Les archives états-uniennes de sécurité nationale déclassifient 50 documents révélant qu’Israël, pour obtenir la bombe atomique, a dû mentir effrontément à l’administration Kennedy résolument opposée à la course à l’armement nucléaire et chimique au Moyen-Orient

Pour une courte introduction en français, visionner cet extrait en français (@2:33) d’un important reportage de la BBC « Israel, Vanunu and the Bomb » (à voir en entier en version française).

 

Nucléaire: Comment Israël a induit en erreur les États-Unis 

http://presstv.ir/DetailFr/2016/04/22/461974/Nuclaire-Isral-a-induit-en-erreur-les-tats-Unis/

PRESSTV

Fri Apr 22, 2016 8:17AM

Le Sunday Times du 5 octobre 1986.

Cinquante documents américains du début des années 1960 qui ont été déclassifiés par les archives du National Security aux États-Unis jeudi, ont fait la lumière sur les tentatives d’Israël de cacher l’un de ses secrets les mieux gardés à ce jour: les détails sur son programme nucléaire. A l’époque, les Américains croyaient que les Israéliens fournissaient «des fausses pistes» sur les intentions de construire une bombe.

Les documents comprennent des documents de la Maison Blanche, le Département d’Etat, le Commissariat à l’énergie atomique et les agences de renseignement américaines. Les éditeurs sont Avner Cohen, professeur à l’Institut Middlebury d’études internationales à Monterey, et William Burr, la tête de la documentation des affaires nucléaires à la National Security Archive, qui est basé à l’Université George Washington dans la capitale.

Un document fournit les minutes d’une réunion entre le président américain John F. Kennedy et le Premier ministre David Ben Gourion en mai 30,1961, au Waldorf Astoria à New York.

Selon les détails de cette réunion, déjà publié dans le passé, Ben Gourion a affirmé à Kennedy que le projet de Dimona (Centrale atomique israélienne dans le Neguèv) n’avait aucune dimension militaire et qu’il s’agissait uniquement d’un programme nucléaire à vocation civile.

La transcription américaine dit: «Notre principal – et pour l’instant seul- but est [l’énergie pas cher]. Nous ne savons pas ce qui se passera dans le futur « .

La transcription israélienne dit: «Pour le moment, les seuls objectifs sont la paix … mais nous allons voir ce qui se passe au Moyen-Orient. Il ne dépend pas de nous. « 

Dix jours avant cette réunion, une autre réunion clé a eu lieu. Ce fut la première visite d’inspecteurs américains (les Américains les appelaient ‘inspecteurs’ – Israël les appelé ‘visiteurs’) au réacteur de Dimona. Les Israéliens avaient considéré la visite productive. Les inspecteurs croyaient que l’installation était en construction et en conformité avec la description des Israéliens: un réacteur de recherche à des fins pacifiques.

Le rapport complet sur la visite de la Commission américaine de l’énergie atomique fait partie du nouveau lot de documents déclassifiés. Selon le rapport, les techniciens présent à Dimona ont affirmé aux Américains que le réacteur serait probablement doublé d’un autre dans un proche avenir.

« Cela aurait pu servir comme un signal d’avertissement et un indicateur inquiétant : le réacteur était capable de produire beaucoup plus de plutonium et on l’a su à l’époque, » soulignent Cohen et Burr avant dans leurs notes explicatives. En fait, les visiteurs sont rentrés chez eux satisfaits, et leur rapport positif a ouvert la voie à la réunion Kennedy-Ben-Gurion.

Un autre document intéressant du National Intelligence Estimate de la CIA sur Israël a été conçu en Octobre 1961, quelques mois après la réunion Kennedy-Ben-Gurion. Ceci est le seul document déclassifié publié sans suppressions. Il a été publié il y a un an, mais négligé par les chercheurs.

« La signification de ceci est que les Américains savaient que Ben Gourion les avait trompé», dit Cohen. « Ils ne pouvaient pas ou ne voulaient pas l’accuser directement de mentir. Peut-être qu’ils ne voulaient pas révéler ce qu’ils savaient. Il est clair que la communauté du renseignement savait que ce que Ben Gourion avait dit et ce que les inspecteurs ont vu à Dimona étaient loin d’être toute la vérité. « 

Les Américains avaient fait pression sur Israël pour permettre une seconde visite à Dimona qui a tourné court, dit Cohen.

« Les inspecteurs américains ont cherché à rencontrer le directeur de Dimona mais il n’était pas là, et l’ingénieurs en chef a organisé une tournée de 40 minutes, beaucoup plus courte que ce qui a été demandé par le protocole.

Après la visite, les Israéliens ont suggéré aux Américains de revenir le lendemain, tout en étant conscient du fait que les Américains allaient rentrer à la maison le lendemain, le prochain vol étant disponible quatre jours plus tard.

De toute façon, la visite était incomplète et Israël a obtenu ce qu’il voulait. Les inspecteurs ont été dûment impressionnés et leur rapport a décrit Dimona comme un réacteur à des fins de recherche, et non pas pour la production du plutonium.

« Selon les documents, citant un officier supérieur de la CIA, les exigences de base de renseignement n’avaient pas été respectée. Et des incohérences entre les résultats de la première et de la deuxième visite étaient flagrantes. »

Le site Web des Archives de la sécurité nationale des Etats-Unis contient d’autres documents américains sur le programme nucléaire d’Israël. On peut apprendre aussi l’arrière-plan pour la réunion 1969 entre le président Richard Nixon et le Premier ministre Golda Meir, où la doctrine de l’ambiguïté est né comme une politique binationale.

« En dépit de la politique d’ambiguïté officielle des gouvernements israéliens, ce qui signifie qu’aucune information factuelle sur Dimona n’est jamais divulgué, il y a des informations historiques abondantes sur Dimona et l’histoire du programme nucléaire d’Israël – l’un des projets les plus étudiés dans les études universitaires sur les programmes nucléaires », Cohen dit.

Source : Haaretz

 

 

Declassified: How Israel Misled the U.S. About Its Nuclear Program

Ben-Gurion’s mumbling to Kennedy helped delay the Americans’ assessment that Jerusalem was on the verge of building a bomb. 

Ofer Aderet for HAARETZ
Apr 21, 2016 6:38 PM

Fifty U.S. documents from the early 1960s were declassified by the U.S. National Security Archive on Thursday, shedding light on Israel’s attempts to hide one of its best-kept secrets to this day: details on its nuclear program. The Americans ultimately believed the Israelis were providing “untruthful cover” about intentions to build a bomb.

 The documents include papers from the White House, the State Department, the Atomic Energy Commission and U.S. intelligence agencies. The editors are Avner Cohen, a professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, and William Burr, the head of nuclear affairs documentation at the National Security Archive, which is based at George Washington University in the capital.

 One document provides the minutes of a meeting between U.S. President John F. Kennedy and Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion on May 30,1961, at the Waldorf Astoria in New York.

 Cohen and Burr call that meeting a “nuclear conference” – Israel’s nuclear program greatly concerned Kennedy. When he met his predecessor Dwight D. Eisenhower before the changeover of January 20, 1961, he was quick to ask which countries Ike believed were determined to obtain nuclear weapons.

 Secretary of State Christian Herter replied: “India and Israel,” before recommending that Kennedy pressure Israel into agreeing to have its nuclear facilities inspected.

 According to the details of that meeting, already published in the past, Ben-Gurion told Kennedy that Israel’s Dimona project was peaceful. The American transcript says: “Our main – and for the time being only – purpose is [cheap energy]. We do not know what will happen in the future.”

 The Israeli transcript says: “For the time being, the only purposes are for peace … but we will see what happens in the Middle East. It does not depend on us.”

 In the newly released minutes, the Americans said “Ben-Gurion spoke rapidly and in a low voice so that some words were missed.” Kennedy had a hard time asking concrete questions.

 “Ben-Gurion mumbled and spoke very softly. It was hard to hear him and understand what he was saying, partly due to his accent,” Cohen, author of “Israel and the Bomb, » told Haaretz.

 “It seemed he was leaving in certain ambiguities, consciously or otherwise, so it couldn’t be said he totally lied to the president. As a result, the president couldn’t ask for clarifications, as noted in the minutes. We only discovered this now, with the declassification of the minutes.”

 The minutes also reveal that the person taking notes, Assistant Secretary of State Phillips Talbot, thought he heard Ben-Gurion mention a “pilot plant for plutonium separation, which is needed for atomic power.” Talbot also heard Ben-Gurion say this might happen “three or four years later.” He understood the prime minister as saying Israel had no intention to develop nuclear weapons for the time being.

 “Ben-Gurion, in what he said and in what he didn’t, was hinting that the nuclear reactor in Dimona could have military potential in the distant future, or at least that is what Talbot believed he heard,” write Cohen and Burr in their explanatory notes to the documents.

 Much more plutonium than was known

 Ten days before that meeting, another key meeting took place. This was the first visit by American inspectors (as the Americans called them – Israel called them visitors) at the Dimona reactor. The Israelis considered the visit productive. The inspectors believed the facility was under construction and consistent with the Israelis’ description: a research reactor for peaceful purposes.

 The complete report on the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission’s visit is part of the new batch of declassified documents. According to the report, people at Dimona told the Americans that the reactor’s output would probably be doubled in the near future.

 “This could have served as a warning signal and a worrying indicator that the reactor was capable of producing much more plutonium than was known at the time,” Cohen and Burr say in the explanatory notes. In fact, the visitors returned home satisfied, and their positive report paved the way for the Kennedy-Ben-Gurion meeting.

 Another interesting document is the CIA’s National Intelligence Estimate on Israel crafted in October 1961, a few months after the Kennedy-Ben-Gurion meeting. This is the only declassified document published without deletions. It was released a year ago but overlooked by researchers.

 “There are some very interesting lines there showing what the U.S. intelligence community really thought about Dimona,” Cohen says.

 The document reveals that at the end of 1961, Washington believed that the reactor’s unambiguous purpose was to create an infrastructure for nuclear weapons.

 “The Israelis intend at least to put themselves in the position of being able to produce nuclear weapons fairly soon after a decision to do so,” the Americans said. They expected the Israelis to have enough nuclear material for two bombs by 1965 or 1966.

 “The significance of this is that the Americans knew that Ben-Gurion was misleading them,” Cohen says. “They couldn’t or wouldn’t directly accuse him of lying. Maybe they didn’t want to disclose what they knew. It’s clear the intelligence community knew that what Ben-Gurion said and what the inspectors saw in Dimona were far from being the whole truth.”

 According to the explanatory notes: “The bottom line is that in 1961 the CIA already knew or understood that the way Israel referred to Dimona, whether through Ben-Gurion or through its scientists, was an untruthful cover.”

 Along with Ben-Gurion’s silences and fuzzy details, the documents show that the Americans wondered whether the Israelis were deliberately trying to deceive them; for example, during a second visit to the reactor in September 1962.

 One document, dated December 27, 1962, wonders about Israel’s unconventional hospitality. Inspectors arrived at the Nahal Soreq reactor for a routine visit in September. The scientific director there was Yuval Ne’eman, later president of Tel Aviv University and science minister for Menachem Begin.

 The runaround, Israel-style

 The Americans had pressured Israel to allow a second visit to Dimona, Cohen says.

 The documents show that Ne’eman decided to take his guests to the Dead Sea. On the way back, as they were passing the Dimona facility, he suggested an unplanned visit.

 According to the documents, Ne’eman said he could organize a talk with the facility’s director, and the two inspectors agreed. But it turned out the director wasn’t there, so senior engineers organized a 40-minute tour, much shorter than what was called for by protocol.

 Following the tour, the Israelis suggested that the Americans return the following day, but the Americans wondered whether this was a diversion. After all, the Israelis knew the Americans were due to fly home the next day. The next available flight was four days later.

 The documents show that the inspectors were puzzled, not knowing whether their visit was part of the inspection or whether they were only day trippers. Either way, the visit was incomplete and did not include visits to all buildings and inspections of all installations.

 Ultimately, Israel got what it wanted. The inspectors were duly impressed and their report described Dimona as a reactor for research purposes, not for plutonium production.

 Still, CIA officials who later discussed the visit cast doubt on the genuineness of the rapid-fire visit. “They were very uncomfortable with it. It seemed like a trick to them,” Cohen said.

 “The documents show that a senior CIA officer said basic intelligence requirements had not been fulfilled and there were inconsistencies between the results of the first and second visits in terms of the use attributed to some of the equipment.”

 The documents also show that Washington wanted to impose security surveillance on Prof. Israel Dostrovsky, a guest researcher in the United States at the time. Dostrovsky was a founder of Israel’s nuclear program and later the first head of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission, as well as the president of the Weizmann Institute of Science and a 1995 Israel Prize winner.

 In 1961, the State Department asked the relevant agencies to keep an eye on Dostrovsky while he was working at the Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island. This was seen as a preventive measure designed to protect U.S. nuclear expertise. Dostrovsky died in 2010.

 The U.S. National Security Archive’s website contains other U.S. documents on Israel’s nuclear program. One can learn there about the background for the 1969 meeting between President Richard Nixon and Prime Minister Golda Meir, where the ambiguity doctrine was born as a binational policy.

 “Despite the official ambiguity policy of Israeli governments, meaning that no factual information about Dimona is ever divulged, there’s abundant historical information on Dimona and the history of Israel’s nuclear program – one of the most studied projects in academic studies on nuclear programs,” Cohen says.

Ofer Aderet
Haaretz Correspondent

Haaretz Report: US Officials Knew Israel Was Lying About Its Nuclear Program [ Ed. note – John F. Kennedy as well as officials in the CIA knew or had a strong suspicion that Israel was lying about its nuclear operation at Dimona. The report below refers to documents that have come to light providing insight into the extent to which Israeli officials went to conceal their nuclear bomb program. This includes a tactic used by David Gurion of deliberately speaking in a thick accent and a barely audible tone of voice during a meeting when Kennedy confronted him on the issue. Of all the different forces that have been implicated in the JFK assassination, which do you suppose had the greatest motive for wanting to see him dead? Looks like Michael Collins Piper may have been right. ]

Newly Declassified Documents Reveal Kennedy Administration’s Concerns Over Israel’s Nuclear Program

Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey

April 22, 2016

Newly declassified documents reveal that President John F. Kennedy and his senior aides were deeply concerned in 1961-62 about the nuclear proliferation risks represented by Israel’s nascent nuclear program. A large April 21 document release was co-sponsored by the National Security Archive, the Nuclear Proliferation International History Project, and the Middlebury Institute’s James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, and edited by Institute professor Avner Cohen and William Burr of the National Security Archive.

Previously classified meeting notes charting the discussion at a 1961 meeting between President John F. Kennedy and Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion were among the documents included in an April 21 release co-sponsored by the National Security Archive, the Nuclear Proliferation International History Project, and the Middlebury Institute’s James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies.

The released documents include records and notes from a May 1961 meeting between Kennedy and Ben-Gurion in Manhattan. During the meeting, Ben-Gurion “emphasized the peaceful, economic development-oriented nature of the Israeli nuclear project” while also slipping in mention of a “pilot” plant to process plutonium for “atomic power.” He was also quoted as saying that “there is no intention to develop weapons capacity now.”

Whatever Ben-Gurion actually said, neither President Kennedy nor U.S. intelligence officials were fully convinced by Israel’s insistence that Dimona was strictly a peaceful project. A recently declassified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Israel prepared several months after that meeting, and published now for the first time, concluded that “Israel may have decided to undertake a nuclear weapons program. At a minimum, we believe it has decided to develop its nuclear facilities in such a way as to put it into a position to develop nuclear weapons promptly should it decide to do so.”

“The significance of this NIE is that the Americans knew or at least recognized that Ben-Gurion was misleading them,” Cohen says. “They couldn’t or wouldn’t directly accuse him of lying. Maybe they didn’t want to disclose what they knew. But it’s clear that the intelligence community understood that what Ben-Gurion said and what the inspectors saw at Dimona were far from being the entire truth.”

Cohen and Burr’s overview of the released documents “reveal that more than any other American president, John F. Kennedy was personally engaged with the problem of Israel’s nuclear program; he may also have been more concerned about it than any of his successors. Of all U.S. leaders in the nuclear age, Kennedy was the nonproliferation president… Kennedy came to office with the conviction that the spread of nuclear weapons would make the world a much more dangerous place.”

Israel’s oldest daily newspaper Haaretz gave the document release prominent coverage (subscription required).

Professor Avner Cohen is also a senior fellow with the Institute’s James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, the largest nongovernmental organization in the United States devoted exclusively to research and training on nonproliferation issues.

How the Israelis Hoodwinked JFK on Going Nuclear

Newly declassified documents reveal how David Ben-Gurion’s mumbles and a trick sightseeing tour helped Israeli officials pull the wool over Washington’s eyes on the real purpose of the Dimona reactor.

By Avner Cohen, William Burr

April 26, 2016

In October 1961, the CIA issued a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Israel, the first since the discovery of the Dimona reactor less than a year earlier, in which the CIA’s analysts assessed broadly the rationale and character of the Israeli nuclear program. For nearly 55 years it was kept secret, until it was quietly declassified in its entirety last year. It sheds light on what the U.S. intelligence community thought about the Israeli nuclear project in the first year of the Kennedy administration, while the Dimona reactor was still under construction. The CIA judgment was straightforward and unequivocal: Israel was placing itself in a position to “produce sufficient weapons-grade plutonium for one or two crude weapons a year by 1965-66, provided separation facilities with a capacity larger than that of the pilot plant now under construction are available.” At a minimum, U.S. intelligence knew that the Dimona project was about weapons capability, not about energy, electricity, or development — as the Israelis had tried to spin the ongoing project.

The declassified NIE also sheds light, by implication, on what American decision-makers, including President John F. Kennedy, must have thought about what Israeli leaders and top Israeli government officials had told them about the Dimona project. For example, this NIE makes apparent that Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion lied to, or at least misled, Kennedy during a private conversation with him just three months earlier. It also reveals that what top Israeli officials at Dimona had told visiting U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) scientists must have been false. Simply put, the CIA knew, or at least believed, that Israel was not telling the U.S. government the truth about Dimona — that the nuclear reactor was intended to develop a weapons capability.

This NIE, as well as other related documents, many of them never seen by scholars, from the first two years of the Kennedy administration, were published on April 21 by the National Security Archive, in collaboration with the Nuclear Proliferation International History Project and the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies. The collection highlights both the complexity and the gravity of the Israeli nuclear program for Kennedy and his administration.

The declassified record reveals that more than any other U.S. president, Kennedy was more personally engaged with Israel’s nuclear program and more concerned about it than any of his successors. Israel was the first case of nuclear proliferation that he had to deal with as a president. And nuclear proliferation was JFK’s “private nightmare,” as Glenn Seaborg, his Atomic Energy Commission chairman, once noted. And more than any other country, Israel was the one that impressed upon Kennedy the complexity and difficulty of the problem of nuclear proliferation.

Worried that a nuclear-armed Israel would destabilize the Middle East, Kennedy wanted to bring his concerns directly to Ben-Gurion. The two leaders met to discuss the nuclear issue at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in New York on May 30, 1961. The meeting was possible thanks to a reassuring report about the first American visit at Dimona, by AEC scientists, 10 days earlier.

The documentation about the Waldorf Astoria meeting is interesting because it includes both the U.S. and Israeli official memoranda of conversations as well as a U.S. draft memorandum, which was previously unknown. Each has interesting differences. The U.S. official memorandum of the conversation, declassified and published in the 1990s, was prepared by Philips Talbot, assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs (and approved — possibly corrected — by White House Deputy Special Counsel Mike Feldman). The Israeli minutes, prepared by Ambassador Avraham Harman, were also declassified in the 1990s and historians have made extensive use of them.

In the Waldorf Astoria meeting, Ben-Gurion provided Kennedy with a rationale and narrative of the Dimona project that was very similar to what the Israeli hosts provided to the AEC visitors to Dimona (albeit non-technical and more political): Namely, that the Dimona project was peaceful in nature; it was about energy and development. However, unlike during the Dimona visit, Ben-Gurion’s narrative and rationale left a little wiggle room for a future reversal. The Israeli transcript makes Ben-Gurion’s caveat pronounced: “For the time being, the only purposes are for peace. … But we will see what will happen in the Middle East. It does not depend on us.” The American transcript, by way of rephrasing Ben-Gurion, reveals a similar caveat as well: “‘Our main — and for the time being — only purpose is this [cheap energy, etc.],’” the prime minister said, adding: “‘We do not know what will happen in the future.’ … Furthermore, commenting on the political and strategic implications of atomic power and weaponry, the prime minister said he does believe that ‘in 10 or 15 years the Egyptian presumably could achieve it themselves.’”

In his draft record, Talbot noted (in parenthesis) that during that part of the conversation, Ben-Gurion spoke “rapidly and in a low voice” in a way that “some words were missed.” Nevertheless, Talbot thought he had heard Ben-Gurion referring to a “pilot plant for plutonium separation which is needed for atomic power,” but that might happen “three or four years later” and that “there is no intention to develop weapons capacity now.” Ben-Gurion was giving himself a lot of wiggle room, if Talbot heard him correctly. The draft was declassified long ago but was buried in obscurity; it needs to be taken into account by scholars.

Days after the meeting, Talbot sat with Feldman at the White House to “check fine points” about “sidelines of interest.” A key issue was plutonium, about which Ben-Gurion “mumbled quickly in a low voice.” Ben-Gurion was understood to say something to the effect that the issue of plutonium would not arise until the Dimona installation would be complete in 1964 or so, and that only then would Israel decide what to do about the processing of plutonium. But that appeared to be incompatible with what Ben-Gurion had said to then-U.S. Ambassador to Israel Ogden Reid in January 1961, namely, that the spent fuel would return to the country that had provided the reactor uranium in the first place — France. But the U.S.-Israeli affairs desk officer, William R. Crawford, who looked further into the record, suggested that what Ben-Gurion had said to Reid was even more equivocal and evasive. Upon close examination, Ben-Gurion might have meant to hint that Israel was preserving Israel’s freedom of action to produce plutonium for its own purposes. Kennedy may not have picked up this point, but then again he, like Talbot, may not have been sure exactly what Ben-Gurion had said.

The Ben-Gurion-Kennedy nuclear summit helped clear the air a bit, but the wary view embodied in the NIE shaped U.S. perceptions of the Dimona project. The Kennedy administration held to its conviction that it was necessary to monitor Dimona, not only to resolve American concerns about nuclear proliferation but also to calm regional anxieties about an Israeli nuclear threat. By mid-1962 the Kennedy administration believed that a second visit by U.S. scientists was necessary and, toward that end, started to put diplomatic pressure on Israel.

On Sept. 26, 1962, after “repeated requests over several months,” a second U.S. visit to Dimona finally took place. Until recently, little was publicly known about that visit except that then-U.S. Ambassador to Israel Walworth Barbour referred to it as “unduly restricted to no more than 45 minutes.” According to professor Yuval Ne’eman, at the time the scientific director of the Soreq nuclear research center and the host of the American AEC visitors, this short, deceptive visit was a deliberate “trick” he devised and executed to reduce U.S. pressure.

Ne’eman told us a great deal about this 1962 visit years ago, but asked not to cite it while he was alive. Now, exactly 10 years after his death on April 26, 2006, with the declassification of U.S. documents, it is time to tell his story. According to Ne’eman, as the host of the two AEC scientists who had arrived to inspect the Soreq reactor (under the terms of Atoms for Peace program) he arranged to take them for a tour of the Dead Sea. This sightseeing, however, was a well-planned pretext to bring them to Dimona — on Israeli terms. So, on their way back to Tel Aviv, as they were passing near the Dimona reactor, Ne’eman “spontaneously” suggested to arrange a quick visit at Dimona to say hello to the director. The purpose was, of course, to have a much shorter, more informal, visit than the U.S. government had been pressing for. In doing so, Israel planned to convince the visitors that Dimona was a research reactor, not a production reactor. And, of course, when the United States continued to press for a visit at Dimona, Ne’eman’s plan was to tell them, “But you’ve already been there.”

A declassified document in the U.S. archives corroborates Ne’eman’s account of the second visit. According to a memorandum written in late 1962 by Rodger Davies, deputy director of the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, the whole visit had been improvised. The two AEC scientists, Thomas Haycock and Ulysses Staebler, were officially in Israel to inspect the U.S.-supplied “Atoms for Peace” reactor at Soreq. But on their way back from a tour of the Dead Sea, their Israeli host (the U.S. document does not mention Ne’eman by name) observed that they were passing by the Dimona reactor and he offered to “arrange a call with the director.” It turned out that the director was not there, but the chief engineers gave them a 40-minute tour of the reactor.

Davies later wrote that the visit made the AEC scientists feel a little awkward, “not certain whether they were [there as] guests of their scientist host or on an inspection.” They did not see the complete installation, nor did they enter all the buildings they saw, but they believed that what they saw confirmed that Dimona was a research reactor, not a production reactor; that, from their point of view, made the visit “satisfactory.” The Israelis cunningly offered the AEC the option to come back to the site to complete the visit the next morning, but because that would have forced a four-day layover Haycock and Staebler declined the invitation.

Davies wrote Talbot that the unconventional nature of the visit stirred suspicion within the relevant intelligence offices in Washington. At least one interagency meeting convened to discuss the visit’s intelligence value. The CIA’s “director of Intelligence,” probably a reference to Deputy Director of Intelligence Ray Cline, was cited to say that while “the immediate objectives of the visit may have been satisfied, certain basic intelligence requirements were not.” It was also observed that “there were certain inconsistencies between the first and second inspection reports insofar as the usages attributed to some equipment were concerned.” According to Davies, the fact that the inspectors were invited to visit again the next day seemed to indicate that “there was no deliberate ‘hanky-panky’ involved on the part of the Israeli,” but the fact that such a return visit would have caused a major delay in the team’s departure made the Israeli offer impractical and perhaps disingenuous.

Whatever the doubts about the intelligence value, the State Department used the visits’ conclusions to assure interested governments that Dimona was peaceful. A few weeks after the visit, as the Cuban Missile Crisis was unfolding, the State Department began to quietly inform selected governments about its positive results. U.S. diplomats told Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, during a briefing on the Cuban situation, that the recent visit confirmed Israeli statements about the reactor. The British and Canadians were also told similar things about the “recent brief visit” to Dimona, without explaining what had made it so short.

The ambiguities of the second visit and the knowledge that the Dimona reactor would be an operating reactor in 1963-1964 guaranteed that the issue and the need for thorough inspections would remain on the Kennedy administration’s agenda. For Kennedy, U.S. relations with Israel could be in jeopardy if an acceptable solution to the Dimona problem was not reached. The next stage of the drama — indeed, the most intense part of it — would come in 1963, when Kennedy sent ultimatums to Israel and diplomatic conflict turned into a secret showdown. However, his first two years in office demonstrated that his determination to prevent an Israeli nuclear weapons program was central to his efforts to avoid nuclear proliferation.

 

LES DOCUMENTS : PRÉSENTATION

 

The National Security Archives
The George Washington University

|||||||The Nuclear Vault:

Resources from the
National Security Archive’s
Nuclear Documentation Project

Concerned About Nuclear Weapons Potential, John F. Kennedy Pushed for Inspection of Israel Nuclear Facilities 

Atomic Energy Commission Inspectors Gave Dimona a Clean Bill of Health – Twice – after Deliberately Truncated Tours, but U.S. Intelligence Remained Suspicious 

International Atomic Energy Agency Inspection of Dimona Was “Our Objective,” According to State Department

National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 547
Posted – April 21, 2016
Avner Cohen and William Burr, editors
For more information contact:
Avner Cohen at 202-489-6282 (mobile), 831-647-6437 (office) or [email protected]
William Burr at 202/994-7000 or [email protected].

Kennedy, Dimona and the Nuclear Proliferation Problem: 1961-1962

by Avner Cohen and William Burr


Washington, D.C., April 21, 2016 – President John F. Kennedy worried that Israel’s nuclear program was a potentially serious proliferation risk and insisted that Israel permit periodic inspections to mitigate the danger, according to declassified documents published today by the National Security Archive, Nuclear Proliferation International History Project, and the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies. Kennedy pressured the government of Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion to prevent a military nuclear program, particularly after stage-managed tours of the Dimona facility for U.S. government scientists in 1961 and 1962 raised suspicions within U.S. intelligence that Israel might be concealing its underlying nuclear aims. Kennedy’s long-run objective, documents show, was to broaden and institutionalize inspections of Dimona by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

John F. Kennedy was a member of Congress when he first met Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion in 1951.  In this photograph taken at Ben-Gurion’s home, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jr., then a member of Congress from New York, sat between them. (Image from Geopolitiek in Perspectief)

On 30 May 1961, Kennedy met Ben-Gurion in Manhattan to discuss the bilateral relationship and Middle East issues. However, a central (and indeed the first) issue in their meeting was the Israeli nuclear program, about which President Kennedy was most concerned. According to a draft record of their discussion, which has never been cited, and is published here for the first time, Ben-Gurion spoke “rapidly and in a low voice” and “some words were missed.” He emphasized the peaceful, economic development-oriented nature of the Israeli nuclear project. Nevertheless the note taker, Assistant Secretary of State Philips Talbot, believed that he heard Ben-Gurion mention a “pilot” plant to process plutonium for “atomic power” and also say that “there is no intention to develop weapons capacity now.” Ben-Gurion tacitly acknowledged that the Dimona reactor had a military potential, or so Talbot believed he had heard. The final U.S. version of the memcon retained the sentence about plutonium but did not include the language about a “pilot” plant and “weapons capacity.”

The differences between the two versions suggest the difficulty of preparing accurate records of meetings. But whatever Ben-Gurion actually said, President Kennedy was never wholly satisfied with the insistence that Dimona was strictly a peaceful project. Neither were U.S. intelligence professionals. A recently declassified National Intelligence Estimate on Israel prepared several months after the meeting, and published here for the first time, concluded that “Israel may have decided to undertake a nuclear weapons program. At a minimum, we believe it has decided to develop its nuclear facilities in such a way as to put it into a position to develop nuclear weapons promptly should it decide to do so.” This is the only NIE where the discussion of Dimona has been declassified in its entirety.

Declassified documents reveal that more than any other American president, John F. Kennedy was personally engaged with the problem of Israel’s nuclear program; he may also have been more concerned about it than any of his successors. Of all U.S. leaders in the nuclear age, Kennedy was the nonproliferation president. Nuclear proliferation was his “private nightmare,” as Glenn Seaborg, his Atomic Energy Commission chairman, once noted. Kennedy came to office with the conviction that the spread of nuclear weapons would make the world a much more dangerous place; he saw proliferation as the path to a global nuclear war. This concern shaped his outlook on the Cold War even before the 1960 presidential campaign – by then he had already opposed the resumption of nuclear testing largely due to proliferation concerns – and his experience in office, especially the Cuban Missile Crisis, solidified it further.

This Electronic Briefing Book (EBB) is the first of two publications which address the subject of JFK, his administration, and the Israeli nuclear program. It includes about thirty documents produced by the State Department, the Atomic Energy Commission, and intelligence agencies, some of which highlight the president’s strong personal interest and direct role in moving nonproliferation policy forward during the administration’s first two years. Some of the documents have been only recently declassified, while others were located in archival collections; most are published here for the first time. The compilation begins with President Kennedy’s meeting with departing ambassador to Israel Odgen Reid on January 31, 1961, days after Kennedy took office, and concludes with the State Department’s internal review in late 1962 of the of the second U.S. visit in Dimona.

The documents published today also include:

  • The Atomic Energy Commission’s recently declassified report on the first official U.S. visit to the Dimona complex, in May 1961. The Ben-Gurion-Kennedy meeting was possible only after that visit produced a positive report on the peaceful, nonmilitary purposes of the reactor. According to the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), Dimona “was conceived as a means for gaining experience in construction of a nuclear facility which would prepare them for nuclear power in the long run.”
  • A letter from the State Department to the AEC asking it to place prominent Israeli nuclear scientist Dr. Israel Dostrovsky of the Weizman Institute, who was a visiting researcher at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, under “discreet surveillance” as a “precautionary step” to safeguard U.S. nuclear know-how. The document notes Dostrovsky’s reputation as one of the individuals “primarily responsible for guiding Israel’s atomic energy program.” In 1966 Dostrovsky was appointed by Prime Minister Levi Eshkol as director-general of Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission, which he reorganized and gave new impetus.
  • Recently declassified records of U.S.-U.K. meetings during 1962 to discuss the possibilities of putting pressure on Israel to accept inspections of Dimona by the International Atomic Energy Agency. While State Department officials did not believe that pressure would work, they agreed that “IAEA controls should be our objective.” In the meantime, “interim ad hoc inspections” were necessary to satisfy ourselves and the world-at-large as to Israel’s intentions.”
  • An assessment of the second AEC visit to the Dimona site in September 1962. After weeks of diplomatic pressure by the Kennedy administration for a second visit, two AEC scientists who had inspected the U.S.-supplied Soreq reactor were “spontaneously” invited for a [tk: Bill, 40 or 45 minutes? All other references are to 40.] 45-minute tour to Dimona, while on their way back from an excursion to the Dead Sea. They had no time to see the complete installation, but they left the site with the impression that Dimona was a research reactor, not a production reactor. CIA and State Department officials were skeptical about the circumstances, unable to determine whether the spontaneous invitation was a treat or a trick.
******************
President-elect John F. Kennedy and Secretary of State-designate Dean Rusk Meet with President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Secretary of State Christian Herter, 19 January 1961. At this meeting Herter warned Kennedy about the Israeli nuclear problem (Photograph AR6279-D, John F. Kennedy Presidential Library)

More than any other country, it was Israel which most impressed upon President Kennedy the complexity of nuclear proliferation. Israel was the first case with which he had to struggle as president. Only weeks before his inauguration, the outgoing Eisenhower administration quietly discovered and confirmed the secret reactor at Dimona. In mid-December the news leaked out while the Eisenhower administration was pondering a Special National Intelligence Estimate, which asserted that, on the basis of the available evidence “plutonium production for weapons is at least one major purpose of this effort. » According to the estimate, if it was widely believed that Israel was acquiring a nuclear weapons capability it would cause “consternation” in the Arab world, with blame going to the U.S. and France for facilitating the project. The United Arab Republic (Egypt/Syria) would “feel the most threatened,” might approach the Soviets for more “countervailing military aid and political backing,” and the Arab world in general might be prompted to take “concrete actions” against Western interests in the region. Moreover, Israel’s “initiative might remove some of the inhibitions to development of nuclear weapons in other Free World countries.”

On January 19, 1961, on the eve of his inauguration, President-elect Kennedy visited the White House – for the last time as a guest – along with his senior team. After 45 minutes of one-on-one conversation with President Eisenhower, the two men walked to the Cabinet Room to join their departing and incoming secretaries of state, defense and treasury to discuss the transition. One of Kennedy’s first questions was about the countries which were most determined to seek the bomb. “Israel and India,” Secretary of State Christian Herter fired back, and added that the newly discovered Dimona reactor, being constructed with aid from France, could be capable of generating 90 kilogram of weapons-grade plutonium by 1963. Herter urged the new president to press hard on inspection in the case of Israel before it introduced nuclear weapons into the Middle East.[1]

With his concern about stability in the Middle East and the broader nuclear proliferation threat, Kennedy took Herter’s advice seriously. Within days he met with departing Ambassador Reid for discussions of Dimona and other regional matters. To help him prepare for the meeting, new Secretary of State Dean Rusk provided an updated report about Israel’s nuclear activities and a detailed chronology of the discovery of Dimona. For the rest of Kennedy’s time in office, Dimona would remain an issue of special and personal concern to him and to his close advisers.

The most important event covered in this collection was the “nuclear summit” held at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in New York City on May 30, 1961, between Kennedy and Ben-Gurion. We refer to it as a nuclear summit because Dimona was at the heart of that meeting. The encounter was made possible thanks to a reassuring report about the first American visit to Dimona, which had taken place ten days earlier.

Kennedy had tirelessly pressured Ben-Gurion to allow the visit since taking office, insisting that meeting the request – made initially by the Eisenhower administration after the discovery of Dimona – was a condition for normalizing U.S.-Israeli relations. In a sense, Kennedy turned the question into a de facto ultimatum to Israel. For weeks Ben-Gurion dragged his feet, possibly even manufacturing or at least magnifying a domestic political dispute into a government resignation, primarily as a ploy to stall or delay that Dimona visit.

By April 1961, after a new government had been organized, Israeli Ambassador Avram Harman finally told the administration that Israel had agreed to an American tour of Dimona. On May 20, two AEC scientists, U. M. Staebler and J. W. Croach Jr., visited the nuclear facility on a carefully crafted tour. The visit began with a briefing by a Dimona senior management team, headed by Director-General Manes Pratt, who presented a technological rationale for, and historical narrative of, the project: the Dimona nuclear research center, the Americans were told, was “conceived as a means for gaining experience in construction of a nuclear facility which would prepare them [Israel] for nuclear power in the long run.” In essence, according to Pratt, this was a peaceful project. As the American team’s summary report, which was highlighted in a memorandum to National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy, made very clear, the AEC team believed that the Israelis had told them the truth: the scientists were “satisfied that nothing was concealed from them and that the reactor is of the scope and peaceful character previously described to the United States by representatives of the Government of Israel.”

The AEC’s team’s official report (document 8A) is now available for the first time. Previously only draft notes written by the team’s leader had been accessible to researchers. The differences between the two versions are minor except for a noteworthy paragraph in the final report, under the headline “General comment.” That paragraph is important because it reveals that the Israeli hosts told the AEC team that the reactor’s power was likely to double in the future. “It is quite possible that after operating experience has been obtained the power level of the reactor can be increased by a factor of the order of two by certain modifications in design and relaxation of some operating conditions.” The AEC team could have seen that acknowledgement as a red flag, a worrisome indication that the reactor was capable of producing much more plutonium than was then acknowledged. But the team’s one-sentence response was benign: “Design conservatism of this order is understandable for a project of this type,” On the basis of such a positive report, the Waldorf Astoria meeting was able to go ahead.


The Kennedy-Ben-Gurion Meeting 

This collection includes both American and Israeli transcripts of the Waldorf Astoria meeting. One of the transcripts is a previously unknown draft of the Kennedy-Ben-Gurion memcon, which has interesting differences with the final version. The U.S. official memorandum of conversation, declassified and published in the 1990s, was prepared by Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs Phillips Talbot (and approved – possibly corrected – by White House Deputy Special Counsel Myer “Mike” Feldman). The Israeli minutes, prepared by Ambassador Avraham Harman, were also declassified in the 1990s and historians have made extensive use of them.[2]

Ben-Gurion provided Kennedy with a rationale and narrative of the Dimona project that was very similar to what the Israeli hosts provided to the AEC team visiting Dimona (albeit in non-technical and more political terms): the Dimona project was peaceful in nature; it was about energy and development. However, unlike during the Dimona visit, Ben-Gurion’s narrative and rationale left a little wiggle room for a future reversal. The prime minister did that by qualifying his peaceful pledge and leaving room for a future change of heart. The Israeli transcript makes Ben-Gurion’s caveat pronounced: “for the time being, the only purposes are for peace. … But we will see what will happen in the Middle East. It does not depend on us” (italics added). The American transcript, by way of rephrasing Ben-Gurion, reveals a similar caveat as well: “Our main – and for the time being – only purpose is this [cheap energy, etc.],” the Prime Minister said, adding that “we do not know what will happen in the future” … Furthermore, commenting on the political and strategic implications of atomic power and weaponry, the Prime Minister said he does believe that “in ten or fifteen years the Egyptian presumably could achieve it themselves” (italics added).

In his draft minutes, Assistant Secretary Talbot notes (in parentheses) that during that part of the conversation, Ben-Gurion spoke “rapidly and in a low voice” so that “some words were missed.” Nevertheless, Talbot thought that he had heard Ben-Gurion making reference to a “pilot plant for plutonium separation which is needed for atomic power,” but that might happen “three or four years later” and that “there is no intention to develop weapons capacity now.” Talbot’s draft was declassified long ago but has been buried in obscurity; it needs to be taken into account by scholars. Notably, the Israeli transcript is even more straightforward in citing Ben-Gurion on the pilot plant issue: “after three or four years we shall have a pilot plant for separation which is needed anyway for a power reactor.”

Days after the meeting, Talbot sat with Feldman at the White House to “check fine points” about “side lines of interest.” There was the key issue of plutonium, about which Ben-Gurion mumbled quickly in a low voice. Ben-Gurion was understood to say something to the effect that the issue of plutonium would not arise until the installation was complete in 1964 or so, and only then could Israel decide what to do about processing it. But this appeared to be incompatible with what the prime minister had said to Ambassador Reid in Tel Aviv in January 1961, namely that the spent fuel would return to the country which provided the uranium in the first place (France). But Israeli affairs desk officer, William R. Crawford, who looked further into the record, suggested that what Ben-Gurion had said was more equivocal and evasive. Upon close examination, Ben-Gurion might have meant to hint in passing that Israel was preserving its freedom of action to produce plutonium for its own purposes. Kennedy may not have picked up on this point, but he, like Talbot, may not have been sure exactly what Ben-Gurion had said.

Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs G. Lewis Jones, an Eisenhower administration hold-over, was on the receiving end of President Kennedy’s telephone calls asking for updates on the requests for a visit by U.S. scientists to Israel’s Dimona complex. (National Archives, Still Pictures Branch, 59-S0, box 20)
Intelligence Estimate

The most intriguing – and novel – document in this collection is National Intelligence Estimate 35-61 (document #11a), under the headline “Outlook on Israel,” which was declassified only in February 2015. This NIE left no doubt that the AEC scientists’ impressions from their visit to Dimona had no impact on the way which the intelligence community made its own determination on Dimona’s overall purpose. While the visit clearly helped to ease the political and diplomatic tensions between the United States and Israel over Dimona, and removed, at least temporarily, the nuclear issue as a problem from the bilateral agenda, it did not change the opinion of U.S. intelligence professionals. In their view, while acknowledging the Israeli official narrative of Dimona as peaceful, it was truly about weapons capability. The Dimona complex provided Israel with the experience and resources “to develop a plutonium production capability.” NIE 35-61 reminded its readers that France had supplied “plans, material, equipment and technical assistance to the Israelis.”

Significantly, the intelligence community estimated in 1961 that Israel would be in a position to “produce sufficient weapons grade plutonium for one or two crude weapons a year by 1965-66, provided separation facilities with a capacity larger than that of the pilot plant now under construction are available.” In retrospect, in all these respects, NIE 35-61 was accurate in its assessments and predictions, although no one on the U.S. side knew for sure when Israel would possess the requisite reprocessing facilities. The language about “separation facilities” raises important questions. If Israel was to produce nuclear weapons it would require technology to reprocess spent fuel into plutonium. Whether and when U.S. intelligence knew that Israel had begun work on a secret, dedicated separation plant – larger than a pilot plant – at the Dimona complex has yet to be disclosed. But if the CIA knew about such plans, it may have meant that key information was concealed from AEC scientists who visited Dimona (or perhaps they were instructed to locate such facilities).[3]

Probably lacking secret knowledge of internal Israeli government thinking, the authors of NIE 35-61 may not have fully understood the depth of Israel’s nuclear resolve, or at least, the modus operandi by which Israel proceeded with its nuclear project. They could not be fully clear – both conceptually and factually – on the nature of the Israeli nuclear commitment, i.e., whether Dimona was a dedicated weapons program from the very start, or, alternatively, whether it was set up as infrastructure leading to a weapons capability upon a later decision. At a minimum, however, the authors of NIE 35-61 believed “that the Israelis intend at least to put themselves in the position of being able to produce nuclear weapons fairly soon after a decision to do so.”

Notwithstanding the lack of clarity, the NIE’s findings were incompatible with what Ben-Gurion told Kennedy about the overall purpose of the Dimona project as well as with what he said about Dimona’s plutonium production capacity. Similarly, the NIE was inconsistent with the AEC report whose writers accepted the Israeli narrative and rationale. The bottom line was that as early as 1961 the CIA already knew – or at least suspected – that the Israeli official account of the Dimona project – either by the prime minister or by Israeli scientists – was a cover story and deceptive by nature.

The Second Visit

The AEC visit and the Ben-Gurion Kennedy meeting helped clear the air a bit, but the wary view embodied in the NIE shaped U.S. perceptions of the Dimona project. The Kennedy administration held to its conviction that it was necessary to monitor Dimona, not only to resolve American concerns about nuclear proliferation but also to calm regional anxieties about an Israeli nuclear threat. In this context, the United States did not want to continue to be the only country that guaranteed the peaceful nature of Dimona to the Arab countries. Hence, during the months after the meetings, State Department officials tried to follow up President Kennedy’s interest in having scientists from “neutral” nations, such as Sweden, visit the Dimona plant. The British also favored such ideas but they sought U.S. pressure to induce the Israelis to accept inspection visits by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Kennedy administration believed that IAEA inspections of Dimona were a valid long-term goal but recognized that a second visit by U.S. scientists was necessary if a visit by neutrals could not be arranged.

The talks with the Swedes did not pan out; by June 1962, the Kennedy administration decided to “undertake the responsibility once more.” On 26 September 1962, after “repeated requests over several months,” a second American visit to Dimona finally took place. Until recently little was known about that visit except that Ambassador Walworth Barbour referred to it as “unduly restricted to no more than forty five minutes.”[4] Also, the late professor Yuval Ne’eman, at the time serving as the scientific director of the Soreq nuclear research center and the official host of the American AEC visitors, was cited in Israel and the Bomb to the effect that the visit was a deliberate “trick” (the word “trick” was used but was not cited in the book) he devised and executed to ease American pressure for a second formal visit in Dimona.[5]

This collection includes archival material that sheds light on the second visit. The key document is a memo, written on 27 December 1962, by deputy director of the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs Rodger Davies to Assistant Secretary Talbot on the September visit. It was hiding in plain sight in a microfilm supplement to the State Department historical series, Foreign Relations of the United States. The memo narrated the improvised circumstances of the visit which fit well with the way Ne’eman told the story in the late 1990s. As the two AEC scientists who had arrived to inspect the small reactor at Soreq – Thomas Haycock and Ulysses Staebler – were being driven back from their Dead Sea tour, Ne’eman noted that they were passing by the Dimona reactor and that he could spontaneously “arrange a call with the director.” Notably, Staebler was among the two AEC scientists who had visited Dimona in May 1961, so he must have met director Pratt. It turned out that the director was not there, but the chief engineers gave them a 40-minute tour of the reactor.

Phillips Talbot, who succeeded Jones as Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, and as a note-taker at the Kennedy/Ben-Gurion meeting had to make sense of the Prime Minister’s rapid and “low” voice. (National Archives, Still Picture Branch, 59-SO, box 41)

The 27 December document reveals that the circumstances of that tour made the AEC visitors feel a little awkward, “not certain whether they were guests of their scientist-host or on an inspection.” They did not see the complete installation, nor did they enter all the buildings they saw, but they believed that what they saw confirmed that Dimona was a research reactor, not a production reactor; and that, from their point of view, made the visit worthwhile and “satisfactory.” The memo also notes that the AEC scientists were presented with the option to come back to the site to complete the visit the next morning, but because that would have forced a four-day layover they declined the offer.

According to Rodger Davies, the highly unconventional nature of the visit stirred suspicion within the relevant intelligence offices in Washington. During one interagency meeting to discuss the visit’s intelligence value, the CIA’s “Director of Intelligence,” probably a reference to Deputy Director of Intelligence Ray Cline, was quoted as saying that “the immediate objectives of the visit may have been satisfied, [but] certain basic intelligence requirements were not.” It was also observed that “there were certain inconsistencies between the first and second inspection reports insofar as the usages attributed to some equipment were concerned.” The fact that the inspectors were invited to visit again the next day seemed to indicate that “there was no deliberate ’hanky-panky’ involved on the part of the [ Israelis,” but the fact that such a return visit would have caused a major delay in the team’s departure flight made the Israeli offer impractical and perhaps disingenuous.

Whatever the doubts about the intelligence value, the State Department deployed the visits’ conclusions to assure interested countries that Dimona was peaceful. A few weeks afterwards, just as the Cuban Missile Crisis was unfolding, the State Department began to quietly inform selected governments about its positive results. U.S. diplomats told Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, during a briefing on the Cuban situation, that the recent visit confirmed Israeli statements about the reactor. The British and Canadians were also told similar things about the “recent brief visit” to Dimona, without explaining what had made it so short. By the end of October, the Department had sent a fuller statement to various embassies.

Davies’ memorandum cites a formal report, dated October 12, 1962, prepared by the AEC team about their visit. But the report was not attached to the memorandum found in State Department files. Unfortunately, except for the 1961 visit report, the Department of Energy has been unable to locate the 1962 report or other such reports from the following years.

THE DOCUMENTS

Documents 1A-B: Briefing President Kennedy 

Document 1A: Secretary of State Rusk to President Kennedy, “Your Appointment with Ogden R. Reid, Recently Ambassador to Israel,” 30 January 1961, with memorandum and chronology attached, Secret, Excised copy
Document 1B: Memorandum of Conversation, “Ambassador Reid’s Review of His Conversation with President Kennedy,” 31 January 1961, Secret
Source: National Archives College Park, Record Group 59, records of the Department of State (hereinafter RG 59), Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, Office of Near Eastern Affairs (NESA/NEA). Records of the Director, 1960-1963, box 5, Tel Aviv – 1961
On 31 January 1961, only days after his inauguration, President Kennedy met with Ogden Reid, who had just resigned as U.S. ambassador to Israel, for a comprehensive briefing on U.S.-Israel relations, including the problem of the Dimona nuclear reactor (an issue in which the new president had a “special interest”). To help prepare the president for the meeting, Secretary of State Dean Rusk signed off on a briefing paper, which contained also a detailed chronology of the discovery of the Dimona reactor, and which reviewed the problems raised by the secret atomic project as well as U.S. interest in sending scientists there to determine whether there was a proliferation risk.
In their 45-minute meeting, Ambassador Reid told President Kennedy that he believed the U.S “can accept at face value Ben-Gurion’s assurance that the reactor is to be devoted to peaceful purposes” and that a visit to Dimona by a qualified American scientist could be arranged, “if it is done on a secret basis.”

 

Document 2A-E: Pressing for a Visit


Document 2A: Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs to Secretary of State, “President’s Suggestion re Israeli Reactor,” 2 February 1961, Secret
Document 2B: Memorandum of Conversation, “Israeli Reactor,” 3 February 1961, Confidential
Document 2C: Memorandum, Secretary of State Rusk for the President, “Israeli Reactor,” 8 February 1961, Secret
Document 2D: Memorandum of Conversation, “Inspection of Israel’s New Atomic Reactor,” 13 February 1961, Secret
Document 2E: Memorandum of Conversation, “Israel’s Security and Other Problems,” 16 February 1961, Secret
Sources: A: RG 59, Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs. Office of the Country Director for Israel and Arab-Israeli Affairs, Records Relating to Israel, 1964-1966 (hereinafter, Israel 1964-1966), box 8, Israel Atomic Energy Program 1961; B: RG 59, Central Decimal Files, 1960-1963 (hereinafter DF), 884A.1901/2-361; C: John F. Kennedy Library, Papers of John F. Kennedy. President’s Office Files, box 119, Israel Security, 1961-1963; D: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/3-1361; D: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/2-1361; E: RG 59, DF, 784A.5612/2-1661 (also available in Foreign Relations of the United States)
Concerned about a recent visit to Cairo by Soviet Deputy Foreign Minister Vladimir Semenov and the possibility that the Soviets might exploit Egyptian concerns over Dimona, President Kennedy pressed State to arrange an inspection visit at Dimona by a U.S. scientist. Assistant Secretary of State G. Lewis Jones soon met with Israeli Ambassador Harman, who explained that the Israeli government was preoccupied with an ongoing domestic political crisis. Prime Minister Ben-Gurion announced his resignation and his intention to take a four-week vacation while still being head of a “caretaker government.” Moreover, Ambassador Harman could not understand why Washington had not simply accepted Ben-Gurion’s assurances about Dimona. Jones responded that suspicions remained and that as a “close friend,” Israel needed to help allay them.
After informing Kennedy about the Harman-Jones conversation, Secretary of State Rusk had his own meeting with Harman, where he also raised the desirability of a visit, noting that Israeli “candor” was important to the state of the U.S.-Israeli relationship. During that conversation as well as another with national security adviser McGeorge Bundy, Harman disparaged Dimona’s importance, arguing that its existence had leaked out “unnecessarily.” But Bundy emphasized “legitimate” Arab concern about the Israeli nuclear project. It is interesting to note that in internal American documents the reference is always to an “inspection,” but when the issue was discussed with Israeli diplomats, U.S. officials avoided raising their hackles by always referring to a “visit.”

Documents 3A-F: Raising Pressure for an Invitation
Document 3A: U.S. Mission to the United Nations (New York) telegram number 2242 to Department of State, “Eyes Only” from Reid to Secretary, 20 February 1961, Secret
Document 3B: Memorandum of Conversation, “U.S.-Israeli Relations – The Dimona Reactor,” 26 February 1961, Confidential
Document 3C: Memorandum by Secretary Rusk to President Kennedy, “Israeli Reactor,” 3 March 1961, with memo from Jones to Rusk attached, Confidential
Document 3D: Memorandum of Conversation, “Dimona Reactor,”13 March 1961, Secret
Document 3E: Memorandum of Conversation, “Dimona Reactor,” 28 March 1961, Secret
Document 3F: Memorandum from Secretary Rusk to President Kennedy, “Dimona Reactor in Israel,” 30 March 1961, with “History of United States Interest in Israel’s Atomic Energy Activities,” attached, Secret
Sources: A: RG 59, DF, 784A.5611/2-2061. B: RG 59, NESA/NEA, Records of the Director, 1960-1963, box 5, Tel Aviv – 1961; C: John F. Kennedy Library, Papers of John F. Kennedy. President’s Office Files, box 119, Israel Security, 1961-1963; D: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/3-1361; E and F: RG 59, DF, 611.84A45/3-3061.
It took many more weeks of back-and-forth American-Israeli exchanges after departing Ambassador Reid told President Kennedy that an American inspection could be arranged. While visiting the United States for fund raising purposes, Ben-Gurion’s chief of staff (and future mayor of Jerusalem) Theodore “Teddy” Kollek met with Ogden Reid in New York and with Assistant Secretary Jones in Washington. He told Reid that Ben-Gurion would accept a visit to Dimona once a new government had been formed in six to eight weeks. Kollek told Jones that a visit “during March” was possible and personally agreed that it would allay suspicions if Dimona was under the control of the Weizmann Institute instead of the Defense Ministry.
The news about a possible March visit went to President Kennedy, but on 13 March Ambassador Harman had nothing to report, claiming that the Israeli government was still preoccupied with domestic politics. At month’s end, Kennedy intervened, apparently calling Jones directly for information about the status of the U.S. request. Following up, Jones called in Ambassador Harman for an update, noting Kennedy’s keen interest in the matter and the importance of Israel removing any “shadow of doubt” about the purpose of Dimona. Harman had no news but believed that nothing would be resolved until Passover ended on 10 April. A chronology that Rusk attached to his memo to Kennedy indicated that the State Department had been asking about the visit at “approximately weekly intervals.”

Documents 4A-B: The Invitation
Document 4A: Memorandum of Conversation, “U.S. Visit to Dimona Reactor Site,” 10 April 1961, Secret
Document 4B: Memorandum by Assistant Secretary Jones to Secretary of State Rusk, “Your Appointment with Israeli Ambassador Harman,” 11 April 1961, Secret
Source: A: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/4-1061 (also published in Foreign Relations of the United States); B: DF, 033.84A11/4-1161
By early April, Ben-Gurion realized he no longer could postpone the American visit to Dimona. His diary revealed that he was persuaded by White House special counsel Myer “Mike” Feldman, and Kennedy political ally Abraham Feinberg, who was involved in fund raising for Dimona, that a meeting between him and Kennedy, in return for an American visit at Dimona, could save the nuclear project. On 10 April, Ambassador Harman finally told Jones and Philip Farley, the special assistant to the secretary of state for atomic energy and outer space matters, that Israel was formally inviting a U.S. scientist to visit the Dimona complex during the week of 15 May, but that the visit should be secret. Jones and Farley agreed that the visit should not be publicized but worried that secrecy could be “counter-productive.” As Jones explained to Rusk the next day, “It seems to us to defeat the objective of establishing that the reactor is a normal civilian atomic project if extreme measures of secrecy are taken in connection with the visit.” Jones also informed Rusk that the Atomic Energy Commission had selected two of its scientists to make the visit: Ulysses Staebler, assistant director of reactor development and chief of the Civilian Power Reactors Branch, and Jesse Croach Jr., a heavy water reactor expert with Dupont, the AEC’s principal contractor for heavy water reactor work.
Jones wrote a briefing paper to help Rusk prepare to speak with Harman about the Dimona invitation, but the only record of their meeting that has surfaced publicly is the part of the conversation concerning Ben-Gurion’s request for a meeting with President Kennedy, possibly as early as the week of April 23. Rusk responded that he would pass on the request to the president but expressed his doubts as the president’s schedule was already full until the first week of June.

Documents 5A-F: Arrangements for the Visit
Document 5A: Memorandum of Conversation, “U.S. Visit to Dimona,” 17 April 1961, Secret
Document 5B: State Department Telegram 798 to U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv, 28 April 1961, Secret
Document 5C: Memorandum of Conversation, “Visit to Israeli Reactor,” 1 May 1961, Secret
Document 5D: Memorandum by Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Philips Talbot to Secretary of State, “Ben–Gurion Visit and Israel’s Reactor,” 1 May 1961, Secret
Document 5E: Memorandum by Secretary of State Rusk to President Kennedy, “Visit to Israeli Reactor,” 5 May 1961, Secret
Document 5F: Robert C. Strong to Armin H. Meyer, “Suggested Points to be Made to U.S. Scientists, Dr. Staebler and Dr. Croach, at the Meeting at 2:30 p.m., May 15,” 15 May 1961 Secret
Sources: A: Source: RG 59, Records of the Special Assistant to the Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, Records Relating to Atomic Energy Matters, 1948-1962 (hereinafter SAE), box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 2 of 2; B: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/4-2861; C: RG 59, SAE, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 2 of 2; D: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/5-161; E: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/5-561; F: RG 59, Israel 1964-1966, box 8, Israel Atomic Energy Program 1961
Israel kept pushing the necessity for secrecy, but Washington insisted that a “quiet visit” was enough to keep Croach and Staebler out of the spotlight. Moreover, the Kennedy administration wanted to be able to inform allies, such as the British, about the visit’s findings. While the Israelis wanted Washington to agree to push the visit back until after the Ben-Gurion-Kennedy meeting, the State Department, under instructions from the White House, refused to change the schedule: the administration wanted the visit to occur before Kennedy met with Ben-Gurion, so that the findings could be fully assessed. The State Department was determined to meet that goal, as was evident from the preparations for a meeting with the inspectors.

Document 6: A Private Debate
Memorandum of Conversation, “Israeli Atomic Energy Program,” 16 May 1961, Secret
Source: RG 59, SAE, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 2 of 2
The second-ranking diplomat at the Israeli Embassy, Mordechai Gazit, raised questions to Phillip Farley about the real purposes of the U.S. visit to Dimona. Justifying the secrecy as protection for suppliers against the Arab boycott of Israel, Gazit argued that it would be years before the reactor could have any military potential and, in any event, Israel needed whatever “means it could find” to defend itself. Taking in Gazit’s implicit admission, Farley noted that Washington was concerned about the impact that an Israeli nuclear project aimed at weapons could have on the region and that an Israeli nuclear weapons program would be disastrous for world stability. “I could not see how Israel could long expect to have nuclear weapons without its enemies also getting them in some way. Once there, were nuclear weapons on both sides, I thought Israel would be in a desperate state.” Its territory was simply too small for it to survive even a small exchange.” Farley’s argument reflects the fundamental Israeli nuclear dilemma to this day.

Document 7: President Kennedy’s Concerns
Memorandum, by L.D. Battle, Executive Secretary, to McGeorge Bundy, Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, “American Scientists’ Visit to Israel’s Dimona Reactor,” 18 May 1961, Secret
Source: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/5-1861
President Kennedy told the new U.S. ambassador to Israel, Walworth Barbour, that he was concerned about Israel’s insistence on a secret visit as well as the “absence of a ‘neutral’ scientist” in the visit to Dimona. Addressing Kennedy’s concerns, the State Department took the position that it was better to put up with Ben-Gurion’s “sensitivities” about secrecy than “have no visit” at all. Nevertheless, the Department advised the White House that “complete and continued secrecy as to the results of the visit would [not] be possible.” The results of the visit would be conveyed to appropriate U.S. agencies “in due course” and would be shared perhaps with some “friendly” governments. Moreover, the U.S. believed that once the Israelis became used to visits to Dimona it might be possible to persuade them to accept visits by scientists from other countries or a publicized inspection by the IAEA.

Documents 8A-B: The Visit to Dimona
Document 8A: Memorandum from Executive Secretary L. D. Battle to McGeorge Bundy, “U.S. Scientists Visit to Israel’s Nuclear Reactor,” 26 May 1961, Secret
Document 8B: Atomic Energy Commission AEC 928/1, “Visit to Israel by U.M. Staebler and J.W. Croach, Jr.,” 7 June 1961, Confidential
Sources: A: RG 59, SAE, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 2 of 2; B: declassification release by DOE
During their visit to Israel (May 17-May 22), AEC scientists Croach and Staebler visited the Weizman Institute, the Technion, the USAEC-funded swimming pool experimental reactor at Soreq, and finally the Dimona complex then under construction. It was in that first visit that Israel provided its “cover” story for the Dimona project, a narrative of “plausible deniability” that would be observed during all future visits.[6] When Croach and Staebler met with State Department officials on their return, they said that they were “satisfied” that the reactor was “of the scope and peaceful character” claimed by Israeli officials. That could only be a tentative judgment because Dimona was still an unfinished project. Although Croach and Staebler found no evidence that the Israelis had nuclear weapons production in mind, they acknowledged that “the reactor eventually will produce small quantities of plutonium suitable for weapons.” Their official report to the AEC was far more circumspect, not mentioning the weapons potential or a capability to produce plutonium. Nevertheless, as noted earlier, they mentioned the Israeli statement about the possibility that the reactor’s power could be doubled in the future, which would increase the potential to produce plutonium.

Documents 9A-D: Kennedy’s Meeting with Ben–Gurion
Document 9A: Briefing Book, “Israel Prime Minister Ben-Gurion’s Visit to the United States,” n.d. [circa May 29, 1961], Secret, excerpts
Document 9B: Memorandum of Conversation, “President Kennedy, Prime Minister Ben-Gurion, Ambassador Avraham Harman of Israel, Myer Feldman of the White House Staff, and Philips Talbot, Assistant Secretary, Near East and South Asian Affairs, at the Waldorf Astoria, New York, 4:45 p.m. to 6:15 p.m.,” 30 May 1961, Secret, Draft
Document 9C: Ambassador Harman’s Record of the Meeting, with attachment on the “Atomic Reactor” (and transcript), sent with cover letter by Mordechai Gazit to Israeli Foreign Ministry, 7 June 1961
Document 9D: Memorandum by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near East and South Asian Affairs Armin H. Meyer of White House discussion on Ben-Gurion/Kennedy Meeting, n.d. [circa 9 June 1961], Secret
Sources: A: RG 59, SAE, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 2 of 2; B: RG 59, Bureau of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs, Office of Near Eastern Affairs, Records of the Director, 1960-1963, box 5, Tel Aviv – 1961; C: Israeli State Archives, file 130.02/3294/7; D: RG 59, Israel 1964-1966, box 8, Israel Atomic Energy Program 1961
On his way to the Vienna summit with Nikita Khrushchev, Kennedy stopped in Manhattan to meet with Ben-Gurion.[7] For both leaders, the Dimona question was a top priority; just as Kennedy wanted Israel to “remove any doubts” that other countries had about its purposes, so Ben-Gurion wanted to resolve this outstanding problem and to let the project be finished quietly. Ben-Gurion stood by his earlier statements that the “main” purpose of the reactor was peaceful – namely, internal economic development. Given Kennedy’s interest in regional stability and aversion to nuclear proliferation, he wanted to be able to let Israel’s Arab neighbors know about the positive results of the recent Dimona visit by American scientists.
The official U.S. memorandum of conversation is published in the State Department’s Foreign Relations of the United States (the file copy at the National Archives is classified even though the FRUS volume has been published), and an Israeli English-language version is also available. As noted earlier, a draft of the official memcon has surfaced which has some interesting differences with the final versions: for example, Ben-Gurion’s tacit acknowledgement of a nuclear weapons potential and a statement suggesting freedom of action about eventual reprocessing. The Israeli minutes of the conversation manifest Ben-Gurion’s ambiguities and evasiveness even more strongly, for example, his assertion that “for the time being, the only purposes of [the Dimona reactor] are for peace.” Moreover, he said, “we will see what happens in the Middle East.”

Documents 10A-C: Sharing the Findings
Document 10A: State Department telegram 5701 to U.S. Embassy United Kingdom, 31 May 1961, Secret
Document 10B: Memorandum of Conversation, “The Dimona Reactor,” 16 June 1961, Secret
Document 10C: State Department Circular Telegram 2047 to U.S. Embassy Jordan [et al.], 17 June 1961, Confidential
Sources: A: RG 59, DF, 033.84A41/5-3061, B: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/6-1661; C: Record Group 84, Records of Foreign Service Posts, U.S. Embassy Vienna, U.S. Mission to International Organizations in Vienna, International Atomic Energy Agency, Classified Records, 1955-1963, box 1, Atomic Energy Developments- Israel, 1959-1961
When Kennedy said that he would like to share the findings of the Dimona visit with other governments, Ben-Gurion did not object to that or the possibility of visits by “neutral” scientists. The British had already asked for information on the Kennedy-Ben-Gurion meeting and one day later, their embassy was given the gist of the Dimona visit report as well as a brief description of the meeting. The State Department made plans to brief Arab governments, but Deputy Assistant Secretary Armin Meyer asked Ambassador Harman if his government would be willing to work with U.S. representatives at the IAEA Board of Governors meeting to make an announcement of the visit to Dimona and also to undertake quiet discussions at the meeting about a possible neutral visit to Dimona. Harman, however, objected to an IAEA role in the Dimona matter until the rest of the world had accepted the idea of inspections and he wanted Washington to coordinate any visit by neutral scientists.
The State Department had already sent a message to Egyptian Foreign Minister Fawzi about the visit and soon sent a circular telegram to embassies in the region, but also to Oslo (Norway was interested because of its heavy water sales to Israel). Through those messages the “highest levels” of those governments were to be informed that the U.S. scientists had “found no evidence” of Israeli preparations for producing nuclear weapons.

Documents 11A-B: Lingering Suspicions
Document 11A: National Intelligence Estimate No. 35-61, “The Outlook for Israel,” 5 October 1961, Secret
Document 11B: Letter, Howard Furnas, Office of Special Assistant to Secretary of State for Atomic Energy and Outer Space, to Dwight Ink, Atomic Energy Commission, 15 November 1961, Secret
Source: A: CIA declassification release; B: RG 59, SAE, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 2 of 2
The State Department’s assurances notwithstanding, within U.S. intelligence circles doubts lingered. In a National Intelligence Estimate on Israel, declassified in 2015 at the request of the National Security Archive, the U.S. intelligence community concluded that:
Israel may have decided to undertake a nuclear weapons program. At a minimum, we believe it has decided to develop its nuclear facilities in such a way as to put it into a position to develop nuclear weapons promptly should it decide to do.
Moreover, if the Israeli had made such a decision, by 1965-1966, the Dimona reactor would produce enough plutonium to build one or two nuclear weapons a year, although to do that they would need larger processing capabilities than the pilot plant then in the works. Other obstacles were the lack of testing facilities and the problem that a test would use up scarce fissile material supplies. Another obstacle, cited by State Department atomic energy adviser Philip Farley in a letter to an AEC official, was a lack of weapons design information. In light of that concern, Farley advised the AEC to be “alert” to the possibility that Israeli scientists might try to acquire nuclear weapons design information “through clandestine means in the United States.” Thus, “discreet surveillance” was necessary of Dr. Israel Dostrovsky, an eminent Israeli chemist, who had recently been given a teaching fellowship at Brookhaven National Laboratory. An expert on isotopes and isotope separation, Dostrovsky was a key figure in Israel’s nuclear-scientific establishment, later becoming the director general of the Atomic Energy Commission (1966-1970). That Dotrovsky had close ties to the Israeli defense establishment may have influenced the notion that he should be a target for surveillance.[8]

Documents 12A-B: Exploring Visits by a “Neutral” Scientist
Document 12A: Robert C. Strong to Phillips Talbot, “Your Appointment with Israel Ambassador Harman, 4:45 p.m., Tuesday, November 14,” 14 November 1961, Confidential
Document 12B: Memorandum of Conversation, “Broadened Access to Israel’s Nuclear Reactor,” 14 November 1961, Secret
Sources: A: RG 59, SAE, box 501, Z1.50 Country File Israel f. Reactor 1961, Part 2 of 2; B: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/11-1461
The Kennedy administration had to balance its apprehensions over Dimona with other concerns, such as the broader implications of the status of Palestinian refugees. With respect to Dimona, the State Department kept in mind President Kennedy’s interest in visits by neutral scientists and Ben-Gurion’s approval of such. Moreover, State Department officials believed that a neutral visit could “obviate any overtones of inspections, which is [sic] unacceptable to Israel,” and also make it possible for Washington to avoid being the sole “guarantor of Israel’s nuclear intentions” on the basis of the May 1961 visit by AEC scientists. During a meeting with Ambassador Harman, Phillips Talbot brought up again the idea of neutral visits and mentioned that Farley had some suggestions to make. Harman said that he would be happy to meet with Farley but that Israel would “prefer a visit by Scandinavian or Swiss scientists.”

Document 13: Memorandum by Robert Amory, Deputy Director of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, to Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs [McGeorge Bundy], 18 January 1962, Secret, excised copy
Source: CIA mandatory declassification review release, under appeal; original file copy at Johnson or Kennedy libraries
That the Central Intelligence Agency has kept secret important findings about the Dimona project is evident from this heavily excised report to McGeorge Bundy, which has been under appeal since 2010. Whatever the findings were, they were enough to induce Bundy to ask his aide, Robert Komer, to “prod” the State Department to arrange “another periodic check on this by scientists.” That, however, would take time.
Among other records, the CIA has also withheld in its entirety a scientific intelligence report, from early 1962, on the Israeli nuclear program; it is currently under appeal with the Interagency Security Classification Appeals panel.

Documents 14A-D: Whether the IAEA Could Be Brought In
Document 14A: Nicolas G. Thacher to James P. Grant, “Your Appointment with Dennis Greenhill and Dennis Speares of the British Embassy,” 12 February 1962, Secret
Document 14B: Memorandum of Conversation, “Israel’s Atomic Energy Program,” 14 February 1962, Secret
Document 14C: William C. Hamilton to Robert C. Strong, “Reply to U.K. Paper on Safeguards,” 9 April 1962, with British memorandum, “Israel’s Nuclear Reactor,” dated 7 February 1962, attached, Secret
Document 14D: Memorandum of Conversation, “Israel’s Atomic Energy Program,” 9 April 1962, with U.S. memorandum attached, Secret
Sources: A: RG 59. Israel, 1964-1966, box 8, Dimona Reactor, 1962-1967; B: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/2-1462; C: Israel, 1964-1966, Box 8, Dimona Reactor, 1962-1967; D: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/2-1462
Worried about the possibility of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, especially in light of Egyptian talks with West Germany about the acquisition of a reactor, the British wanted to find ways to meet Arab concerns about Dimona by bringing the site under scrutiny of the emerging IAEA safeguards/inspection system. The British recognized that achieving this would be very difficult – the Israelis objected to IAEA inspection because they professed to be worried about the inclusion of Soviet bloc officials on the inspection teams; moreover, the French, who had supplied the reactor and fuel elements, were also unlikely to accept international inspection of the irradiated fuel. Nevertheless, because Dimona was not yet an operating reactor (and the IAEA Safeguards Division was still being created), the British suggested preliminary, ad hoc steps, such as inspection by a “neutral” (in terms of the Arab-Israeli dispute) observer such as Canada. They believed that because of Israel’s reluctance, U.S. “pressure” would be required.
The State Department concurred with the objective of the British proposal: “we fully agree on the desirability of bringing Near East nuclear development under IAEA control.” Nevertheless, believing that Israeli and French objections were not likely to yield to “pressure,” State Department officials also favored pursuing such steps as visits by “neutral” scientists.. They believed, however, that Canada was not neutral enough because it was so closely associated with the IAEA; nor was Ottawa likely to get any more information than Washington could. Washington had been holding talks with the Swedes, but if they did not pan out, the U.S. could arrange a second visit by its scientists.

Documents 15A-E: Trying to Arrange a Second Visit
Document 15A: Robert C. Strong to Phillips Talbot, “Another Visit to Israel’s Dimona Reactor,” 22 June 1962, Secret
Document 15B: Memorandum of Conversation, “A Second Visit by U.S. Scientists to Israel’s Dimona Reactor,” 22 June 1962, Secret
Document 15C: State Department telegram 233 to U.S. Embassy Egypt, 11 July 1962, Secret
Document 15D: Memorandum of Conversation, “Proposed Visit of U.S. Scientists to the Dimona Reactor,” 14 September 1962, Secret
Document 15E: William Brubeck, Executive Secretary, to McGeorge Bundy, “Second Visit by U.S. Scientists to the Dimona Reactor,” 18 September 1962, Secret
Sources: A: RG 59, DF, 611.84A45/6-2262; B: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/6-2262; C: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/7-1162. D: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/9-162; E: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/9-1462
No documents about U.S. efforts to find a “neutral” visitor have surfaced so far, but apparently the Swedes expressed only “faint interest” in playing a role, which led Washington to decide to “undertake the responsibility once more.” As it had been over a year since the first visit, U.S. diplomats believed that if the Israelis agreed to another one it would provide an opportunity for Washington to preserve a “favorable atmosphere” in the region by making assurances about the reactor to Cairo and other Arab capitals (as long as the assurances were warranted). On 22 June, Talbot renewed the question with Ambassador Harman but the lack of response led Talbot to bring up the matter on 14 September. By then two AEC scientists were scheduled to visit the U.S.-financed reactor at Soreq in a matter of days and it made sense for them to include a visit to Dimona. Harman, however, said that no decision could be made until later in the month when Ben-Gurion was back from a European trip.

Documents 16A-B: The Second Visit

Document 16A: A: State Department telegram 451 to U.S. Embassy Egypt, 22 October 1962, Secret

Document 16B: Memorandum of Conversation, “Second U.S. Visit to Dimona Reactor,” 23 October 1962, Secret

Document 16C: Rodger P. Davies to Phillips Talbot, “Second Inspection of Israel’s Dimona Reactor,” 27 December 1962, Secret

A: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/10-2262; B: RG 59, DF, 884A.1901/10-2362; C: U.S. Department of State, Microfiche Supplement, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961-1963, Volumes XVII, XVIII, XX, XXI (Microfiche Number 10, Document Number 150)

Never making a formal reply to the U.S. request, the Israelis used the ploy of an improvised visit to evade the substance of a real visit. As noted in the introduction, decades later an Israeli source confirmed to Avner Cohen that this was indeed a trick. While the two AEC scientists, Thomas Haycock and Ulysses Staebler, did not see the complete installation, they believed that they had enough time to determine that Dimona was a research reactor, not a production reactor, which, from their point of view, made the visit “satisfactory.” U.S. intelligence did not agree because the visit left unanswered questions, such as “whether in fact the reactor might give Israel a nuclear weapons capability.”
A few weeks after the visit, just as the Cuban Missile Crisis was unfolding, the State Department began to inform selected governments about its results. U.S. diplomats told Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, during a briefing on the Cuban situation, that the visit confirmed Israeli statements about the reactor. The British and Canadians were also told about the “recent brief visit” to Dimona, without explaining what had made it so short. By the end of October, the Department sent a fuller statement to embassies in the Middle East, as well as London, Paris, Ottawa, and Oslo.

NOTES
[1]. Richard Reeves, President Kennedy: Profile in Power (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994), pp. 29-33.
[2]. Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb (New York, Columbia University Press, 1998), 108-11; Warren Bass, Support Any friend, 2003, 200-02.
[3]. In conversations Avner Cohen had with the late John Hadden, the CIA station chief in Israel during 1964-68, he made it apparent that his office was fully clear about “what was Dimona doing,” including reprocessing, and was not allowed to maintain any contact with the visiting AEC scientists. See also Israel and the Bomb 187-90.
[4]. Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 112.
[5]. Yuval Ne’eman told Avner Cohen about his “trick” on the visit of 1962 in many of the conversations during the 1990s and 2000s. When Cohen published Israel and the Bomb in 1998 he cited only a condensed version of Ne’eman tale—Ne’eman still considered it sensitive in the 1990s. Now, almost ten years after his passing (2006), Cohen is comfortable citing his tale in more detail.
According to Ne’eman in an interview conducted in March 1994, as the host of the two AEC scientists who had arrived to inspect the Soreq reactor (under the terms of the “Atoms for Peace” program) he “arranged” to take them for a tour of the Dead Sea. This was a well-planned pretext to bring them to Dimona on Israeli terms. So, on their way back, by late afternoon, as they were passing near the Dimona reactor, Ne’eman “spontaneously” suggested to arrange a quick visit at Dimona to say “hello” to the director whom inspector Staebler had known from the visit a year earlier, in May 1961. Ne’eman told them this was a great opportunity since their government was pressing for such a visit. The purpose was, of course, to have a much more informal and abbreviated visit rather than the formal one the US government wanted. In doing so, Israel would ease American pressure and convince the visitors that Dimona was a research reactor, not a production reactor. When the United States continued to press for a visit, Ne’eman told them, “you just did it.”
[6]. For more information on the visit, see Cohen, Israel and the Bomb, 105-108.
[7]. For the Kennedy-Ben-Gurion meeting, see ibid, 108-109.
[8]. Ibid , 21.

 

Op-Ed: Netanyahu is not the first leader the White House found « frustrating » There is no friendship without disagreements and there have been plenty of those in Israel’s history of relations with the USA. (…)Ironically, many of the Israeli leaders with whom past U.S. presidents have clashed were from the leftwing Labor Party, not the rightwing Likud.  Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, was the first Israeli leader to find himself at odds with Washington.(…)President John F. Kennedy, for his part, was frustrated by Ben-Gurion’s refusal to acknowledge that Israel was developing nuclear weapons. Meeting in New York City in May 1961, JFK pressed the Israeli leader for details on what was taking place at the Dimona nuclear research facility.   « Ben-Gurion mumbled and spoke very softly; it was hard to hear him and understand what he was saying, partly due to his accent, » according to Prof. Avner Cohen, author of Israel and the Bomb. Recently-declassified National Security Archive documents show that U.S. inspectors who were given a partial tour of the Dimona facility in 1962 felt they were being « tricked » and « misled » because they were shown only some of the buildings.

50 ans après l’assassinat de JFK, un livre de référence vient de paraître colligeant et examinant sa correspondance: The Letters of John F. Kennedy. L’éditeur Martin W. Sandler reconnaît que la thèse de l’implication centrale d’Israël dans l’assassinat, thèse développée par Michael Collins Piper dans Final Judgment, est « des plus intrigantes »! Final Judgment est le seul et unique ouvrage conspirationniste mentionné dans cet ouvrage de référence de plus de 400 pages. L’auteur ne peut être suspecté d’antisémitisme ou encore de biais contre Israël: c’est un historien juif respecté et la maison d’édition qui distribue son livre est l’une des plus prestigieuses maison d’édition. Il écrit en page 333:

In March 1992, Representative Paul Findley of Illinois, wrote in the Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs, “It is interesting. . . . to notice that in all the words written and uttered about the Kennedy assassination, Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned.” Two years later in his book Final Judgment, author Michael Collins Piper actually accused Israel of the crime. Of all the conspiracy theories, it remains one of the most intriguing.

What is indisputable is that, although it was kept out of the eye of both the Press and the Public, a bitter dispute had developped between Israeli prime minister David Ben-Gurion who believed that his nation’s survival depended on it attaining nuclear capability and Kennedy who was vehemently opposed to it. In May 1963, Kennedy wrote to Ben-Gurion explaining why he was convinced that Israel’s pursuit of nuclear weapons capability was a serious threat to world peace.

Il va même plus loin en conférence:

I’ll tell you one thing: I found articles – not tripped in publications but in very sophisticated publications – saying, « Forget Lyndon Johnson! Forget the CIA! Forget Fidel Castro! MOSSAD killed JFK because they were upset by what he had done to Ben-Gurion. » So you see, we drop a few bombs like this in this book, unproven … (Historian Martin W. Sandler, Author of The Letters of John F. Kennedy, lecture at the JFK Museum; Nov 16, 2013, CSPAN2 | BookTV @51 min : 21 sec)

« Je vais vous dire une chose: j’ai trouvé des articles–pas dans des publications disjonctées mais dans des publications très sophistiquées–qui disaient: « Oubliez Lyndon Johnson ! Oubliez la CIA ! Oubliez Fidel Castro ! Le MOSSAD a tué JFK parce qu’ils étaient bouleversés à cause de ce qu’il avait fait à Ben-Gourion. » Alors, vous voyez, on lâche quelques petites bombes comme celle-ci dans le livre, non prouvées… »

 

 

Sur ce blog:

Hormis les médias juifs ou pro-palestiniens, personne ne parle du rapport américain déclassifié en février dernier confirmant l’existence du nucléaire israélien

Inversion accusatoire: après l’accord sur le nucléaire iranien, Israël menace d’aller en guerre, mais c’est l’Iran qui est accusé de menacer la paix mondiale…

Détenteur d’un important arsenal nucléaire et chimique, Israël est responsable de la course à l’armement nucléaire et chimique au Proche-Orient… Qu’attendent nos chères démocraties pour condamner cet état terroriste partisan d’al-Qaïda et le compter parmi leurs ennemis?

L’ONU: antijuif et anti-américain? Une nouvelle résolution onusienne contre la militarisation de l’espace rejetée exclusivement par Israël et les États-Unis

Après JFK et Obama, au tour de l’Onu de demander à Israël d’ouvrir ses installations nucléaires aux inspections

RAPPEL: « Si la Corée du Nord continue dans cette voie, elle devrait être rayée de la carte, cela serait un excellent message, très clair, au reste du monde et spécialement aux Iraniens », déclarait en avril 2013 sur les ondes de Fox News l’ancien ambassadeur d’Israël aux Nations unies Dan Gillerman

Médiats juifs anti-juifs? CNN et le NY Times mentionnent l’arsenal nucléaire d’Israël, qui explique pourquoi ses voisins se sont dotés d’armes chimiques

Guerres sionistes et Option Samson: vers la délivrance ultime

Ça commence à sentir la fin

S’ils vont en enfer ils nous emportent avec eux

L’option Samson comme justice ultime

The Jewish War of Survival

Nixon s’est opposé à l’acquisition du nucléaire par Israel

La Grande-Bretagne craignait qu’Israël n’utilise la bombe atomique

Jimmy Carter révèle qu’Israel a 150 armes nucléaires

Flashback: Kadhafi dénonce le rôle central d’Israël dans l’assassinat de JFK

Khadafi: « le Mossad a assassiné JFK » (2008)

Kadhafi réitère ses propos sur l’assassinat de JFK par le Mossad

Assassinat de JFK: c’était pas des nazis!

Rothschild et JFK: les liens de l’avocat « montréalais » Bloomfield (à la tête de Permindex) avec le clan Rothschild documentés par un auteur québécois

La piste israélienne n’est plus ignorée dans les ouvrages de référence sur JFK, panique des néocons dans les médias (National Review, Washington Free Beacon) – Extrait de la fin du livre « The Letters of John F. Kennedy »

L’assassinat de JFK: une décision de l’administration Ben-Gourion

L’arsenal nucléaire israélien au centre de la guerre secrète entre JFK et Israël

La connexion israélienne: la seule à réunir toutes les pièces du puzzle de l’assassinat de JFK

Israël admet que le producteur du JFK d’Oliver Stone, Arnon Milchan, était un agent du Mossad

Surprise durant la semaine de l’anniversaire de l’assassinat de JFK: Arnon Milchan, producteur juif d’Hollywood, a confirmé ce que nous savions en avouant publiquement avoir été à l’emploi du Mossad dans le cadre du développement du programme nucléaire d’Israël…

Yitzhak Shamir, le terroriste devenu président d’Israël qui joua un rôle central dans la conspiration contre JFK

John F. Kennedy (22 novembre 1963) In Memoriam. Mystère résolu et c’est pas grâce à Peter Dale Scott, ni à Alex Jones, ni à Robert Groden, ni à Jim Marrs

Michael Collins Piper contre la mafia juive

Collection audiovisuelle et livresque de Michael Collins Piper (1960-2015)

Décès du légendaire journaliste télé Walter Cronkite . « Je ne peux penser à aucun groupe — à l’exception des renseignements israéliens — qui aient pu garder sous silence la conspiration pour l’assassinat de JFK pendant si longtemps. » « I can’t think of any group — with the exception of Israeli intelligence — that would have been able to keep the JFK assassination conspiracy under wraps for so long. »

Assassinat de JFK: rien à voir avec le décret 11110 et la Réserve Fédérale

JFK: un autre mythe s’écroule

Des sympathies et ambitions nationalistes de Joseph P. Kennedy

Pourquoi ils ont tenté de tuer de Gaulle

Déclassification de l’enquête sénatoriale sur le lobby sioniste aux USA (1963)

Les documents du FBI sur les fameux « Israéliens dansants » arrêtés le 11 septembre 2001

Analyse du rapport du FBI sur les « Israéliens dansants »

Posted in Non classé | Commentaires fermés sur Les archives états-uniennes de sécurité nationale déclassifient 50 documents révélant qu’Israël, pour obtenir la bombe atomique, a dû mentir effrontément à l’administration Kennedy résolument opposée à la course à l’armement nucléaire et chimique au Moyen-Orient

Découvrez le conspirationniste anti-islam débile choisi pour être conseiller en affaires étrangères du candidat présidentiel bushiste Ted Cruz. Il est l’inspirateur du projet de Trump de déporter les musulmans: non, ce n’est pas Boris Le Lay, c’est le néocon membre du PNAC Frank J. Gaffney Jr. L’équipe Cruz rassemble aussi d’autres néoconservateurs comme Elliott Abrams et Michael Ledeen. Cruz croit aussi en plusieurs autres théories du complot, particulièrement celles impliquant George Soros.

Rappelons que Gaffney est cité 7 fois comme autorité dans le manifeste de Breivik, le tireur d’Oslo… Mais bon, surtout pas d’amalgame! : car notre bon « néo-nationaliste » Finkielkraut est lui aussi cité comme une autorité dans ce manifeste, et le pauvre il n’y est pour rien! (MDR!)

Gaffney a également fait une entrevue très cordiale avec leader nationaliste blanc et fondateur d’AmRen Jared Taylor, dont les liens étroits (mais peu connus) avec des rabbins et avec l’ADL laissent songeurs. Taylor est cité comme source d’inspiration dans le manifeste du tireur de Charleston (été 2015).

 

Un conseiller de Ted Cruz pense que Washington est infiltré par les Frères musulmans Le controversé Frank Gaffney conseille le candidat à la primaire républicaine en matière d’affaires étrangères.

Le plan de Cruz pour neutraliser les djihadistes Le plan de Cruz lui a peut-être été suggéré par son nouveau conseiller, Frank Gaffney, qui a déjà qualifié Barack Obama de «premier président musulman».

Réseau Voltaire: Les conseillers de politique étrangère de Ted Cruz Le sénateur Ted Cruz, candidat à l’investiture présidentielle au sein du Parti républicain, a publié la liste de ses conseillers pour les questions de politique étrangère.

Islamophobie : Gaffney, l’éminence grise de Donald Trump Aux Etats-Unis, la campagne pour les primaires républicaines a été particulièrement violente. Donald Trump, qui fait figure de favori, a successivement pris pour cibles les Latinos puis les musulmans américains. Derrière ces attaques racistes, se profile l’ombre d’un homme. Son nom : Frank Gaffney.

Qui est Frank Gaffney, le conseiller “anti-musulmans” de Donald Trump ? A la faveur des dernières saillies de Donald Trump sur les musulmans, un conseiller politique extrémiste revient sur le devant de la scène.(…)  Des liens avec suprémacistes blancs:  Gaffney a son propre talk show radio, à l’audience confidentielle. En septembre, il invite Jared Taylor, un white nationalist [nationaliste blanc] à la tête du Council of Conservative Citizens, un groupuscule que le meurtrier de l’église de Charleston a cité comme source d’inspiration dans son manifeste.

Les Frères musulmans ont infiltré le gouvernement américain selon un conseiller de Ted Cruz L’Amérique vit au rythme des primaires. Et il n’y a pas que Donald Trump qui sorte des clous… En réalité, c’est tout le Parti républicain qui diffuse ses idées anti-islam. La preuve avec les déclarations d’un des conseillers de Ted Cruz. Après les polémiques suscitées par les déclarations islamophobes de Donald Trump, c’est au tour de l’autre candidat du même parti, Ted Cruz, de s’en prendre aux musulmans. Mais cette fois, aucune proposition de mesure concrète : Frank Gaffney a préféré emmener les électeurs dans la théorie du complot… Le sénateur texan Ted Cruz a récemment nommé une équipe de conseillers en affaires étrangères pour gérer sa campagne. Frank Gaffney est l’un d’eux : ce conseiller est le directeur du think-tank anti-islam Center for Security Policy. Il est aussi connu par ses positions radicales contre les musulmans et l’Islam. Washington, Harvard et le Congrès infiltrés…

Primaires américaines : Ted Cruz, conseillé par un conspirationniste anti-islam Le principal rival de Donald Trump est désormais entouré de Frank Gaffney, réputé pour ses théories fumeuses. Bien entouré… Pour faire mieux que Trump, il faut faire pire que Trump ? Son principal rival Ted Cruz s’est entouré d’un conseiller sulfureux pour sa campagne. Fondateur d’un think tank réputé « extrémiste », le Center for Security Policy, Frank Gaffney est un ancien de l’administration Reagan. Mais il est surtout connu pour ses positions dures contre l’islam, considéré comme « une menace pour la sécurité nationale. » Selon lui, les musulmans vivant en Amérique cherchent à imposer la charia aux Etats-Unis.

Ted Cruz Announces National Security Team, Including Frank Gaffney, Michael Ledeen, Elliott Abrams

 

Meet The People Behind Ted Cruz’s Terrifying Foreign Policy Plan

Frank Gaffney (PNAC member)

 

Michael Ledeen (PNAC member)

 

Elliott Abrams (PNAC member)

 

Here Are Five of Ted Cruz’s Most Fanatical Foreign Policy Advisors Three staffers from extremist group behind Trump’s racist Muslim ban are among Cruz’s picks.

Neocons and a CIA Propagandist : The men behind Ted Cruz

Wall Street Journal: Republican Candidates’ Foreign-Policy Plans Come Into Greater Focus Trump continues to play advisers close to vest; Cruz names 23 national-security experts. Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump continues to hedge questions about his foreign-policy team even as the advisers to his two challengers are coming into sharper focus.

Cruz Assembles an Unlikely Team of Foreign-Policy Rivals

NYTimes: Ted Cruz’s foreign policy advisor: Think tank founder who spread rumours that Obama secretly Muslim Sen. Ted Cruz came under fire Thursday after unveiling a list of national security advisers that included Frank Gaffney Jr., a former member of the Reagan administration who is now best known for holding extreme views about Islam.

WashPost: Meet the radical anti-Islam conspiracy theorists advising Ted Cruz They believe « Islam is evil » and that sharia may soon conquer America.

Ted Cruz Promotes Jihad Expert Frank Gaffney Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) 97% is praising one of his security advisors who is being attacked by a jihad-linked advocacy group in Washington.

Ted Cruz’s New Adviser Is Even More Anti-Muslim Than Donald Trump Here are some of the most Islamophobic theories spun out of the mind of Frank Gaffney.

Ted Cruz’s anti-Muslim adviser: Cruz taps Frank Gaffney for his national security team Cruz’s newest adviser warns of a vast Islamist conspiracy to impose sharia law on American soil

Ted Cruz’s Foreign Policy Team Includes a Notorious Islamophobe Top Cruz adviser Frank Gaffney has suggested that President Obama is a secret Muslim.

Who is Frank Gaffney? Once a respectable Washington insider, Frank Gaffney Jr. is now one of America’s most notorious Islamophobes.

CAIR Asks Ted Cruz to Drop Hate Group Leader Gaffney, Discredited General, Other Islamophobes as National Security Advisers

Meet the Anti-Muslim Leaders Advising Donald Trump and Ted Cruz Following the attacks in Brussels on March 22, GOP Presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz issued a call for the United States to “immediately halt the flow of refugees from countries with a significant al-Qaida or ISIS presence.”

Who is Frank Gaffney? An Anti-Muslim Conspiracy Theorist May Be Behind Ted Cruz’s Muslim Surveillance Proposal

Crazytown: Frank Gaffney And More of Ted Cruz’s Crazy Advisers So much for any optimism about a potential Cruz reboot of international relations after the mistakes of the last two administrations. Ted Cruz has unveiled his foreign policy team, and things are even worse than you’d imagined.

VIDEO – Why Is Ted Cruz Seeking Policy Advice from Frank Gaffney, a Leading Islamophobe?

Ted Cruz’s newest adviser: anti-Islam conspiracy theorist Frank Gaffney

Ted Cruz also loves Frank Gaffney, the Islamophobe whose flawed data Donald Trump is using to justify banning Muslims from the U.S.

Think Trump’s an Islamophobe? Meet Ted Cruz’s national security adviser Frank Gaffney believes that US officials have submitted to sharia law and a crescent moon is secretly included in government logos.

New York Magazine: Ted Cruz Names Anti-Muslim Conspiracy Theorist As Top Foreign-Policy Adviser

Jewish Insider: Cruz announces national security team Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz on Thursday announced his national security advisory team, consisting mostly of anti-establishment national security experts. Members of Cruz’s national security team include Frank Gaffney, the founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, former Senator Jim Talent, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, and former Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams, who was also on Marco Rubio’s short-lived national security team.

WHY DID TED CRUZ HIRE THIS OBSCURE SECURITY ADVISER? Norway’s terrorist Anders Breivik cited him 7x – now Ted Cruz loves him. (…) Anders Breivik, the Norway terrorist, cited Gaffney and his nonsense think tank seven times in his writings used his arguments to justify his terror and killing many young people in Norway, according to Think Progress. In a report from July 25, 2011 Think Progress writes: ” Right-wing pundits and bloggers were quick to leap to judgement that the Norwegian terror attacks were the work of al-Qaeda or an Islamic terrorist. But the news that the attacker had blond hair and blue eyes and was inspired by right-wing “counterjihad” bloggers suddenly turned the tables on many of the bloggers and supposed “terrorism experts.” Anders Breivik’s manifesto contains numerous in-text and footnoted citations to prominent Islamophobic bloggers, supposed experts on Islamic terrorism and think tanks claiming to be on the frontlines of battling Islam’s attacks on democracies. Individuals cited in Breivik’s manifesto include: Center for Security Policy‘s President Frank Gaffney; “counterjihad” bloggers Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer; Investigative Project on Terrorism’s Director Steven Emerson; Middle East Forum President Daniel Pipes; and controversial historian Bat Ye’or.” So Frank Gaffney had an inspiring effect in 2011: in Norway.  With 77 mainly young people killed by a mad, with Gaffney’s center 7times arguing terrorist. Norway’s terrorist Anders Breivik cited him often – now want-to-be-US-president Ted Cruz.

Anti-Muslim Hate Group Leader Frank Gaffney Is On Ted Cruz’s National Security Advisory Team Frank Gaffney, the head of the Center for Security Policy (CSP), is reportedly a member of GOP presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) national security advisory team. The Southern Poverty Law Center has termed CSP an anti-Muslim hate group, and Gaffney has a history of pushing bigoted anti-Muslim smears and conspiracy theories.

You WON’T Believe Who’s Advising Donald Trump and Ted Cruz! Presidential Republican nominees Donald Trump and Ted Cruz get their anti-Muslim rhetoric from Islamophobic leaders in the US.

Anti-Muslim Hate Group Leader Frank Gaffney Is On Ted Cruz’s National Security Advisory Team Frank Gaffney, the head of the Center for Security Policy (CSP), is reportedly a member of GOP presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) national security advisory team. The Southern Poverty Law Center has termed CSP an anti-Muslim hate group, and Gaffney has a history of pushing bigoted anti-Muslim smears and conspiracy theories.

Notorious Islamophobe Frank Gaffney To Join Cruz National Security Team Frank Gaffney, a prominent anti-Muslim activist and former Reagan administration official, will join the Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) campaign’s national security advisory team, according to Bloomberg’s Eli Lake.

Frank Gaffney: From Pariah To Ted Cruz Adviser Gaffney was banned from CPAC, the annual conservative event, after he promoted the bogus charge that two of the event’s organizers were secret agents of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Ted Cruz Adds Birther, Anti-Muslim Conspiracy Theorist To His Campaign Ted Cruz has continued to reach out to extremists that even other Republicans wouldn’t dare touch, today appointing Frank Gaffney, an activist so bizarre that even the American Conservative Union issued a blistering report criticizing him for making outlandish claims, to his campaign’s foreign policy advisory board. Gaffney, who heads the Center for Security Policy, has alleged that “there is mounting evidence that the president not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself,” calling President Obama “America’s first Muslim president.”

Motley Cruz: Ted’s Wacky Foreign Policy Team Neocons and conspiracy theorists have joined the Texas senator. Jacob Heilbrunn March 17, 2016 Tweet Printer-friendly version Frank Gaffney, who has been toiling in the far right anti-Muslim vineyards for over a decade, likes to refer to “creeping Sharia.” He himself is plain creepy. Now he and his staff at the Center for Security Policy appear to have crept into the Ted Cruz campaign, along with a passel of neoconservatives such as Elliott Abrams and Michael Ledeen who should know better but apparently don’t care that they are cheek by jowl with a febrile conspiracy theorist. How much lower can the neocons sink?

Ted Cruz’s new foreign policy advisor is notorious for conspiracy theories and Islamophobia

Ted Cruz’s National Security Team Includes a Notorious Anti-Islam Conspiracy Theorist Senator Ted Cruz announced his team of national security advisers on Thursday, including a prominent anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist and several members of an organization that has been described as a hate group.
VIDEO – Ted Cruz’s New Foreign Policy Advisor Frank Gaffney Has A History Of Islamophobia

Bloomberg | New Cruz Adviser Gaffney Criticized Over Islam Views: NYTimes Criticism has greeted the inclusion on a list of national security advisers to GOP presidential contender Ted Cruz of a former Reagan administration official who once wrote an op-ed in Washington Times suggesting President Obama is a Muslim, NYTimes reports.

Ted Cruz’s latest addition to his national security advisory team is an extreme anti-Muslim activist Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan administration Pentagon official and an outspoken anti-Muslim activist, is set to be one of the newest members of the Cruz campaign’s national security advisory team, Bloomberg reports. Gaffney, who first met Sen. Ted Cruz back in 2012 when he says he advised the Texas senator about introducing « legislation to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, » has been labeled « one of the nation’s leading Islamophobes » by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Gaffney has claimed that members of the Muslim Brotherhood have infiltrated the Obama administration, specifically citing Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and he was banned from the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in 2010 after he accused CPAC officials of « infiltrating the organization on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood, » Talking Points Memo reports. He reappeared at CPAC this year to lead a panel called « Countering the Global Jihad. »

Ted Cruz’s Team of Islamophobes Ted Cruz, explains Davison, « has assembled a collection of some of the most prominent Islamophobes in American right-wing circles and balanced them with a group of neoconservatives who only want to go to war against part of the Islamic world, not all of it. » Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), one of the three remaining candidates for the Republican presidential nomination, is unveiling his national security team today, and Bloomberg View columnist Eli Lake was able to preview some of its members for his readers this morning.

Gaffney: Ted Cruz Will Save Us From Sharia Law! Frank Gaffney, the raging Islamophobic bigot who is one of Ted Cruz’ main advisers, told Breitbart News’ radio show that we must elect Cruz in order to save us from the imposition of Sharia law in the United States. Because that’s a totally plausible thing that might happen, amirite?

The crazy conspiracy theories of Ted Cruz’s new foreign policy adviser

Presidential candidate Cruz appoints Islam critics as advisers Ted Cruz, Donald Trump’s closest rival in the Republican race for the White House, named his national security advisers on Thursday, including former staffers of President Ronald Reagan and members of a think tank that has been called an anti-Muslim « hate group » by a civil rights organization.

Ted Cruz’s New Foreign Policy Team Makes Him as Extreme as Donald Trump GOP presidential contender Ted Cruz has unveiled a foreign policy team full of conspiracy theorists and arch-neoconservatives who support policies just as belligerent as those of Donald Trump. While Cruz has been supported by some Republican figures (most recently, Sen. Lindsey Graham) who consider him a relatively moderate alternative to Trump, the foreign policy advisers he has assembled show him to be running as an extremist.

Cruz’s Preposterous Foreign Policy Team Jacob Heilbrunn sums up my reaction to Ted Cruz’s list of foreign policy advisers: If Cruz was seeking to burnish his bona fides as the new Joseph McCarthy of the GOP, whom he physically resembles, then he has done well. But his motley crew of advisers further tarnishes the Republican party. Cruz has cobbled together a group of conspiracy theorists and fanatical hard-liners to advise him on foreign policy. This is not very surprising for anyone that has listened to the senator talk about foreign policy issues for very long, but it’s worth noting.

Cruz draws from anti-Islamist fringe The senator’s foreign-policy team includes advisers with a history of extreme statements. Ted Cruz’s new team of foreign policy advisers includes several fringe conservative activists and fervid anti-Islamist hardliners — but few of the GOP establishment elites who are outraged over the rise of Donald Trump.

MSNBC: Meet Ted Cruz’s foreign-policy team Most voters probably don’t pay attention to the presidential race at a granular level, but it’s worth keeping an eye on the kind of advisers a candidate surrounds himself or herself with. As we recently discussed, who a presidential hopeful turns to for guidance, especially on matters of foreign policy and national security, tells voters something important about the kind of presidency the public can expect. It mattered, for example, that Jeb Bush surrounded himself with members of his brother’s team, just as it mattered that Marco Rubio put together a “dream team” of prominent neoconservatives. (Asked yesterday who he’s speaking with for guidance on foreign policy, Donald Trump said, “I’m speaking with myself. I have a very good brain.”) As for Ted Cruz, Eli Lake reports today for Bloomberg View that the Texas senator is unveiling his own national security advisory team, which includes names like Elliott Abrams – who lied to Congress about the Iran-Contra scandal, and who was also on Rubio’s advisory team – and former assistant U.S. attorney Andrew McCarthy, known for his far-right contributions to National Review. But the name that stood most was Frank Gaffney, one of the nation’s most notorious anti-Muslim activists.

Meet Ted Cruz’s nightmare of a foreign policy team On Wednesday, Donald Trump said that his foreign policy team consisted of no one other than himself (“I have a very good brain,” he explained). On Thursday, Ted Cruz announced a foreign policy team that was somehow even more frightening.

Ted Cruz Adviser: Joseph McCarthy Was ‘Spot-On!’ – We’re starting to get a sense of what a President Cruz administration would look like — and it’s horrifying. Reacting to the terror attacks today in Brussels, Belgium, Cruz remarked that he wants police to “patrol Muslim neighborhoods” in the United States — a totally ineffective measure in terms of national security, but one that’s sure to delight the Islamophobes of Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy who enthusiastically support his candidacy. This sort of paranoid politics has a long pedigree in America. Cruz foreign policy adviser Claire Lopez, who is also vice president of Gaffney’s organization, made that point herself when she told South Carolina radio host Vince Coakley earlier this month that Sen. Joe McCarthy’s red scare was totally “spot on.” Lopez was pushing conspiracy theories about the Muslim Brotherhood in America…

Ted Cruz Defends Adviser Who Called Obama ‘America’s First Muslim President’ Frank Gaffney has also accused conservative leader Grover Norquist of sinister ties to radical Islam.

Ted Cruz brings Islamic critics to advise Ted Cruz, Donald Trump’s closest rival in the Republican race for the White House, has named his national security advisers, including former staffers of president Ronald Reagan and members of a think tank that has been called an anti-Muslim « hate group » by a civil rights organisation.

VIDEO – MSNBC’s Chris Hayes: Ted Cruz’s Foreign Policy Team Includes « Anti-Muslim Conspiracy Theorist » Frank Gaffney Hayes: Cruz’s List Of Foreign Policy Advisers Is « A Real Rogue’s Gallery Of Warmongers And Bigots »

VIDEO – The Hatemonger Behind Ted Cruz Ted Cruz is the Republican establishment’s last hope against Donald Trump. But if you’re hoping for a bit of sanity from him, well… check out his new advisor: Frank Gaffney.

Islamophobia Runs Deep in Ted Cruz’s Campaign, and He’s Not Sorry About It Hours after suicide bombers killed more than 31 people and injured dozens more in Brussels on Tuesday, in an attack that ISIS eventually claimed responsibility for, Sen. Ted Cruz released a hard-edged response, calling for law enforcement agencies to « patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized. » The statement was particularly notable in that it seemed to directly target innocent American Muslims — a stance Cruz had not yet publicly taken.

 

Surprise! Ted Cruz’s Foreign Policy Team Is F*cking Psycho.

Ted Cruz puts infamous anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist Frank Gaffney on his ‘national security’ team

Cruz Hires Neocon Loons, Gaffney, Ledeen, Abrams Dubs Hawkish New Foreign Policy Team ‘Trusted Friends’ Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz, has unveiled his new foreign policy team, stacked with some of the most aggressive hawks imaginable, saying they are a group of his “trusted friends” who believe in a “strong America.” At the center of his team is neoconservative ultra-hawk Frank Gaffney, a loudly anti-Muslim figure who believes in a wild array of conspiracies, including that a number of top political figures from both parties of being part of a secret Muslim cabal plotting the conquest of America.

Frank Gaffney, ‘Notorious Islamophobe’ And Muslim Critics Named Ted Cruz Advisers GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz on Thursday announced his 23-member foreign policy team and national security coalition, who purportedly share the common goal of « defining and confronting radical Islam. » One of those members is being touted as more anti-Muslim than Donald Trump: Frank Gaffney Jr. heads the Center for Security Policy, and is accused of promoting anti-Muslim conspiracy theories, news outlets reported.

Cruz Tries to Have It Both Ways With His Foreign-Policy Advisors Cruz’s team spans the spectrum from run-of-the-mill neocon to flaming Islamophobe.

New Ted Cruz national security advisors are leaders of the Islamophobia industry US Politics With Marco Rubio’s exit from the GOP race, the world is now faced with the reality that either Donald Trump or Ted Cruz are just a step away from the White House.

TED CRUZ CAMPAIGN INSANITY INCREASES WITH FRANK GAFFNEY ADD Ted Cruz, as a leading member of the Tea Party, has already earned a reputation among those outside that sector of the GOP as a right-wing religious extremist, and Cruz’s reputation for extremism just grew exponentially. On Thursday, according to a Bloomberg report on the assembly of his foreign policy advisers, Ted Cruz announced the members of his team, and Frank Gaffney is to be his top adviser.

VIDEO – CNN: Ted Cruz defends foreign policy adviser Frank Gaffney

VIDEO – Ted Cruz Stumbles As CNN’s Blitzer Presses Him On Anti-Muslim Conspiracies Of Foreign Policy Adviser Frank Gaffney Wolf Blitzer: Gaffney Has Said The Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrated Government, That Obama Is A Muslim, And That Chris Christie’s Appointment Of A Muslim Was Treason

Ted Cruz Pulled a Trump, Dodging Question About Adviser’s Anti-Muslim Views Ted Cruz refused to disavow the anti-Muslim views of his new foreign policy adviser, Frank Gaffney.

Extremist Conspiracy Theorist Frank Gaffney Defends His Boss Ted Cruz Over Anti-Muslim Statements Frank Gaffney, classified as an extremist by the Southern Poverty Law Center, is a senior advisor to Cruz.

Ted Cruz Declines Opportunity to Disavow Foreign Policy Advisor’s Belief That President Obama Is a Secret Muslim “Frank Gaffney is someone I respect,” Ted Cruz said Monday, defending his foreign policy advisor. Frank Gaffney is a serious thinker.” Frank Gaffney thinks that President Barack Obama, Governor Chris Christie, and longtime Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin are part of a secret Muslim conspiracy.

During an interview on CNN Monday night, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) was asked about the anti-Muslims statements made by Frank Gaffney, a member of the national security team on Cruz’s presidential campaign. « Frank Gaffney is a serious thinker who has been focused on fighting jidahists, fighting jihadism across the globe, » Cruz told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. « And he’s endured attacks from the left, from the media because he speaks out against radical Islamic terrorism, because he speaks out against, for example, the political correctness of the Obama administration that effectively gets in bed with the Muslim Brotherhood. »

Ted Cruz Plays Dumb About Frank Gaffney’s Hateful Rhetoric Frank Gaffney is, without any doubt, one of the top dealers in Islamophobic hate speech. He’s also on Ted Cruz’s foreign policy team now.

Ted Cruz slammed for adopting ‘notorious Islamophobe’ Frank Gaffney as advisor Ted Cruz has been lambasted after his team of national security advisors included Frank Gaffney, known for his extreme views on Islam.

CAIR Asks Ted Cruz to Drop Hate Group Leader Gaffney, Discredited General, Other Islamophobes as National Security Advisers Retired Lieutenant General William G. « Jerry » Boykin says ‘[Islam] should not be protected under the First Amendment,’ there should be ‘no mosques in America’

Here are some of the people who Ted Cruz’s adviser thinks are part of a secret Muslim conspiracy Donald Trump is usually understood to be the candidate with the most abhorrent views on Islam in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. But after his latest hire, Ted Cruz could steal the title.

Ted Cruz Adviser Frank Gaffney: Bono Is A Tool Of Radical Islamists Anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist and Ted Cruz national security adviser Frank Gaffney is none too pleased that the musician Bono urged the U.S. Senate to provide more aid to the Middle East to help fight terrorism and the refugee crisis.

4 Conspiracy Theories Promoted by Frank Gaffney, Ted Cruz’s New Adviser According to the presidential candidate’s national security adviser, U.S. Missile Defense Agency logo isn’t what it seems.

Endorse This: Ted Cruz’s Own Joseph McCarthy

US Muslims decry Cruz’s call for community surveillance

ADL condemns Cruz for call to patrol ‘Muslim neighborhoods’

Crazed, whack-job Judaic acolytes play concern-troll over ‘Them Mooooz-Lums’…

Islamophobia: Ted Cruz wants to “secure Muslim neighborhoods” Today, in response to the tragic Brussels terrorist attacks, Ted Cruz called for the United States to “empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized.”

After Brussels, Cruz and Trump’s Advisors Make (Bad) Headlines Critics say Gaffney and Phares are Islamophobes who believe Obama is pro-Muslim.

Ted Cruz Blames Donald Trump For Brussels Attack

YouTube locks video of Ted Cruz blaming Donald Trump for the Brussels attack.

WashPost: Dana Milbank: Trump helping to make other candidates look not so zany Redefining extremism, Trump has even embraced provocateur Frank Gaffney, making him safe again.

VIDEO – Raw Story: Ted Cruz outdoes Trump — adds Muslim-hating ‘birther’ conspiracy theorist to his foreign policy team

Ted Cruz Is an Anti-Muslim Bigot, Too The GOP has an anti-Muslim hate problem: Ted Cruz’s foreign-policy team is anchored by America’s biggest Islamophobe.

Ted Cruz’s extreme views stir concern Cruz is not only personally dis­liked by many of his colleagues for his obstructionist tactics on Senate floor but for his extreme right-wing views that are beyond what general American public would support.

UN CONSPIRATIONNISTE NOMMÉ TRUMP (…)Soyons précis : Alex Jones n’est pas la source unique de Donald Trump. Quand Trump, quelques jours plus tard, propose d’interdire aux musulmans d’entrer aux Etats-Unis, il s’appuie sur un sondage. D’après ce sondage, effectué auprès de 600 musulmans vivant aux Etats-Unis, 25 % d’entre eux soutiennent le principe du jihad sur le sol américain, tandis que 51 % estiment que oui, les musulmans d’Amérique devraient avoir le choix d’être gouvernés par la charia. Ce sondage a été publié par un think tank fondé par un ancien ministre de Reagan, Frank Gaffney, et à l’origine d’un certain nombre de grandes affirmations conspirationnistes. La rumeur increvable selon laquelle Barack Obama serait secrètement musulman, c’est lui. L’autre rumeur selon laquelle une juge de la Cour suprême voudrait imposer la charia aux Américains ? Encore lui. Plus récemment, l’adolescent de 14 ans expulsé quelques jours de son lycée, car accusé d’avoir fabriqué une bombe ? Toujours lui (l’adolescent, qui fabriquait en fait une horloge, a reçu depuis le soutien de Barack Obama et de Mark Zuckerberg).

Media Explain That Frank Gaffney, Whose Poll Inspired Trump’s Proposed Ban On Muslim Immigration, Is A « Notorious Islamophobe »

Meet Frank Gaffney, the anti-Muslim gadfly who produced Donald Trump’s anti-Muslim poll

Donald Trump’s Muslim comments: Who’s behind the ‘bogus’ stats he’s cited? Frank Gaffney Jr. is a once-respectable Washington insider who is now “one of America’s most notorious Islamophobes,” according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. The non-profit plans to include Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy on its 2015 hate list when it is released in February.  When announcing his prejudiced proposal to ban Muslims from entering the U.S., Trump cited stats pulled from a debunked survey by Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy.

Meet Frank Gaffney, Donald Trump’s Expert on Muslim Conspiracies On Monday evening, presidential candidate Donald Trump announced that Muslims, including US citizens, should be banned from entering the United States. In his statement he linked to a poll conducted by the Center for Security Policy (CSP), an organization founded by the notorious anti-Muslim extremist Frank Gaffney. (…)Gaffney’s campaign against Syrian refugees has prompted him to seek out more radical allies. In September, Gaffney invited white nationalist Jared Taylor on his radio show to discuss the Syrian refugee crisis. Taylor is one of the most outspoken white nationalists in America today. Following the murder of nine African Americans in Charleston this summer, Taylor was appointed spokesperson by the white nationalist group Council of Conservative Citizens, the group alleged perpetrator Dylann Roof cited as his gateway into white nationalism. In 2005 for example, after Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, Taylor wrote, “When blacks are left entirely to their own devices, Western Civilization—any kind of civilization—disappears.” During the interview, Gaffney called Taylor’s vile American Renaissance website « wonderful, » and asked, “Is it the death of Europe what we’re seeing at the moment in terms of this migration, this invasion?” After a number of watchdog groups including the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote about Taylor’s appearance on Secure Freedom Radio, Gaffney backtracked, and attempted to bury the evidence by scrubbing the Taylor interview from his site and claimed he was “unfamiliar” with Taylor’s views before inviting him on.

Both Trump and Cruz Have Surrounded Themselves With Islamophobic Advisers Advisers include a man who openly said that Islam should not be protected under the first amendment.

Meet Donald Trump’s Islamophobia Expert [Frank Gaffney]  When Trump needed the numbers to back his much-lambasted anti-Muslim immigration proposal, he knew who to turn to: long-time conservative activist Frank Gaffney. In his announcement of his proposal to temporarily end all immigration by Muslims to the United States, Trump cited the work of the Center for Security Policy (CSP), a Washington, D.C.-based think tank headed up by former Reagan-administration defense official Frank Gaffney, which promotes hawkish foreign policy views, particularly in the Middle East; advocates for higher levels of defense spending; and warns about the infiltration of the U.S. government by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Donald Trump’s call to ban Muslim immigrants is based on a very shoddy poll

Trump Cites Unscientific Poll From Fringe Group [Gaffney] in Call for Banning Muslim Immigration

Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll [by Gaffney]

Islamophobic Organization’s Misleading Poll Used To Justify Donald Trump’s Call To Ban Muslims From America

Trump Cited A Poll From An Anti-Muslim Outfit [Gaffney] In His Call To Ban Muslims  GOP Presidential candidate Donald Trump cited an unreliable poll from a famously anti-Muslim think tank in his call to ban Muslims entry into the United States.

Donald Trump’s Anti-Muslim Justification Relies On Heavily Criticized Poll From Conspiracy Theorist [Gaffney] Group

VIDEO – Insane Conspiracy Theories Ted Cruz Actually Believes (i.e. the Soros-marxist conspiracy)

Center for American Progress: Chapter 2 – The Islamophobia misinformation experts Anders Breivik, the confessed Norway terrorist, cited Gaffney and CSP seven times in his manifesto.  Several examples of how Gaffney and the Center for Security Policy develop and deploy their incorrect academic research using the foundation’s money to spread an increasingly shrill message of hate and fear prove these points.  […]  [H]e is one of the lead engineers of the « anti-Sharia » movement sweeping the nation. His think tank released the 2010 report « Shariah: The Threat to America, » which reframed Sharia, or Islamic religious law followed by any practicing Muslim, as a « totalitarian ideology » and « legal-political-military doctrine. »

Gaffney Wonders If Norwegian Terrorist’s Manifesto Was A ‘False Flag Operation’ Intended To ‘Suppress Criticism’ Of Sharia

Neocon WWIII Scenario? Frank Gaffney: Rise of Sharia Rule in the Arab World Will Bring War

Wash. Times’ Gaffney: For Muslims, “The Preferred Way Of Achieving [Shariah Law] Is … Through Violence”

Gaffney: The Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the Obama administration

Gaffney: Obama « has exhibited a sympathy for the agenda » of the Muslim Brotherhood

Gaffney Still Fearmongering About Sharia In U.S.

Frank Gaffney Says Pres. Bachmann Could Uproot Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrators In U.S.

Conservative Board Unanimously Condemned Gaffney’s ‘Reprehensible’ And ‘Unfounded’ Attacks

GOP Candidates’ Favorite Anti-Muslim Activist Interviews Prominent White Nationalist

CAIR Islamophobia Watch: Islamophobe Frank Gaffney Hosts ‘White Supremacist’ Jared Taylor

Anti-Muslim Activist Frank Gaffney Interviews White Nationalist Jared Taylor on His Radio Show Sharing the Stage: Islamophobe Frank Gaffney invites white nationalist Jared Taylor to appear on his radio show.

Don’t Be Fooled By Frank Gaffney’s Backtracking About White Nationalist Jared Taylor

Frank Gaffney regrets speaking to white nationalist Jared Taylor. Why you shouldn’t believe him.

« Wonderful »: Wash. Times Columnist Frank Gaffney Lavishes Praise On White Nationalist Leader

Jared Taylor est cité de nombreuses fois dans le manifeste du tireur fou de Charleston (été 2015), comme source d’inspiration de son manifeste.

Cruz adviser claims ‘Islamic supremacism’ being pushed in Congress Officials within Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-Texas) office refused to meet with Muslim advocates on Monday, they claimed, after a controversial adviser for Cruz’s presidential campaign accused the advocates of pushing “the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood.” In a contributor’s op-ed published on The Hill’s website, Frank Gaffney warned that “organizations associated with Islamic supremacism” are seeking to “dominate” an advocacy day on Monday on Capitol Hill.

Conspiracy Theory: Ted Cruz’s Batshit Advisers Edition While some lawmakers chose to meet with their Muslim constituents today, Ted Cruz did not. Actually, one of Ted Cruz’s top advisers wrote today that the US Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) is actually a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood which seeks « Islamic supremacism. »

Ted Cruz and his conspiracy theorists The candidate’s foreign policy advisers think sharia may soon conquer America Donald. Trump’s call to bar Muslims from entering the country got all the attention, but an even uglier thread of anti-Muslim bigotry exists inside Ted Cruz’s campaign. The team of foreign policy advisers he announced on March 17 — “trusted friends who will form a core of our broader national security team,” Mr. Cruz called them — includes some of the most fanatical anti-Muslim activists in America. The list got some attention when it was unveiled because of its leader, Frank Gaffney, a prominent anti-Muslim writer. But the campaign has enlisted a deeper bench of aides with records that are, if anything, even more shocking.

ANTI-ISLAM WEBSITE BARENAKEDISLAM: « I am a Trump supporter but super kudos to Ted Cruz for this » Yesterday was Muslim Brotherhood Day on Capitol Hill in Washington DC where Muslims invaded the Capitol and annoyed as many Congresspeople and Senators as they could. Senator Ted Cruz turned them away.

RWW: Ted Cruz’s Staff Reportedly Refuses To Meet With Delegation Of Texas Muslims Ted Cruz’s national security adviser Frank Gaffney, a notorious anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist, has been urging members of Congress to refuse to meet with participants in today’s National Muslim Advocates Day, where Muslim-Americans around the country went to the U.S. Capitol to meet with their elected representatives and their staff. Gaffney claimed that the lobby day, a tactic used by various groups of all political stripes, was actually an effort to impose “Sharia inside our country.”

Ted Cruz’s Senate Office Turns Muslim Constituents Away  Monday was national Muslim Advocacy Day on Capitol Hill, but in Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s office, it was more like Ignore Your Muslim Constituents Day. A total of 215 congressional offices opened their doors to Muslims who traveled to Washington to meet with their representatives, members of the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations said at a Monday evening press conference. But 14 Texas constituents were unable to get a meeting with anyone from Cruz’s office, despite repeated attempts over a period of weeks.

Creep-Cruz Adviser, ‘Israeli-Firster’ Boykin, Falls For Internet Hoaxes About ‘Sharia Courts’ In Texas And Michigan

Ted Cruz: de bête noire… à sauveur? (Pour que les gros médias commandités et contrôlés se mettent à défendre le BUSHISTE sioniste débile Ted Cruz et à le mettre sur un piédestal, il faut vraiment qu’ils aient grand peur de Trump!)

Obama says Republican politics created Trump’s candidacy GOP officials face the fact that highly unpopular Cruz may be sole chance to stop billionaire’s march to nomination.

Donald Trump May Be Crazy, But Ted Cruz Is Far More Dangerous Except for the doomed campaign of John Kasich, the GOP campaign has come down to Donald Trump and Ted Cruz. Donald Trump has grabbed the lion’s share of the public’s attention, but Ted Cruz has put together a very strong grassroots network of right-wing activists and religious fanatics that have helped him win in states where fundamentalist Christians have greater control over the Republican Party.

Cruz-backer Bickle pledges commitment to Israel, Jews, explains his Hitler comments In Op-Ed on The Times of Israel, evangelical leader apologizes if he has ‘communicated beliefs poorly’.

Why Ted Cruz’s Preacher Sidekick Is No Friend of the Jews — or Israel

Most Jews Will Refuse Cruz, Despite His Warm Embrace of Israel The Texas senator’s constituency is limited to single-issue Israel voters and those Orthodox Jews who share his contempt for ‘New York values.’

Jewish voters keen on Clinton, Sanders, widely dislike Trump, Cruz

Poll: American Jews have unfavorable view of Trump and Cruz

‘Christian’ Ted Cruz celebrates Resurrection of Christ by calling for killing of innocent civilians

Is Ted Cruz a Dominionist?

Cruz’s father, a pastor, highlights Israel support Appuyer Israel c’est vouloir mourir pour Israel.

Cruz Father: Ted Cruz “Anointed” To “Bring the Spoils of War to the Priests”

Ted Cruz Has Been ‘Called And Anointed’ By God To Be The Next President

Meet the Evangelical Christians Behind Ted Cruz — They’re Super Jewy

Ted Cruz, A Bush By Another Name

Jewish leaders back Ted Cruz, say he’s the best hope for survival of Israel, West in face of ‘existential’ threat posed by Iran

Duke Exposes the Scumbay Slimeball Ted Cruz as a total ZioShill !

Ted Cruz, l’ami « inconditionnel » d’Israël

VIDEO – Sen. Ted Cruz Booed Off Stage Re: his position on the special US-Israel relationship.

Ted Cruz’s Palestine debacle: Let’s outsource American peace policy to Israel

Cruz takes aim at Trump and Obama in AIPAC speech

Cruz jabs Trump for being ‘neutral’ on Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Cruz: Together We Will Stand With Israel and Defeat Radical Islamic Terror

Republic presidential candidate Ted Cruz begins AIPAC speech with Purim analogy Presidential candidate Ted Cruz began his address to the AIPAC conference in Washington D.C. with a timely Purim analogy, with the Jewish festival celebrating the Jews’ escape from the jaws of extinction centuries ago set to begin on Wednesday evening. « When we come together, we can defeat tyrants. Today we are reliving history, » Cruz said, linking America’s fate to Israel’s.

Powerful Rival Factions of Top Republican Donors Get Behind both Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz

Hinting at endorsement, Adelsons give Cruz maximum donation Power couple contributes $2,700 to Texas senator’s campaign, in possible indication of future backing.

Sheldon and Miriam Adelson Each Give Maximum $2,700 to Ted Cruz Campaign The Adelsons’ donations, the maximum allowed for direct donations to a campaign, were reported in various media on Sunday after they were revealed in Federal Election Commission filings.

Insane Islamophobic Ted Cruz Mailer Imagines ISIS Hijacking Washington The mailer declares that the United States is « under assault » from Islamic fanatics.

Primaire américaine : la petite phrase du jour de Ted Cruz sur Donald Trump

When Ted Cruz slams Trump for ‘chutzpah,’ should Jews be offended or honored?

Geraldo raps Ted Cruz’s ‘New York values’ comments as ‘anti-Semitic’

Top US news contributors call Cruz’s ‘New York values’ comment anti-Semitic

Ted Cruz says Donald Trump has ‘NY values,’ the jews cry anti-Semitism

Was Ted Cruz Talking About the Jews?

Ted Cruz Hates “New York Values” But Sure Loves New York Money

Is Ted Cruz an anti-Semite? No, But… Is Ted Cruz an anti-Semite? Of course not. Many of his top aides and supporters are Jews. Is Ted Cruz exploiting hostility toward Jews in his presidential campaign? It’s complicated. He’s exploiting hostility toward liberals. And in American political culture, being liberal and being Jewish are so intertwined that the line between attacking the former and attacking the latter can blur.

Phil Giraldi–Rating the Candidates Who wants war?

Trump Tells the Truth About Interventionism Opposes endless war supported by Clinton, Rubio and Cruz

Jimmy Carter: I’d pick Trump over Cruz

Ron Paul: Cruz Not a Libertarian, He’s Owned by Goldman Sachs

Jeb Bush endorses Cruz for the GOP presidential nomination.

VIDEO – RWW News: Glenn Beck Says Nobody Can Understand The Moses-Like Burden That Ted Cruz Carries

VIDEO – Glenn Beck Thinks Ted Cruz Is Like Moses

Glenn Beck Endorses Ted Cruz For President

Glenn Beck calls for Cruz-Rubio ticket to take on Trump

Sarah Palin is Stupid and Dangerous; Ted Cruz is Just Dangerous

 

 

 

Sur ce blog:

 

 

Posted in Non classé | Commentaires fermés sur Découvrez le conspirationniste anti-islam débile choisi pour être conseiller en affaires étrangères du candidat présidentiel bushiste Ted Cruz. Il est l’inspirateur du projet de Trump de déporter les musulmans: non, ce n’est pas Boris Le Lay, c’est le néocon membre du PNAC Frank J. Gaffney Jr. L’équipe Cruz rassemble aussi d’autres néoconservateurs comme Elliott Abrams et Michael Ledeen. Cruz croit aussi en plusieurs autres théories du complot, particulièrement celles impliquant George Soros.

Le grand rabbin Yitzhak Yossef, fils du célèbre défunt grand rabbin Ovadia Yossef, rappelle qu’en principe les non-juifs ne devraient pas pouvoir vivre en Israël, et cautionne l’assassinat préventif des « terroristes », les controversés assassinats extrajudiciaires d’Israël dénoncés même par les États-Unis. Loin d’être une anomalie, ce type de discours témoigne–au même titre que la ségrégation dans les maternités–du racisme de l’ensemble de la société israélienne.

 À Gauche, le grand rabbin ashkénaze d’Israël David Lau, à droite le grand rabbin sépharade d’Israël Yitzhak Yossef.

 

Grand rabbin : les non juifs ne devraient pas avoir le droit de vivre en Israël Le rabbin Yitzhak Yosef dit que les non juifs qui n’appliquent pas les sept lois de Noé devraient être “expulsés en Arabie saoudite”

Chief rabbi: Non-Jews shouldn’t be allowed to live in Israel Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef says gentiles who don’t take on seven Noahide Laws should be ‘expelled to Saudi Arabia’

Non-Jews are forbidden by Jewish law to live in Israel, chief rabbi says

Sephardi Chief Rabbi Says non-Jews Forbidden From Living in the Land of Israel Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef argues that Jewish law prohibits non-Jews from living in Israel unless they have accepted Noachide laws, adding that some non-Jews live in Israel to serve the Jewish population.

Le Grand rabbin séfarade d’Israël précise ses propos controversés contre les non-Juifs Il rappelle simplement que l’État juif veut pas juste dire que les juifs dominent mais que c’est l’État des juifs, l’État des juifs vivant séparés des autres peuples. Donc en principe il devrait y avoir que des juifs. Mais bien sûr il y a les réalités: la job sale doit être faite par quelqu’un, ce qui permet des entorses au principe de stricte judéité d’Israel… Il est en train de dire que l’État juif ne doit pas considérer les non-juifs comme des Israéliens à part entière.

Le Grand Rabbin d’Israël revient sur ses déclarations messianiques’ Le Grand Rabbin sépharade d’Israël, Yitzhak Yosef, est revenu sur sa déclaration au sujet des personnes qui ne respectent pas les lois Noahides qui ne devaient pas vivre en Israël, en affirmant que son commentaire était « théorique ».

5 shocking quotes by Israel’s chief rabbis

Chief Rabbi Yosef: If a terrorist is trying to commit an attack it is a mitzvah to kill him

 

 

 

 

 

VIDEO –Jews Rally For Israeli Soldier Who Executed Palestinian

Right-wingers rally for release of IDF soldier outside military court

Israelis rally around soldier filmed executing injured Palestinian on video

35,000 Israelis Sign Petition to Award Medal to IDF Soldier Who Murdered Wounded Palestinian

Groundswell of Support Builds in Israel for Soldier Who Killed Helpless Palestinian

Plusieurs milliers de manifestants demandent la libération du soldat Elor place Rabin à Tel Aviv

Thousands at Tel Aviv rally call for release of IDF soldier charged in Hebron shooting

“Death to the Arabs” rally draws thousands in Tel Aviv

« Mort aux Arabes » scandé à Tel Aviv en faveur du Franco-Israélien Elor Azria : qu’en pense Manuel Valls?

Israeli Soldier Filmed Executing Wounded Palestinian Man

The ‘Traitors’ Who Filmed Our ‘Heroic’ Soldier Executing a Wounded Palestinian Terrorist According to Israel’s right wing, the anti-occupation NGO B’Tselem is the guilty party.

 

Hebron settlers file complaint against Palestinian who filmed execution

Jewish terrorists threaten life of Palestinian who shot video of execution

Israeli Army Raids Home of Man Who Filmed Hebron Execution

Colonies israéliennes illégales: financées par Goldman Sachs!
Why Is Goldman Sachs Funding the Violent, Racist Jewish Settlers of Hebron? Even though the firm’s Charitable Gift Fund consistently gives to right-wing Israeli groups or their U.S. fronts, the Hebron aid is a standout, as the showcase city for the worst of the Israeli occupation.

 

New video shows soldier shaking hands with far-right activist after shooting subdued Palestinian attacker

After killing stabber, soldier shook hands with far-right activist

‘Hebron soldier acted according to wartime protocol’

 

On Hebron Shooting, Netanyahu and Bennett Follow Enraged Public All the Way to the Right Cabinet members seem to be riding the tiger of public opinion — which, at least on social media, is vehemently and crudely backing the soldier who shot and killed a wounded Palestinian assailant — and are afraid to anger it.

Ya’alon to Bennett: Pleasing an Extreme, Violent Minority Could Lead Israel to Anarchy Israeli defense minister slams lawmakers who he says are waging a campaign of incitement against the IDF.

Liberman slams Netanyahu for ‘field trial’ of IDF soldier who killed wounded terrorist

Netanyahu defends soldier caught on tape executing wounded Palestinian: ‘IDF is the most moral army in the world’

Israel’s Leaders Are Appeasing Extremists at the Cost of Diaspora Jewish Support Two diametrically opposed world views are clashing in Israel – and at stake is whether Israel will continue to be a unifying symbol for Jews worldwide.

How Israel’s High Court Implicitly Aids the Soldier Accused of Hebron Manslaughter Why be shocked at the public’s support for arrested IDF soldier when the country’s justices have already provided him with a line of defense?

Don’t Believe the Polls: Israelis Don’t Really Think Killing Neutralized Terrorists Is Right The minute Ya’alon and Eisenkot came out at the head of those convicting the soldier in the Hebron incident, they elevated the seriousness of the affair completely out of proportion.

Controversy Surrounding Hebron Shooting Is Hypocrisy Indeed Is this the first time a soldier has executed a Palestinian in cold blood, or did the fact that it was caught on film make the difference?

Incitement against Ya’alon Likud activists angry the defense minister won’t back soldier who shot wounded terrorist post inciting photos, calling to end his career.

Is Ya’alon the target of political assassination? Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon has found himself in the right flank crosshairs of the Likud after taking a moral stand on the Hebron shooting.

Under fire from extremists, Ya’alon vows: I won’t yield in fight for Israel

 

Netanyahu faces criticism over shooting of Palestinian

Leahy Asks Kerry to Investigate if U.S. Aid Contributes to Israeli ‘Human Rights Violations’ Senior Senator, along with 10 Democratic Congressmen, ask the State Department to investigate alleged ‘gross violations of human rights,’ namely Israel’s alleged extrajudicial killings of Palestinians.

US : Un sénateur réclame une enquête sur les présumées ‘exécutions extra-judiciaires’

US senator asks for probe into possible Israeli ‘extrajudicial killings’

Netanyahou s’en prend aux sénateurs américains qui appellent à une enquête sur les assassinats de Palestiniens

Netanyahu pans US senator’s call to probe ‘extrajudicial killings’

Netanyahu spars with US senator over Israeli army’s rights record

Netanyahu to Kerry: Declare Israel doesn’t commit extrajudicial killings

Bibi Orders Kerry To Declare Israel Doesn’t Commit Extrajudicial Killings

Here’s what happens when a US senator calls for Israel to be held accountable for atrocities

US accuses Israel of using excessive force against Palestinians Annual US report on human rights says nearly half of Palestinians killed by Israel were not carrying out attacks, and many times did not pose a threat to life.

IDF Soldier claims he was stabbed; police skeptical

Le jeune soldat israélien a été acquitté du meurtre du terroriste arabe palestinien

Execution of Young Palestinian Exposes Israel’s Military Culture

The IDF: The Most Semi-moral Army in the World If half of the Israeli population is racist, violent, bloodthirsty, aggressive and ultra-nationalist, does that mean that half of the Israeli army is, too?

Israeli minister proposes putting pre-teens in jail

Israeli court refuses to release 11-year-old Palestinian prisoner

Plus de 400 enfants palestiniens détenus dans les prisons israéliennes

Why Did Israeli Police Ambush and Shoot at Palestinian Kids? The Border Police shot a Palestinian boy in the leg during a protest. The army says he was using a slingshot; his father thinks he was deliberately targeted.

Israel Approves New Law To Punish Palestinian ‘Terrorists’ Under Age Of 14

Israel Minister Calls for “Civil Targeted Killings” of BDS Leaders

Cisjordanie : les bulldozers israéliens ne chôment pas Les autorités israéliennes ont entrepris de démolir toutes les constructions palestiniennes en zone C de Cisjordanie, pourtant financées par les Européens.

Netanyahu Claimed That New Building Plans Wouldn’t Expand Israeli Settlements; Aerial Photos Prove Otherwise Netanyahu’s office claimed that plans approved this week were for renovation of existing buildings, but Haaretz checked – and it turns out the prime minister got it wrong.

Netanyahu, Ya’alon Approved Over 200 New Housing Units in Settlements, Outposts Palestinian chief negotiator says the move, which follows more than a year-long low-key construction freeze, highlights need for UN Security Council resolution condemning settlements.

The defense of the minister of defense With incitement against Moshe Ya’alon only on the rise, the Shin Bet is taking no chances; the volatile discourse surrounding Ya’alon has elements of political motivation.

C’est pas les musulmans qui menacent ouvertement le ministre israélien de la défense!

Israel Should Let Conscientious Objector Serve Both Society and Her Conscience The army fears people like Tair Kaminer – but this fear is unjustified and even exposes the IDF’s hypocritical behavior: Most Israeli youths want to be drafted. Kaminer’s individual punishment is unfair.

Israeli medics are leaving wounded Palestinians to bleed to death

Israeli Doctors Assist In Torture Of Palestinian Prisoners

Israeli High Court Rejects Haaretz Petition to Interview Jailed Palestinian Leader Marwan Barghouti Senior Fatah official is serving five life sentences for murdering Israelis; court rejects petition without hearing parties’ arguments.

Avi Mograbi : “Israël est un pays raciste où la question de la pureté de la race est sans cesse posée”

Survey: 85% of Israeli Arabs fear rising levels of racism

Hating Arabs is not racism. It’s values! Haïr les Arabes ce n’est pas de la haine, c’est avoir des valeurs!

‘Another Terrorist Is Born’: The Long-standing Practice of Racism and Segregation in Israeli Maternity Wards While no hospital in Israel has a policy of separating Jewish and Arab patients, testimonies show segregation is implemented in wards with doctors and management turning a blind eye.

With Few Tweets, Israeli Lawmaker Reveals Extent of Settlers’ Racism The Habayit Hayehudi MK is just another weird, racist clown who loses control and spews nonsense in abundance, without even being aware of the damage he is causing.

Lawmaker backs segregated Jewish, Arab maternity wards Bezalel Smotrich says he doesn’t ‘enjoy’ Arabs’ company because they’re ‘enemies’; Bennett: They’re ‘created in God’s image’

Israeli Lawmaker: My Wife Wouldn’t Want to Give Birth Next to an Arab Woman

MK: Segregation in hospitals Bayit Yehudi MK Betzalel Smotrich calls for segregating maternity wards and is immediately condemned for racist remarks.

Un député prône la séparation des Arabes et des Juifs dans les maternités Bezalel Smotrich a déclaré qu’il n’ « appréciait » pas la compagnie des Arabes parce qu’ils sont des « ennemis »

La ségrégation, pratique courante dans les hôpitaux israélien

With Few Tweets, Israeli Lawmaker Reveals Extent of Settlers’ Racism The Habayit Hayehudi MK is just another weird, racist clown who loses control and spews nonsense in abundance, without even being aware of the damage he is causing.

Lawmaker backs segregated Jewish, Arab maternity wards Bezalel Smotrich says he doesn’t ‘enjoy’ Arabs’ company because they’re ‘enemies’; Bennett: They’re ‘created in God’s image’

Israeli Lawmaker: My Wife Wouldn’t Want to Give Birth Next to an Arab Woman

MK: Segregation in hospitals Bayit Yehudi MK Betzalel Smotrich calls for segregating maternity wards and is immediately condemned for racist remarks.

Un député prône la séparation des Arabes et des Juifs dans les maternités Bezalel Smotrich a déclaré qu’il n’ « appréciait » pas la compagnie des Arabes parce qu’ils sont des « ennemis »

Refusing to Give Birth to Racism: No to Arab-Jewish Segregation in Israel’s Maternity Wards  It’s shameful that an Israeli lawmaker brought the ugliness of racism, all the talk of ‘us’ and ‘them’, back into the one place meant to be the safest space, a space of solidarity, for all.

Polls show most Israelis oppose segregating Jews and Arabs in hospitals Les colons font-ils partie du sondage?

Israël commence à ériger son mur de séparation dans un secteur chrétien

 

Israel was soft on Jewish terrorists in the 1980’s, will history repeat?

Jewish extremist remains in jail as son is circumcised Rejecting offer to conduct ceremony in prison, family holds brit in Jerusalem after courts rule that Meir Eittinger is public threat.

Meir Ettinger will not be released for his son’s circumcision The radical right-wing activist’s family are planning to appeal the decision at the High Court of Justice; his wife refuses to have the ceremony in jail.

Israel’s Justice Minister Must Stop Attempts to Fundamentally Distort Israeli Democracy

Controversial Israeli Arab Lawmakers Know Exactly What They Are Doing Balad MKs have never disguised their aspiration to change Israel’s nature as the nation-state of the Jewish people. What’s becoming clear is the strategy they have chosen for this purpose.

Israel is reborn into a monster – and no one is going stop it By Gideon Levy (Ha’aretz)

The Dangerous Political Battle for Israel’s Extreme Right Netanyahu, Bennett and Lieberman are trying to draw a small but dangerous group to their respective sides, allowing an extremist, irresponsible minority to effectively control the Israeli agenda.

Unsafe Places: The Racism Behind Identity Politics Misguided attempts to combat racism are simply conservative politics in disguise.

Analysis: Unyielding religious establishment threatens to be its own undoing

 

France, Spain and Sweden back decision; US, UK, Germany among 6 countries opposed. PM slams UNESCO resolution ignoring Jewish connection to Temple Mount Netanyahu accuses body of ‘rewriting a basic part of human history’; decision says Israel ‘planting Jewish fake graves’ on site

Aide ou ingérence politique ? Israël et l’UE s’affrontent au sujet de bâtiments palestiniens L’Europe dit qu’elle finance les constructions dans la zone C de Cisjordanie pour compenser les négligences d’Israël ; Jérusalem soutient que ces structures sont illégales

Israel’s ‘Bible Trail’: Demolishing Palestinian homes to make national parks #Occupation Thousands in East Jerusalem caught in planning trap, with critics accusing officials of using heritage and tourism to pave way for settler land grab

What Do Israel and Sweden Have in Common? Almost nothing, except that of late we’ve become a normal country without any existential crises to cope with.

VIDEO – La vérité sort de la bouche de Netanyahou (Extrait du reportage de Paul Moreira pour Spécial Investigation: « Voyage dans une guerre invisible »)

Palestine: Israeli Police Abusing Detained Children With Arrests Spiking, Growing Concern

Israeli Army Giving Its Soldiers a License to Kill Shoot to kill. Not to apprehend, not to wound. To kill. This is the ethos of the IDF 2016.

To Those Racists in Israel Who Are Proud of a Murderer Which leader is worthy of admiration: Ahmad Tibi or Rehavam Ze’evi?

The Judeo-Nazis in the Israel’s Legislature Racism is always offensive and it is important to fight it. But even racism has its shades, too. Knesset Member Bezalel Smotrich’s vocabulary is that of the master race.

How and Why Radical Right-winger Bentzi Gopstein Was Acquitted The judge’s faith in Gopstein is interwoven in a process of acceptance, separation and differentiation.

Radical right-winger acquitted of assault of radical left-winger Despite being documented on video attacking Ezra Nawi, judge clears Benzi Gopstein of charges, accepting his claim that he thought Nawi and other left-wing activists, who were climbing the fence into a Jewish neighborhood in Hebron, were Arabs seeking to harm Jews.

Does Yitzhak Rabin’s Party Still Believe the Occupation Is the Israel’s Biggest Problem? The absolute condemnation by the Labor Party of its own MK for his comments on the Hebron shooting raises difficult questions.

The Israeli Right’s Monstrous Naiveté on the Occupation Dani Dayan, who was recently appointed Israel’s consul general in New York, believes the Palestinians have accepted the presence of settlers throughout the West Bank.

What Happened at This Once-idyllic West Bank Spot Embodies the Israeli Occupation’s Evils As of this week, Israeli authorities have demolished structures in a Palestinian hamlet near the Jordan Rift Valley four times this year. An improvised school and a small swimming pool also fell victim to the bulldozers.

On racism and criticism in Israel Op-ed: For Bezalel Smotrich’s information – there’s a higher chance the Arab baby born on the same day as your son will be a life-saving doctor than a life-taking terrorist.

There’s No Place in Israel for an Honest Arab Zionist Union’s Zouheir Bahloul dared to say the truth – that anyone who tries to stab a soldier at a damned Hebron roadblock isn’t a terrorist – and started an almost fascist stampede.

Field Trips, Workshops and Ceremonies: How Settlers’ Agenda Found Its Way Into Israeli Schools Analysis of four programs operated by the Education Ministry shows a common method and goals – omitting or distorting historical facts, blurring disputes and continuous emphasis on one identity, closed off to others.

Unitarian Universalists divest from companies profiting from Israel’s occupation On attend toujours quelque prise de position semblable du côté de l’Église catho… On risque d’attendre longtemps. Les Églises unies et presbytériennes ne sont pas aussi immobiles et crasses que l’Église catho et les évangélistes à ce sujet là. Ily a de moins en moins de différence entre les évangélistes sionistes et l’Église catho. C’était pas aussi pire sous Benoit XVI…

As Expected, Zionist Union Acted Quickly to Curb Israeli Arab Lawmaker’s Linguistic Larceny MK Zouheir Bahloul’s attempt to distinguish between a terrorist and a freedom fighter constitutes an existential threat to Zionism.

 

Sur ce blog:

 

 

Posted in Non classé | Commentaires fermés sur Le grand rabbin Yitzhak Yossef, fils du célèbre défunt grand rabbin Ovadia Yossef, rappelle qu’en principe les non-juifs ne devraient pas pouvoir vivre en Israël, et cautionne l’assassinat préventif des « terroristes », les controversés assassinats extrajudiciaires d’Israël dénoncés même par les États-Unis. Loin d’être une anomalie, ce type de discours témoigne–au même titre que la ségrégation dans les maternités–du racisme de l’ensemble de la société israélienne.