Jonathan Pollard's 2nd Letter to A Member of Knesset - A Case Study - Part II

To: MK Mickey Eitan
From: Jonathan Pollard

VIA FACSIMILE

September 3, 2004

Re: Visit request for September 27, 2004

Dear Mickey

Thank you for your lengthy response to my letter of 19 August 2004 in which I asked you:

"Please help me to understand why you want to meet with me again. If you can tell me what you have accomplished in the year that has elapsed since our last meeting; or if you can tell me one single promise you made to me and have kept after all of our meetings, then I might understand why you would ask to meet with me again."

In your response to me, you are not able to cite a single example of any promise kept or initiative successfully completed. Instead you offer me empty words and generalizations which claim that you have done so much for me - yet you cannot say what.

You attempt to deflect the facts I have written to you by employing pop psychology. You suggest that the reason I fail to appreciate your efforts is that "deep in [my] heart I feel I do not deserve it."

You write: "I have expended time, efforts and money on your case more than any other politician in Israel... I am not sure you yourself deep in your heart totally believe you naturally deserve it"

You are right Mickey. I do not deserve the shabby treatment, double-dealing, and empty promises that you have repeatedly extended to me. Even as a prisoner, I am quite capable of discerning fact from fiction, and differentiating between substance and empty talk. If only you and your fellow MKs were as capable of doing the same

You write that my letter to you "contained a mixture of false representations of fact and incorrect conclusions." I understand that you are referring my list all of those initiatives and promises you have failed to accomplish since our last meeting, and a list of those things you have done in favor of your own or Prime Minister Sharon's interests, to my detriment, over the same time period. You offer no factual rebuttal of any of my points and you are unable to cite a single example of anything promise you have made to me and actually kept.

You say that we should meet nevertheless to clarify these things face to face. Mickey, a conversation to clarify things is useful when the issue is a matter of opinion, or an academic exercise. I do not care a fig for empty words and empty gestures. I care only for facts. Unfortunately, the facts are indisputable, and there is not a shred of evidence that contradicts them.

The facts are:

  1. You have not secured a clear government policy on my case
  2. You have not secured implementation of my shevui status
  3. You have not secured the participation of the Ambassador and regular prison visits
  4. You have not spoken out publicly as you promised -- especially with regard to Sharon's trashing of the Knesset Petition to President Bush with 112 MKs signatures
  5. You have not gotten the Knesset Petition into President Bush's hands
  6. You have done nothing to alleviate my medical, legal, or in-prison plight, and nothing to alleviate the severe privation my wife is suffering and her lack of medical support.
  7. You have not acted on a dozen other initiatives that I spoke with you privately about, on more than one occasion, such as the initiative to engage the Mossad to resolve outstanding issues; to return the Master List of documents to the US and to have the Government finally submit a truthful affidavit .
  8. You have not lobbied or advocated for me. My sources indicate that there is absolutely no evidence in Israel of in the US of any honest, intensive initiative on your part on my behalf.

The facts about what you have done are:

  1. You attempted to force a counterproductive and damaging "Pollard bill" through Knesset, despite my strong opposition.
  2. You acted as a fig leaf for PM Sharon. Every time you were faced with a choice between helping me by speaking out and telling the truth or remaining silent to cover for Sharon, you covered for Sharon.
  3. You resigned from the Knesset Lobby with the attendant publicity benefiting no one but you.

In conclusion: in my last letter I wrote: "In light of all of the above Mickey, why do you want to meet with me again?" Now permit me to reword the question: In light of all of the above Mickey, why would I want to meet with you again?"

Stay well.
Jonathan

cc Larry Dub; Aviv Ezra

See Also: