23-02-2010, 03:25 PM
Peter Presland Wrote:There's at least one part of that Global Research article by Gordon Thomas (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...t=va&aid=17713)and referenced by Mark in the previous post that supports Austin's original point about Thomas's reliability. It concerns the assassination of Gerald Bull:
Quote:Within the global intelligence community, respect for Mossad grew following the kidon assassination of Dr Gerald Bull, the Canadian scientist who was probably the world's greatest expert on gun-barrel ballistics. Israel had made several attempts to buy his expertise. Each time, Bull had made clear his dislike for the Jewish state.The BIG problem with all that is that it is presented as the definitive version of what happened, whereas it is far from certain that Mossad were the prime movers - or even the trigger men.
Instead he had offered his services to Saddam Hussein, to build a super-gun capable of launching shells containing nuclear, chemical or biological warheads directly from Iraq into Israel. Saddam had ordered three of the weapons at a cost of $20 million. Bull was retained as a consultant for a fee of $1 million.
On the afternoon of March 20, 1990, the sanction to kill Bull was given by the then prime minister, Yitzhak Shamir. Nahum Admoni, the head of Mossad, sent a three-man team to Brussels, where Bull lived in a luxury apartment block. Each kidon carried a handgun in a holster under his jacket.
When the 61-year-old Bull answered the doorbell of his home, he was shot five times in the head and the neck, each kidon firing their 7.65 pistol in turn, leaving Bull dead on his doorstep. An hour later they were out of the country on a flight to Tel Aviv.
Within hours, Mossad's own department of psychological warfare had arranged with sayanim in the European media to leak stories that Bull had been shot by Saddam's hit squad because he had planned to renege on their deal.
Magda's thread about Stephan Koch here suggests a plausible alternative. I was so intrigued by that thread that I bought a copy of Gerald James's book 'In the Public Interest' and have just finished reading it. James became deeply enmeshed in events leading to the 'Arms to Iraq' scandal through the mid-late eighties and early nineties. He was the Chairman of Astra Holdings throughout and knew Gerald Bull personally. Bull's was not the only assassination with deep connections to UK involvement in that arms trade. Belgian 'Minister of State' Andre Cools and investigative reporter Jonathan Moyle were two other obvious ones and there were several other highly suspicious, premature unexplained deaths. More on Moyle in another of Magda's threads here
In short MI6, the eyes, ears, facilitators and enforcers of UK Deep State interests were undoubtedly relieved at the early demise of all those players and were as well placed as any organisation to ensure they occurred.
So, contrary to Gordon Thomas's dogmatic version, there are other possibilities with more substantial motive and capability which he does not even mention. Hmmmm.
There is, of course, another possibility Peter. That is that Mossad were contracted to carry out Bull's assassination on the part of another friendly state. I remember this case somewhat and discussed it with someone I knew who investigated it for the purposes of making a TV documentary about it. In this person's view the assassinations had the 'style" of a Mossad hit. But he believed British fingerprints were actually all over it.
We can extend this analysis further about the Robert Maxwell death. Gordon Thomas said in one of his books, that Mossad were behind that. A (now retired) senior journalist I know who worked for Maxwell conducted his own private investigation and believed it was probably the US and/or UK who were ultimately responsible.
The bottom line is that if you wish to conduct a high profile assassination you're going to make damn well sure you muddy the waters by contracting out to another friendly agency - who may well also contract out to yet another friendly agency etc etc., and they, in turn, ultimately may use independent cut outs.
Thomas could be precisely right and absolutely incorrect at the same time.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14