« Afghan News | Main | National Journal Blog - 24 May 2010 »

24 May 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Colonel, Phil,

The Israeli government is a dangerous and wacky lot. One of their 'think tanks' is all up in their underwear at the 'delegitimizers' of the Israeli government. Seems that the Israeli think tank calls for 'sabotaging' those who oppose the Israeli government, but what is interesting is they admit that the 'delegitimizers' do have a point.

Reut Institute's whinings - see:




We the U.S. are getting hosed big time with the "Iron Dome' defense for Israel to the tune of 'at least' (on the surface) $205 Million U.S. taxpayer dollars. While the Israelis will make out (once again) like fat cats at the expense of the working American taxpayers, they will most probably steal/espionage their way regarding the Classified portions of the U.S. 'Iron Dome' defense net. And then those who oppose U.S. operations will have their espionage agents steal and/or buy that U.S. classified tech from the Israeli scuz-buckets. Which then we all know will put in jeopardy U.S. Military and Intelligence personnel at some future point. Arghh.

Here's the text of the U.S. - Israel Missile Defense Cooperation And Support Act

[Chairman of the US House Foreign Affairs Committee Howard L. Berman, statement on the passage of the US-Israel Rocket and Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act, 20 May 2010] [2]


Full text of the United States-Israel Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act:



H. R. 5327

To authorize assistance to Israel for the Iron Dome anti-missile defense system.


MAY 18, 2010

Mr. NYE (for himself, Ms. GIFFORDS, Mr. MCMAHON, Mr. HIMES, Mr. ACK­ERMAN, Mr. BERMAN, Ms. KOSMAS, Mr. BISHOP of New York, Mr. TURNER, and Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs


To authorize assistance to Israel for the Iron Dome anti-missile defense system.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This Act may be cited as the ‘‘United States-Israel Missile Defense Cooperation and Support Act’’.


Congress finds the following:

(1) The State of Israel is under grave threat and frequent attack from missiles fired indiscriminately by Hamas terrorists on its southern border and Hezbollah terrorists on its northern border.

(2) The Jewish State of Israel, as a close ally of the United States, requires and deserves all nec­essary assistance to defend itself from such indis­criminate attacks on its citizens.

(3) The United States remains committed to Israel’s qualitative military edge, including its ad-vantage over non-state actors such as Hezbollah and Hamas, which boast increasingly sophisticated and powerful weapons as a result of support from Iran and other state actors.

(4) Regional stability and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians requires that Israel can en-sure the safety of its population against missile and other threats.

(5) The United States can help to advance the cause of peace by supporting Israel’s ability to de-fend itself against missile and other threats.

(6) The State of Israel announced in January 2010 the successful testing of its Iron Dome anti-missile defense system which is capable of inter­cepting short-range missiles launched by militants in Gaza and South Lebanon.

(7) In the face of threats from its neighbors and non-state actors, Israel historically has requested it be given the means to defend itself, by itself.

(8) President Barack Obama has stated: ‘‘Our commitment to Israel’s security is unshakable.’’.

(9) Vice President Joe Biden has stated: ‘‘From my experience, the one precondition for progress is that the rest of the world knows this — there is no space between the U.S. and Israel when it comes to security—none.’’.

(10) Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates has stated: ‘‘President Obama has affirmed, the United States commitment to Israel’s security is unshakable, and our defense relationship is stronger than ever, to the mutual benefit of both nations.’’.

(11) President Obama recently requested funds to help the State of Israel procure and maintain Iron Dome missile batteries.


The President, acting through the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State, is authorized to provide assistance to the Government of Israel for the procurement, maintenance, and sustainment of the Iron Dome anti-missile defense system for purposes of intercepting short-range missiles launched against Israel.

Why can't the Israelis fund their own defense shield? They have Madoff's stolen Billions parked in their Israeli Banks! Scuz-buckets!!!


Ooh, that's it: The Israeli leadership is mirror imaging!

If the Iranians are any bit as clever as the Israelis are are, they will do exactly as they did - they will have a secret nuclear enrichment and weapons program, they will steal and lie and cheat to get and maintain it, they will deny having it, they will proliferate their weapons to sympathetic regimes if the price is right and flout the NPT, conduct diplomacy in name only etc. pp.

In brief: Iran is a menace because Israel was there first. Or so.

Yes, that story is quite a whopper.

R Whitman

a good follow up story


William R. Cumming

Actually what Israel was most worried about and the quo in the quid pro quo with S.Africa was 155mm shells and ability to surge supply when needed by Israel. This and 20mm ammunition are often in short supply when actual fighting begins. Even for US Armed Forces but because of availabilty issues becomes a highly valuable pressure point for those trying to modify Israeli behavior during actual conduct of its warfighting. A chart of world wide production and surge capacity of these munitions should be a basic tool in the kit of all INTEL officials.

Seems that the Israeli think tank calls for 'sabotaging' those who oppose the Israeli government...

Do they use the English word sabotage?

I assume (based on zero knowledge) much of this sort of incendiary crap is provocation. They NEED antisemitism.


1975. A full 35 years later the President of the United States still dances to the tune, and avoids "hypothetical questions".

Beyond strange. Beyond embarrassing. What's the word.. pathological?

But even that doesn't seem to capture it. I think the inability to speak openly of Israeli nuclear weapons and their numerous and growing delivery systems is an indication of self-destructiveness.

Roy G

Militant Zionism and Apartheid South Africa; birds of a feather...

Interestingly, but not surprising, a google search returns far more links to Peres' denial than to the actual story. Meanwhile, I found the personal letter from Peres to his SA counterpart to be quite rich in retrospective irony:

Dear Dr. Rhoodie,

Allow me to thank you most sincerely for the great efforts you employed to ensure the success of the meetings which took place in Pretoria on the 13th an 14th of this month.

It is to a very large extent due to your perspicacity, foresight and political imagination that a vitally important cooperation between our two countries has been initiated. This cooperation is based not only on common interests and on the determination to resist equally our enemies, but also on the unshakeable foundations of our common hatred of injustice and our refusal to submit to it.

Just as I am aware of the significant personal role that you have played as from the preliminary stages of our talks, so I am convinced that the new links which you have helped to forge between our two countries will develop into a close identity of aspirations and interests which will turn out to be of long-standing benefit to both our countries.

I am looking forward very much to meeting you again during your next visit to Israel.

With warm personal regards,

Sincerely yours,
Shimon Peres




Take a look at para 124 of their pdf version of the document


Look at how they use calls to attack/sabotage/create a price tag for daring to criticize Israel's behavior and actions.

And look at the next to last paragraph item 30. and how they label those who level criticisms against Israel as antisemitism

What this amounts to is a carefully crafted Israeli psyop designed to counter growing valid criticisms of its abhorrent behavior and actions towards any and all who dare to question it. Terms like bringing out the antisemitism race card when they can't effectively counter valid criticisms that have hard documentations backing such criticisms.


An “American Academic” Polakow-Suransky published in London’s “Guardian”
an article about an alleged Israeli offer to sell Apartheid-South Africa some nuclear weapons. Shimon Peres, the President of Israel and Nobel Peace Price winner, says this is a lie , it never happened. I don’t know who is telling the
truth, but I wonder why some people automatically prefer to believe
Polakow-Suransky? Is Peres a worldwide known liar, or is his only sin to be
a Jew and Israeli? I know the correct answer to my question . Do you ?


gzbarth, almost assuredly part of a "response team" to discredit the documentary evidence of Israel's nuclear weapons and its irresponsible use of them, has crafted his post to "sow doubt", in our minds, and to suggest that believing the documentary evidence is anti-Jewish. How clever!

I particularly appreciate the very apt touch when he calls it the "Nobel Peace Price" winner. Is it Freudian, that 'c' instead of a 'z', or just unusually accurate reporting?


I don't quite get you. Do you suggest the South Africans (or someone else) forged these documents or that Polakow-Suransky lies? Or that the Guardian is 'biased against Israel' and that his reporting thus cannot be trusted?

More to the point: Was in your mind the correct answer to your question ever in doubt?

Info: Mr. Polakow-Suransky is Senior Editor at the Council of Foreign Relations. Somewhat unsurprising, he is also Senior Editor of Foreign Affairs.


Israel revelations resonate in global talks on establishing WMD-free zone

UN conference aimed at international non-proliferation is reportedly close to agreement



The Hasbara are out an about already.

Their first talking point is that "This is old news" which it isn't. What we had before were allegations always dismissed by Israel. Unless the pdf.s are forged we have proof.

The second talking point is that, since Israel is not a signatory to the NPT, that this was legal.

Their Third talking point is that you are anti Semitic for even raising the issue.

Their Fourth talking point, appealing to the inner racist, is that South Africa was surrounded by a sea of black faces and felt a need to defend itself.

No doubt more apologetic thoughts will be offered.


Interesting article on Shin Bet. Perhaps they learned something from the apartheid regime after-all?


Castellio,I'm an 86 year old American and certainly not part of some "response team".
Confusedponderer, the answers
to all your questions find here:


and we are to take that denial at face value?

Allen Thomson

The documents discussed in the Guardian article connect with a very interesting paper published back in 2004:

Israel and the South African bomb
Peter Liberman
The Nonproliferation Review,
Volume 11, Issue 2 Summer 2004 , pages 46 - 80


confusedponderer, take it or not,that's the truth.You are
are reading too many conspiracy theories.



Let's assume for a minute that you are in fact an 86 year old American... My God! You've been around long enough to get some sense of Israel's nuclear history, it's past relations to South Africa and its constant denials! Don't you have any sense of responsibility to those younger than you who lack the longer overview you could provide?

Coming at this another way... Will you read Polakow-Suransky's book? Will you bring it to the attention of others to further public knowledge and debate? Or will you simply quote the Times most enlightening line: "I think that the president’s denial puts an end to the subject”?

That choice is yours, and your answer will define your actual level of responsibility to your fellow citizens: do you work against their interests by obscuring the facts and closing down the debate, or do you engage with the subject and seek to inform yourself?

There are very real consequences to your choice.


And we're supposed to take the Israelis word for it as implied in the NYTimes article? Give me a physical break. The U.K. Guardian paper has shown the spotlight on the Israeli [nuclear] skunks in the hen house. The Israelis are attempting to lie their way out of this like they did with their murder in Dubai.


why not accept the denial at face value?

Patrick Lang


The Israelis claim the papers are forgeries. What does the South African government say? They are the source of the documents released to this author. pl



What would South Africa gain with 'forgeries' as the Israelis are very loudly claiming? The Israelis are the ones with a lot to loose with their Nuclear aresenal becoming public knowledge, they will have lost their 'ambiguity'. And then the pressure would be on for the Israelis to sign onto the NPT and allow IAEA inspections of their Nuke inventories. Israel would no longer have their Nuke bully stick to wave around.

My money is with the South Africans are telling the truth.


carelessly misread confused ponderer - thought he was referring to gzbarth's denial of response team operative role.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

December 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Blog powered by Typepad