Michael Piper and Final Judgment

[Albert Doyle]

David's obviously not arguing honestly and hoping to string together some momentum from his constructed canards. However what is most clear here is that he is in open contempt and denial of Ben-Gurion's mental collapse that led to his departure from Israeli government. He is playing dumb and saying we have failed to document it. He obviously protests too much and attempts to deny a well-known and accepted event and its cause as described by those close to Ben-Gurion and detailed in those books.


Your "position" David is an obvious attempt to bypass the meaning of Echevarria's comment and what it meant. What you are doing is a regressive maneuver designed to digress into ruminations of deep political groups associated with the assassination in order to create an obfuscating filibuster designed as 'sincere' argument in order to get around the main issue. This is due to your not having read the book and other biases. However as I posted numerous times the key is defining "new jew backers" and who they were? Once you were as deep into the conspiracy as Echevarria was any group that prominent and powerful would have to be under the knowledge and control of the main cabal. Most likely Echevarria was referring to some kind of Lansky organized backing. It is very possible this had a direct Mossad input which would explain why this was now defined as a "jewish" interest. For you to try suggest this new separate "Jewish" interest was only interested in Cuba is laughable and only illustrates how ignorant you are of what Piper wrote and how much merit it has. I mean who's fooling who here David? Your attempt to claim they were only interested in Cuba is obvious as the desperate denial that it is and once you understand the bigger arrangement in that underground it is laughably ridiculous that these jewish interests would drop all the desperate concern they themselves had "for the future existence of Israel," as Ben-Gurion put it, and only back Cuba. But go ahead David, weild that weak canard in the face of all this and continue to assert a 'superior' position in the debate using those obviously cheap devices against the well-established facts.

By the way, what did cause Ben-Gurion's nervous breakdown that those in government around him said was caused by his exchanges with Kennedy? Or are we going to be dragged back into your footnote hoops and hurdles?

[David Josephs]

Thank you Mark for posting those HARSH redacted words...

"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.
"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."


IOW - JFK asks BG to provide accurate and reliable information on the progress of their reactor/weapons program
as the US is Israel's #1 supporter and defender... provider of weapons and money and, and...

while the Middle East is a powder keg - the US president asks an ally to cooperate... NOT TO STOP DEVELOPING... but to be honest about the situation.
Does JFK get this honesty from his Israeli ally? or does he get more lies?

Seems to me it is BG who straight faced LIES to JFK and the USA about the reactor program.... and its "peaceful" purpose and did so for years with help from the French...
Then again, THANK YOU MARK for at least committing to SOME EVIDENCE...

It is up to the reader themselves to determine if this "information" supports the conclusion.
I for one, am not convinced...
I for one, see a secretive and uncooperative ALLY who is lying to our faces while jeapardizing the Middle East
The USA not only didn't want Israel to have nukes, they didn't want ALL OF the MIDDLE EAST to have nukes...

Some of us can read and see the difference... others, not so much.
DJ



"The Sudanese Ambassador asked whether Prime Minister Ben Gurion had discussed
the reasons for secrecy regarding Israel's second reactor. Mr. Talbot replied
that he had not. It was the President who had raised the question of Israel's
atomic research programs, and he had done so not in terms of history but in
terms of the present and of future intentions. Prime Minister Ben Gurion's
assurance on peaceful uses was firm. "

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...24_61.html4. Ambassador Harman expressed unhappiness with the manner in
which Israel's nuclear development came to the public's attention.

(A project of such significance was bound to become public
knowledge sooner or later. It had already been under way for perhaps two years.
Our Government endeavored to keep the matter secret while waiting for Israel's
official explanation, but was forced to comment when the story "broke" in rather
sensational terms in the British press. There is considerable justification for
the Israel contention that they were compelled to maintain tight security for
fear of Arab harassment of the project. A number of Congressional leaders remain
unhappy that the Israelis kept a development of this importance secret from the
United States in a period when they were operating on a basis of special
confidence to press highly sensitive requests for arms and economic assistance.)

[Albert Doyle]

David is just flat out lying now. Now he's deliberately defrauding the record and suggesting JFK was OK with Israel's nuclear development. If that's the case then why did Ben-Gurion have a nervous breakdown and was driven out office by it?

David is offering chutzpah-rich defense lawyer legalistic-type arguments. He's definitely not honestly searching for the truth here like he claimed. JFK was opposed to any nuclear weapon development by Israel. That's what the impasse was about.

David is in ignorant denial that Kennedy prohibited nuclear weapon development by Israel or that Angleton snuck nuclear materiel from that Pennsylvania company behind Kennedy's back.

Prime Minister Ben Gurion's
assurance on peaceful uses was firm. "

Talk about mendacious chutzpah! Meanwhile Israel was busy using those materials supplied by Angleton to construct nuclear weapons at the secret facility while it was escorting US weapons inspectors past false facilities constructed specifically for the purpose of deceiving Kennedy's inspectors.

In spite of all this David says "Trust me" in regard to Ben-Gurion.

David is now straight-facedly telling us Kennedy was OK with Israel's nuclear weapon development even though Ben-Gurion is on record as saying Kennedy's position "threatened the future existence of Israel."

[David Josephs]

David is just flat out lying now. Now he's deliberately defrauding the record and suggesting JFK was OK with Israel's nuclear development. If that's the case then why did Ben-Gurion have a nervous breakdown and was driven out office by it?

David is offering chutzpah-rich defense lawyer legalistic-type arguments. He's definitely not honestly searching for the truth here like he claimed. JFK was opposed to any nuclear weapon development by Israel. That's what the impasse was about.

David is in ignorant denial that Kennedy prohibited nuclear weapon development by Israel or that Angleton snuck nuclear materiel from that Pennsylvania company behind Kennedy's back.

Prime Minister Ben Gurion's
assurance on peaceful uses was firm. "

Talk about mendacious chutzpah! Meanwhile Israel was busy using those materials supplied by Angleton to construct nuclear weapons at the secret facility while it was escorting US weapons inspectors past false facilities constructed specifically for the purpose of deceiving Kennedy's inspectors.

In spite of all this David says "Trust me" in regard to Ben-Gurion.

David is now straight-facedly telling us Kennedy was OK with Israel's nuclear weapon development even though Ben-Gurion is on record as saying Kennedy's position "threatened the future existence of Israel."

:banghead:

Oy... tell you what Albert... how about YOU stick to telling us what YOU think and I'll stick to explaining my position myself... :thumbsup:

So far your responses to my asking for YOUR idea of proof has yet to produce a single citation or example that others reading this thread could call SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION.

We can all see you can spell my name correctly Albert...

How about starting a post with, "Piper says "A" and "A" is supported with the following..... 1) , 2), 3)... etc....
AND LET PEOPLE DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES?

JFK "prohibited nuclear weapon development by Israel" - WHERE ON EARTH DO YOU GET THIS BS ALBERT? JFK did no such thing...
So during this prohibition, and being lied to by BG, he sells Hawks to Israel...

And if we find that Dimona was not producing weapons grade product... yet all the while BG lying about that capability with the French assisting them along the way
how again is JFK "PROHIBITING" anything?

Scientists Find No Evidence of Nuclear Weapons at Dimona Reactor

(October 31, 1962)

---

This is a Circular Airgram from the Department of State to certain posts concerning the visit by two U.S. scientists to the Israeli nuclear reactor at Dimona.

---

Reftel (sent all addressees except Algiers) authorized addressees inform governments to which accredited of results unpublicized visit in spring 1961 by two qualified scientists to Israel reactor site at Dimona. According to observations then reported, Dimona project appeared of type and magnitude described publicly by Israel leaders (e.g., research reactor with 24 megawatt capacity). While they also concluded reactor upon completion in two or three years would produce small quantities plutonium as do others of comparable size and character, our experts found no evidence Israelis preparing produce weapons. We noted, accordingly, that observations US scientists tended support public and private assurances re peaceful intent Dimona project. We further noted that highest levels this government opposed to proliferation nuclear weapons production capabilities and had so informed Israel.



JFK letter to Eshkol re Dimona:
"You are aware, I am sure, of the exchanges which I had with Prime Minister
Ben-Gurion concerning American visits to Israel's nuclear facility at Dimona.
Most recently, the Prime Minister wrote to me on May 27. His words reflected a
most intense personal consideration of a problem that I know is not easy for
your Government, as it is not for mine. We welcomed the former Prime Minister's
strong reaffirmation that Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful
purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel's willingness to permit periodic
visits to Dimona.

On 3 October 1957, France and Israel signed a revised agreement calling for
France to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste
facilities were designed to handle three times that power) and, in protocols
that were not committed to paper, a chemical reprocessing plant. This complex
was constructed in secret, and outside the IAEA inspection regime, by French and
Israeli technicians at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col.
Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps.

Although the United States government did not encourage or approve of the Israeli nuclear program, it also did nothing to stop it. Walworth Barbour, US ambassador to Israel from 1961-73, the bomb program's crucial years, primarily saw his job as being to insulate the President from facts which might compel him to act on the nuclear issue, alledgedly saying at one point that "The President did not send me there to give him problems. He does not want to be told any bad news." After the 1967 war, Barbour even put a stop to military attachés' intelligence collection efforts around Dimona. Even when Barbour did authorize forwarding information, as he did in 1966 when embassy staff learned that Israel was beginning to put nuclear warheads in missiles, the message seemed to disappear into the bureaucracy and was never acted upon

Sources and Resources http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...nukes.html

• The Third Temple's Holy Of Holies: Israel's Nuclear Weapons Warner D. Farr, LTC, U.S. Army, September 1999
  
• The Bomb That Never Is by Avner Cohen, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2000, Vol 56, No. 3 pp.22-23
  
• Israel and the Bomb. Avner Cohen has provides a detailed account of of the political aspects of Israel's nuclear history that draws on thousands of American and Israeli government documents-most of them recently declassified and never before cited-and more than one hundred interviews with key individuals who played important roles in this story.
  
  

[Mark Stapleton]

while the Middle East is a powder keg - the US president asks an ally to cooperate... NOT TO STOP DEVELOPING... but to be honest about the situation.

It is up to the reader themselves to determine if this "information" supports the conclusion.
I for one, am not convinced...
I for one, see a secretive and uncooperative ALLY who is lying to our faces while jeapardizing the Middle East
The USA not only didn't want Israel to have nukes, they didn't want ALL OF the MIDDLE EAST to have nukes...

Some of us can read and see the difference... others, not so much.
DJ

What rubbish.

Of course JFK wanted Israel to stop developing nuclear weapons. He was prepared to risk a major confrontation with Israel on this matter. Why else would he keep hounding Ben-Gurion, demanding inspections? Why else would he issue NSAM 231?

It reads in part, ...in view of his great concern over the destabilising impact of any Israeli or UAR program looking toward the development of nuclear weapons, the President also wishes the Department of State to develop proposals for forestalling such programs

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nsam-jfk/nsam231.gif

Although NSAM 231 mentions both Israel and the UAR, it was aimed squarely at Israel. Why? Because the UAR, and in fact no other Middle Eastern country had any nuclear program underway in 1963.

Cohen writes in Israel and the Bomb (p.118) that on 25 March 1963, Kennedy, after receiving the CIA's estimate of the consequences of Israel's nuclearization, asked Bundy to issue a presidential directive to Rusk, requesting him to look for "some form of international or bilateral US safeguards" to curb the Israeli program. NSAM 231 was issued the following day.

Your smug dismissal of the gravity of this issue to both Kennedy and Ben-Gurion doesn't square with the historical record.

Your assertion that Kennedy was merely asking an ally to co-operate, but not to stop, is ridiculous.

[Mark Stapleton]

JFK "prohibited nuclear weapon development by Israel" - WHERE ON EARTH DO YOU GET THIS BS ALBERT? JFK did no such thing...
So during this prohibition, and being lied to by BG, he sells Hawks to Israel...

And if we find that Dimona was not producing weapons grade product... yet all the while BG lying about that capability with the French assisting them along the way
how again is JFK "PROHIBITING" anything?

That's not BS, it's the truth. JFK "forbade" nuclear weapons development by Israel might have been a little clearer. And yes, while forbidding Israel from developing nukes and being lied to by BG, he sells Hawks to Israel. Why? Because he was committed to Israel's security, as he said repeatedly, and he also wanted Israeli concessions on the Palestinian refugee problem, which of course he never got.

But he forbade Israel from developing nukes. On this he was more concerned with the security of the region overall, as any decent statesman would be, rather than the myopic focus on Israel demanded by Ben-Gurion. Also, he was probably shaken up by what happened in October 1962, when a nuclear confrontation looked possible. Some cite this as a turning point in his Presidency. You might as well stop spouting BS here David. You're looking sillier with every post.

[David Josephs]

"I'm" looking sillier? :flypig:

The information is out there... people can read it and decide for themselves....

Seems you need to do an awful lot of convincing just to get your point across because the source info is so vague and ambiguous..

Israel was going to develop mukes regardless of what JFK was saying... they were already developing them with a France who wanted to hide the fact
JFK was pushing a PEACE agenda... which required Israel's cooperation - Israel building nukes did NOT require the USA's cooperation.
BG LIED HIS A$$ OFF while expecting the USA to be at their beckon call, to defend and protect, to supply and strengthen... and then when caught at it, called on it you claim THAT is was precipitated the assassination? - some ally.

Your overstatement of the actual situation in support of Piper's conclusions is the silly part here Mark.

Please consider some alternate points of view that do not include Israeli involvement at all...

If you want to spout rhetoric... deal with these FACTS... and connect the dots
DJ

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index....opic=16780
Oddly enough, Permindex was incorporated in Basle in 1956, the same year when Ferenc Nagy travelled to Germany and Switzerland on the eve of the Hungarian uprising. It is certainly not by pure chance that Nagy, Wisner CIA's asset, choose this busy period of his life to become one of Permindex's directors. In all evidence, Nagy proximity with the CIA and the fact that at the same time he associated with Permindex is enough to let us conclude that Permindex was related to Wisner's anti-Communist crusade, in as much that it was directed by Nagy, one of CIA's important collaborators in its anti-Soviet operations. Also, the facts that the Italian Gladio network was revealed to be coupled with the P2 freemasonic lodge and that Bloomfield described Permindex's George Mantello as a 33rd degree Freemason, tend to indicate that Permindex may be intricated with the CIA's Italian Gladio network.

There are fantastic links to background data on this thread leading to this presentation of info from Terry Mauro.. seems they use the same sources yet come to a completely different conclusion... one not as sexy and contraversial as ISRAEL DID IT - and one that wouldn't sell as many books.... yet supportable conclusions none the less...

Are you comfortable with the thought that these JEWS were in bed with the NAZI's, Communists and Facists. You/Piper believes that Israeli's and Nazis would team up to kill JFK? Or did Bloomfield just not know about the Nazi's and the Facists of Italy....

EDIT: btw - Gladio is mentioned 54 times in the following article... the term GLADIO does not appear in Piper's book.
Interesting how this important CIA backed group to fight communism - a group of KILLERS/SPIES/MILITARY - is conveniently ommitted from Piper's examination of the situation...

The origin of Gladio can be traced to the so-called "secret anti-Communist NATO protocols", which were allegedly protocols committing the secret services of NATO member states to work to prevent communist parties from coming to power in Western Europe. According to the Italian researcher Mario Coglitore, the protocols required member states to guarantee alignment with the Western block "by any means".[SUP][[/SUP][SUP]citation needed[/SUP][SUP]][/SUP] According to US journalist Arthur Rowse, a secret clause exists in the North Atlantic Treaty requiring candidate countries, before joining NATO, to establish clandestine citizen cadres standing ready to eliminate communist cells during any national emergency. These clandestine cadres were to be controlled by the country's respective security services.[SUP][4[/SUP][SUP]][/SUP]



http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2005/32...rince.html
Permindex was
chaired by Canada's Bloomfield, while its international arm, CMC, was based in
Rome, and Clay Shaw's firm in New Orleans, International Trade Mart, was a
subsidiary of Permindex/CMC. According to documents released through the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA), OSS veteran Shaw worked for the CIA, as well. There
was ample evidence of Shaw's involvement in the assassination, for which he was
indicted by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison. Notably, one of the
names found in Shaw's personal phone book was that of Princess Marcella
Borghese, a member of the Black Prince's family. And one of the lower-level
figures in the ambit of the plot, Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby (who
assassinated patsy Lee Harvey Oswald), charged repeatedly in letters from jail,
that "the Nazis and the Fascists were behind the Kennedy murder." According to
the highly credible Torbitt manuscript, "Ruby was much more knowledgeable about
the conspiracy than most."

Huge
financial resources flowed through Permindex/CMC for no commercial purpose. Some
of these funds, at least, were provided through banks which had earlier financed
the Nazis, including one intimately associated with Allen Dulles from the time
of his 1930s work with Nazi cartels, through to his 1953-61 stint as CIA chief.
Some hints of where the money was going could be found in French and Italian
press reports that CMC official Ferenc Nagy, the fiercely anti-communist former
Prime Minister of Hungary, was financing Jacques Soustelle and the OAS, along
with other European fascist movements; or in New Orleans District Attorney
Garrison's observation about "Shaw's secret life as an Agency [CIA] man trying
to bring Fascism back to Italy."[6]

NATO units
were also involved in at least some of the numerous assassination attempts on
France's President Charles de Gaulle in 1962-63, which was no doubt a factor in
de Gaulle's withdrawing France from NATO's military command in 1966. France,
after all, had been a key target of NATO's "Operation Demagnetize" in the 1950s,
and the "anti-communist," bitterly anti-de Gaulle OAS operatives like Guerin
Serac, were natural partners of NATO. Adm. Pierre Lacoste, director of the
France's military secret service DGSE (1982-85), admitted after Andreotti had
exposed Gladio's existence in 1990, that some "terrorist actions" against de
Gaulle and his plans to liberate Algeria were carried out by groups involving "a
limited number of people" from the French Gladio organization!

A five-year
investigation by France's SDECE intelligence agency of a 1962 assassination plot
against de Gaulle found that the assassination had been planned in the Brussels
headquarters of NATO by a specific group of British and French generals, who
employed former fascists for the planned wetwork.


[6] When the CMC first started up in Rome, its chief public figure, the pro-fascist former Prime Minister of Hungary, Ferenc Nagy, announced that it had major financial backing, including from J. Henry Schroder Bank and the Seligman Bank in Basel. The Seligman Bank was a large stockholder of the CMC, and its principal, Hans Seligman, sat on the boards of both the CMC and Permindex. With J. Henry Schroder, Nagy had spilled the beans on a most sensitive institution, and the bank was quick to deny his claim. J. Henry Schroder Bank had been intimately involved in the Dulles/Nazi financial deals from the 1930s, and, as CIA chief, Dulles maintained $50 million in "contingency funds" at Schroder under his sole control. See William F. Wertz, Jr., "The Plot Against FDR: A Model for Bush's Pinochet Plan Today," EIR, Jan. 21, 2005.

For further details on Permindex/CMC, including its finances, see a January 1970 manuscript by William Torbitt; New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison's book, On the Trail of the Assassins; and the account in the 1992 edition of the book, Dope, Inc.: The Book That Drove Kissinger Crazy, by the authors of Executive Intelligence Review. EIR maintained a close relationship with Garrison until his death in 1992. The Italian left-wing daily Paese Sera also ran a series on CMC/Permindex in March 1967, exposing it as a shell for huge sums of money that had nothing to do with "commerce," naming some of its elite banking connections, and profiling its board members as Anglo-American intelligence-connected ex-Fascists and fanatical right-wingers. Earlier scandals regarding CMC/Permindex had caused an uproar in Parliament and elsewhere, which forced CMC/Permindex to leave Rome for Johannesburg in 1962, the year before the entity orchestrated the Kennedy assassination. Garrison observed that the Italian government had expelled CMC/Permindex for "subversive intelligence activity."

[Albert Doyle]

Oy... tell you what Albert... how about YOU stick to telling us what YOU think and I'll stick to explaining my position myself... :thumbsup:

So far your responses to my asking for YOUR idea of proof has yet to produce a single citation or example that others reading this thread could call SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION. [/COLOR]

The phony pretense is thick here. It's obvious that you need to impose this Von Peinian you-answer-your-material-I'll answer-mine because you can't give an honest answer to the credible questions I asked. Your phony supporting documentation demand is just your dishonest way of side-stepping your obvious inability to honestly answer what was shown. The evidence is documented enough. The only reason you are asking for further documentation is because you can't honestly answer the documentation that was shown.

JFK "prohibited nuclear weapon development by Israel" - WHERE ON EARTH DO YOU GET THIS BS ALBERT? JFK did no such thing...
So during this prohibition, and being lied to by BG, he sells Hawks to Israel...

From the entire accurate history you are flagrantly ignoring. You are trying to force dishonest semantic tricks here which shows you are not honestly looking for the truth. The entire process of JFK's interactions with Ben-Gurion was the deterring of nuclear weapon development by Israel. Typical of Israel involvement deniers you've jumped the shark here and are offering suggestions that are clearly in contempt of the known and acknowledged history. The only reason this history isn't more openly documented is because of the dirty intrigue that went on around it and how it was related to JFK's death. You got a real problem here because in your zeal to deny this by aggressively going on the offensive and trying to question otherwise known elements of the event you still haven't adequately explained what Echevarria meant?

Your reference to the Hawk missile sales once again highlights your desperation to assert disingenuous context. Kennedy offered the Hawk missiles in order to placate Israeli politics on both sides of the Atlantic. Your reference is wholly dishonest because it once again offers one of your strawman specialties suggesting that if Kennedy forbade nuclear weapons he would also forbid conventional missiles. This is yet another prime example of the ridiculousness of what you offer that you always fail to account for when exposed. The correct context of the Hawk sales was that Kennedy was trying to satisfy support for Israel's defense for all lobbies concerned in order to take pressure off his demand for nuclear restriction. What you are doing is like the right-wingers who try to misquote Kennedy and paint him as a Cold War war hawk. You are in contempt of not only everything shown in The Unspeakable but also everything shown in sources about the Ben-Gurion conflict.

The answer to your miserable question is that we are getting it from all accurate sources of the event. You're just seeking excuses.

And if we find that Dimona was not producing weapons grade product... yet all the while BG lying about that capability with the French assisting them along the way
how again is JFK "PROHIBITING" anything?

Scientists Find No Evidence of Nuclear Weapons at Dimona Reactor

(October 31, 1962)

---

This is a Circular Airgram from the Department of State to certain posts concerning the visit by two U.S. scientists to the Israeli nuclear reactor at Dimona.

---

Reftel (sent all addressees except Algiers) authorized addressees inform governments to which accredited of results unpublicized visit in spring 1961 by two qualified scientists to Israel reactor site at Dimona. According to observations then reported, Dimona project appeared of type and magnitude described publicly by Israel leaders (e.g., research reactor with 24 megawatt capacity). While they also concluded reactor upon completion in two or three years would produce small quantities plutonium as do others of comparable size and character, our experts found no evidence Israelis preparing produce weapons. We noted, accordingly, that observations US scientists tended support public and private assurances re peaceful intent Dimona project. We further noted that highest levels this government opposed to proliferation nuclear weapons production capabilities and had so informed Israel.

This is just squirming contempt for what has already been shown. Your speculative arguments are in contempt of the already established record that was already shown in this thread. It is known fact that Angleton snuck nuclear materiel behind JFK's back and that Israel had bricked-over the elevator that led to the processing facility at Dimona when Kennedy's inspectors arrived. Despite being shown this already you ignore it and return with your contemptuous speculative filibuster. It's obvious Israel bricked-over that level of Dimona because it was developing nuclear weapons against Kennedy's wishes. Yet you have abject hubris to see this and counter with a report that the inspectors did not see any signs of nuclear development as if you were presenting a sincere argument. You have real balls. How could they see any signs if the Israelis constructed a completely new bogus facility and took them to it? Or bricked-over the level where they were doing the work? Not very bright (or honest).

JFK letter to Eshkol re Dimona:

"You are aware, I am sure, of the exchanges which I had with Prime Minister
Ben-Gurion concerning American visits to Israel's nuclear facility at Dimona.
Most recently, the Prime Minister wrote to me on May 27. His words reflected a
most intense personal consideration of a problem that I know is not easy for
your Government, as it is not for mine. We welcomed the former Prime Minister's
strong reaffirmation that Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful
purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel's willingness to permit periodic
visits to Dimona.

On 3 October 1957, France and Israel signed a revised agreement calling for
France to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste
facilities were designed to handle three times that power) and, in protocols
that were not committed to paper, a chemical reprocessing plant. This complex
was constructed in secret, and outside the IAEA inspection regime, by French and
Israeli technicians at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col.
Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps.

Although the United States government did not encourage or approve of the Israeli nuclear program, it also did nothing to stop it. Walworth Barbour, US ambassador to Israel from 1961-73, the bomb program's crucial years, primarily saw his job as being to insulate the President from facts which might compel him to act on the nuclear issue, alledgedly saying at one point that "The President did not send me there to give him problems. He does not want to be told any bad news." After the 1967 war, Barbour even put a stop to military attachés' intelligence collection efforts around Dimona. Even when Barbour did authorize forwarding information, as he did in 1966 when embassy staff learned that Israel was beginning to put nuclear warheads in missiles, the message seemed to disappear into the bureaucracy and was never acted upon

As per above, that's absolute dishonest bullshit. You are making the exact same arguments that the "Kennedy escalated VietNam" deniers make against the obvious facts. That Kennedy was cool with VietNam, didn't really prevent it, and in the end approved of escalation with NSAM 273. You know, there's no documentation for what was written in The Unspeakable and Douglass got it all wrong.


You're really losing this debate.


(Could you turn off the color. I don't know how to edit it out)

[David Josephs]

You know, there's no documentation for what was written in The Unspeakable and Douglass got it all wrong.

'Nuf said Albert.... if you're in a position to claim Unspeakable is wrong... you simply don't GET it and my time is being wated in discussion with you.

"You aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know....."

Thank you for your posts... they make very clear where you stand and what you feel is adequate as supporting documentation for a conclusion...

Finally, LEARN how to use the forum... really not that hard... if you can't take the time to investigate how to work this simple tool
what does that say about how far you WONT GO in investigating your posted conclusions - which is a bit more complicated than changing font color.

Don't be offended if I ignore this thread and your posts on this subject.... posting with you and Mark is like discussing Oswald's innocence with Bugliosi and Posner...

Bad assumptions leading to worse conclusions.... and that doe-eyed stare of, "huh?, what do you mean my evidence is pathetically lacking? it's obvious that Oswald did it alone...."

yes Albert... you are painfully obvious.

[Albert Doyle]

"I'm" looking sillier? :flypig:

The information is out there... people can read it and decide for themselves....

Seems you need to do an awful lot of convincing just to get your point across because the source info is so vague and ambiguous..

Israel was going to develop mukes regardless of what JFK was saying... they were already developing them with a France who wanted to hide the fact
JFK was pushing a PEACE agenda... which required Israel's cooperation - Israel building nukes did NOT require the USA's cooperation.
BG LIED HIS A$$ OFF while expecting the USA to be at their beckon call, to defend and protect, to supply and strengthen... and then when caught at it, called on it you claim THAT is was precipitated the assassination? - some ally.

Your overstatement of the actual situation in support of Piper's conclusions is the silly part here Mark.

Please consider some alternate points of view that do not include Israeli involvement at all...

If you want to spout rhetoric... deal with these FACTS... and connect the dots
DJ

David pretends that the funding issue wasn't involved or that America, as is true today, wasn't the single-most important benefactor of Israel and that possible sanctions or restrictions weren't a factor. David also pretends that the movement towards detente and world peace evidenced in Douglass' The Unspeakable wasn't a factor. And that Kennedy couldn't have leveraged this movement in relation to Israel's development of nuclear weapons or made them look bad for being the nation that refused to participate in this movement.

Ask David to explain where the documentation would be for Kennedy threatening the CIA/Tibor Rosenbaum underground funding source in both JFK's moves towards the CIA and RFK's moves towards the US mob? There's more to this, and its relation to Ben-Gurion's statement that JFK threatened the future existence of Israel, than David's sincerely-offered sources present. It's why Piper's book is important.

David's facile equivocations in regard to France and Israel's intentions are just offhand evasive rubbish and silly. To say Israel did not depend on the US for nuclear development ignores Angleton's supplying of nuclear development materials, Israel's dependence on US power for its existence, the Mediterranean network financed by Rosenbaum's mafia money laundry Swiss bank, and ultimately the source of Ben-Gurion's strife (that David denies). These things have to be tied together to give an honest rendering of the situation, as well as Echevarria's comments.