The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Obama Administration is preparing to release one of this country’s most notorious spies in an effort to placate Israel in the aftermath of Iranian agreement. Jonathan Pollard, an Israeli spy, betrayed his country and was arrested as he attempted to flee to the Israeli embassy in 1985. He was not only convicted of espionage but the Justice Department and intelligence agencies have long maintained that he did untold harm to the national security. The question of the release of Pollard has always raised interesting political, social, and legal questions. Thirty years is certainly not an insignificant amount of time and Pollard reportedly has health issues. My greatest concern is one of special treatment, particularly on sentencing policy for other national security cases. (For full disclosure, I have handled and continued to serve as lead counsel in national security cases).
For some the release comes at a time of tension over Israeli spying operations against the United States. Israel has long been accused of being one of the greatest sponsors of espionage against the United States, including recent reports ranking it among the top most active countries targeting the United States. The alleged concession will not sit well with some people who will argue that we should not trade away spies to appease other nations upset with our foreign policy. This would not be a spy swap with Russia but what the Wall Street Journal is suggesting is a concession prize to help political relations both inside and outside the United States. Particularly given the opposition to the Iran deal itself, the release would be viewed by many as too high a price for political relations. After all, the United States still gives Israel billions each year in aid, including massive military support. However, the Administration is framing the issue as a routine release after serving 30 years for the espionage. 
On its face, the Pollard case file contains elements that have always worked against leniency, particularly in the relations with Israel after his arrest. Pollard reportedly stole tens of thousands of documents for Israel and allegedly sought to broker arms deal with the governments of South Africa, Argentina, and Taiwan. He eventually agreed to cooperation in exchange for a deal for his wife and a reduction of charges. In the meantime, Israel insisted that they did not run Pollard as a spy and that he was part of an unauthorized operation — a suggestion that has been widely questioned. However, the case has also been colored by bad blood between Israeli and American intelligence officials over the case. When asked to return the material, U.S. officials accused Israel of giving back a small amount of low classified documents and then abusing a U.S. team sent to retrieve more documents. There were even allegations that Israeli intelligence stole material from the U.S. team sent to Israel. It has also refused to release the name of his handler. This record contributed to a long and fervent opposition by intelligence officials to the release of Pollard. There has been a long effort to release Pollard both by the Israeli government and Jewish organizations in the United States. Many of his advocates have insisted that he gave intelligence to an ally and the harm was not as severe for that reason for the United States. Others have argued that, given his cooperation, 30 years is more than enough time.
The question of his release date raises an interesting question. It is also worth noting that, while Pollard was given a life sentence, in June 1987, the laws in effect at the time of Pollard’s sentencing set parole after 30 years for federal life-sentence inmates. That would put his release date at November 21, 2015. However, he is still subject to the discretion of the Commission and is only subject to release in the absence of significant prison regulation violations or a “reasonable probability” of recidivism.
This is a palpable mistrust of the statement made by the Administration over the discussions with Israel. National Security Council spokesperson Alistair Baskey insisted that Pollard’s prison status “will be determined by the United States Parole Commission according to standard procedures. There is absolutely zero linkage between Mr. Pollard’s status and foreign policy considerations.” Zero linkage? If Pollard is released on the heels of the Iran deal, it would be viewed by many as an amazing coincidence. Moreover, Baskey’s statement raises yet another question of whether the Administration is too cavalier with the truth of statements to the American people. Is the Administration denying that the release has been discussed with Israel? The Administration is clearly gearing up to treat the November date as a release date to suggest that it has done nothing special for Pollard. The Justice Department released a tough sounding statement by spokesman Marc Raimondi statement that, if you read it closely, suggests that it will no longer oppose release: “The Department of Justice has always and continues to maintain that Jonathan Pollard should serve his full sentence for the serious crimes he committed, which in this case is a 30-year sentence as mandated by statute.” The question is whether the Justice Department will take the same position in other cases in national security cases. The Justice Department often challenges such constructive release dates and arguing that changed policies or practices can extend sentences. If there is any discretionary decision, it is notorious for opposing any release in major criminal cases.
Here is the link to the excerpt above
http://www.democracynow.org/2015/7/23/theodore_bikel_remembered_fiddler_on_the
——————————————–
And regarding extremism, there has been more extremist acts and toll from non-Muslim groups in the US since 9/11 than from jihadis. The facts, just the facts, bambam…that is your kryptonite 🙂
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html?_r=0
WASHINGTON — In the 14 years since Al Qaeda carried out attacks on New York and the Pentagon, extremists have regularly executed smaller lethal assaults in the United States, explaining their motives in online manifestoes or social media rants.
But the breakdown of extremist ideologies behind those attacks may come as a surprise. Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.
The slaying of nine African-Americans in a Charleston church last week, with an avowed white supremacist charged with their murders, was a particularly savage case.
But it is only the latest in a string of lethal attacks by people espousing racial hatred, hostility to government and theories such as those of the “sovereign citizen” movement, which denies the legitimacy of most statutory law. The assaults have taken the lives of police officers, members of racial or religious minorities and random civilians.
Non-Muslim extremists have carried out 19 such attacks since Sept. 11, according to the latest count, compiled by David Sterman, a New America program associate, and overseen by Peter Bergen, a terrorism expert. By comparison, seven lethal attacks by Islamic militants have taken place in the same period.
If such numbers are new to the public, they are familiar to police officers. A survey to be published this week asked 382 police and sheriff’s departments nationwide to rank the three biggest threats from violent extremism in their jurisdiction. About 74 percent listed antigovernment violence, while 39 percent listed “Al Qaeda-inspired” violence, according to the researchers, Charles Kurzman of the University of North Carolina and David Schanzer of Duke University.
BamBam, yes indeed the greater threat ON OUR OWN SOIL may be right wing extremists. And yes we will see an occasional attack by an Islamic extremist, on our own soil. Who mentioned Christianity? I didn’t. However there is a disturbing story out of Oklahoma in which two homeschooled brothers from a Christian family stabbed almost their entire family to death. The father was associated with the same homeschool organization that the Duggars are associated with. This far right wing extremism is increasingly associated with fundamentalism, whether it be Islamic or Christian. I’m a Christian, a Presbyterian, which is not even close to any form of fundamentalism, thank the Lord.
PhillyT and Fiver, well said.
Good point, Annie.
The problem we have us that our leaders used to be smarter than us, nowadays however, they are just as ignorant and obtuse as some of us. (By the way, PhillyT, I hope you know that urging Nick to hold 2 thoughts at once while knowing his head would explode- and that’s a fact that I know and he knows- is urging a simpleminded child to play russian roulette with a fully loaded gun. Please keep him away from me, I just don’t want any brain on me :))
Bambam, just curious, do you have any affiliations with Israel? Your obtuse zionism must not be from mere right wing christianity…although we have seen that too. Your stock reply to any criticism of Israel (same as Nick’s but slightly less irrational) is to fling the poo of antisemitism. How do you reply to this person, Theodore Bikel, who is one of the major faces of Israel and Judaism, and who yet is an ardent critic of what Israel does:
“But it may surprise you to learn that Theodore Bikel, a man so closely identified with Israel and with Jewish life, was also an outspoken critic of Israeli policy, especially a pending measure known as the Prawer Plan, which would forcibly relocate some 40,000 Bedouins from their ancestral lands. Just last week, Israel’s agriculture minister, Uri Ariel, withdrew a request that the cabinet discuss continuing the legislation, pending more input from Bedouin leaders. In May, Israeli Arabs protested a two-to-one Supreme Court decision to allow the destruction of an unrecognized Bedouin village to make way for a Jewish town, ruling its Bedouin residents had no legal rights to it. Well, in late 2013, Bikel wrote an editorial in The Forward headlined “Israel Must Work with Bedouin to Develop Negev for All: Forced Removals and Hostility to Ancient People Must End.” He also produced a widely watched video for Rabbis for Human Rights that opens with the title, “Fiddler with No Roof,” and his own introduction.
THEODORE BIKEL: My name is Theodore Bikel, and I want to ask you to help prevent a terrible moral tragedy. I’ve spent much of my life playing Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof. I see parallel with what is happening today. Forty thousand Bedouins in the Negev desert are being told to get out of their homes. Remember the scene in Fiddler on the Roof when the Russians arrive and tell them they have three days to get out. Tevye says, “Why should I get out?” They said, “Not just you. All of you.” They said, “Why? Why should we leave?” “I don’t know why. I have an order here.” It’s a piece of paper, and “Get thee out.” “What if we refuse to leave?” We know the consequences of refusal.
And as you keep excusing Israel, here are the news today:
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Israeli-Forces-Storm-Vandalize-Jeruselems-Al-Aqsa-Mosque-20150726-0002.html
I. Annie
I missed nothing, except, maybe, that additional military member who was shot and killed by what you would so boldly call AN OCCASIONAL RADICALIZED ISLAMIC TERRORIST at 11:58 am.
THE THREAT, IT APPEARS ON OUR OWN SOIL MAY JUST BE RIGHT WING EXTREMISTS, again @11:58 am.
I missed nothing, including your perpetual state of blindness with regard to the threat, WORLDWIDE–by the way, that includes the ON OUR SOIL reference–of Islamic terrorism. The lone, crazy gunman, who happens to be Christian and not following Christianity, is compared to the homicidal Muslim, who is merely following the requirements of his faith by killing all infidels. Great comparison.
Find “mega” the Israeli spy deeper than Pollard and prosecute him or her too. No statute of limits for treason.
Obama lead well to strike the deal with Iran. Who cares if the
GOP milit-Indus. complex, Saudi shayks and Israeli war pigs care? But there is no reason to release Pollard…. Oh by the way, I wonder did Pollard pay income tax on his
Blood money?
Pollards daddy was an atheist Jew. Dont pretend an atheist Jew is not a Jew ( see Dershowitz’ book Vanishing Jew before you call me names for aayomg so). He was one of the first Jewish professors at university of Notre
Dame. Pollard embarrasses Jews of good will with his treason and American goys who shill for Israel on this are fools.
The plus side to this story is that it drives home the point that AIPAC is a foreign agent and should be required to register as such. The abuse of Jewish Zionist power in the US must be curbed.
fiver
The fact that you need to ask that question is all-telling.
No it was FIVE military members Bam Bam and yes I did mention him as the “radicalized Islamic extremist”. The threat to OUR society here in the U.S. “on our own soil” did you miss that in your fervor? There is a HUGE threat by ISIS in the Mideast, no kidding, I’m not disputing that, that should’ve been clear from my words, that I bolded here.
Just curious, bam bam: Was that “Muslim” who shot and killed four Marines a terrorist?
I. Annie
I think what you meant to say was not that fiver and PhillyT hit the nail on the head; rather, you should have said that they have been hit on the head. Do tell, the threat to society is the lone and occasional radicalized Islamic extremist? Please, explain that to the hundreds–thousands–of Christians and others, worldwide, being beheaded, raped, kidnapped and murdered by that lone, radicalized Islamic extremist. Boy, that sure is one busy lone, isolated, Muslim radical! Why, society is terrified of nuns and priests terrorizing entire Muslim communities, burning down mosques, raping women, beheading non-Christians and kidnapping children! Thank you, and your two cohorts, for setting us straight. No surprise that you fail to mention the Muslim who just shot and killed the four Marines. Of course, he is just that lone, radicalized Muslim. It’s the throngs of wild-eyed and crazed Christians and Jews that we need to fear.
Bruce.
Please look up “No True Scotsman Fallacy.” Then get back to us.
Fiver, Spinelli has in the past said that it was wrong to call Hitler himself an animal because it was wrong to call a human being an animal, yet here he calls Palestinians “animals”. What does that say? Those who identify Hitler has more human, even heroic, hmmmm, wasn’t that the latest right wing nut shooter, the one in Lafayette and the one before him who shot the black parishioners in SC? The threat it appears, on our own soil may just be right wing extremists and an occasional radicalized Islamic extremist.
Fiver and PhillyT, you hit the nail on the head.
Inga – the last shooter was mentally ill. You should understand that. He was a member of a lot of groups. I think they found a Bible at his house, too. So, he was Christian.
The glib reduction of people to “animals”
It can happen all so easily. As children we often learned in terms of the “good guys” and the “bad guys.” Sure, it is a ridiculously simplistic view of reality, but it’s easy enough for a child’s mind to grasp.
As we grew into adulthood, most of us learned that the world is far more complex than the adolescent view of “good guys” versus “bad guys,” and we adjusted our frame of reference as our knowledge and experience grew.
But not everyone.
Some preferred to stay in that simplistic mindset. It’s just so easy and safe. No need to puzzle out a difficult and complex world. Forget about the full spectrum of reality; black and white is all you need to know. Logic and information can be so difficult and scary – especially when they lead away from a desired result. So some simply ditch facts and reason whenever inconvenient and instead rely upon emotion, unquestioning religion, and, of course, the phrase “common sense” (as well as an ever-annoying use of allcaps).
While there is a certain romance to childlike innocence, when held by adults it can lead to some truly terrifying results. Most people are repulsed, for example, by a targeted military attack on four boys playing soccer on the beach. Of course we are. It’s barbaric, indefensible brutality.
But make those boys Palestinian and the military attacking them Israeli? The “good guys” versus “bad guys” mentality effortlessly converts the scenario into the valiant defense of the Chosen people of God from the terrorist Palestinian/Canaanites. And the Bible is quite prolific on what the Israelites should do to the Canaanites to please a bloodthirsty God.
After all, the “bad guys” are just “animals.” And suffering, even celebrating, the deaths of innocents by convenient good guy/bad guy labeling is far easier for some than attempting to process a complex thought. Any excuse will suffice no matter how ridiculous because in a child mind the “good guys” are simply incapable of doing bad things.
These fearful, intentionally ignorant sheep are easily led to war – any war. Their buttons are not only easy to push (Look over there! There’s a bad guy! He’s like Hitler!), but war also offers them a perfect comfort zone for their adolescent framework. They are on the side of “Good”; any who disagree are on the side of “Evil,” are not “tough,” or hate our troops.
We’ve been at war (against ever shifting enemies for ever changing reasons) for a decade and a half – far longer than any war we’ve ever had. An adult mind might wonder if this is really an effective strategy. But armchair tough guys just wrap themselves in a childish cocoon of their own superimposed “right” and “wrong” and call for more war (fought by other people’s children, of course).
In accessing my own inner child, I simply have to ask: “Why do they hate our troops?”
A right wing Christian hate group? Christians don’t hate if Christians hated there wouldn’t forgiveness
And sadly, we fell into the same trap that Israel did. We stand on high moral ground, upholding civil and human rights for the world. Right up to the moment something happens to US, and then all bets are off. Torture people? You bet? Illegal search and detention? No problem. You mess with the U.S. or Israel and we will throw our principles out the window faster than you can say waterboarding. So watch out.
Nick @9:42 am
You got it exactly right. Well said.
Most of the attacks here in the US are coming from right wing christian hate groups. When will we start dealing with them?
I had it all correct phillyt. And one can say, that as the terrorists in Israel started random bombings of public places and firing missiles into Israel, the people of Israel elected serious leaders to deal w/ the animals. Almost all the world is trying to appease terrorists. Israel does not have that “luxury.” As we in the US experience more attacks from the Jayvee, we will get even tougher. Israelis and Americans are quite similar in that we don’t take any crap! We simply need to elect people here that are serious and smart.
Actually Nick, you got it half right. Which is more than usual for you, so congratulations!
The liberals and intellectuals did indeed support Israel back in the day. For numerous reasons. But so did the crazy christian end-timers. It was a weird commonality to two groups shared.
But as time went on and Israel’s behavior became more and more aggressive, less and less defensible, and the stories of abuse and torture came to light, a lot of liberals tempered their support. Unlike conservatives, however, liberals are able to sustain two thoughts simultaneously, and many of them (us), believe that the Palestinians have a right to a homeland AND that Israel has a right to exist. Both ideas at the same time! I know, weird, right? Your head might explode, but try it sometime.