Pollard Spy Case

Bernard Henderson--former father-in-law of admitted spy Jonathan Pollard--has invented a hero persona for the convicted spy (letter, Jan. 25). Now he is attempting to invent a villain persona for those who would report the facts (column by Norman Polmar and Thomas B. Allen, Jan. 18).

Henderson writes that “Pollard . . . personally as well as others in Naval Intelligence used Polmar frequently to disseminate disinformation, a role Polmar weakly denied. . . .” Fact: I have never met Pollard, never spoken to him by phone, nor in any other way had contact with him.

Fact: Naval Intelligence has never used me to disseminate disinformation. Indeed, as revealed in the U.S. News & World Report magazine on Nov. 9, 1992, the Naval Investigation Service and Defensive Investigative Service twice had me under investigation in the 1980s for “leaking” classified information. Those charges--brought by Adm. Bruce DeMars--were later dismissed by Navy officials as being “absurd.” Anyone who has read my numerous books and articles on naval subjects would see that I am a staunch critic of the Navy.

Fact: Jonathan’s wife, Anne, knowingly used information about China that Jonathan had stolen in an attempt to obtain a position with a public relations firm. Further, Anne knew that the Israelis were paying Jonathan for his “services,” paid for their first-class honeymoon in Europe, and bought her a $10,000 diamond and sapphire ring in Paris. When he was being interrogated by U.S. intelligence officials, Jonathan twice called Anne, giving her the alarm signal about the “cactus” in their apartment; she promptly attempted--but ineptly--to hide the suitcase full of classified documents they had in their apartment.

NORMAN POLMAR

Washington