WHY WON'T CLINTON RELEASE POLLARD?

WINSTON MIDEAST ANALYSIS & COMMENTARY

December 9, 1998
by Emanuel A. Winston, Middle East analyst & commentator

The probability of Bill Clinton releasing Jonathan Pollard now as he enters his 14th year in prison is very low. The strongest indicator of this was when CIA Director George Tenet almost became hysterical, threatening to resign if Pollard were released. Tenet is relatively new to the job of shepherding the CIA as it continues through its many years of errors and embarrassments. So why should a CIA Director go ballistic, when he was not even around during the Pollard sentencing - he never had a trial).

Others in the intelligence community, along with the State Department, moved with speed and amazing zeal each time there was a mention of Pollard's commutation. Do you believe the old saying: "Where there's smoke, there's fire."? Why have all Washington-based institutions experienced such adamant determination and hostility, when they have never done so before with spies from other nations?

For example, the State Department stepped in as advocates for high ranking Egyptian spy, Abdelkader Helmy, who was caught smuggling out classified missile nose cone material (carbon). The State Department worked with or on the Justice Department who takes their marching orders from the President and "Poof!" the charges were reduced and the spy went home. That missile nose cone technology was used by Saddam for his SCUDs. Does that make State and Justice culpable for the deaths and damage Saddam's SCUDs caused during the Gulf War - including the 28 Marines killed on the last day of the war?

The hysteria that surrounds the case of Pollard leads one to suspect that our Intelligence Agencies, acting on orders from the State Department and President engaged in covert activities against Israel which, if exposed, would shock the nation. But, how is it possible that the leading democracy in the world conducted a secret war against the security of the only democracy in the Middle East?

Well, when we look at the Bush/Baker years, we find their fingerprints all over weapons' shipments to Iraq, their illegal transfer of technology and their involvement, along with the European nations, in weapons' sales to Saddam Hussein. During the Gulf War a strange transfer of combat aircraft took place. Saddam sent over 100 Soviet-built aircraft to Iran (his most committed enemy). Iran accepted them as partial payment for the losses they suffered during the Iran/Iraq war which Saddam started.

But, Iran had no maintenance infrastructure for Soviet aircraft. There's a strong belief that President Bush brokered the deal wherein the Soviet-built aircraft would then be transferred to Syria who had the maintenance infrastructure for the Soviet planes. Here, as in the past, neither Congress nor the Justice Department made any effort to open up hearings on America's Syrian connection or our secret Middle East foreign policy.

Saudi Arabia and Kuwait furnished the money to pay off both Iran and Iraq. Recall how Saudi Arabia and Kuwait gave Syria close to $4 Billion dollars after the Gulf War for their virtual non-participation? Syria used those funds to immediately buy weapons including those planes supposedly shipped to Iran by Iraq.

After the Gulf War, our weapons, including tanks and helicopters, were supposed to be returned to U.S. stores. But, we were told, that this very short term war (4 days) with Saddam had turned most of our equipment into non-refurbishible junk. Helicopters stacked on the decks of returning aircraft carriers were just kicked overboard (they said) because they were not worth returning for maintenance and parts.

The more likely explanation is as follows: Here was an opportunity to transfer large quantities of weapons to nations out of the view of the Congressional Oversight Committees. I wonder if Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia were recipients of our generosity, a covert transfer which likely was kept recorded only in our secret computer files.

It is highly probable that Pollard is thought to have picked up this kind of information of earlier malfeasance and will spill the beans when released. None of this information has any value today. It is stale and 14 years out of date.

There were, of course, some Israelis such as Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres, among others, who received and utilized this information. They, too, did not wish to be identified. President Clinton is stuck with the advice of his intelligence people who are frantically counseling the President to not let Pollard go.

Just as we are now finding out how leaders of European nations worked with their enemies (the Germans) to confiscate the wealth of their Jewish citizens, so, too, may there be an astonishing exposé that various Presidents, the ubiquitous, insidious State Department and our Intelligence Agencies have been closely tied to Israel's Arab enemies.

Imagine the political impact if the dozens of spies America operating in Israel were exposed, denials notwithstanding. Imagine the outcry if it were told that information gleaned from our on-ground intelligence (Humint) and satellite photos of Israel's military were routinely passed on to Saudi Arabia, Syria and Egypt. Imagine if, like the case of Kalmanovitch (the highly placed Russian spy) there were Israelis high up in government who were in the pocket of US Intelligence.

When Gen. Alexander Haig, Reagan's first Secretary of State¹ was asked on national television, if we were spying on NATO, he replied: "I certainly hope so!" He went on to say that "friendly countries spy on other friendly countries. That espionage is basically illegal, and when your spy is caught it's bad; if not, it's fine."

I think that George Tenet's hysteria has a solid base and he has good reasons to ensure Pollard does not make it out of prison. Tenet thinks Pollard would be a living symbol of what happens to a man who is feared could compromise a CIA which now, as then, worked so diligently against the Jewish State on orders from superiors deeply invested in Arab oil interests. And, of course, more recently Prime Minister Netanyahu accepted - or rather - had to accept the CIA as the monitor of Palestinian commitments to cease terrorism. It's like the foxes have been put to guarding the hen house.

Tenet admits the CIA has been monitoring the PLO compliance for the five years since Oslo.² If so, how can the CIA approve of Arafat's control of terror activity when 300 Israelis (and 11 Americans) have been murdered by PLO terror; thousands wounded, some maimed for life? Former head of the CIA's ME Operations, Frank Anderson says the CIA had intelligence links with the PLO since 1974.³

The American people have been saturated with disinformation from the PR (Propaganda) mechanism at State, Intelligence and the White House. The idea was to make Pollard's name so odious that, when their mechanisms went to work to keep him in prison, the people wouldn't cry out that it was unfair. For example, Aldrich Ames was not pursued in the papers and TV news with the same emotionally charged viciousness. Aldrich Ames (the CIA spy had provided the names of US agents to the Soviets who executed them) was dealt with in the press in a matter-of-fact way with no incendiary language.

Caspar Weinberger, then Secretary of Defense, and CIA Intelligence who blamed Pollard for this blood-bath, only later learned that the Russian agent Ames cleverly arranged to frame Pollard in order to shield himself.. However, Weinberger, the CIA, Naval Intelligence, among others, had committed themselves deeply to the persecution of Pollard.

Even after learning that it was Ames and not Pollard who betrayed our agents and got them killed - even then - they could not let go of Pollard. Not only was this an embarrassment of poor control over our own agencies but, worse yet, to expose an American operation dedicated to the elimination of a fellow democracy, Israel, would be unthinkable.

Jonathan Pollard did, indeed, have access to US Intelligence gathered about Saddam Hussein's weapons' programs. The data on Saddam's poison gas allowed Israel to prepare for civil defense by providing everyone in Israel with a gas mask, including the development of the baby gas tent. Israelis called their gas masks "Pollies". They knew who to thank. Pollard could access readily available information which spoke of prior knowledge and even assistance of the Europeans, Americans and Soviets to Saddam in the making of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Computers too can reveal truths.

As a relevant example, Joseph Di Genova, was the State Department's prosecutor against Pollard and the key character responsible for breaking the government's plea bargain agreement with him. He was also involve in a related computer matter. After Di Genova left the Justice Department, James Baker brought him back, presumably to investigate the minor charge that Baker had used State Department records to get something nasty on Bill Clinton before the election.

After Bush lost to Clinton, with Baker's authority, Di Genova stripped every computer in the White House of its disks and hard drives. Air Force One, the President's plane was also stripped of its electronic memory. To this day, these disks and hard drives remain hidden and possibly destroyed. Clearly, the information in that electronic memory could speak about President Bush and Jim Baker's role in Iran/Contra weapons' sales to Iraq and Iran as well as the betrayal of a fellow democracy and ally: Israel.

Jonathan Pollard was NOT a computer hacker. He didn't need to be. He knew how to take information that was readily available and to piece it together in order to understand the big picture. He understood the system.

Within the systems of the Intelligence Agencies are black programs conducted against friends and allies along with the names of those responsible. Betrayal - double cross - plans to kill off another nation ... hardly things those involved would want exposed. But Pollard readily saw and read open information on these programs. US Intelligence knew and assisted the Europeans to provide catastrophic weapons to Saddam Hussein but, on Weinberger's orders, kept information from Saddam's intended first victim, Israel.

Yes, I think George Tenet's hysteria is well founded. His job is to protect the CIA and connected Intelligence Agencies. He must also protect agents plugged into Israel's political and military system. Therefore, to see Tenet, joined by Albright, Cohen, et al in a great, mutual chest pounding, telling the American people how risky it would be to release Pollard will not be surprising.

Pollard was a miracle for Caspar Weinberger. Now, he could start the familiar witch hunt for Jews in research, the military and other areas of government. He thought that, without Jews to watch and expose the covert transfer and sale of technology to such evil regimes as Iraq, Syria, sometimes through and to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, things would run smoother.

Yes, Pollard did notify Israel, our friend and ally, about the buildup of Arab arsenals with their poison gas missiles. During the first night of Saddam's SCUDs bombing Israel, while sitting in sealed rooms in gas masks at 3:59 am, we heard Caspar Weinberger being interviewed on the radio. He said: "It's a shame that Saddam is using poison gas." How did he know? And why didn't he see to it that Israel knew? All of this vital intelligence was supposed to be transferred to Israel according to pledges of a series of American Presidents, the Congress and unfulfilled "Memorandums of Understanding".

Think of how many important individuals were involved in the covert transfer of weapons of mass destruction who now fear being exposed. They think keeping Pollard in prison is their only safety guarantee unless he was to be killed ...by accident, of course! (G-d Forbid!)

Here again, as in the past, our Congress refused substantive hearings on our foreign policy intrigue in the Middle East to include questioning our various CIA Directors and all those involved in a massive cover-up of what we were doing and planning for Israel.

Strange, isn't it? Jonathan Pollard did exactly what the American-dominated court made law at the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1946. Namely Pollard refused orders of his superiors to keep Saddam's poison gas secrets which could have lead to Genocide. Helping Saddam acquire catastrophic weapons with which he promised: "...to burn half of Israel" is most certainly co-conspiracy in planned Genocide.⁴ Under International Law any American, European, Japanese is required to follow the Nuremberg laws and refuse to follow orders when their governments turn to Genocide. And they must warn the intended victim.

Does our Government work with dangerous hostile nations to transfer technology? In a word: Yes! We already know that they assisted Saddam in his acquisition of weapons of mass destruction. We again see a report on the CIA covering up the transfer to China of missile technology by the American manufacturers who supplied the parts and the technicians.^{5 & 6} Apparently, this is indicative of a long standing policy to arm our enemies and betray our friends. Surely, Jonathan Pollard was a great danger to the giants of industry, high level politicians and our Intelligence Agencies tasked to keep it all under wraps.

Yes, indeed! America desperately needs dozens of such whistle blowers if Big Business and government conspire to run a shadow government. The American people deserve better. If asking for an honest President, State Department, CIA is an oxymoron ...so be it. Clearly, it is the obligation of every American citizen to expose an intended crime by government officials. Pollard broke an agreement to hold confidential the arming of a nation on the Congressional Watch list of Terror Nations. Pollard warned the intended victim nation and, for that, he was railroaded into silence. This surely is not the American way.

On November 25, 1985, the day Jonathan was arrested, I wrote: "The Pollard matter speaks of embarrassing an ally for some purpose yet to emerge. Will Israel be willing to remain silent on the arms package to Jordan recently rejected by Congress? Will Israel be silent on a forthcoming arms package to Saudi Arabia? Will Israel be embarrassed sufficiently to talk to a PLO/Palestinian delegation and thereby allowing the US to also speak directly to the PLO? [Which we now know they were doing - despite prior agreements.]

In essence, was Israel sufficiently humiliated in the press to force acceptance of things not previously acceptable? Was Congress to be made sufficiently angry for a short time so certain Arab programs could be pushed through? Based on previous anti-Israel PR just before an attempt to push through a dangerous Arab arms package, one must be suspicious of the circumstances surrounding the "great" spy catch.⁷

FOOTNOTES:

1. "Jonathan Pollard - He Broke the Law, But Did He Betray his Country?" by E. A. Winston JEWISH HERALD March 27, 1987
2. "CIA Too Involved in Palestinian Peace Accord?" by Greg Seigle JANE'S DEFENSE WEEKLY November 4, 1998
3. "CIA meets PLO ...back to the late 1960s" by David Makovsky HA'ARETZ 11/13/98
4. "Israel's Spy was Right about Saddam" by Angelo M. Codevilla WALL ST. JOURNAL 8/6/98
5. "CIA Admits Telling Hughes Electronics of Impending Senate Probe" AP CHICAGO TRIBUNE 12/6/98
6. "Pentagon Inquiry Faults Missile Aid to China by Hughes" by Jeff Gerth NEW YORK TIMES 12/9/98
7. "Spying on Allies a Laughing Matter - Or Is It?" By Emanuel A. Winston CHICAGO SUN-TIMES 12/10/85