Fresh Commentary on U.S. foreign policies affecting the security and future well-being of the Jewish state – with references for “fact checking” the accuracy and the reliability of the supporting information. [Dated: November 17, 2013]
“At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” Mark Twain
“The search for truth implies a duty. One must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true.” Albert Einstein
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” [Isaiah 5:20]
Former-CIA Director James Woolsey tells American President Barack Obama that the president should ignore the fact that Jonathan Pollard is Jewish and issue an executive pardon – freeing him from nearly thirty years of harsh imprisonment.
Jonathan Pollard’s offense was the release to Israel of sensitive information that U.S. spy agencies had collected concerning the military build-up and offensive strategies of Israel’s Arab neighbors.
Jonathan Pollard never released secret information affecting or related to America’s defense.
Jonathan Pollard, a Jewish-American, never committed treason. Jonathan Pollard’s sentence – life in prison without parole – was a miscarriage of American justice – based on evidence that was largely a distortion of truth. [Please see: The Jerusalem Post, Editorial – Pollard’s Fate, November 10, 2013.]
For further commentary, please see: http://www.jpost.com/International/Former-CIA-director-renews-call-for-Pollards-release-330831.
For a review of former-CIA Director James Woolsey’s insightful comments, please see: http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2012/070512f.htm
Jonathan Pollard’s petition for presidential clemency has been on the “wait-and-see list” of the American President Barack Obama since October 2010.
FOOTNOTE: “Pollard consistently argued that his actions were motivated by a need to protect the existence of the State of Israel, after he discovered that certain individuals within the American national security mechanism were putting Israeli lives at risk by deliberately withholding some of the information to which Israel should have been privy under a 1983 memorandum.” [Please see: Israel Hayom – Newsletter “America’s double standards” by Smarda Bat Adam, October 29, 2013.]
Related U.S. documents show conclusively that:
1) “Israel was legally entitled to this vital security information according to a 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the two countries.”
2) “The information being withheld from Israel included Syrian, Iraqi, Libyan and Iranian nuclear, chemical, and biological warfare capabilities – being developed for use against Israel. It also included information on ballistic missile development by these countries and information on planned terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian targets.” [Please see: The Facts of the Pollard Case at the following URL http://www.jonathanpollard.org/facts.htm.]
What in principle is the difference between –
(i) The American government withholding information from Israel that is vital to the Jewish state’s security, which under a Memorandum of Understanding in 1983, the United States was obligated to share with the State of Israel; and
(ii) The American government withholding information from the American electorate concerning the probable negative impact of the Affordable Care Act of 2012 (referenced as “Obamacare”)?
In principle, there is no difference: both represent a violation of trust between the United States of America’s Executive Branch of Government and parties who have the legal right to receive such information in order to secure and maintain their respective well-being.
Chaim Ben-Moshe Jerusalem, Israel Reply: firstname.lastname@example.org