In his March 25th response to the White House's invitation to "provide
his written views" for consideration, Larry Dub points out that as long
as his client is not permitted access to his complete file in order to
defend himself and challenge the false accusations in it, the review
process is a sham, and no honest resolution of the case can result.
Dub questions the White House's role in failing to stem the hemorrhage
of classified information about his client that has been leaked to the
media by the executive agencies in violation of American Law.
He also questions the credibility of submissions from these same
agencies whose vested interests are blatant and cites as an example CIA
Chief George Tenet who publicly insists on the continued incarceration
of Pollard who has served 14 years of a grossly
disproportionate sentence, but has nothing to say about Chinese American spy Peter Lee
who recently got 1 year in a halfway house -no prison time- for giving
the Chinese classified US laser technology to design and test nuclear
warheads without detection.
Mr. Charles Ruff,
White House Legal Counsel
March 25, 1999
The White House,
Dear Mr. Ruff,
Your March 12, 1999 letter was received today. In it you indicate that
you have received submissions from the government executive agencies
regarding my client's case and you state that I may "provide my written
Mr. Ruff, it is deeply troubling that the President's review of my
client's case continues with complete disregard for my client's due
process rights and with gross insensitivity towards the Jewish community
and the State of Israel.
Our office records show that you are in receipt of a number of
letters in which we repeatedly requested the right to fully review the
complete record of my client's case in order to prepare a proper
submission. Our requests have been totally ignored.
As well, every request by Jewish community leaders to advocate for the
release of Mr. Pollard with the President has been rebuffed. The
Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations' recent request
to meet with the President was summarily dismissed. Similar requests by
such Jewish leaders as Eli Wiesel, Alan Dershowitz, and Edgar Bronfman
were met with a resounding backhand. My own requests to meet with you
have been ignored.
What is particularly disturbing to note though is that the President's
review of my client's case was initiated as a direct result of the
inappropriate behavior of the director of the Central Intelligence
Agency. It has been well-publicized that CIA chief George Tenet
threatened the President in order to embarrass him into backing down on
a commitment to free Mr. Pollard that he made as an integral part of the
Wye Accords. Tenet claimed that freeing Mr. Pollard, who has now served
over 14 years of a grossly disproportionate sentence, would demoralize
the CIA and would undermine their efforts at deterrence.
Oddly enough, this same CIA chief has not uttered a word of protest over
the inappropriately light sentence recently received by Chinese
American spy Peter Lee. Lee's sentence - 1 year in a halfway house and
no prison time - was meted out for giving China classified US laser
technology, which now enables China to test and design nuclear warheads
without detection. And not a peep out of Mr. Tenet about how this
sentence makes a mockery of the notion of deterrence.
As a result of the disclosure of Chinese espionage, the Intelligence
community is now desperately trying to stem security leaks in the
national weapons labs. At the same, a blind eye has been turned to the
virtual hemorrhage of classified information which has been leaked to
the media by these same agencies about my client's case. The White
House's failure to take steps to punish the government officials
responsible implies tacit approval.
We would welcome the opportunity to participate in an honest review of
However: a review that does not allow Mr. Pollard access to his file to
rebut the lies and exaggerations it contains; a review that does not
allow him the right to defend himself against the false accusations now
being hurled at him in the media by government officials; a review that
accepts without reservation the submissions of government agencies
with vested interests; and a review that condones the selective leaking
of classified information to serve political ends, is a sham.
If the President's review continues to disregard my client's right to
equal justice under the law, an honest resolution of this case is not
Very truly yours,
Larry Dub Esq.