Posts: 1,597
Threads: 81
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Oct 2012
your conclusions, even in your last post, are not supportable by any corroborated evidence....
PLEASE CITE SOURCES...
Quote:Ben-Gurion was driven to a nervous breakdown by his negotiations with Kennedy. He resigned office because of it, yet you are trying to suggest this was a product of Hersh's imagination. As is typical of you David, it seems to me like you are trying to hide too much behind that obvious Hersh-association device. You can't defeat this with source defamation. It is obviously well beyond just Hersh alone. Mark has already cited the books referencing this.
No Albert. Mark hasn't... if he has... link to the post and stop shying away from the task at hand.
Notable historians are not so fearful of the Mossad as to avoid mentioning connections where they are real...
That these men existed at a time and circumstance that
Piper and Hersh use to create a very good leap of faith,
sells some books and books some seminars - but in the end
the connections are loose and weak as the causal agent for JFK's assassination.
But, as I've said before... in all tall tales there remains many little truths..
Extremists - as we see every time - use ambiguous rhetoric as a rallying cry...
Were there Israeli's and Jews and CIA and,and and intermixed with a common purpose... yes Albert, that is not hard to see.
But pinning the assassination on "Ben-Gurion had a dispute with Kennedy over Israel's attempt to acquire nuclear weapons"
is to ignore the real, right down the Potomac, threat, who actually HAD nukes aimed at commies and pleaded with the man to use them...
Who actually HAD plans to invade Cuba
Who HAD plans for Vietnam where opportunity there DWARFED Israel's concerns in 1963....
Where the US HAD to remain friends with the OIL PRODUCING COUNTRIES of the Middle East... (pssst: we use a lot of oil here)
Pull your head out of Piper's #$% long enough to cite his evidence either from the book or from his sources...
As such a supporter, this should be readily available as you MUST be asked to support your posts all the time...
You really do not have a word doc with copy/paste citations from Piper?
When I can quote Kleins/Waldman/Michaelis exhibits by heart showing why that whole deal was a charade? (to name but ONE example)
In fact... for your edification and the enjoyment of anyone who'd like to check em out....
http://s1233.photobucket.com/albums/ff394/dhjosephs/
(please note - this is NOT all original work... some was saved and used to create new analysis... yet the majority is my work)
This is a part of MY BODY OF EVIDENCE and analysis which I refer to when trying to support my conclusions or assertions
If the EVIDENCE cannot stand on its own, without YOUR HELP EXPLAINING IT TO US...
WHO are you convincing?
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
Quote:your conclusions, even in your last post, are not supportable by any corroborated evidence....
PLEASE CITE SOURCES...
Exactly what Von Pein would say David. You're ruminating against the obvious again and trying to force it into your contrived strawman nut shells. If I'm not mistaken you are denying that Ben-Gurion had a showdown with JFK through those letters. That destroys your credibility because it's acknowledged fact. Otherwise they wouldn't classify the letters (another point you never seem to get around to in your filibusters)
The sources were already cited. They are also in Piper's footnotes if you bothered to check.
Mark Stapleton
Unregistered
David Josephs Wrote:Chapter 5 -
By mid-1963 Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurionhated Kennedy with a passion. In fact, he considered JFK a
threat to the very survival ofthe Jewish State.
[FONT=Times New Roman]
Well that's true. Ditto for the other things Hersh and Piper say about the JFK/BG relationship, regardless of the flowery rhetoric they sometimes employ. And the idea that because Hersh never visited Israel this somehow erodes his credibility is absurd and, if anything, erodes your credibility.
Your posts are long, meandering and often contradictory.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
21-10-2012, 04:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 21-10-2012, 04:27 PM by Albert Doyle.)
I mean it's obvious from David's approach that he's trying to wish away the reality of this. Using the Jewish Virtual Library on this matter is like using McAdams on the Kennedy Assassination. Or even the Warren Report or CNN. Yet David once again comes in and tries to sell us this research method as a sincere and honest seeker of the truth. He condemns Hersh (who may deserve it elsewhere) yet cites the Jewish Virtual Library on some of the deepest matters concerning Israeli intrigue. Meanwhile the real record shows Israel created an entire false facility when Kennedy sent inspectors over to Dimona. They even bricked-over an elevator in the other building in order to conceal a level of the building dedicated to nuclear weapon development. David, of course, will only believe this if we can produce hard copy written proof. This dilemma that those around Ben-Gurion witnessed as leading to a nervous breakdown, and Ben-Gurion's subsequent departure from the Israeli government, not to mention the sealing of the written record in the form of JFK's letters to Ben-Gurion, is something David doesn't believe and thinks was only a product of Hersh's sensationalism. David, why did they seal those letters again? Was it because they might have revealed a sudden altruistic emotion in the Israelis for suddenly putting their US underground assets to work for the Cubans as you suggest? Was even Vanunu another one of Hersh's exaggerations - or not another example of Israel's desperation over its nuclear program? Are you denying that Ben-Gurion said Kennedy's restriction represented a threat to the future of Israel? Or do we need to bring you sworn and written quotes on a shining silver platter from Mount Zion?
Quote:Were there Israeli's and Jews and CIA and,and and intermixed with a common purpose... yes Albert, that is not hard to see.
...As Piper makes clear. Realize, Mr Josephs, what you just said there has gotten many a person ostracized as vile anti-semites. After reading your posts it becomes clear to me that you are indirectly suggesting Israel was involved. I agree and thank you for that.
.
Posts: 1,597
Threads: 81
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Oct 2012
Albert Doyle Wrote:Quote:your conclusions, even in your last post, are not supportable by any corroborated evidence....
PLEASE CITE SOURCES...
Exactly what Von Pein would say David. You're ruminating against the obvious again and trying to force it into your contrived strawman nut shells. If I'm not mistaken you are denying that Ben-Gurion had a showdown with JFK through those letters. That destroys your credibility because it's acknowledged fact. Otherwise they wouldn't classify the letters (another point you never seem to get around to in your filibusters)
The sources were already cited. They are also in Piper's footnotes if you bothered to check.
No Albert... AGAIN... the sources are NOT cited... as I've shown above... I posted the ACTUAL TEXT OF THE BOOK and it still does not supoort your posts about Piper...
I posted the index and footnotes related to statements and find SY Hersh as the only source with a single Israeli "informant" as the backbone of Piper's case...
Why is pointing/linking to the sources and quoting evidence from a book you obviously support and defend so hard for you and Mark?
Of course I am denying it... prove me wrong - POST THE EVIDENCE...
y'know... open the book, find what you believe supports your position and POST IT SO WE ALL CAN JUDGE FOR OURSELVES...
and no DVP does not like to ask for evidence... in fact he never asks for it - he, like you both - comes to conclusions that are not supported by the evidence...
Case in point - (if you read/follow DVP then you might be aware of this conversation)
Kleins order for Hidell has a specific Item # - C20-T750 - as it appeared in Feb.
Waldman handwrites C2766 onto the order which relates it back 1 of 100 rifles on 10 packing slips
C20-T750 in FEB was a 36" M91/38TS rifle... as it had been since August of 1962
C2766 is a 40" M91/38FC rifle...
I asked DVP and any LNer on the planet whether or not any other single order from Kleins was ever seen showing ANY OTHER of the 99 40" rifles on an order form for a C20-T750 prior to March 1963...
Obviously if Kleins was replacement shipping the 36" rifle with the larger one... more than one of the 99 other rifles would have been shipped to a customer who placed a C20-T750 order prior to or just subsequent to HIDELL's order.
The microfilm from which the FBO printed HIDELL's order is a CE and contains hundreds of orders on it...
but the FBI only asked that the HIDELL order be printed... and when researchers when to the archives they were told that film is not longer there....
Without evidence that any other Kleins order experienced the same substitution in the 6 months prior to Hidell's order, how can DVP and the LNers claim that Hidell's order was REAL and consistent with what was being shipped... business keep records just for that purpose...the FBI destroys rexcords - just for that purpose....
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF ANY SECRET WAR - nor is there any evidence of a connection
Quote:Using the Jewish Virtual Library on this matter is like using McAdams on the Kennedy Assassination.
Dont you get embarassed by making comments like that? McAdams is nothing but commentary on the evidence to convince you Oswald was alone
a "library" houses the actual documents - without commentary - as EVIDENCE for you to read and incorporate into your understanding...
Are you now saying that the actual documents from the period - some, not all of course - are FAKED? ALTERED? PLANTED?
or are they actual accounts (written by USG staffers) of these meetings and reflect the sentiments of those in attendance?
Then as I've asked more times than not... POST/LINK/CITE the pages of Piper's book you say shows this evidence... I've post my EVIDENCE, not only my opinions
Using Sy Hersh as a source requires GREATER corroboration, not less boys...
and it seems from continued reading, that Piper hangs his hat on Sy as the end all source of this "secret war"...
Piper writes yet provides no support for:
" In Israelin 1963David Ben-Gurion certainly looked upon John F.
Kennedy as a modern-day Haman, a son of the Amalekites. As he pondered
the brutal conflict with JFK, Ben-Gurion no doubt remembered the
meditation that is read on Purim:"
How about one of you actually give it a try rather than pull the old DVP ad hominem SOP reply and think you've scored some cosmic points
Mark - SAYING piper and hersh are correct does notmake it so... PROVE IT with something other than YOUR flowery rhetoric... Cite a page dude...
One flippin page... I went in and reviewed an entire chapter specifically called out by Piper and it still offers nothing...
No peer corroboration at all Mark... but SY was in on it...
Hey if that's your standard for evidence, I can see why you've bought into his story and don't like to cite supporting evidence... there isn't any.
According to Seymour Hersh: "Israel's bomb, and what to do about it,
became a White House fixation, part of the secret presidential agenda that
would remain hidden for the next thirty years."106
As Hersh notes, quite profoundly we see in retrospect, this secret war
with Israel was never once noted by any of Kennedy's biographers
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
Mark Stapleton Wrote:David, the ignorance of that comment shows how little you know about the final years of Ben-Gurion's Prime Ministership.
BG's obsession with protecting and preserving the nuclear deterrent is not just emphasised in Piper's book but also in Cohen's "Israel and the Bomb" and Michael Bar-Zohar's biography of Ben-Gurion, to name just two. The old man was so upset by Kennedy's determination to prevent Israel's acquisition of nuclear weapons that some Cabinet colleagues thought he was losing his mind.
And yes, Israel has played the existential threat card on other occasions (like now with Iran for example), but the point you ignore is that in mid-1963 Kennedy wasn't buying it. That's the point. He couldn't get through to Kennedy no matter how hard he appealed, no matter how many times he invoked the (relatively fresh) memory of the Holocaust.
Kennedy's harsh letter of May 18 causes the most consternation. BG responds with a letter on May 27, which basically stalls for more time. On June 5, after a meeting in El Paso, it is announced that JFK will visit Texas in November. On June 15 Ben-Gurion resigns. He never corresponds with Kennedy again.
And there's more books than the two listed above. Why deny this commonly-known history, David, with source contrivances?
Quote:Piper writes yet provides no support for:
"In Israelin 1963David Ben-Gurion certainly looked upon John F.
Kennedy as a modern-day Haman, a son of the Amalekites. As he pondered
the brutal conflict with JFK, Ben-Gurion no doubt remembered the
meditation that is read on Purim:"
That's a strawman David (even worse Ben-Gurion did see Kennedy that way as is evidenced by his inferring JFK threatened the future of Israel and having nervous breakdown over it that you are in denial of even though it's common knowledge).
Answer the main argument.
Posts: 1,597
Threads: 81
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Oct 2012
Albert Doyle Wrote:Mark Stapleton Wrote:David, the ignorance of that comment shows how little you know about the final years of Ben-Gurion's Prime Ministership.
BG's obsession with protecting and preserving the nuclear deterrent is not just emphasised in Piper's book but also in Cohen's "Israel and the Bomb" and Michael Bar-Zohar's biography of Ben-Gurion, to name just two. The old man was so upset by Kennedy's determination to prevent Israel's acquisition of nuclear weapons that some Cabinet colleagues thought he was losing his mind.
And yes, Israel has played the existential threat card on other occasions (like now with Iran for example), but the point you ignore is that in mid-1963 Kennedy wasn't buying it. That's the point. He couldn't get through to Kennedy no matter how hard he appealed, no matter how many times he invoked the (relatively fresh) memory of the Holocaust.
Kennedy's harsh letter of May 18 causes the most consternation. BG responds with a letter on May 27, which basically stalls for more time. On June 5, after a meeting in El Paso, it is announced that JFK will visit Texas in November. On June 15 Ben-Gurion resigns. He never corresponds with Kennedy again.
And there's more books than the two listed above. Why deny this commonly-known history, David, with source contrivances?
Except Israel had already begun the project with France... JFK was not stopping anything... he was attempting to keep peace in an area NOT dominated by Israeli's
You cant say that Arabs didn't deserve to live peacefully either... Israel exists in a bigger picture Albert... it was not about JFK not BUYING it, it was some Israelis believing their own agenda superceded world peace and the desires of the HAND THAT FEEDS THEM, the USA.
So let's look at this HARSH letter: would you please HIGHLIGHT what within this letter you find most "harsh" and cause for "consternation"
which in turn would give rise to the assasination of the man at the behest of the harsly treated Ben-Gurion?
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...18_63.html
Verbatim text. You should deliver following letter from President to Prime Minister Ben-Gurion:
"Dear Mr. Prime Minister:
"I welcome your letter of May 12 and am giving it careful
study.
"Meanwhile, I have received from Ambassador Barbour a report of
his conversation with you on May 14 regarding the arrangements for visiting the
Dimona reactor. I should like to add some personal comments on that subject.
"I am sure you will agree that there is no more urgent business
for the whole world than the control of nuclear weapons. We both recognized this
when we talked together two years ago, and I emphasized it again when I met with
Mrs. Meir just after Christmas. The dangers in the proliferation of national
nuclear weapons systems are so obvious that I am sure I need not repeat them
here.
"It is because of our preoccupation with this problem that my
Government has sought to arrange with you for periodic visits to Dimona. When we
spoke together in May 1961 you said that we might make whatever use we wished of
the information resulting from the first visit of American scientists to Dimona
and that you would agree to further visits by neutrals as well. I had assumed
from Mrs. Meir's comment that there would be no problem between us on this.
"We are concerned with the disturbing effects on world
stability which would accompany the development of a nuclear weapons capability
by Israel. I cannot imagine that the Arabs would refrain from turning to the
Soviet Union for assistance if Israel were to develop a nuclear weapons
capability--with all the consequences this would hold. But the problem is much
larger than its impact on the Middle East. Development of a nuclear weapons
capability by Israel would almost certainly lead other larger countries, that
have so far refrained from such development, to feel that they must follow
suit.
"As I made clear in my press conference of May 8, we have a
deep commitment to the security of Israel. In addition this country supports
Israel in a wide variety of other ways which are well known to both of us.
[4-1/2 lines of source text not declassified]
"I can well appreciate your concern for developments in the
UAR. But I see no present or imminent nuclear threat to Israel from there. I am
assured that our intelligence on this question is good and that the Egyptians do
not presently have any installation comparable to Dimona, nor any facilities
potentially capable of nuclear weapons production. But, of course, if you have
information that would support a contrary conclusion, I should like to receive
it from you through Ambassador Barbour. We have the capacity to check it.
"I trust this message will convey the sense of urgency and the
perspective in which I view your Government's early assent to the proposal first
put to you by Ambassador Barbour on April 2.
"Sincerely,
"John F. Kennedy"
Rusk
Quote:Piper writes yet provides no support for:
"In Israelin 1963David Ben-Gurion certainly looked upon John F.
Kennedy as a modern-day Haman, a son of the Amalekites. As he pondered
the brutal conflict with JFK, Ben-Gurion no doubt remembered the
meditation that is read on Purim:"
That's a strawman David (even worse Ben-Gurion did see Kennedy that way as is evidenced by his inferring JFK threatened the future of Israel and having nervous breakdown over it that you are in denial of even though it's common knowledge).
Answer the main argument.
"INFERRING" Albert... this is complete supposition... was there anyone close to BG who can corroborate this?
And I did not make the statement, Piper does... and it is very easy to refute... just look at that HARSH letter and make your argument
DJ
Definition of STRAW MAN1 : a weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
21-10-2012, 07:46 PM
(This post was last modified: 21-10-2012, 08:08 PM by Albert Doyle.)
I would think that would be in the Ben-Gurion biography David. You write paragraphs worth of filler, David, but they end up being answered by one or two lines. I'm sure the Ben-Gurion biography confirms this. Piper is well footnoted, so I'm sure that's where he got it. Surely you're not trying to deny this is an accurate description of Ben-Gurion's behavior at the time?
Now let's run over your position once again. You are contending that although this is already well-established in history and in books like those Mark and Piper list, you are saying this didn't occur and was the result of exaggerated accounts? What you are saying is even though there is plenty of evidence Ben-Gurion and JFK were at serious loggerheads over the nuclear issue and Ben-Gurion was witnessed as having a mental breakdown over it, that this is completely unrelated and coincidence and the product of wishful thinking on Hersh's and Piper's behalf? Even though you have no counter explanation for what caused this or why the letters were classified? Hmm.
Also, you are saying that although the persons of deep enough power in America to get involved with the CIA/Cuban nexus could not be unrelated to the assassination cabal that this had nothing to do with anything and the "new jew backers" were altruistically doing a favor for only the Cubans - even though they had major issues that were all directly satisfied by JFK's assassination and proven by Israel's gains following it?
I just want to get your position clear because I'm honestly seeking the truth here..
Oh yeah, I forgot. Also, even though you are admitting involvement that has gotten others excoriated and vilified you are not doing so, while doing so, while saying you are trying to disprove it. You're admitting Israel was involved just like many other interests but wasn't involved?
I'm just trying to clarify your position.
.
Posts: 1,597
Threads: 81
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Oct 2012
21-10-2012, 10:16 PM
(This post was last modified: 22-10-2012, 03:16 AM by David Josephs.)
Albert Doyle Wrote:I would think that would be in the Ben-Gurion biography David. You write paragraphs worth of filler, David, but they end up being answered by one or two lines. I'm sure the Ben-Gurion biography confirms this. Piper is well footnoted, so I'm sure that's where he got it. Surely you're not trying to deny this is an accurate description of Ben-Gurion's behavior at the time?
Now let's run over your position once again. You are contending that although this is already well-established in history and in books like those Mark and Piper list, you are saying this didn't occur and was the result of exaggerated accounts? What you are saying is even though there is plenty of evidence Ben-Gurion and JFK were at serious loggerheads over the nuclear issue and Ben-Gurion was witnessed as having a mental breakdown over it, that this is completely unrelated and coincidence and the product of wishful thinking on Hersh's and Piper's behalf? Even though you have no counter explanation for what caused this or why the letters were classified? Hmm.
Also, you are saying that although the persons of deep enough power in America to get involved with the CIA/Cuban nexus could not be unrelated to the assassination cabal that this had nothing to do with anything and the "new jew backers" were altruistically doing a favor for only the Cubans - even though they had major issues that were all directly satisfied by JFK's assassination and proven by Israel's gains following it?
I just want to get your position clear because I'm honestly seeking the truth here..
Oh yeah, I forgot. Also, even though you are admitting involvement that has gotten others excoriated and vilified you are not doing so, while doing so, while saying you are trying to disprove it. You're admitting Israel was involved just like many other interests but wasn't involved?
I'm just trying to clarify your position.
.
So again Albert... you just can't point to anything in that letter that justifies your conclusion, can you?
Clarify YOUR position with support... the Letter is right there Albert... point to the passages thatsupport you previous post... why do you run from that?
My position remains that you and Mark are not prepared to post the actual evidence... only references to them and hopes we go find them ourselves.
and when we do, we find them horribly inadequate to support the conclusion.
My position is that the players Piper names are part of a world wide illegal activites cabal and in the event of an assasination THEY are on the top of the list to be examined...
Piper and you are stating that Ben-Gurion's anger at the letter I posted above led to JFK's assassination...
Pure BS boys... PROVE your conclusion before questioning everyone else's,
unless you simply can't...
which usually results in ad hominem and the changing of the subject from YOUR story to everybody else's objections... as we've seen in EVERY reponse in this thread
Mark Stapleton
Unregistered
David Josephs Wrote:So let's look at this HARSH letter: would you please HIGHLIGHT what within this letter you find most "harsh" and cause for "consternation"
which in turn would give rise to the assasination of the man at the behest of the harsly treated Ben-Gurion?
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...18_63.html
Verbatim text. You should deliver following letter from President to Prime Minister Ben-Gurion:
"Dear Mr. Prime Minister:
"I welcome your letter of May 12 and am giving it careful
study.
"Meanwhile, I have received from Ambassador Barbour a report of
his conversation with you on May 14 regarding the arrangements for visiting the
Dimona reactor. I should like to add some personal comments on that subject.
"I am sure you will agree that there is no more urgent business
for the whole world than the control of nuclear weapons. We both recognized this
when we talked together two years ago, and I emphasized it again when I met with
Mrs. Meir just after Christmas. The dangers in the proliferation of national
nuclear weapons systems are so obvious that I am sure I need not repeat them
here.
"It is because of our preoccupation with this problem that my
Government has sought to arrange with you for periodic visits to Dimona. When we
spoke together in May 1961 you said that we might make whatever use we wished of
the information resulting from the first visit of American scientists to Dimona
and that you would agree to further visits by neutrals as well. I had assumed
from Mrs. Meir's comment that there would be no problem between us on this.
"We are concerned with the disturbing effects on world
stability which would accompany the development of a nuclear weapons capability
by Israel. I cannot imagine that the Arabs would refrain from turning to the
Soviet Union for assistance if Israel were to develop a nuclear weapons
capability--with all the consequences this would hold. But the problem is much
larger than its impact on the Middle East. Development of a nuclear weapons
capability by Israel would almost certainly lead other larger countries, that
have so far refrained from such development, to feel that they must follow
suit.
"As I made clear in my press conference of May 8, we have a
deep commitment to the security of Israel. In addition this country supports
Israel in a wide variety of other ways which are well known to both of us.
[4-1/2 lines of source text not declassified]
"I can well appreciate your concern for developments in the
UAR. But I see no present or imminent nuclear threat to Israel from there. I am
assured that our intelligence on this question is good and that the Egyptians do
not presently have any installation comparable to Dimona, nor any facilities
potentially capable of nuclear weapons production. But, of course, if you have
information that would support a contrary conclusion, I should like to receive
it from you through Ambassador Barbour. We have the capacity to check it.
"I trust this message will convey the sense of urgency and the
perspective in which I view your Government's early assent to the proposal first
put to you by Ambassador Barbour on April 2.
"Sincerely,
"John F. Kennedy"
Rusk
David, you just can't seem to get it right in your long, rambling posts, can you.
The harsh part of JFK's May 18 letter is contained in the 4 lines that were classified.
Right after Kennedy reiterates his commitment to the security of Israel, he added: "This commitment and this support would be seriously jeopardised in the public opinion in this country and in the West, if it should be thought that this Government was unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to peace as the question of Israel's efforts in the nuclear field."
This comes from p.128 of Cohen's 1998 book "Israel and the Bomb". The footnotes state that these four lines are still classified on the American side and they do not appear in the FRUS 1961-1963 version of the letter. The letter can be found in full at ISA 7233/5/A.
(FRUS stands for Foreign Relations of the US. ISA stands for Israel Security Agency, their equivalent of the FBI, I assume.)
The copy of the letter you linked from the Jewish Virtual Library site may be verbatim, but it still omits the explicit threat Kennedy made to Ben-Gurion. Why the Jewish Virtual Library would quote the version of that letter with the missing text rather than the version with the full text is a mystery. Maybe you should refrain from sourcing them so frequently.
|
