Caspar Weinberger was Ronald Reagan’s secrtary of defense from 81 to ‘87.’)
A friend’s email this afternoon mentioned to Pollard case. Pollard is of course guilty as heck. But my friend casually and authoritatively mentioned Weinberger hated Israel. I hate to ask him to back up his statement as I am unclear of a lot that happened in those days.
What would have made him think this?
Unless your friend has some particular expertise or knowledge of the relevant history, the most likely explanation I can think of is that it’s an empty opinion he heard somewhere and is just parroting. It’s up to you how much effort you put into deeper analysis for other possibilities. I wouldn’t invest a lot, myself.
A casual search shows evidence of Weinberger’s antipathy towards Israel, not that I was ever particularly aware of it.
Taking a hard line against Pollard was to Weinberger’s credit (overall his legacy is not so hot).
Thank you very much.
Yeah, espionage by a “friend” is a whole lot more offensive than from an adversary. Practically an act of war, from a country we had supported.
If you go so far as to label spying “practically an act of war,” I wonder how you would characterize the attack on the USS Liberty.
The US has been known to spy on its own citizens; I think you can safely assume our government is spying on every country in the world, allies included. And it would surprise me if most of our allies aren’t spying right back.
Wasn’t there some uproar a while ago about the USA bugging the phones of fellow NATO leaders?
Besides, in light of recent events, an article quoting Lindsey Graham as the authoritative source probably has a different tilt to it.
Suffice to say that all politics is messy and every country wants other countries to do something that those countries would prefer not to do. Any country would be foolish not to do some data collection even within allied countries. I also question whether you can ascribe the actions of a large corporation to all of the hired help.
Sure, but I would draw the line at illegal activities Like bribing a intelligence officer to betray his country.
IIRC, Pollard approached Israel at his own initiative. They took what he was offering, and eventually paid him, but they didn’t buy anything he wasn’t happy to sell.
If you think the US isn’t doing exactly that and more to our allies in Europe and elsewhere, I have a bridge to sell ya (not saying it is right, mind you, just that it is definitely happening).
I don’t doubt it for a minute. For most misconduct, I assume the US is one of the worst offenders.
Maybe I’m naive, but I seriously doubt there is anything critical we could learn by conducting illegal spying information in the UK, Germany, or Israel. Anything of real importance we could get by working with this allies. (I’m not an intelligence expert, so I could be way off)
Gee, how sad he forced them into it. 
Many other such cases (Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen and John Walker for instance) have involved people approaching foreign governments i.e. the Soviet Union with the goal of being paid for turning over classified material and/or betraying agents in the field. Pollard apparently revealed the names of thousands of people who’d worked with U.S. intelligence.
Israel initially denied that Pollard officially spied for them (falsely claiming it was a “rogue” operation), took over a decade to admit paying him for U.S. secrets, and repeatedly lobbied for the U.S. to release him from prison, which would strike many people as arrogant given the circumstances. When Pollard finally arrived in Israel, he got a hero’s welcome.
"Mr Pollard, 66, and his wife Esther were greeted at the airport by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who recited a Jewish blessing with them.
“You’re home,” Mr Netanyahu said, before handing over an Israeli ID card…
(The Pollards) knelt down at the bottom of the stairs and kissed the tarmac before reciting the Shehecheyanu blessing with the prime minister.
“Welcome back. It is great that you have finally come home. Now you can start life anew, with freedom and happiness,” Mr Netanyahu told Mr Pollard."
Meanwhile Pollard gets to enjoy the fruits of his labors through a well-stocked bank account (possibly over $1 million according to one estimate).
This may go over well in Israel - in the U.S., not so much.
"In September 2011, according to one report, Vice President Joe Biden - who was chairman of the [Senate Judiciary Committee] at the time of Pollard’s arrest - told a group of rabbis, “President Obama was considering clemency, but I told him, ‘Over my dead body are we going to let him out before his time. If it were up to me, he would stay in jail for life’. Biden later denied having used those precise words, but acknowledged that the report characterized his position accurately.”
Biden’s sentiments reflect my own.
Interesting. I wonder if that might have something to do with this.
I get why Americans would be angry at Pollard. After all, he betrayed you.
But I’m not going to criticize the Israeli public for supporting him, either. Whatever his reasons, he helped us, and he was punished for it. We’re not going to turn our back on someone like that just to avoid pissing off the United States. What kind of people would we be if we disavowed those who suffered for us? Besides, Israel benefitted from the information he provided. Our government at the time was responsible what happened, not him.
You had to punish him. Fine. But that doesn’t mean we don’t owe him.
No, it’s mostly because Bibi had his tongue so far up Trump’s ass he tasted hair dye.
You still don’t get it.
Continually whining and pressuring the U.S. over the years to release Pollard, then giving him a hero’s welcome (by the Prime Minister, no less) and big wads of cash for a lux retirement effectively constitutes pissing in the eye of the United States.
By doing so Israel gives ammunition to its enemies in this country. Sorry you’re unwilling to acknowledge that.
I DO get that treating Pollard the way we do is pissing in America’s eye. What you don’t get is that NOT treating him that way would be betraying our core principles, and given the choice we’d rather do the former.
Or just accept that we’re a foreign culture who sees things differently than you do.
Is the US passing in England’s eye by refusing to extradite Anne Sacoolas?