The Obama administration’s antisemitic “dissing,” in life and death, of a noted scientist

On June 18, 2011 a famous, highly decorated and widely respected scientist died at the age of 95 and was buried two day later in the Hebrew Orthodox Cemetery in South Bend, Indiana.  For the most part, local and national media were silent about his death.  This silence is more disgraceful since it is associated with the ignominious behavior of the Obama administration in continuing the government’s long standing antisemitic actions against a member of the deceased’s family.  All of Dr. Morris Pollard’s children attended his funeral except for his youngest son, Jonathan, who was not permitted to attend despite formal pleas from American Jewish leaders and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu.   Dr.  Pollard was not even permitted to have  Jonathan visit him while he lay dying.

The question one has to ask is why express such uncivilized behavior against a man of the stature of Morris Pollard?

When Dr. Pollard lay dying, a desire to see his son was his.  The funeral was about honoring Morris Pollard’s life.  Children visiting a dying father and, afterwards, attending his funeral is about honoring the man.  For those who are religious, let us not forget the fifth commandment: Thou shalt honor thy father and thy mother.   These actions have nothing to do with condoning or extolling Jonathan or any other member of the family or friend under such circumstances.

Why does Dr. Morris Pollard deserve being honored?   As a result of his WWII research Pollard received a commendation medal  for heroism and for sustained acts of meritorious service and three presidential citations.  For his investigations into cancer, he received the Hope Award from the American Cancer Society.  Pollard’s investigations while serving in the army and at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston covered a variety of  viral diseases including those important in tropical medicine; he participated in vaccine development and he developed the first serological test for Hepatitis A.   During his 50 year tenure as Director of the Lobund Institute at the University of Notre Dame he revived the moribund laboratory and brought it to a world class standard; there he and his colleagues worked with gnotobiotic animals so as to study the mechanisms of disease.   He made important contributions to cancer therapy and, inter alia, developed bone marrow transplants for treating leukemia.

Why would the government not permit humanitarian gestures to honor a man, in the last stages of his life and as well as in death, who, through his research and leadership, made important contributions to the advancement of science and medicine thereby contributing to making this a better world?

What danger to the US could possibly  result from Jonathan visiting his dying father and attending his funeral?

To answer the above questions, we have to look elsewhere other than in Dr. Pollard’s life’s work for answers.  The obvious place to start is with Jonathan.

Jonathan Pollard was an intelligence analyst who was arrested for giving Israel classified U.S. data concerning the developing capabilities of Syria, Iraq, Libya and Iran with respect to nuclear, chemical, and biological warfare.  The US was obligated to provide Israel with such information according to the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the two nations.  By his own admission, former deputy CIA director Bobby Inman was so incensed that Israel had used American-supplied satellite photography to destroy Iraq’s Osirik nuclear facility  (from which President G. H. Bush benefited immensely a decade later in the first Iraq war) that, apparently on his own recognizance, ordered the withholding of intelligence information from Israel; he made it a criminal act to transmit certain intelligence information of some Arab states to Israel.  Pollard discovered this deliberate suppression, which violated the written agreement, and, through the chain of command, tried to get the decision reversed.  He was told to “mind his own business”, and that “Jews get nervous talking about poison gas; they don’t need to know.”  He also learned that an aspect of denying the flow of information to Israel was to limit Israel’s ability to act independently in defense of its own interests.  Note the not too subtle antisemitism.  These overt expressions of hate were exacerbated by the well-known hatred of Israel harbored by then  Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger.  Weinberger engaged in an immoral, if not illegal, act when, at the end of the hearings, he provided the sentencing judge with a 46-page classified memorandum to which neither Pollard nor any of his attorneys have ever been allowed access – even till today – thereby violating Pollard’s constitutional rights.  I am not condoning Pollard’s illegal activities. However, I am able to understand his anger at what was occurring and why it was happening; I am able to understand his frustration at not being able to correct, through appropriate channels, a seemingly illegal activity based on hate of Jews and Israel, and I am able to understand, without approving of them, the reasons for doing what he did.

It has been my long time conclusion that as a result of the overt antisemitic attitudes of the people involved, Pollard was tried as a spy but sentenced as a Jew.

How else can one explain the above actions and the fact that the American government violated the plea agreement entered into with Pollard – even though Jonathan Pollard completely cooperated with the investigators – and sentenced him to life imprisonment without parole, the harshest sentence ever given to a spy for such a minor offense.  Consider: because of the plea agreement, Pollard never had a trial; he was never charged with treason; he was never indicted for harming the United States; and, he was never indicted for compromising American secrets.  Ultimately, he was indicted on one count of passing classified information to an ally without intent to harm the United States.

Of the more than 20 other Americans caught spying for non-adversarial nations, not one was ever given a life sentence.  Of the more than 60 people caught spying for adversarial nations over the past two to three decades and who caused immeasurable damage to the United States, a few were given a life sentence.

There is no question that Pollard had been singled out for special treatment.  Why?  From my perspective:  because the non-adversarial nation was Israel and Pollard is a Jew and the prosecuting people involved had independently expressed a profound hatred of Israel and Jews.

I have long contended that the Jonathan Pollard case is the American equivalent of the infamous French Dreyfus Affair.  Yet, the Pollard case is not the first in which a Jew was singled out for harsh treatment.

Americans picture themselves as being great humanitarians who have great compassion for their  fellow human beings  throughout the world.  Yet, when it comes to Jews a separate standard seems to apply.  The different value system was just applied so as to interfere with honoring a very deserving Jewish man in the last days of his life and in the memorial following his death.

Shame on the media for not promoting the story of Morris Pollard, whose life could and should serve as a role model for the young.

Shame on the Obama administration for condoning and participating in an overt manifestation of antisemitism.   By so doing has Obama, not too subtly, signaled the haters of the world that he stands with them?

(I use the word shame despite the fact that I am well aware that the concept of shame no longer seems to connote the sense of opprobrium associated with such conduct; indeed, I wonder whether shame still exists in modern society).

Shame!