Absorption Minister Yuli Edelstein to persuade Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Labor Party chairman Ehud Barak to jointly and publicly call for his release.

Pollard's meeting with Edelstein at the Federal Correctional Institution in Butner, North Carolina - his first with an Israeli minister - lasted more than an hour, Edelstein's spokesman said.

"Just bring me home," Pollard told Edelstein. The former US naval analyst, who is serving a life sentence on charges of spying for Israel, referred to himself as an Israeli, the spokesman said.

Edelstein handed Pollard a letter from Netanyahu in which the prime minister promised: "I will not spare any effort to bring about your release from jail."

The spokesman described Pollard's mood as "unbelievably positive. He looks like he's quite well," although Pollard, 42, has some health problems, including migraine headaches, that are not getting adequate medical attention, the spokesman asserted.

Edelstein said on Channel 1's Popolitika last night that Pollard had complained to him that Israeli governments have ignored his plight, Itim reported.

He also said that he "found a very warm and intelligent man." He said that Pollard "asked me to encourage ministers and other public figures to visit him."

Edelstein said he found that Pollard was very knowledgeable about Israeli affairs, and was not bitter, but a little cynical about how ready Israel was to try and win his release.

At Pollard's request, Edelstein asked prison authorities to allow him to receive kosher food, to have a radio, and to permit him to make more telephone calls.

Edelstein's visit was intended to generate publicity for Pollard and to put his case back on the national agenda. In addition to seeking support from Netanyahu and Barak, Pollard asked that other ministers visit him "to keep up the momentum," the spokesman said.

"The people of Israel are behind him," the spokesman maintained, noting that Pollard gets hundreds of letters of support.

Pollard's supporters argue that his sentence was "excessive." But his bids for clemency have been rejected by the White House. Pollard is said to have given Edelstein some information that might help win his release, but the spokesman would not elaborate.

Pollard was arrested with his first wife, Anne, outside the Israeli Embassy in Washington, where they sought asylum, on November 21, 1985. Anne Pollard was released from jail and made aliya in January 1991.

POLLARD ASKS BEN-ELISSAR FOR APOLOGY

August 6, 1997 B"H

Dear Mr. Ambassador,

Re: Erroneous Comments by Embassy Staff to JTA Please be aware that my wife and I have irrefutable proof of the fact that:

a) A prison visit had been confirmed by all parties and that there were no "unresolved issues".

b) The Embassy was in full agreement that Mrs Pollard and Rabbi Lerner attend the meeting.

c) The Embassy assured Mrs. Pollard in a telephone conversation with Mr. Dan Arbel on July 25,1997 that the Embassy would make the appropriate arrangements with the Prison to include Mrs Pollard and Rabbi Lerner as part of the Embassy's party for the Special Visit August 7, 1997.

Jonathan Pollard

Pollard cancels Israeli visit, says he's being 'stabbed' in back

WASHINGTON, Aug. 5 (JTA) -- Jonathan Pollard was on the verge of receiving his first visit from an Israeli Embassy diplomat when the convicted spy abruptly called off the meeting. In a letter to Israel's ambassador to the United States, Eliahu Ben-Elissar, Pollard lambasted a renewed strategy by Israeli Justice Minister Tzachi Hanegbi to have Pollard transferred to an Israeli prison.

"Mr. Ambassador, it is not possible for me to receive an Israel Embassy official while the government of Israel is actively engaged in stabbing me in the back," Pollard wrote, according to a copy of the letter provided by his wife, Esther. "Only a government without honor would publicize a bogus prisoner transfer plan which they knew full well was not viable," Pollard wrote.

Pollard, a former navy analyst, is serving a life sentence in a federal prison in Butner, N.C., for spying for Israel. But in a sign that the Pollard camp called "good news," the Israeli Supreme Court scheduled a hearing for Oct. 29 to hear Pollard's petition of the government. According to Esther Pollard, the government will have to answer whether the Israeli government had approved of Pollard's spying operation. But the news of the court's hearing did not soften the Pollards' contempt for Hanegbi.

An international treaty on prisoners recently signed by Israel would allow Israel to request that the United States transfer Pollard to a jail in Israel. Pollard recently secured Israeli citizenship. But Hanegbi's plan incensed Pollard, who sees his life sentence as "a terrible injustice," according to Rabbi Avi Weiss of New York, who speaks frequently with Pollard. Esther Pollard said Hanegbi's statements undercut their primary strategy to get Jonathan out of jail. Supporters of Pollard argue that his life sentence is unjust and he should be freed. The visit was tentatively scheduled for Aug. 7, according to an Israeli Embassy official.

Among the issues that had yet to be resolved was an embassy request to meet with Pollard without his wife present, according to the official. But, the official added, Esther Pollard agreed to a meeting only if she or a rabbi from New York were present. For her part, Esther Pollard said the issue was resolved and she would have been at the meeting. Before the issue was resolved, however, Jonathan Pollard called off the meeting.

The meeting, which according to his supporters was requested by the embassy, would have been the highest-level visit by an Israeli since the early 1990s when two members of Knesset went to Pollard's prison. A representative of the Israeli consulate in Atlanta visited Pollard once. Now, Pollard will only accept a visit from the ambassador himself, Esther Pollard said. Originally, a lower-level diplomat was slated to go. The embassy has not yet answered Pollard's letter "We're formulating a response and considering the situation in view of the letter," the Israeli official said.
JTA

JONATHAN POLLARD, who when a U.S. Naval Intelligence agent, passed on to Israel (a U.S. ally) information concerning Iraq's capacity to use gas and chemical warheads just prior to the Gulf War. The U.S. had not warned Israel, and Pollard whose family had been gassed in the Holocaust, did warn Israel. Pollard (in spite of a plea bargain to the contrary) was given a "Life without parole" sentence as a result of unjust interference in the case by Casper Weinberger, U.S. Secretary of Defence. Spies for enemy countries have consistently received lesser sentences. Since incarceration Pollard has married a Canadian (Elaine Zeitz); and we are among those asking that Pollard's sentence be commuted by President Clinton so Pollard can go to Israel where he was recently awarded Israeli citizenship for saving Jews from potential gas attack.