Michael Piper and Final Judgment

[Mark Stapleton]

I'm going to analyse your 'rebuttal' piece by piece Mr. Coogan. Then we'll see who the ducker and diver is.

[Magda Hassan]

I don't see the point here. Sure Kennedy was concerned with it as he was also concerned with the nuclear programmes of other states, the UAR is mentioned. Dimona was up and running for years before Kennedy took office. Truman helped them get their first nuclear reactor in Nachal Sorec under the Atoms for Peace programme. They worked with the French later to build Dimona. France did this because of the Suez crisis and it was known then to be the basis for the Israeli nuclear weapons program. The cosy relationship with France ended with De Gaulle who wanted to stop the supply of uranium but all Israel had to do was agree to sham inspections and say it was peaceful and the French contracts ran their term until 1966. Norway and the UK were busy shipping things to Israel in the 50's and 60's. There is no way Kennedy could close it down regardless of what he wanted to do. It wasn't down town Texas. As you remember the big aid money had not been given at that time so he was unable to with draw any funding to put any pressure on. They already had what they wanted nuclear wise and there was nothing JFK could do. No point, if this is it, to assassinate him. That horse had long bolted.

[Mark Stapleton]

I don't see the point here. Sure Kennedy was concerned with it as he was also concerned with the nuclear programmes of other states, the UAR is mentioned. Dimona was up and running for years before Kennedy took office. Truman helped them get their first nuclear reactor in Nachal Sorec under the Atoms for Peace programme. They worked with the French later to build Dimona. France did this because of the Suez crisis and it was known then to be the basis for the Israeli nuclear weapons program. The cosy relationship with France ended with De Gaulle who wanted to stop the supply of uranium but all Israel had to do was agree to sham inspections and say it was peaceful and the French contracts ran their term until 1966. Norway and the UK were busy shipping things to Israel in the 50's and 60's. There is no way Kennedy could close it down regardless of what he wanted to do. It wasn't down town Texas. As you remember the big aid money had not been given at that time so he was unable to with draw any funding to put any pressure on. They already had what they wanted nuclear wise and there was nothing JFK could do. No point, if this is it, to assassinate him. That horse had long bolted.

The point here is that Kennedy was very concerned with Israel's nuclear program, and determined to put a stop to it. When I asserted that JFK was strongly opposed to Israel's nuclear program in that thread, Mr. Coogan responded with ridicule.

Yes, the UAR is mentioned, but as IATB goes on to state (p118):

Although NSAM referred to both Israeli and Egyptian nuclear programs, Israel was its main concern. Israel was percieved as being close to making critical nuclear decisions but US intelligence did not know enough about where the Israeli program was heading.

The fact is Kennedy had to invoke the UAR in NSAM 231 in order to maintain the perception of even handedness but Kennedy and his advisors all knew that no other country in the Middle East was working on a nuclear program except Israel.

As for Kennedy being unable to stop Israel's nuclear program, I don't agree and nor did Kennedy. The reactor did not become critical until after Kennedy's death and he was prepared to risk a major confrontation with Israel in order to stop it.

[Vasilios Vazakas]

Regarding the French connection or the Corsican Ruse as Charles so aptly named it, i have written these comments
https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...os+vazakas

There is no way we'll ever agree on these issue, you don't seem to understand the concept of false sponsors. I suggest you construct a Sponsors-False Sponsors-Facilitators-Mechanics model based on your Piper theory.
I believe you perpetuate the cover for the real sponsors by insisting on the Jews theory. If you wish
to do so, please continue. So you find EO11110 a non-issue compared to Lansky et al. And all these are more important than Brundage who you consider to be CIA. Actually he was more than CIA, he was part of the Establishment. You have now become part of the big lie. Congratulations.

[Seamus Coogan]

I don't see the point here. Sure Kennedy was concerned with it as he was also concerned with the nuclear programmes of other states, the UAR is mentioned. Dimona was up and running for years before Kennedy took office. Truman helped them get their first nuclear reactor in Nachal Sorec under the Atoms for Peace programme. They worked with the French later to build Dimona. France did this because of the Suez crisis and it was known then to be the basis for the Israeli nuclear weapons program. The cosy relationship with France ended with De Gaulle who wanted to stop the supply of uranium but all Israel had to do was agree to sham inspections and say it was peaceful and the French contracts ran their term until 1966. Norway and the UK were busy shipping things to Israel in the 50's and 60's. There is no way Kennedy could close it down regardless of what he wanted to do. It wasn't down town Texas. As you remember the big aid money had not been given at that time so he was unable to with draw any funding to put any pressure on. They already had what they wanted nuclear wise and there was nothing JFK could do. No point, if this is it, to assassinate him. That horse had long bolted.

The point here is that Kennedy was very concerned with Israel's nuclear program, and determined to put a stop to it. When I asserted that JFK was strongly opposed to Israel's nuclear program in that thread, Mr. Coogan responded with ridicule.

Yes, the UAR is mentioned, but as IATB goes on to state (p118):

Although NSAM referred to both Israeli and Egyptian nuclear programs, Israel was its main concern. Israel was percieved as being close to making critical nuclear decisions but US intelligence did not know enough about where the Israeli program was heading.

The fact is Kennedy had to invoke the UAR in NSAM 231 in order to maintain the perception of even handedness but Kennedy and his advisors all knew that no other country in the Middle East was working on a nuclear program except Israel.

As for Kennedy being unable to stop Israel's nuclear program, I don't agree and nor did Kennedy. The reactor did not become critical until after Kennedy's death and he was prepared to risk a major confrontation with Israel in order to stop it.

Is this all you have in you're mighty comeback? Knocked out in round one by Magda!

[Mark Stapleton]

Is this all you have in you're mighty comeback? Knocked out in round one by Magda!

Yeah right.

The first part of Mr. Coogan's rebuttal has now been effectively trashed.

Kennedy was strongly opposed to the Israeli nuclear program. This is an historical fact. He was prepared for a showdown with Ben-Gurion if necessary. Kennedy's final letter to Ben-Gurion dated 16 June 1963 and devoted to the Dimona problem was, according to IATB, (p.134) "the toughest and most explicit message from Kennedy to Ben-Gurion. To force Ben-Gurion to accept the conditions, Kennedy exerted the most useful leverage available to an American President in dealing with Israel: a threat that an unsatifactory conclusion would jeopardize the US Government's commitment to, and support of, Israel".

Hiding behind others won't help you now, Mr. Coogan.

[Magda Hassan]

The point here is that Kennedy was very concerned with Israel's nuclear program, and determined to put a stop to it. When I asserted that JFK was strongly opposed to Israel's nuclear program in that thread, Mr. Coogan responded with ridicule.

Yes, the UAR is mentioned, but as IATB goes on to state (p118):

Although NSAM referred to both Israeli and Egyptian nuclear programs, Israel was its main concern. Israel was percieved as being close to making critical nuclear decisions but US intelligence did not know enough about where the Israeli program was heading.

The fact is Kennedy had to invoke the UAR in NSAM 231 in order to maintain the perception of even handedness but Kennedy and his advisors all knew that no other country in the Middle East was working on a nuclear program except Israel.

As for Kennedy being unable to stop Israel's nuclear program, I don't agree and nor did Kennedy. The reactor did not become critical until after Kennedy's death and he was prepared to risk a major confrontation with Israel in order to stop it.

Israel's early sponsor was France not the US. It wasn't until after the Arab-Israeli wars in the late 60's and early 70's that the US stepped up with meaningful amounts of money. I think you over estimate Kennedy's ability to do a thing about it apart from hold his breath to eleventy, give lectures to them or denounce the country at the UN. Which all would have been totally ignored in the same way the British were ignored before Partition. Or do you really think he was going to invade or bomb them? I am sure Kennedy was wanting to stop it but that wasn't going to happen in the real world any more than he could have stopped the UK or France with their's. I don't know why the US intelligence had trouble working out what was going on there. The French knew all about it and that it was weapons capable. Dimona was operational and had supplies that did not depend on the US to keep going until at least 1966. Though they were happy enough to game the system and get their supplies from whomever as shown by the Numec/Apollo scam and who is to say that wasn't done under the table with some knowledge of the US and with plausible deniability. They certainly never followed through with any convictions or consequences so the US don't look too upset. Just like they don't press Israel today on the existence of their arsenal so the military funding can continue. If it is acknowledged that Israel has nuclear weapons all that funding stops from that instance. The programme went critical only with regards to weapons in the mid 60's though there is some suggestion that it could have been earlier. In any case not dependent on the US for supplies or permission.

I also think you underestimate the Arab position and over estimate the Israeli position at the time. Yes, their nuclear programme was not anything like that in Israel. But it was a threat of an arms race in the region. There was much pressure to keep the Arabs on side or to at least keep them from the Soviet sphere of influence which was very appealing to some nations. The Atoms for Peace programme was used as a political tool to keep countries with in the US sphere. Arab nationalism and socialism were very wide spread in the area at the time. It was also just after the Suez Crisis and before the 6 day war so Israel didn't have all that mythology around it yet. It was just some pissant country on the Mediterranean Sea where some Jews went to live after the war surrounded by Arabs. Albeit with the fairly good and resourceful brains trust but more chutzpah than substance.

[Mark Stapleton]

[Israel's early sponsor was France not the US. It wasn't until after the Arab-Israeli wars in the late 60's and early 70's that the US stepped up with meaningful amounts of money. I think you over estimate Kennedy's ability to do a thing about it apart from hold his breath to eleventy, give lectures to them or denounce the country at the UN. Which all would have been totally ignored in the same way the British were ignored before Partition. Or do you really think he was going to invade or bomb them? I am sure Kennedy was wanting to stop it but that wasn't going to happen in the real world any more than he could have stopped the UK or France with their's.

Yes I know France was Israel's original supplier. This ended with DeGaulle's election in the late 50's, although Peres was able to broker a compromise deal which kept French companies involved for a bit longer.

But that's not the point here is it?

The point being debated here, which you seem to ignore, is whether or not Kennedy strongly opposed the Israeli nuclear program. I think we have established here that he did oppose the nuclear program to the point of risking a major confrontation with Israel over the issue.

I was ridiculed rudely by Mr. Coogan for making this point and I have now proved him wrong.

The question of whether or not Kennedy could have stopped the program in reality is, once again, beside the point. The point here is that Kennedy thought he could. That's what drove him to confront Israel so directly. He was determined to use the strongest diplomatic pressure at his disposal to get a result.

Why would you think that I would seriously entertain the notion that Kennedy would bomb or invade Israel?

That's pretty weird Magda.

[Mark Stapleton]

I also think you underestimate the Arab position and over estimate the Israeli position at the time. Yes, their nuclear programme was not anything like that in Israel. But it was a threat of an arms race in the region. There was much pressure to keep the Arabs on side or to at least keep them from the Soviet sphere of influence which was very appealing to some nations. The Atoms for Peace programme was used as a political tool to keep countries with in the US sphere. Arab nationalism and socialism were very wide spread in the area at the time. It was also just after the Suez Crisis and before the 6 day war so Israel didn't have all that mythology around it yet. It was just some pissant country on the Mediterranean Sea where some Jews went to live after the war surrounded by Arabs. Albeit with the fairly good and resourceful brains trust but more chutzpah than substance.

The Arabs didn't have a nuclear program. None. Zero.

Kennedy knew this. If one had existed, I'm sure he would have exerted great pressure on them to desist.

The rest is all very interesting but not relevant to what is being discussed here is it?

[Magda Hassan]

[Israel's early sponsor was France not the US. It wasn't until after the Arab-Israeli wars in the late 60's and early 70's that the US stepped up with meaningful amounts of money. I think you over estimate Kennedy's ability to do a thing about it apart from hold his breath to eleventy, give lectures to them or denounce the country at the UN. Which all would have been totally ignored in the same way the British were ignored before Partition. Or do you really think he was going to invade or bomb them? I am sure Kennedy was wanting to stop it but that wasn't going to happen in the real world any more than he could have stopped the UK or France with their's.

Yes I know France was Israel's original supplier. This ended with DeGaulle's election in the late 50's.

But that's not the point here is it?

The point being debated here, which you seem to ignore, is whether or not Kennedy strongly opposed the Israeli nuclear program. I think we have established here that he did oppose the nuclear program to the point of risking a major confrontation with Israel over the issue.

I was ridiculed rudely by Mr. Coogan for making this point and I have now proved him wrong.

The question of whether or not Kennedy could have stopped the program in reality is, once again, beside the point. The point here is that Kennedy thought he could. That's what drove him to confront Israel so directly. He was determined to use the strongest diplomatic pressure at his disposal to get a result.

Why would you think that I would seriously entertain the notion that Kennedy would bomb or invade Israel?

That's pretty weird Magda.

Yes, it is pretty weird but what was the alternative? Nothing. Just "strongly opposing the Israeli nuclear program" Which amount to a just lot of hot air. That's all he could do. It doesn't matter that Kennedy thought he could stop it. Because he couldn't. He can write letters to Ben Gurion till the cows came home. He can stomp his feet and pout. Pull his hair out and tell everyone how bad Israel is. He can yell at their ambassador. Expel him even though I doubt he would have done that even. What matters is that the Israeli's knew he couldn't stop them. Their programme was already a fact of life, a reality, and needed no US inputs as they had all they needed already. Ergo, they had no reason to assassinate him because they had what they wanted and he could do nothing about it and they Israelis knew it even if Kennedy thought otherwise. Kennedy would just have to suck it up. Just as some do today.