ed note–is possible that he’s telling the truth and was set up as a move meant to embarrass Hillary Clinton, given the fact that Weiner’s soon-to-be ex-wife is a close advisor. However, probably not, and what the story reveals is how degenerate a group this particular pedigree of individuals is and who bring to the business of legislation all their addictions and lower instincts.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan has launched an investigation into Anthony Weiner’s alleged sexting with a minor.
Prosecutors have issued a subpoena for Weiner’s cellphone records, CNN reported Thursday.
The allegations, which first appeared in the Daily Mail on Wednesday, include that Weiner sent explicit texts to an unnamed 15-year-old girl for months, dating back to January. The British tabloid also reported that the former New York congressman pressed the girl to dress up in “school girl outfits” and indulge “rape fantasies,” and published shirtless photos of Weiner that he allegedly sent to the girl.
Weiner, who was involved in two previous similar scandals since 2011, when he resigned from the House of Representatives, sent a statement to CNN.
“I have repeatedly demonstrated terrible judgment about the people I have communicated with online and the things I have sent,” he said. “I am filled with regret and heartbroken for those I have hurt. While I have provided the Daily Mail with information showing that I have likely been the subject of a hoax, I have no one to blame but me for putting myself in this position. I am sorry.”
Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin, a longtime aide to Hillary Clinton, announced last month that she was separating from him after the New York Post published sexually suggestive messages sent between him and an unnamed woman.
“If the reports are true, it’s possibly criminal and it is sick,” New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said at a news conference Thursday. “And frankly, I’ve heard enough about Anthony Weiner and I think that goes for all New Yorkers.”
“I’ve also lived through the horrors of a Great Depression and two World Wars, the second of which was started by a man who promised that he would restore his country it to its former greatness.” ~Kirk Douglas
Actor Kirk Douglas suggested he sees similarities between Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler, in an op-ed published months before his 100th birthday.
“I have always been deeply proud to be an American. In the time I have left, I pray that will never change,” Douglas wrote in the article, published Monday by The Huffington Post.
While not mentioning the Republican nominee by name, the Jewish actor quoted directly from a recent speech by Trump, in which he argued for ideological screening tests for potential immigrants.
“These are not the American values that we fought in World War II to protect,” Douglas wrote.
The 99-year-old actor, who starred in countless Hollywood hits beginning in the 1940s, compared Trump’s policy proposals to those of Hitler, saying the Republican nominee’s words “could also have been spoken in 1933,” the year the Nazi leader became Chancellor of Germany.
“I’ve also lived through the horrors of a Great Depression and two World Wars, the second of which was started by a man who promised that he would restore his country it to its former greatness,” Douglas wrote, drawing links to Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again.”
In the op-ed, Douglas recalled the challenges his parents faced, when moving to the US from Russia, as certain groups, including Jews, “felt the stigma of being treated as aliens, as foreigners who would never become ‘real Americans.’”
Douglas concluded by throwing in a reference to late Jewish actress and friend Lauren Bacall.
“My 100th birthday is exactly one month and one day after the next presidential election. I’d like to celebrate it by blowing out the candles on my cake, then whistling ‘Happy Days Are Here Again.’ As my beloved friend Lauren Bacall once said, ‘You know how to whistle don’t you? You just put your lips together and blow,’” he wrote.
Douglas has contributed to Jewish causes and had a second bar mitzvah the year he turned 83. Last year his son, Hollywood actor Michael Douglas, won Israel’s $1 million Genesis Prize, which is known informally as the “Jewish Nobel.”
Muslim impostor and Zionist asset, Omar Bakri aka Fustuk, has, once again, revealed himself as what he truly is, a filthy Israeli Jew–and not just any Israeli mole but one directly tied to the Woolwich scam. Posing as a puffed-out Muslim preacher, in fact, Bakri is a Syrian Jew whose entire purpose is to wage war against Islaam for his Zionist handlers. Fully capable in English, he attempts to disguise himself with his fake “broken English Arabic-style” accent. A fraudster to the extreme Bakri’s purpose is to create the platform for the demonization of Islaam and draw untoward attention to it, all unfavorable and derogatory, so that the Zionist crimes go unanswered.
Sabba – He must have known all along that he was a chosen child of satan who had joined Jobbik to subvert it and destroy it from within while parading as a Hungarian nationalist/patriot, by way of deception. As they always do. There is a very vibrant and powerful jewish community in Hungary whose members do not feel the need to make aliyah only because they are jews. So why does this guy so impulsively decided to pack up and move his family in Palestine? I wonder if rather than discovering his jewish roots, it is not a matter of his being found out and exposed as a jewish traitor and destroyer. What has he actually done to Jobbik that is making him run away from Hungary and find refuge in the world headquarters of la Kosher Nostra?
TIMES OF ISRAEL – A former Hungarian politician who resigned from his right-wing nationalist party after discovering he has Jewish roots said he is immigrating to Israel. Csanad Szegedi told a World Zionist Organization conference last weekend that he is planning to move to the Jewish state with his wife and two children.
Szegedi was a member of the anti-Semitic, far-right Jobbik party starting in 2003 and served in various leadership roles. The Anti-Defamation League described Jobbik as “openly anti-Semitic” during his time in the party.
“After the nightmares that my relatives underwent in the Holocaust, my family and I very much want to be part of the positive dream that Israel constitutes for us,” he told the Hebrew-language Maariv newspaper, adding that he had already submitted immigration paperwork.
In 2012, Szegedi publicly revealed that he had Jewish relatives, including his maternal grandmother, an Auschwitz survivor. He resigned from all Jobbik positions in July 2012 and gave up his party membership. That wasn’t good enough for the party: the next month it asked him to give up his seat in the European Parliament as well. Jobbik said the issue was suspected bribery, not his Jewish roots. Szegedi stayed in the European parliament as an independent.
Szegedi met in August 2012 with Rabbi Slomo Koves, of Hungary’s Orthodox Chabad-Lubavitch community, whose own parents were in their teens when they discovered they were Jewish.
“As a rabbi… it is my duty to receive every person who is in a situation of crisis and especially a Jew who has just now faced his heritage,” Koves said.
Szegedi said in 2013 that he is keeping Shabbat and trying to observe the laws of Kashrut. “I have discovered that I can reconcile my conservative viewpoints as Hungarian and as observant Jew,” he told German newspaper Welt am Sonntag.
Judaism is traced from mother to child, meaning that under Jewish law Szegedi is Jewish. Szegedi said he defines himself as someone with “ancestry of Jewish origin — because I declare myself 100 percent Hungarian.”
I-24 NEWS – Pulitzer prize-winning historian Saul Friedlander, a world authority on the Holocaust, said Friday he would leave the United States if Donald Trump was elected president. The 83-year-old Israeli-American writer, who escaped the Nazis by being hidden in a Catholic boarding school in France, described Trump as a “dangerous crazy”.
He said the controversial Republican candidate could win November’s election because of Hillary Clinton’s “tendency to lie and to hide things”.
“One cannot exclude Donald Trump winning even though he is a dangerous crazy,” he told AFP.
“He says whatever comes into his mind.”
Friedlander’s magisterial two-volume history of Nazi Germany and the Jews charts Adolf Hitler’s rise to power in a period where populism was rising across the world as it is today.
“We don’t know what (Trump) thinks,” said the writer, whose parents perished in Auschwitz after being handed over to the Germans by French police as they tried to escape to neutral Switzerland.
“At the same time, there is a huge swathe of Americans, mostly poor, angry whites, who dream of having him in the White House.
“He is kind of a release valve for their anger against the ‘establishment’ represented by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
“Because she has, unfortunately, a tendency to lie and to hide things,” he said, referring to her recent bout of pneumonia, which her campaign was only forced to disclose after she was seen stumbling into her car.
“Trump, by comparison, seems totally open and frank, even if he has not published his income tax returns.”
Friedlander, who is based in Los Angeles, also warned of the rise of anti-Semitism and of Holocaust denial.
“Negationists are, in general, anti-Semites, and I am utterly opposed to debating with them. It gets you nowhere, they will always find a so-called detail showing that all these stories of gas chambers were a joke.
“They are obsessed by the idea that Jews could have invented the story of their extermination,” said the author, whose new books, “Reflections on Nazism” and “Where Memory Leads”, have just been published in France.
The historian — who left France for Israel after World War II and worked as an assistant to former president Shimon Peres — has been very critical of the Jewish state’s treatment of the Palestinians.
“But I am also worried about the rising movement, particularly on US university campuses, questioning Israel’s right to exist.”
Build peace not settlements
He said extremism on both sides had done “profound damage” to the chances of a Middle East peace settlement.
“I remain a supporter of a two-state solution, but my friends in Israel say that if a Palestinian state is created on the West Bank, it will be in the hands of Hamas, like Gaza. Then Israel will be surrounded by people determined to destroy it, they say.
“However, if we want to build peace, we have to halt settlement building, destroy wildcat settlements and abandon others,” Friedlander said of Israeli construction on land seized during the 1967 Six Day War that the Palestinians want for a future state.
“We have to do that at least to show good faith.
“If not, we risk losing the values of justice and equality that were once at the heart of Israel and Zionism,” he added.
Sabba – The prices are even shamelessly provided: from $96 000 to $166 000
WDRB – Gay Parents To Be (GPTB) at Reproductive Medicine Associates of Connecticut (RMACT) will be participating at the Men Having Babies (MHB) Conference in Brussels, Belgium from September 24 – 25, 2016. During the Conference, attendees will learn about surrogacy through a variety of speakers and breakout sessions, including discussions about the surrogacy process, how to choose providers and current laws within Europe. CONTINUE READING
THE GUARDIAN – The heir to one of the world’s biggest art-dealing dynasties has appeared in court on Thursday in one of the biggest tax fraud trials ever held in France. Guy Wildenstein, 70, is accused of hiding in offshore tax havens a family fortune amassed over more than a century and estimated at more than €1bn (£858m). If convicted, the Franco-American, who is a friend of former French president Nicolas Sarkozy, faces up to 10 years in jail and a bill from the French authorities of €553m in back taxes. He has denied the charges. CONTINUE READING
Some lives do seem to matter more than others: had he been black or one of DEM MOOOOZLEMS or, even worse, black AND Muslim….
METRO – Fabian Frederick Blandford, a 64-year-old former Buddhist monk, was found guilty of carrying out sex abuse against minors in a court in Chiang Mai, Thailand.He was also convicted of trafficking children for prostitution and pornography. However judges sentenced him to four years and two months, suspended for three years – meaning that he will only go to jail if he commits another offence in that time. CONTINUE READING
UK – Rabbi Issues Letter Warning To Women Not To Wear Red And Yellow Or ‘Sinful’ Skirts That Reveal Their KneesSeptember 23rd, 2016
THE INDEPENDENT – An Ultra-Orthodox Jewish rabbi has issued a letter to thousands of women warning them it is a sin to wear skirts which show their knees,The Independent has learned. The letter, seen by The Independent, warns women to adhere to a list of “cardinal points” in how they dress. The rules include covering one’s knees, wearing fabric loose enough to cover the outline of one’s hips and forbids wearing bright colours. CONTINUE READING
Nyman Levin, a British Jew, was entrusted with the U.K. and the U.S.’ most sensitive nuclear secrets. Did he pass on some of those secrets to Dimona?
The Friday of January 22, 1965, was one of those cold and gray English winter mornings. London may have been starting to swing, but not around 10 Downing Street, the British prime minister’s residence. The press were camped outside the premier’s front door as he faced a new crisis.
Prime Minister Harold Wilson had woken up to find his parliamentary majority cut to three after a shock overnight by-election defeat for his Labour Party. The last Conservative government had imploded after a series of spy scandals that would have been farcical if they weren’t so serious. MI6 officer Kim Philby had been revealed as a KGB spy after he fled to Moscow, and then-Secretary of State for War John Profumo had been forced to resign when it emerged he was having an affair with model and showgirl Christine Keeler, who was also the mistress of the Soviet naval attaché. The last thing Wilson needed was another major scandal, let alone a spy scandal.
A black, official Jaguar limo came around the corner, past the Westminster Underground station, where the Evening Standard newspaper sellers would be screaming out “Wilson poll shock!” and “Churchill latest!” (Sir Winston Churchill, Britain’s legendary war hero, was on his deathbed.) The Jaguar stopped outside 70 Whitehall, the back door to 10 Downing Street.
Unseen by the press, a small man wearing glasses slipped into the anonymous black doors of the Cabinet Office. He was 58, but looked younger. His name was Nyman Levin. In photographs he appears kind and clever, like a trusted family doctor.
There is a photo of this man lawn bowling happily with his colleagues. You wouldn’t think he was a master of doomsday. Then you notice a sign noting the location: the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment Bowling Club. Nyman was the big boss of that establishment. As such, he held one of the most sensitive jobs of the Crown.
Levin knew every British — and almost every American — nuclear weapons secret, including the most alarming fact that the United States’ ultimate deterrent at the time, the submarine-launched Polaris missile, was faulty and might not ultimately work.
Decades later, we learned from a well-placed source that Levin was being quietly investigated at the time on suspicion he was leaking nuclear secrets to Israel. Even today, however, more than half a century on, citing reasons of national security, the British government firmly refuses to confirm or deny whether Levin was under investigation. Indeed, the British government fought the authors tooth and nail to prevent the release of any relevant files about Levin.
Possible security risk
We don’t know whether Levin was actually helping Israel’s nuclear efforts. But if he was, that ride into Whitehall would have been tense. Levin took medication for angina, but was otherwise in good health. British security officials had questioned him about his connections to Israel before, and it had not been a pleasant experience for him.
Just three days earlier, he had been abruptly eased out of his job as head of the British nuclear weapons program at the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment (AWRE), in Aldermaston, in the south of England. Now he had been summoned to the Cabinet Office, where he was supposed to be attending a secret meeting about nuclear weapons with Sir Solly Zuckerman, the government’s chief scientific adviser. Zuckerman, two years Levin’s senior, was another Jew who had been investigated as a possible security risk.
We don’t know whether the meeting was really a pretext to get Levin into Whitehall, and then perhaps quiz him about any connections he had to Israel. We do know that Levin walked into the foyer of the Cabinet Office. Zuckerman arrived just behind him, and later gave an eyewitness account of the scene: “I saw Dr. Nyman Levin, the director of the nuclear weapons establishment at Aldermaston, lying outstretched on the floor.”
(Zuckerman may not have been told that Levin was no longer the director — or perhaps he preferred to ignore it.) Levin, Zuckerman added, “had not even managed to get to the lift before suffering a heart attack.” He was rushed across Westminster Bridge to St. Thomas’ Hospital, where he regained consciousness, but died the following Monday.
Perhaps fortuitously for Prime Minister Wilson, Levin’s shocking demise went unnoticed because the British public was focused on another death: On Sunday January 24, Churchill, by wide consensus the greatest Englishman of the 20th century, passed away at 90. Churchill was remembered, above all, for rallying the British in their finest hour, standing alone against the Nazis in the summer of 1940, and for his postwar warning of Stalin’s “Iron Curtain” coming down across Europe.
But the British tended to forget that Churchill was also the first politician to realize that an atom bomb could be built, and to order his scientists and military to do so, even if they were eventually overtaken by U.S. industrial might. Now, one of the guardians of the secrets of the nuclear bomb had died while apparently under investigation.
There was no public hint that Levin had ever come under suspicion. Any such scandal would have been terrible news for the British prime minister, and devastating news for the increasingly strained relationship with the Americans. Indeed, to this day, the story remains unknown.
Ahead of his time
Nyman Levin was a genius, a man years ahead of his time. For example, he envisaged flat-screen televisions as early as 1934. That year, he was the first to patent liquid crystal displays (LCDs), and to describe them as “suitable for … television.” He made breakthroughs in radar and radio, and worked on all sorts of advanced weaponry. He also happened to be trusted with every British and American nuclear secret.
Levin was born in the East End of London in 1906, a time when 100,000 Jews lived in its tightly packed streets. Most were recent immigrants from Russia and Eastern Europe. His father, Lewis (Leibisch) Levin, had a small business making paper bags, which he sold to local shops.
Levin was sent to the Central Foundation Boys’ School, but had to leave at 16 to work in the family business. He was determined to be a scientist, took physics evening classes and won a scholarship to Imperial College, London. For generations afterward, Nyman Levin was held up as an example within the extended family of what can be achieved by determination and hard work: Younger members of the extended Levin clan would be asked, “Why can’t you be like Nyman?”
From Imperial he moved to the Marconi telecom company, where in the 1930s he developed some of the technologies that made television practical. He registered multiple patents in the United Kingdom and United States.
After World War II began, Levin’s research helped lead to the super high-frequency radar which allowed night fighters to intercept Luftwaffe bombers over Britain. He developed the VHF radio networks that allowed commanders to communicate with their forces on D-Day, and he was one of the first civilians to land on the Normandy beaches.
After the war, Levin developed guided weapons for the Royal Navy, as well as improvising underwater TV cameras to find a missing submarine. His son Peter told us, “He was always a practical sort of person.” The early 1950s was also when Nyman Levin first became involved with nuclear weapons, as the navy proposed putting kiloton warheads on his new Sea Slug missiles.
Peter Levin, today in his 70s, remembers that if Nyman was called to Whitehall for a meeting, he’d ask his driver to stop outside Harrods on the way back so he could pick up kippered herring for tea from the food hall. The family was very much part of the local Jewish community in Surbiton, in southwest London, where they lived. Levin helped buy the land for a new synagogue there.
In 1955, he was headhunted by Rank Precision Industries, which was looking for new products. Levin quickly spotted that the new U.S. Xerox machines were going to revolutionize office life, and he built the first photocopier factory – a joint venture between the two firms – in Europe. During the war, he had traveled to the United States on several occasions to brief American scientists. Now he was making regular trips to Xerox’s headquarters in Rochester, New York. His firsthand knowledge of how Americans worked would prove invaluable in his next job.
Soviet spy scandal
During World War II, a small team of British scientists had gone to Los Alamos, New Mexico to assist on the Manhattan Project. After the war, though, the Americans shut Britain out from their development of nuclear weapons. After the first Soviet atomic bomb test, in late August 1949, it seemed that the Americans would resume nuclear cooperation with Britain. But that was derailed by a major British nuclear espionage scandal.
Physicist Klaus Fuchs had been one of the key members of the British scientific delegation in Los Alamos. He was born in Germany, but had fled to Britain in 1933 after Hitler came to power. He worked under Hans Bethe on the implosion design — a key element in the development of the plutonium bomb. Bethe considered Fuchs one of his “most valuable men,” and the Americans asked him to stay at Los Alamos to assist with preparations for Operation Crossroads (the first nuclear tests after World War II).
But in the United States, the mood was turning against cooperation. The U.S. Atomic Energy Act of 1946 prohibited transfer of nuclear weapons-related information — defined as “restricted data” — to any foreign country, including the United Kingdom. In August 1946, Fuchs returned to Britain and was recruited as one of the key scientists to work on Britain’s then-secret atom-bomb program, which was based at an old RAF base at Harwell, near Oxford.
Fuchs was able to pass on a great deal of highly classified U.S. information to the Harwell team. But what neither the British nor the Americans knew was that he was also passing the information on to Soviet intelligence.
By July 1949, information from the Venona project (the code name for a U.S. code-breaking operation against the Soviets) started to indicate that Fuchs was spying for Russia. But British authorities were hesitant to take action, partly because they didn’t want to reveal in court that the West had broken Soviet codes, and partly perhaps because Fuchs was vital to their own secret nuclear project. In December 1949, MI5 interviewed Fuchs, but he denied being a spy and carried on working at AWRE at Aldermaston. Weeks later, though, Fuchs voluntarily confessed to espionage.
After the Russians detonated their first atom bomb, the Americans flirted with the idea of making nuclear weapons for Britain. The leak in British security became a watershed in Anglo-American nuclear relations. In the end, Britain built its own weapons, detonating an atom bomb for the first time in 1952. But the Americans and Russians were moving onto more powerful, hydrogen bombs, using fusion not fission. The U.K. was now forced to play catch-up.
In the winter of 1957-58, Aldermaston physicist William Cook solved the problem of making a fusion bomb for the British. A series of hydrogen bombs were detonated on Christmas Island and, once Britain had reached that capability, the Americans finally agreed to share their nuclear secrets again.
At the same time, Cook was recruiting his old friend Nyman Levin to Aldermaston. Levin’s initial appointment was as deputy director, but the following year, in 1959, he took over as chief. Nyman now had access to all U.S. nuclear weapons designs, as well as the British ones.
In public, as the man at the top of the British nuclear priesthood, Levin was unambiguously in favor of the nuclear deterrent. Privately, though, he expressed doubts, with Peter Levin saying his father would tell him, “What happens if you drop it? And if you’re not going to drop it, why have it?” At the time some American scientists were pushing the idea that nuclear weapons could be used in a limited way, to win wars, but Levin saw them only as a deterrent.
MI5’s job was to hunt for moles, and for many decades it was suspicious of Jews. This was partly due to latent anti-Semitism, partly to a fear that Jews would be loyal to the then newly created State of Israel over Britain. The Security Service, as it is also known, had been on the front line in pre-state Israel against the underground militias in the mid-1940s. And in the 1950s and early ’60s, MI5 had a policy of not recruiting Jews, something that was revealed by Christopher Andrew in his 2009 history of MI5, “Defend the Realm.”
All the time, MI5 sleuths were knocking on suspects’ doors as they looked for more spies. Zuckerman, who found Levin collapsed on the Cabinet Office floor, was one of Britain’s top defense scientists and a prominent Jew, but he was investigated on three separate occasions — once at the behest of the FBI — on suspicion of being a Soviet agent.
If they were sniffing about for connections to communism or loyalty to Israel, there were elements in Levin’s background that might have made an MI5 investigator suspicious. Like Nyman, his half-brother Solomon had lived in London’s East End. But when the czar of Russia was deposed in 1917, Solomon sailed to Russia to join the revolution. And Nyman’s half-sister Annie had married a left-wing agitator called Sam Leff, who organized the Workers’ Circles in the East End, which played a central role in the battle against home-grown fascism.
In 1936, the British Union of Fascists, led by Oswald Mosley, was threatening to become a mass movement. The group attacked Jews and Jewish property. Official Jewish organizations thought it best to keep their heads down, but the menace grew. So, in the summer of 1936, Leff’s Workers’ Circles, working with Jewish communists, formed a breakaway group: the Jewish People’s Council against Fascism and Anti-Semitism (JPC). It was formed to defend “the Jewish People” against the fascists, though at the time, MI5 and the police regarded the JPC as dangerous subversives. Nyman himself appears briefly to have been part of the group.
Nyman Levin’s records and family history would have been combed through as part of the vetting process before he was appointed at Aldermaston. His son Peter remembers that there was something else after he moved to AWRE: His father was interviewed by one of MI5’s “trenchcoat and trilby”-wearing interrogators – “a man in a beige mackintosh,” as Peter put it. He was asked about any communist or Israeli connections he might have. Nyman Levin was shaken by the questioning.
His connections with Israel were not unusual for a British Jew at that time. He had relatives there and he also donated to the Technion, Israel’s prestigious institute of technology in Haifa. What Levin did in the summer of 1958, soon after the appointment was made, was also natural for a British Jew, but might have looked suspicious to an MI5 spy hunter. He went on vacation to Israel, with his wife, Dora, and daughter, Rachel.
It was an interesting time for the second-in-command of Britain’s nuclear weapons program to visit Israel. The Israelis were then openly building their small Soreq nuclear reactor under the American “Atoms for Peace” program, but they were also secretly building the much larger Dimona reactor, with French assistance. Israeli intelligence would have been well aware of Levin’s almost unique access to all of Britain and America’s nuclear secrets.
MI5 became much more concerned about a potential Israel connection after discovering, in 1960, that Israel was quietly building a production reactor in the Negev. The man who made the British discovery of Dimona was Peter Kelly, who was part of a Defense Intelligence unit collecting open source and covert intelligence on foreign nuclear weapons programs.
In August 1960, the British military attaché in Tel Aviv secretly photographed a huge facility under construction at Dimona. The pictures were rushed to Kelly’s office just off Trafalgar Square and he immediately realized it was a French nuclear reactor and sounded the alarm. Britain’s Joint Intelligence Committee — which consists of the heads of MI5, MI6 and other spymasters — commissioned Kelly to find out what the Israelis were up to, and what help they were getting from outside sources.
Kelly quickly learned from confidential sources in France about the deal to supply a reactor. A source on the ground at Dimona said there was a system of “underground galleries” being built under the plant, which made Kelly even more suspicious. Just three months later, by the start of November, Kelly had reached the conclusion that Israel was building a secret plant capable of making atom bombs.
The JIC concluded that, depending on the size of the reactor, Israel would be able to assemble up to “six nuclear weapons a year.” Kelly also discovered that France was not the only country assisting Israel.
Britain had secretly supplied Israel with 20 tons of heavy water, needed for the reactor. They loaded the shipments onto Israeli ships at a British port in 1959 and 1960, for delivery straight to Israel. Civil servants had approved the deal and deliberately concealed it from the Americans. In case the transfer ever became public, officially it was a deal between a Norwegian company, Noratom, and Israel. Noratom took a 2-percent commission on the transaction.
The U.S. secretary of defense in the Kennedy administration, Robert McNamara, was shocked when the full details of the deal were shown to him by us in 2005: “The fact Israel was trying to develop a nuclear bomb should not have come as a surprise, but that Britain should have supplied it with heavy water was indeed a surprise to me,” he told the Newsnight show.
A sample of fissile material, uranium-235, was also supplied, in 1959, and another British company, Albright & Wilson, knowingly provided chemicals needed for reprocessing of plutonium from the Dimona reactor. In 1966, Britain supplied Israel with a sample of pure lithium-6 and two tons of the chemical used to make the isotope lithium-6. The most plausible use for lithium-6 is to “boost” the efficiency of nuclear warheads. It is still unclear whether these were decisions made by civil servants on their own, or whether they were covertly authorized by a minister.
Kelly was the Defense Intelligence expert on Israel’s nuclear weapons program from 1960 to 1966. It was Kelly who told us that three Jewish scientists, including Nyman Levin, had been investigated for leaking nuclear secrets to Israel. Two had been cleared, but the Levin investigation was still pending when he died in 1965.
British Defense Intelligence was concerned when it learned that Israeli nuclear scientists had been having unauthorized meetings with British atomic energy officials, and that one of them had requested to spend three months at AWRE. Kelly also believed that another Jewish civil servant, Michael Israel Michaels, had deliberately tried to mislead his political superiors about Israel’s nuclear program, and had helped it obtain nuclear materials from Britain.
Michaels was the top official at the Science Ministry dealing with nuclear affairs, and in this capacity he was among the British officials who helped establish the International Atomic Energy Agency in 1957.
In May and June 1961, Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion met separately with U.S. President John F. Kennedy and British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan on the Dimona issue. The Joint Intelligence Committee prepared a new report based on Kelly’s work for British Science Minister Lord Hailsham, so he could brief Macmillan ahead of the June 2 meeting with Ben-Gurion. On its way over, the report passed across the desk of Michaels, who wrote a cover note saying it was “inconclusive” — perhaps hoping that Hailsham would take his word for it and not go through the entire 21-page document.
However, Hailsham, one of the cabinet’s most senior figures, read it thoroughly and scrawled across Michaels’ note that it was “only just short of conclusive” and that the safe assumption was that Israel was making plutonium and “preparing for a weapons programme.” Hailsham also asked the JIC to find out whether Israel would have the capability to make battlefield nuclear weapons.
The meeting between Ben-Gurion and Kennedy, at New York’s Waldorf Astoria hotel on May 30, 1961, was amicable, even friendly. Ben-Gurion denied that Israel had a weapons program and provided a civilian rationale for the Dimona project. Indeed, that rationale seemed to be consistent with the findings of the U.S. inspections team that had visited Dimona just 10 days earlier. But Kelly, who was already aware that underground facilities were being built at Dimona, wrote that the U.S. inspection was “heavily stage managed” and that “important developments were concealed.” It subsequently turned out that Kelly’s assessment was right.
Ben-Gurion still had to deal with Macmillan. This is where Michaels stepped in again. Michaels was not a particularly observant Jew, but he was a very strong supporter of the State of Israel. At this critical point, he was invited to visit Israel by Dr. Ernst David Bergmann, then-head of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission. He was there between May 9 and May 21.
Defense Intelligence smelled a rat. Kelly wrote his superiors that the invitation “may be more than a coincidence.” He suspected — rightly — that Israel would tell Kennedy and Macmillan that the hitherto secret Dimona reactor had nothing to do with nuclear weapons, and that it would use Michaels to produce a report to “prove that everything is above board.”
On his visit, Michaels met Deputy Defense Minister Shimon Peres, Ben-Gurion and Bergmann, the three key figures in Israel’s nuclear program. He saw the Dimona plant from a distance but did not go in. As Kelly had suspected, Michaels’ report played down the possibility of Israel making nuclear weapons. Michaels handed it to Lord Hailsham two days before Ben-Gurion met Macmillan at 10 Downing Street. Defense Intelligence had no time to dissect it and counter its claims. The Dimona reactor was still at the top of the agenda, but Michaels helped take some of the heat out of the discussion.
The following week, Kelly tore Michaels’ report apart line by line and wrote him, in an official response, “The assurances given you by the Israelis do not always accord with the intelligence picture.” He said the signals that Israel was trying to get the bomb were very strong — stronger than the signals had been from Russia before it detonated its first atom bomb. Kelly’s estimate was that Israel might have a “deliverable warhead” by 1967.
Kelly also appreciated why Israel wanted the bomb. He wrote to Michaels, “I should have thought myself that the argument for Israel holding independent nuclear weapons was rather stronger than for the United Kingdom holding independent nuclear weapons.” But whatever Kelly’s sympathies, Britain’s policy was to stop any further proliferation.
A year later, in 1962, Michaels was still claiming Dimona was harmless. But Defense Intelligence thought “the Israelis could have a weapon well before the end of this decade.” And in 1966, Michaels was involved in the “plutonium row.” Israel wanted to buy a small sample of plutonium from Britain, perhaps to compare with its own production. Defense Intelligence objected and the Foreign Office agreed to block the export because, “It is Her Majesty’s Government’s policy not to do anything which would assist Israel in the production of nuclear weapons.” Michaels wasn’t happy with this decision. He fought the Foreign Office and Defense Intelligence until the sale was authorized. He didn’t tell his boss, Technology Minister Tony Benn, about the sale of plutonium to Israel.
In Britain, then, we have examples of ministries agreeing to sell heavy water and other restricted items to Israel without safeguards when they shouldn’t have. We have an example of a Jewish atomic energy civil servant who repeatedly helped Israel’s cause. And the Jewish boss of the nuclear weapons program whom MI5 suspected of giving nuclear secrets to Israel. But is that so different from what happened in America?
The American experience
To put the case of Levin (and the other cited cases) into context, one must take a look at the American experience. After all, the United States is the bomb’s birthplace, the cradle of all nuclear knowledge. Were there similar cases of sympathetic Americans with access to nuclear secrets who aided the Israeli nuclear project? And if so, how did the U.S. government react to them?
In 1991, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh tackled these sensitive issues in his book “The Samson Option,” highlighting two particular cases: those of Edward Teller and Zalman Shapiro. Hersh elaborated on these incidents, but even today, more than 25 years on, both cases — like that of Nyman Levin — remain obscure and inconclusive.
While Levin kept a low profile, Teller was arguably the most well-known nuclear scientist in America after Robert Oppenheimer. Teller was the “father” of the hydrogen bomb and was the force behind the creation of the second American weapons lab, following Los Alamos, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. In the 1980s, he was the inspiration behind President Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars” initiative.
Teller was also known for his deep commitment to Israel, a country he visited numerous times, prior to his death in 2003. He was also recognized as the American who, beginning in the mid-to-late 1960s knew the Israeli nuclear project most intimately.
A case in point: It was Teller who informed the CIA in 1968 — via Carl Duckett, the Agency’s assistant director for science and technology — that he believed Israel had become a nuclear-weapons state, with “several weapons ready to go.” Furthermore, Teller told Duckett that if the CIA was waiting for Israel to announce itself as a nuclear state by conducting a test, it was badly mistaken. That tip, according to Duckett, was the most single convincing piece of information he ever received while at the CIA. Duckett reported it immediately to CIA director Richard Helms, who soon after briefed President Lyndon B. Johnson. Johnson instructed Helms not to share the information with anybody else in the administration, not even Secretary of State Dean Rusk or McNamara.
But did Teller serve only the United States? Or perhaps his tip-off was also meant to serve Israel? Years later, Prof. Yuval Ne’eman — one of Israel’s leading theoretical physicists and later a science and technology minister, who was also Teller’s closest friend in Israel — shared his own side of that story, which suggests Teller’s tip was intended to benefit Israel.
According to Ne’eman, who died in 2006, he met Teller shortly after 1967’s Six-Day War, at a physics conference in Rochester, New York. This was at a time when the negotiation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) was close to completion. Teller held the view — radically different from that of the U.S. government — that it would be a grave mistake for Israel to join the NPT.
Teller told Ne’eman he wanted to talk with him privately. He took him outside, suggesting they sit back to back by a large tree, evidently trying to conceal the fact that they were having a conversation. Without eye contact, Teller told Ne’eman that he was about to inform the CIA that Israel had already acquired the bomb. Teller added that he thought the continuation of the “cat-and-mouse game” over Dimona — referring to the farcical American visits to the reactor at Dimona — had become “unhealthy” and was undermining the interests of both parties. Teller apparently thought letting the CIA know that Israel was a nuclear-weapons state would end the U.S. visits to Dimona and maybe even make the NPT issue moot.
By telling Ne’eman, Teller probably wanted to test his idea on a well-connected Israeli.
According to Ne’eman, he responded in a noncommittal way, but upon his return to Israel rushed to report his conversation to Prime Minister Levi Eshkol. According to Ne’eman, Eshkol appeared comfortable with Teller’s initiative. Teller’s tip was taken seriously by the CIA because it was no secret that he had inside knowledge of the Israeli program.
But did Teller actually cross the line in supporting the Israeli nuclear program.
As in the case of Levin, we don’t know for sure. Many of the FBI’s files on Teller are still classified, so we don’t know whether Teller was ever formally investigated regarding his close relations with Israel. But there were persistent rumors that he gave technical guidance to Israel’s nuclear weapons scientists. And one thing is clear: Even if Teller was investigated, the findings never led to a criminal indictment. Either there was no evidence or someone higher up decided that the national interest required looking the other way — as the British initially did with Klaus Fuchs.
From Pennsylvania to Dimona
The other case of possible U.S. assistance to the Israeli nuclear program via a sympathetic individual involves a private company: the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (NUMEC), located in a suburb of Pittsburgh. The individual involved was its co-owner and president, a nuclear chemist and technical wizard named Zalman (Zal) Mordecai Shapiro, who died this past July. Shapiro, who had played a key role in the development of the reactor that powered the USS Nautilus (the world’s first nuclear submarine), also worked on the development of the fuel for the first commercial nuclear power reactor, at Shippingport, PA. Shapiro was also known as an ardent Zionist.
NUMEC was founded in 1957 by Shapiro and a group of financial-backer friends, with the purpose of inventing new methods of processing nuclear fuel. Shapiro ran NUMEC until the early 1970s, when it was sold to the Atlantic Richfield Co. and Babcock & Wilcox Westinghouse. NUMEC began manufacturing fuel for nuclear reactors in 1959, and over its lifetime processed thousands of tons of uranium, reaching a peak annual throughput of more than 700 metric tons in 1973.
Ever since the mid-1960s, there have been allegations that a significant amount of highly enriched uranium (HEU) was diverted from the Apollo plant in Pittsburgh to Israel.
It started in early 1965, when a routine inventory check by the Atomic Energy Commission of government-owned HEU that had been leased to NUMEC, discovered a significant discrepancy. In early 1966, after further investigations, the AEC confirmed that 178 kilograms (392 pounds) of HEU was missing from the Apollo plant. Within three years, the amount of missing U-235 grew to nearly 300 kilograms.
In the decades that followed, the case of the missing uranium was investigated by a host of federal agencies, including the AEC, FBI and CIA. Some of the investigators acknowledged the possibility that the HEU may have been diverted to Israel. The prevailing view at the CIA was that diversion took place, but hard proof was never found — or at least it never became public.
Nowadays, much more is publicly known about the NUMEC affair than ever before. In 2009, the FBI declassified a 1980 sworn affidavit by a former NUMEC employee who had testified that he encountered “armed strangers” on the facility’s loading dock one night in early 1965. He claimed to witness them loading what seemed to be canisters of HEU into a truck. He insisted he had seen a shipping manifest which said the material was headed to a ship bound for Israel. He said a NUMEC manager later ordered him to keep his mouth shut about what he had seen – or else.
Over the years, the FBI has declassified numerous reports indicating that Zalman Shapiro met with a number of Israeli intelligence officials, including the Israeli “science attaché” from the embassy in Washington — all known to be related to LAKAM, Israel’s Bureau of Scientific Relations, which dealt with technology espionage. Finally, in 2015 the CIA released another set of declassified documents that give credence to the claim that in 1968 CIA personnel in Israel found microscopic evidence of the presence of HEU traceable to the United States near the nuclear facility at Dimona.
Shapiro himself always vehemently denied the allegations, insisting that no diversion took place and that the loss of all the HEU should be attributed to routine loss commonly involved in such industrial processes. “Why would I jeopardize my integrity, my life?” Shapiro told me in a phone interview a few years ago.
The late Avraham Hermoni, Israel’s one-time scientific attaché to Washington, told Avner Cohen in the 1990s that his meetings with Shapiro were all legal and proper. NUMEC provided Israel with nuclear batteries for intelligence use, and Shapiro himself also provided advice on scientific projects. “A great deal of injustice was done to this man,” Hermoni declared, in an interview a few years before he himself died in 2006.
There is a great deal that still remains publicly unknown. The NUMEC affair is still inconclusive, indeed unresolved. While suspicions do persist, they never led to an indictment. After numerous FBI investigations, some of which included the use of unauthorized wiretaps on Shapiro’s phones, the U.S. Department of Justice chose not to proceed with any legal action against him. Either the FBI couldn’t produce the evidence to make a legal case against him, or some extraordinary political and foreign policy considerations did not allow for it.
Was Levin a spy?
The week that Nyman Levin died, the biggest-grossing movie in the United States was “Goldfinger.” American audiences gasped as British MI6 superspy James Bond saved the United States from Auric Goldfinger’s devious plot to set off a nuke at Fort Knox. But by then, Lyndon B. Johnson was in the Oval Office and he knew that not everyone in MI6 was as heroic as Agent 007.
A procession of MI6 officers had confessed to spying for the KGB, and the “Profumo Affair” had helped topple Prime Minister Harold Macmillan. By April 1964, the trail had even reached Buckingham Palace, when the urbane Sir Anthony Blunt — the curator of the queen’s art collection — admitted that he too had been a Soviet spy while working in MI5. He was allowed to keep his job and it was all kept from the British public until 1979.
President Johnson could have been forgiven for thinking that Britain was a burlesque show run by upper-class twits who were also traitors. He had little patience with Prime Minister Wilson at the best of times. According to one U.S. ambassador to London, he once referred to Wilson as a “little creep.” From Johnson’s perspective, the United States was supplying Britain with the state-of-the-art Polaris submarine nuclear missile system at a cut-rate price. Yet in December 1964, when the United States had asked the United Kingdom to send a few troops to Vietnam to give the Americans some political cover for their war, Wilson had said no. All LBJ wanted was the level of support that Tony Blair would later give George W. Bush during the invasion of Iraq. In LBJ’s typically colorful words, Wilson was “peeing all over” him.
He might have uttered some other characteristically choice Texan words if he’d been told that the head of Britain’s nuclear weapons program was also under investigation for leaking nuclear secrets — including perhaps America’s most sacred secrets — to a foreign power. Given how the U.S. responded to the Klaus Fuchs affair, the Polaris deal might not have survived.
Was the Levin investigation yet another thing the British failed to tell the Americans about, like that shipment of heavy water? If so, this could explain why Levin, whether he was responsible for any leaks or not, seems to have been erased from history.
Our numerous Freedom of Information requests to the Cabinet Office about Nyman Levin were all turned down on security grounds, even though he died over 50 years ago. When we appealed to the information commissioner, he ruled that we should be given limited access, but the Cabinet Office appealed to the Information Tribunal and obtained a ruling that the files should stay closed.
Peter Kelly died in 2009 and, in any case, would not say any more once the Cabinet Office refused to release the information.
In 1959, when Levin became the boss at Aldermaston, he gave a “not for attribution” interview to the New Scientist magazine. It says he showed “quickness and shrewd intelligence,” called him funny and occasionally blunt, and certainly not pompous, an impression reinforced by photos that often showed him as the only man not wearing a hat.
But was he a spy? Nyman Levin was a supporter of Israel and we can certainly see why MI5 — particularly given its view of Jews at the time — might see him as a suspect. But we can’t come to any firm conclusion about whether he ever crossed the line and leaked any secrets. His son is sure he didn’t. “I never had a sniff of him being devious,” Peter Levin told us.
But “espionage” is probably not a helpful concept here. We know that Levin’s U.S. equivalent, Edward Teller, did help Israel in its nuclear project — but did he think he was betraying the United States? Most certainly not. Maybe the same could be said about NUMEC’S Zalman Shapiro. If Levin passed sensitive, nuclear-related information to the Israelis, would he have thought he was betraying Britain? The same answer applies: No.
Avner Cohen a professor of nonproliferation studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, is the author of “Israel and the Bomb.”
Meirion Jones is the investigations editor at the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in London.
TIMES OF ISRAEL
Americans have learned resilience from their experience with terror, say experts in Israel BY ANDREW TOBIN September 23, 2016, 6:37 am
In the hours after the bombings Saturday in New York and on the Jersey Shore, the phrase became an instant slogan for New Yorkers’ purported coolness under fire. Attributed to a witness of the bombing that injured 31 people in Manhattan, one of three apparently attempted by a New Jersey man apprehended Sept. 19, it quickly spread online.
Media commentators soon picked up on the meme of New Yorkers’ resilience.
On “The Daily Show” Monday night, host Trevor Noah made light of news footage of New Yorkers complaining about being mildly inconvenienced by the bombing. BuzzFeed highlighted tweets by New Yorkers debating which of Manhattan’s ill-defined neighborhoods should be properly identified as the site of the bombing.
Over here in Israel, a country that prides itself on how quickly it recovers after a terrorist attack, experts on social resilience agreed that Americans are rightly impressed by New Yorkers — though they said Saturday’s bombings, which had no fatalities, was not a particularly severe test. While Israelis have been prepared for terrorism by decades of experience, they said, New Yorkers may develop resilience just by living in the hectic city.
“If you have past experience with continuous disruption it helps, it helps to be prepared for disruption caused by terror,” Meir Elran, the lead researcher on homeland security at the Institute of National Security Studies, a leading think tank in Israel, told JTA.
“As we say in Hebrew: Shit does happen. I think New Yorkers may be uniquely aware of that.”
In social science, resilience can be defined as a society’s ability to bounce back from a disruption, or an event that interferes with daily life. The faster a society returns to normal following a disruptive event, like severe violence or a natural disaster, the more resilient it is said to be. The more disruptive the event, the longer it will take to return to normalcy.
Past experience of disruptions and social capital are major predictors of resilience.
“It is true that people are resilient in general. Otherwise the human race would not have sustained itself for so many generations through so many various disruptions,” Elran said. “It is also true that there are societies that are more resilient than others, and the rate of resilience of a society depends to a great extent on past exposure to disruptions and how socially and economically well off it is.”
Unfortunately, Israel has dealt with regular disruptions by Palestinian terrorism since before its founding. Rather than collapsing, the society has strengthened, including by gradually and haltingly improving its preparation.
After the second intifada and the Second Lebanon War, both in the 2000s, Israel shifted its security doctrine to include protecting the homeland rather than only taking the fight to the enemy. The state built a security barrier with the West Bank, developed missile defense systems and restructured its Home Front Command, among other things. (On Tuesday, sirens sounded across Israel as part of a national preparedness drill, a practice introduced after the Second Lebanon War.)
At around the same time, observers have said, there was a shift in the way Israelis thought about themselves. Matti Friedman, a former correspondent for The Associated Press, said in his new book that Israelis by 2000 had given up on reshaping the Middle East, be it through Oslo-like compromise or Lebanon War-like force.
“When these things began to be clear, something interesting occurred,” Friedman wrote in “Pumpkinflowers.” “People in Israel didn’t despair, as our enemies hoped. Instead they stopped paying attention. Our happiness would no longer depend on the moods of people who wish us ill, and their happiness wouldn’t concern us more than ours concerns them.”
Speaking to JTA from Jerusalem, he said: “There have been stabbing attacks here over the last few days. The city is completely unaffected. It hasn’t come up in people’s conversations. It hasn’t affected people’s plans that I know of. If the intention is to disrupt people’s lives and make them afraid, it’s not working.”
Deeming Zionist slogans outdated, Friedman in his book suggested a new one to rival New York’s: “On the bus.” This was the terse answer an Israeli soldier named Harel gave to an interviewer who in 2000 asked how he managed to return to Southern Lebanon after his entire platoon was killed in the helicopter crash that ultimately led to Israel’s withdrawal from the area.
An Israeli Border Police officer checking a Palestinian man in front of the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem’s Old City, Sept. 20, 2016. (Sebi Berens/Flash90)
An Israeli Border Police officer checking a Palestinian man in front of the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem’s Old City, Sept. 20, 2016. (Sebi Berens/Flash90)
Of course, New Yorkers have faced terrorism, too, most notably the world-shaking attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Like Israel, New York and the United States, traumatized by the attacks, responded by becoming more prepared. The creation of the New York Police Department’s Counter-Terrorism Bureau, the US Department of Homeland Security, and the Transportation Security Administration are just a few examples. But terrorism is not part of daily life in the Big Apple the way it is in Israel.
“The situation in New York is still fundamentally different,” an Israeli researcher on social resilience told JTA on condition of anonymity because of the public nature of his policy work.
“Attacks like those [in New York and New Jersey] this week are sporadic, quite rare events that contradict the usual story of life in New York City. So for now at least, it is possible to ignore terror as part of a shared reality there.”
Elran said the level of disruption caused by the bombings was “very low.”
Still, the American celebration of New Yorkers’ resilience to terrorism has empirical backing, the researchers said. Studies have found the first responders and the public in general returned to normal life remarkably quickly after 9/11, in many ways within a few weeks.
New Yorkers may be resilient to terrorism despite relatively little experience in part because the intensity of living in the city involves near constant disruption on a small scale, according to the researchers.
“Events happen here very quickly, and in New York, it is also the case,” said the social resilience researcher in Israel. “People there experience work-related stress and life is very intensive.”
Elran said it takes a certain degree of sophistication to understand that things are not always going to be stable.
“New Yorkers, with their diversity of experience, can been seen as people who are more accustomed to disruption,” he said. “And it helps that they tend to be socially and economically well to do.”
Israel, too, has flourished socially and economically despite the constant threat of terrorism. The nation’s adaptability, arguably informed by its challenges, has made Israel a world leader in technology and security. But there are downsides, the social resilience researcher said.
“There is no magic way to avoid paying a price,” he said. “In Israel, there are high levels of frustration and aggression, and you know what the driving culture here is like.”
Anyone who has taken the New York subway during rush hour may be able to relate.
The majority oppose, but the Zionist entity gets what it wants anyway…Hmmm, does no one care about the will of the people? Why not?
The latest outbreak of feral negro violence has occurred over the past two nights in Charlotte, NC. There, a young negro male, reportedly in possession of a weapon, was shot
…And they are still peddling the same debunked Zionist hogwash about Assad’s “chemical weapons.”