« Iran, Israel, Afghanistan, the ACA, Natanyahu - Obama Agonistes | Main | "Hollywood Producer/Spy Arnon Milchan Played A Key Role In Israel's Nuke Program" Business Insider »

27 November 2013

Comments

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

turcopolier

WRC

Tron? pl

turcopolier

rst

Let us all know when you find out. You know where to find me. Happy Thanksgiving. pl

IRmep

It's timely for this reason:

When an unauthorized book about Milchan came out last year, both Netanyahu and Peres told Milchan not to talk about it.

Now he's blabbing and pulling stars onstage. So the question is:

1. Did Netanyahu and Peres release him to blab? Is this part of the Israeli tantrum over the Iran deal?
2. Is Hollywood the vehicle for Israel to now become a declared nuclear power? Milchan could be a trial balloon for assessing US attitude and seeing how it all plays in the media that much of the *unauthorized" material, tech and know-how transfers came from the US.

It's a story.

Walrus

As far as I know, Krytrons are needed for implosion type weapons (ie: plutonium) which require multiple detonators to be fired as near as possible to exactly the same time.

William R. Cumming

Sorry PL! "Treason" not "tron"! Typo!

turcopolier

WRC

so far as I know he is not an American citizen and therefore could not be tried for treason. pl

turcopolier

All

There are many Jewish Americans here on SST. I grieve with you. pl

kao_hsien_chih

Many Chinese nuclear physicists and rocket experts were also educated in US (and in some cases, wound up in PRC due to circumstances not always of their choosing). Would you say that US supported PRC's nuclear and missile programs?

stanley henning

All I can say is, this could have all been detected and stopped but was not. It seems we have serious problems as relates to our dealings with Israel. We need to distance ourselves from them - they are not Americans and couldn't care less about us except in areas where they can use us.

Medicine Man

Just arrogant is my guess.

CK

Where would that backlash start David? In the broadcast media, in the dead tree newspapers, on talk radio; ownership is content control. And the ownership of old media is not about to allow any examination or backlash. Adelson gets a pass, Soros gets one too, the second stringers like Blitzer and Goldberg and Cohen ... The Fox mouths controlled by Murdoch; none of the above will ever see a backlash from the "respectable" foreign owned media.
Pollard was jailed, the Liberty was covered up, and Milchan gets a pass too.
Freedom to create backlash against a hostile intellectual minority would require that some non minority own a printing press or a broadcast network; and be willing to face the outrage and power that 66 years of inertia and subornation have acquired.
They are not witless, they understand that at least for the important future the internet will not impede them. And they own enough democratically purchased congresspeople that should it appear that the internet might have some actual negative effect; regulations will appear to further neuter this media as well.

Harper

Days after Pollard's arrest, I received a phone call from a friend who was working for then-Secretary of Defense Cap Weinberger. He asked to meet me right away at Charlie's Place, a bar in Maclean not far from the CIA. I met him there and he showed me a piece of paper with a list of names. He explained that he was working for the SecDef's general counsel and that they believed that there was an "X Committee" of high ranking DoD officials who were feeding document IDs to Pollard to steal. The list of names was a who's who in the neocon apparatus then in the Pentagon and who returned again under Bush 43. Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Wurmser, Wohlstetter and even Fred Ickle were on the list of suspected allies of the Lekem agent Pollard.

The point is that the system was so heavily penetrated by dual loyalists who deluded themselves that American and Israeli security interests were actually identical, and that there was no conflict between being an American patriot (ie. neocon) and an Israeli spy. This madness persisted long before Pollard and well after. The penetration runs so deep that it is almost invisible. Hollywood, as it became a font of political financing and cultural power, was a natural target. The ADL takes local police and sheriffs on free junkets to Israel to indoctrinate all and recruit some. Back in 1992, a major scandal erupted when it turned out that local San Francisco police officers were spying for Israel on anti-apartheid and civil rights groups (pro-Palestinian). There is no spying so petty as to be missed in this vast web.

Col. Lang is absolutely correct that this behavior, combined with Netanyahu's obvious hatred of any U.S. government that fails to do Israel's bidding, is creating a very ugly backlash. In the minds of the rightwing Zionists, any Jew who prefers the United States to Israel is deserving of whatever they get, so they don't care about backlash. They welcome and relish it. In my view, every case of gloating espionage should be treated as Pollard was treated. President Reagan did not try to intervene to lighten the scandal when Pollard was caught. He clearly understood, as did Weinberger and at least some at the Department of Justice, that espionage is espionage and there is really no such thing as friendly espionage. It is understandable that Germans are furious that the NSA was spying on Chancellor Merkel's personal cell phone and other aspects of her private family life. Is an Israeli spy any less of a traitor to the U.S. if he happens to have a talent for making movies? I don't think so.

confusedponderer

Not witless per se IMO, just self righteous enough to delude themselves on this.

Self righteousness is something transcendent. They have seen the light and need not to bother with anybody else's opinion any more, be it that of other Americans, law enforcement or a judge.

confusedponderer

PS: I think that boasting these exploits is trying to generate a sense of Israeli heroism, meant to recruit other talent for the cause.

Look I was an arms dealer, embargo buster, smuggler and Israeli spy (in brief, as far as US law is concerned, a criminal qualifying for a triple digit sentence) - and made a fortune and am a hero in my country, Israel!

That alone ought to be reason enough for the US to prosecute and indict that man and bar him from ever returning to the US. Fine him for embargo busting. Maybe freeze some of his assets. Or seize them under forfeiture laws (which I think are odious, but that's another issue). There is, considering the overreach of US law enforcement, quite a lot of things the US can do with him, if they wanted.

Ulenspiegel

If you read the wikipedia article you cite you find that other explanations are possible, see Euroclus Studie, which make at least as much sense sense as the theories of release of sufficient amounts of radioactivity.

RetiredPatriot

Israeli leadership decided to be even more "open" about their "non-existant" nuclear program. And what it can do. Might a test of one of their intermediate-range ballistic missiles be in the offing? Or perhaps another South Atlantic "flash" just to let everyone know who they are and what they are capable of? Reinforcing their deterrent capability by demonstrating its existence seems logical in the wake of a US-Iran rapprochement on the nuclear front.

RP

Fred

What, if any, are the connections between Milchan and the Clintons? Hollywood is one of their favorite fundraising venues. If there's a connection I can see another firestorm (after al the shouting of Benghazi! dies off) in the electioneering to come.

The beaver

I may get a slap on the back of the head like in NCIS but, when 20% of Congress take freebies from the State of Israel and its facilitators in the US wrt annual summer trips to Israel, one wonders as who call the shots.
Every prospective Presidential candidate must go to Israel before the primaries as if they need to get the blessings of some high priests.
Sadly, we are witnessing the same M.O. in Canada

Castellio

Yes.

JFK asked that Ben Gurion open up Dimona for regular inspections, doing so at first in person in New York in 1961, then through increasingly insistent letters. The last one was dated June 15, 1963. Kennedy urged that a first visit should take place immediately, followed by regular visits every six months, otherwise "This Government’s commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized."

See The Samson Option by Hersh, written way back in 1991

David Habakkuk

MM, CK, CP:

The events of this summer have made me think that the internet may be – I do not go beyond that – becoming more powerful than I had earlier thought. A pattern has become very visible in the U.K., where articles in the MSM generate a great deal of comment from people who are clearly drawing heavily on the internet, so that the journalists involved are brought into close contact with a frequently extremely sceptical readership.

Looking at the ‘best rated’ facility on the ‘Mail Online’ and ‘Telegraph’ sites in particular, the visceral hostility to the idea of intervention in Syria was very evident – as also was the very strong suspicion of the role of Israel. The dynamic which produced the unexpected Commons vote against intervention resulted in substantial measure, I think, from similar people contacting their MPs. Both MSM journalists and politicians are under pressure from a growing ‘peasants’ revolt’ among people who are, not uncommonly, articulate and informed.

My impression has been that something similar was happening, but to a somewhat lesser extent, in the U.S. Filtering the comments on Tom Friedman’s column on Ari Shavit’s recent book ‘My Promised Land: The Triumph and Tragedy of Israel’, however, I was struck both by the consistent scepticism of the ‘Readers’ Picks’, and the way this clearly reflected recent events.

In his book, Shavit describes the ‘ethnic cleansing’ of the Palestinian town of Lydda, and goes on to argue that ‘Lydda does not make Zionism criminal’. The most recommended comment picks this up, suggests that most if not all nations have committed ‘great crimes’, but argues that the problem with Israel’s is that ‘it is a crime presently continuing.’ The second most recommended observes that ‘Israel does not have the right to try to draw the U.S. into the middle east to do their dirty work’, and that ‘we have been used for decades by Israel.’

Part of what you may be seeing here, I think, is Netanyahu’s cocking a snook at Obama over the settlements, and his inability to realise that after the Iraq disaster fresh attempts to embroil Americans in Middle East wars are not exactly warmly received by everyone, coming home to roost. It may mean that Friedman is likely to have to confront the fact that the kind of liberals who have been traditional allies of Jews in the United States as in Britain have been turning against Israel for reasons which have nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

(See http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/opinion/sunday/friedman-something-for-barack-and-bibi-to-talk-about.html )

Both arrogance and an – intense – self-righteousness certain enter into the behaviour of people like Adelson and Milchan. But the effect of these things is that these people really do live in a bubble. They have got so used to the successful employment of a combination of bribery, intimidation and moral blackmail to silence dissent that I do not think they can realise the impact that a statement like ‘I did it for my country and I'm proud of it’ is likely to have.

This is not ‘dual loyalty’ – which is partly unavoidable condition for many in the modern world, and increasingly tragic for a growing number of Jews – it is a clear statement that he never had any loyalty to the United States at all.

David Habakkuk

Colonel Lang,

A comment on the 'Mail Online' report suggested he had dual nationality. Does anyone here know whether this is right or wrong?

David Habakkuk

Harper,

‘The point is that the system was so heavily penetrated by dual loyalists who deluded themselves that American and Israeli security interests were actually identical, and that there was no conflict between being an American patriot (ie. neocon) and an Israeli spy.’

This hits a crucial nail on the head. In the nature of things, it would be unlikely that the security interests of the United States and Israel would in all circumstances be identical. To attempt to resolve problems of conflicting loyalties by pretending that they always have been and always would be compatible, inevitably, meant that those doing so could not think straight either about the interests of the United States or about those of Israel.

Ironically, if people like Perle and Wolfowitz had been unambiguous ‘Israel Firsters’, like Arnon Milchan and Sydney Pollack, they might not have been so muddle-headed, and their actions might not have been as damaging alike to the interests of the United States and of Israel.

Neil Richardson

Dear Mr. Habakkuk:

"With people like Milchan -- and Sheldon Adelson, and Jeffrey Goldberg -- I am baffled. Do they not realise that they are courting a backlash? Are they really as witless as they appear to be?"

I too think it's arrogance and self-delusion by these individuals and Bibi. As you know MENA isn't my area of expertise, but this NYT article had grabbed my attention earlier this month.

http://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/12/israel-increasingly-courting-china-as-an-ally/

One question that still remains unanswered for me is the threshold point for some of the prominent neoconservatives in recognizing the divergence of US and Israeli national interests. I had raised this question a few years ago here. Back in 2004, Israel's contract to update Harpy UAVs for the PRC had led to a fairly big row according to Haaretz.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/pentagon-denies-seeking-yaron-s-dismissal-1.144238

And an op ed piece by Ze'ev Schiff followed shortly thereafter.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/selling-arms-to-china-or-not-1.144834

I admit I could be very naive about this, but I still believe most neocons are patriotic Americans albeit terribly misguided. If push comes to shove as Bibi seems to suggest two weeks ago, I wonder if that would be too much even for the likes of Feith and Wolfowitz. I'm hoping if others with direct information could fill some gaps on this.

David Habakkuk

IRmep,

A good question. My sense is that tantrum is quite likely. It may be that the Israelis can see an advantage in abandoning the ambiguity they have cultivated for decades, and making an open statement of what everybody knows. But I have difficulty seeing how they could think they have anything to gain by owning up to having a large nuclear arsenal at this point.

It seems to me clear that Netanyahu and his ilk have got so used to assuming that the U.S. is 'a thing you can move very easily', as he said at Ofra back in 2001, that the emerging signs that this may be ceasing to be so are liable to create panic.

A desire to reassure themselves that their assumption of omnipotence is still valid, because the consequences of facing up to the way the world is changing are too traumatic, may perhaps be a more plausible explanation of what is going on than Machiavellian calculation.

A central fact both about recent Israeli governments and the American Israeli lobby is that while they can be tactically very astute, there are utterly inept at strategic thinking. Time and again, failure to understand how stupid these people really are causes misunderstandings of what is actually happening.

Andrew

Perhaps "nudge nudge, wink wink" is a bit difficult to locate in the archives.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

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            
Blog powered by Typepad