United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Hey, Let’s Release a Traitor! [Pollard]
Source:
WeaponsMan
URL Source: http://weaponsman.com/?p=24068
Published: Jul 22, 2015
Author: Â
Post Date: 2015-07-22 08:35:28 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 3100
Comments: 66
Jonathan Pollard, caught on surveillance video stealing documents. American traitor Jonathan Pollard is closing in on the backstretch of his stint in Federal Prison. “Wait,” you say. “He was sentenced to life in prison!” Well, just like the way the Administration can release a bunch of terrorists from Gitmo to resume their lives of crime, or swap some of them for a traitor, to reward the turncoat, or release another bunch of drug and gun criminals to play Santa Claus in July — all these things really happened, we are not making them up — they can release a traitor and spy if they like. And the word is, that the US Department of Justice will reward the spy for his 1980s betrayal by kicking him out of his long-term rent-controlled apartment in the Crowbar Condiminiums on the 30th Anniversary of his arrest. Pollard must have been a true puzzlement to the Administration. A spy with the simplest motivation of all, greed, he mostly stole things that were no direct use to his Israeli spymasters, but which they could trade for things they needed from other US enemies, like Russia. That was, in fact, what his Mossad handlers directed him to steal. And Pollard’s mercenary motivation was clear for several reasons. First, he admitted it when caught, so that’s a bit of an indicator. Also, Israel wasn’t his first stop. He’d tried two other foreign powers, only to be turned down (the Russians and Chinese both thought he was a really clumsy FBI dangle), before setting his sights on Israel. Since his arrest, he’s rediscovered his previously more or less lapsed Judaism and conned a lot of Israeli society into believing that the mostly Russian-related secrets he stole were Middle Eastern intel that the US was not sharing with Israel out of a lack of trust (gee, we can’t imagine why that might obtain). He has a huge fan club, and an army of lawyers and helpers that have been trying to spring him for decades, and might finally get their wish. One of their complaints has been that Pollard, who’s only 61, is in ill health and is likely to die within months. (Hmmm, last time we heard that it was about a Libyan terrorist that the British government released due to a “imminently terminal” diagnosis… the guy lived for years). He’s being released, not out of humanitarian concerns, as far as we can tell, but because hey, he was a cancer attacking America, a traitor; and that’s something that the whole Beltway can get behind. The Jonathan Pollard of 2015 probably believes himself he was an Israeli patriot, but the Jonathan Pollard of 1985 would have sold the stuff to Hezbollah or Islamic Jihad just as gladly, if they’d had an embassy (give Washington time, they might) and he’d thought they had any money. His supporters argue that he did not deserve life in prison. We agree. What he deserved was what civilized men always understood as The Spy’s Reward. Still does. Of all the claims about Pollard, the most controversial is the one that he spied for money, and not for Jewish/Israeli patriotism. An excellent overview of the Pollard case by the investigator who took his first confession is Capturing Jonathan Pollard by Ronald Olive, and it recounts Pollard’s extensive drug use, grandiose behavior, and attempts to spy for several nations including Australia (! p. 43-44). He also shared extensive classified and codeword information with a CBS reporter, Kurt Lohbeck, and offered Lohbeck a chance to share with him in the profits of selling one classified document to Pakistan (with whose intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, Lohbeck already had a relationship). Lohbeck declined, but he and his editor, Sam Roberts, who discussed Pollard at length, apparently never considered turning Pollard in. After all, they could use the secrets he provided. Azoulay, Orly, and Eichner, Itamar. Reports: US Justice Dept. will not oppose Pollard’s release. YNet News, 19 July 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4681431,00.html Olive, Ronald. Capturing Jonathan Pollard: How One of the Most Notorious Spies in American History Was Brought to Justice. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2013. Shalev, Chemi. Jailed spy Pollard on track for November 21 release – unless something goes wrong. Ha’aretz, Jerusalem. 17 July 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/west-of-eden/.premium-1.666604
(1 image) 
Update
Sources
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 62.
#1. To: TooConservative (#0)
Do OUR spies deserve death when captured?
There's usually a 'gentlemen's' agreement in spycraft to not kill an opposing nation's operative but to swap them out. At least the case during the Cold War. However, Pollard was not an international spy...He was a greedy American traitor. I guess the question should be does he deserve a traitor's reward?
God did not authorize men to kill men for betraying their nation. He only authorized it in direct defense - if necessary (and it is never necessary to kill a man under your power, because you are no longer defending yourself) - and as justice for murder. Benedict Arnold could have been executed by the British, for he killed many British soldiers without cause. However, he could not have been executed by the Americans, because he didn't kill any Americans. He TRIED to hand over a fort to cause his nation to lose the war. But he failed and nothing happened. Americans were white hot with rage, understandable. There is no justification to kill under such circumstances. In custody, Arnold was not a threat. The concept of the state itself must be rethought. Americans had no justification to kill the British in 1775. The American Revolution started as an unjust war. Arnold was a murderer who deserved death for killing British soldiers, as did all of the American Colonists who killed the British in 1775. The Americans should have paid their taxes, obeyed the laws, petitioned peacefully, and awaited either a change of heart by the authorities or a new King or government. When the cause itself is unjust, if you go out onto a battlefield and kill in its service, you are nothing but a murderer. Because YOU believe your idol to be just, you won't repent the killings. And when you die, you will be convicted of murder in the service of an idol and thrown into the Lake of Fire for your idolatry and murders. There is only salvation for the repentant. War is mass murder in the service of idols, particularly for the side that started the war, but also for the other side, if they do not limit what they do to defense. Stopping an attack by taking territory can be defense. Firebombing cities full of civilians is not defense, it is mass murder. Unrepentant pilots who firebomb cities burn in Hell, no matter what flag they flew under, and no matter how proud they are of their idolatry.
The Colonists of the time seem to disagree with you:) Some dudes coming off the docks in red coats, with rifles, shot and canon with naval battery support, then heading to where the guns of the colonists are kept...Yikes sounds like self defense to me. I mean who will defend the widow and the orphan and families?
Defend the widow, the orphan and families from whom?
Those that wish them harm and death.
Who was THAT in the suburbs of Boston in 1775?
Red coats coming to seize the milita armory.
More broadly, the colonists were Englishmen who were being taxed without representation. Due to this and other oppressive measures, the king of England had proven himself a mere tyrant and no longer merited the obedience of his former subjects. For all people that people talk about the Declaration, I sometimes think no one has ever read past the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness bit. I assure you, there's more to it than that.
Taxation without representation does not give a man any authority to attack and kill other men. Did the Jews have representation in Roman government? No. They were subjects paying tribute, not citizens at all. God told them to pay their taxes. The colonists faced nothing from Britain like the oppression that the Jews faced from Rome. God did not authorize the Jews to revolt. The American revolt in 1775 was morally unjustifiable. The Americans had no right to stand behind walls and shoot down British soldiers because they didn't want to pay taxes to the British government. The Americans who lined Concord road and shot down British soldiers were murderers.
Scripture is not a guide to good government or a treatise on good citizenship. Much of what falls under this heading in the O.T. and N.T. is archaic and cannot be applied to living in the modern world, at least not in the First World countries where Christians are concentrated. As for the colonists, they were Englishmen, first and foremost (back when that had a very particular meaning). And subjects of the British crown, a protectorate of the British empire and its naval power.
The orthodox catholic (small letters) teach there is a thing called a just war. But Vic is not wrong - HBO had a great miniseries on John Adams and it showed a Protestant member of the continental congress declaring that rebellion against the king with violence was a grave sin and how he was insulted by many of the delegation and later courted and he abstained from voting. John Dickinson was his name. He reminds me of general Lee in that he was against armed rebellion but when it happened led 10,000 men as a brig general in the militia against the British. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDzwtl5Z2cA&feature=player_embedded
A Prot? But not a Presbyterian, I bet. They were the real instigators of the Revolution. A bunch of hotheads with those subversive Geneva footnotes in their family bibles.
Quaker. See the video.
#63. To: Pericles, Vicomte13 (#62)
Quaker. That figures.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestWhat he deserved was what civilized men always understood as The Spy’s Reward.
#8. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
Do OUR spies deserve death when captured?
#14. To: redleghunter (#8)
However, Pollard was not an international spy...He was a greedy American traitor. I guess the question should be does he deserve a traitor's reward?
#21. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
Americans had no justification to kill the British in 1775.
#23. To: redleghunter (#21)
#31. To: Vicomte13 (#23)
Defend the widow, the orphan and families from whom?
#38. To: redleghunter (#31)
Those that wish them harm and death.
#47. To: Vicomte13 (#38)
Who was THAT in the suburbs of Boston in 1775?
#48. To: redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#47)
Red coats coming to seize the milita armory.
#53. To: TooConservative (#48)
More broadly, the colonists were Englishmen who were being taxed without representation. Due to this and other oppressive measures, the king of England had proven himself a mere tyrant and no longer merited the obedience of his former subjects.
#59. To: Vicomte13 (#53)
(Edited)
Did the Jews have representation in Roman government? No. They were subjects paying tribute, not citizens at all. God told them to pay their taxes.
#60. To: TooConservative, Vicomte13 (#59)
(Edited)
#61. To: Pericles (#60)
But Vic is not wrong - HBO had a great miniseries on John Adams and it showed a Protestant member of the continental congress declaring that rebellion against the king with violence was a grave sin and how he was insulted by many of the delegation and later courted and he abstained from voting.
#62. To: TooConservative (#61)
A Prot? But not a Presbyterian, I bet.
Replies to Comment # 62.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 62.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]