Nuke Whistleblower Wants Israel's Reactor Destroyed

[maddezmom]

By Allyn Fisher-Ilan
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Mordechai Vanunu, about to complete an 18-year jail term for spilling Israeli nuclear secrets, has called for the destruction of Israel's secretive Dimona reactor, newspapers reported on Monday.

"Just like the Iraqi reactor was destroyed, I want the Israeli reactor destroyed," Vanunu, referring to Israel's 1981 bombing near Baghdad, was quoted as saying in a videotaped meeting recently with security officers.

"I am defending the Arab world," he said in the interview, according to a transcript carried by newspapers. The tape was to be broadcast later in the day.

Vanunu, a former technician at the Dimona reactor, was jailed in 1986 as a traitor after disclosing information to Britain's Sunday Times newspaper which led analysts to conclude Israel had produced as many as 200 nuclear bombs at the facility.

~snip~
more: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=4863226

[keithyboy]

1. Where is the international outrage about this?

Buried beneath Rupert Murdoch's media enterprise, no doubt.

[Muddleoftheroad]

2. Or perhaps

It takes into account the numerous wars against Israel by her many Arab neighbors. If any nation needs nukes, it's Israel.

[Junkdrawer]

4. Israel is above the law? What if the Arab states start using Israel's

intransigence as an excuse to go forward with their programs? Wouldn't that make the region much more dangerous?

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. Above what law?

The law about nukes has been that once you get them, you keep them. Look at India, Pakistan and China and probably North Korea.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

13. Doesn't that encourage covert nuclear programs?

[Muddleoftheroad]

20. Do they need encouragement?

They happen anyhow.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

39. There's a great reason to let it happen

[DarkPhenyx]

5. Israel needs a swift kick in the ass.

Not nukes. They are an oppressive regime, lead by terrorists, who are commiting human rights violations on a daily basis.

[Muddleoftheroad]

8. You describe the PA not Israel

[DarkPhenyx]

16. Yes, I know that is what you think.

That's why I made sure to mention Israel as the group led by terrorists and conducting human rights violations. Had I just just said "terrorist" and "human rights violation" your blind faith in Israel would have made you hear PA instead of Israel. I did try and make sure you didn't make that mistake. That's me. Always helpful. :) Gotta do my part.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

6. So who exactly is the arbiter over who gets nukes and who does not?

Oppressors get nukes but the oppressed cannot fight back? Why should Israel be able to exert supreme, unilateral power over the region?

If any country needs to learn what human rights are about, it's Israel.

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. The world has opposed ANY new nation getting nukes

Once you get them, you keep them.

When has Israel ever tried to exert "supreme, unilateral power over the region?"

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

14. Uhm, daily?

[Muddleoftheroad]

21. How so?

How is Israel exerting power over Egypt? Jordan? Saudi Arabia? Even Iran which has threatened to use nukes on Israel if it ever gets them?

[DarkPhenyx]

17. So if Bush believed Iraq had nukes...

...they were allowed to keep them? Interesting. Please! Tell me more.

[Muddleoftheroad]

22. Yep

If he had attacked, our army would have been nuked. Ask the North Koreans how that works.

[DarkPhenyx]

25. What is your logic behind supporting...

...nuclear proliferation? Just curious.

[Muddleoftheroad]

27. Not supporting it. It's just a fact.

Lots of nations have nukes. Not much I can do about it. And, in Israel's case, there's nothing I would do about it.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[maddezmom]

10. can't answer those questions, but Israel should sumit to inspections

[Vladimir]

19. If I was a third world leader

I would spend most of my time trying to get a nuke. They are definitely a proven insurance against being fucked with militarily.

Sadly I can see only one place where this imperio-driven proliferation will end. :nuke:

V

[0007]

12. No one in the world needs NUCLEAR weapons of anykind

[Muddleoftheroad]

23. Easy to say

Except when your nation is surrounded by enemies who wish to wipe you out.

[DarkPhenyx]

26. You still don't need nukes.

Israel proved that several times over.

I also posit that if Israel was less beligerant they would be in a far stronger position internationally. I know I'd be far more likely to support Israel if they weren't led by terrorists and conducting human rights violations on a daily basis.

You do realize that, in addition to being terrorists, the Isreali goverment is also an extremist RW group.

[Muddleoftheroad]

29. Times change

Israel's military won't always be the top in the region.

Nukes provide Israel with security because they know that the Arabs can't push them into the sea.

The Israeli government is a government designed to protect Israel from attack. When Arafat declared Intifada, Israel put in a general to defend itself. If the Palestinians want peace, Israel will choose a different kind of leader.

[DarkPhenyx]

30. And when we were attacked by Iraq

We fell in behind Bush.

How do you feel about bulldozing villages in order to move your people onto the land. What is your opinion on being in gross violation of multiple UN mandates and resolutions? Mass indiscriminate punishment? Use of heavy weapons and war grade munitions in residential areas?

I am not saying that teh PA is innocent as a lamb by any means, but Israel is as bad or worse. WHy do you continue to ignore the evils they do?

[Muddleoftheroad]

31. What does Iraq have to do with this?

The anti-Israel forces almost make me laugh. They find all this empathy for the Palestinians but fail to try and understand the Israeli side. There is a reason for Israel attacking terrorists. It's because the PA and Arafat don't. In fact, Arafat funds, encourages and supports them.

As for the UN, it is made up of either of a couple constituencies -- Arab nations, Muslim nations, oil-hungry nations and nations with wonderful records of anti-Semitism. And you expect Israel to get a fair hearing?

[DarkPhenyx]

53. Actually yes.

Particualrly considering that your generalization about the UN is wrong in the extreme.

Why is it that you support them so strongly? Why is it that you are ignoring their record in all of this? I would also like to ask why you are assuming the "black and white" mentality again? I would hope you know that it isn't a black and white situation.

[Muddleoftheroad]

64. What is wrong about that UN assessment

I think one of the Muslim leaders claimed about 50 nations that they hold sway over. And there are a bunch more who are wildly dependent on Arab oil. Then there's Europe -- Germany, France, Poland, etc. -- none of which have good records of dealing with Jews. Then there are nations that oppose Israel just to piss off the U.S.

[Malva Zebrina]

60. sure,

everybody should have nukes. I agree--Iran has had numerous wars against her, therefore Iran should be able to develop nukes. Afganistan has had numerous wars against her and does not have nukes--that's why it is so easy to topple any regime there.. There have been numerous wars in Russia--that's why they have nukes. Any country that does not try to develop nukes, given the barbaric notion of pre-emtive-ventive attack of Bush and Sharon, has to be negligent as to their own welfare and that of their citizens.


Nukes do not seem to have stopped terrorist attacks.

[NNN0LHI]

3. More info

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L19599561.htm

Five facts about Israeli nuclear whistleblower Vanunu

[the Kelly Gang]

11. Vanunu was very brave but I worry about his future

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

15. some israeli terrorist will assassinate him

If not the IDF itself. They seem to like assassinations.

[madrchsod]

18. isreali government

has the right to turn it`s neighbors or anyone who disagrees with it`s policies into a radioactive pile of goo. it is their right as a nation.

[Muddleoftheroad]

24. No, it merely has the right to defend itself

Against those many Arab nations that seek to destroy it.

[CabalBuster]

32. God will make sure those evil zionists will self-destruct

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

37. You forgot one part

The "at any cost" part.

[Muddleoftheroad]

40. That's not the definition

Nor is it the reality. If it were, there were would be a lot of dead Palestinians.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

42. You're obviously living in a dream world

One in which there haven't been 25,601 Palestinian casualties since September 2000.

On edit: For the record, I do believe if the rest of the world would let them do it, they'd have eradicated the Palestinians altogether in fulfillment of David Ben-Gurion's dream.

[Muddleoftheroad]

45. The PALESTINIANS declared Intifada

So you can blame those who walked away from a peace discussion and turned to terror once again.

And, though 25,000 casualties sounds like a lot, in a population of millions, it's not. If Israel wanted the Palestinians gone, they would be gone.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

48. You can blame Ariel Sharon who desecrated a holy land

Or you can blame Yigal Amir who destroyed the first peace process.

Like I said, the rest of the world wouldn't put up with Israel killing every last Palestinian and they're not strong enough to fight everyone. Not even the U.S. would support that action.

[Muddleoftheroad]

52. "Desecrated a holy land?"

You must be joking. Ariel Sharon, like anyone else, and certainly like an Jewish Israeli has a right to visit the holiest place in Judaism.

[Darranar]

74. So...

the Zionists who have strongly criticized Israel's policies from the beginning believe that "at any cost" part?

Or perhaps you are foolishly generalizing?

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

Wow, what a skewed definition

[CabalBuster]

43. that's an accurate description .... if you do your research

you'll see that in consistenly exposes what's currently driving the zionist state to self-destruction. I am not a jew hater, I recognized that many jews are against oppression and racism and that they do not agree with the state of affairs in Israel. Believe it or not, Judaism is a peaceful religion.

http://www.serendipity.li/zionism.htm

[Muddleoftheroad]

46. "I am not a Jew hater"

Hmmmm...

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

44. Skewed? Really?

Do you know the purpose of the kosher laws? $5 bets you do not.

[Muddleoftheroad]

47. Dying to hear this.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddleoftheroad]

54. Wow, one person says that

Most I have heard say that Kosher rules were designed as health considerations in many cases.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

57. I'm guessing that's because

You never stopped to question what the official line was. That's not exactly Hebrew School material.

[Darranar]

76. Interesting theory, haven't heard it before...

is there any evidence supporting it?

[Gimel]

82. Halacha

The Jewish code of ethics (Jewish Law) is "to build a fence around Torah", not the Kashrut laws specifically, but all religious observance. Each has a basis in Torah, and the not mixing meat and milk comes from a verse "do not boil a kid in his mother's milk".

It is strictly observed on all kosher tables. However, Kashrut is much more than that.

[Darranar]

83. Well, there has been some discussion of the purpose of Kashrut....

and one of the reasons given is to differentiate between the Jews and non-Jews, not far at all from the thought expressed above.

However, that exposes another flaw: this sort of thing IS discussed, in Hebrew School and in more elite circles.

The actual verse, I believe, is "tradition is a wall around Torah" (or something of the sort), the point being the idea that if one follows the laws that his or her parents did, the Torah would survive. Talmudic law, that is Jewish law drawn from the discussions and interpretations of the Rabbis, is supposed to come from the Oral Torah, which is supposed to be a companion to the Written Torah, not a wall around it.

But interestingly I have heard that the Oral Torah is necessary because it differentiates Jews from Christians, who accept the validity of the "Old Testament", the Written Torah, but not the Oral Torah.

The fact is that many Jews throughout the ages, supposedly from the time Joshua led the Children of Israel into Canaan until now, have been deeply concerned with stopping assimilation, not a foolish concern for a minority religious group, especially considering the vast suffering that group has endured throughout the ages. This is shown in the Book of Judges, where every time a few Jews start worshipping another god, their enemies are victorious (it's interesting how the gracious, just, kind, loving, merciful God of the Torah seems to have a fondness for brutal collective punishment, but that is a different matter); the concept of divine intervention in this case is troubling to me, being an athiest, but it was very likely an excuse used, and the stories were repeated throughout the ages as a warning against assimilation. It does not at all so unreasonable to me to believe that the Kashrut laws were intended for such a prevention of assimilation; the idea from the verse you cite must be expanded greatly to reach the current prohibitions on eating dairy and meat together.

[Gimel]

84. Kashrut

If you've ever read the Shulhan Auruch, or an abridged version, would be able to see what the "fence around Torah" is. Almost every single law, has a health objective connected to it. From circumcision to the burying of the dead in a timely fashion (same day as the passing) all the laws are linked to physical, emotional and/or spiritual health. The life of the community is important, so in order to preserve the traditions, a religious community is ideal.

[Darranar]

86. Well, yes, that is claimed by many...

I don't believe it, however.

There are quite a few obscure and seemingly pointless laws. The Red Cow comes to mind, though I doubt the Shulchan Aruch covers that.

I must admit that I have not read the Shulchan Aruch; dreary religious texts are not my style. I am, however, familiar with many of the laws contained within it; for the most part not by choice, but that is another matter.

Religious communities tend to divide, discriminate, and obstruct progressive change; I prefer secular.

[Gimel]

89. It's like in Fahrenheit 9/11

The lawmakers have never read the Patriot Act and don't know what it actually says, they never read the laws, but they discuss the bills and pass them according to what others tell them about them.

If you haven't read the law, why are you discussing it?

[Darranar]

90. Because I know it...

and there are plenty of other sources for law aside from the Shulchan Aruch.

[Gimel]

91. Don't be so vague

What sources are you quoting?

The Shulhan Auruch is THE authentic code of Jewish Law. It is derived from Torah, hand based on teaching and tradition.

what source are you referring to in the post #83 above where you say "discussion of the purpose of Kashrut" is to differentiate the Jews from the Gentiles?

[Darranar]

92. It is true that the Shulchan Aruch is, in essence, the final word...

for Orthodox Judaism at least.

However, reading it is not necessary to understand Jewish law.

I never said that discussion of the purpose of Kashrut was to differentiate Jews from Gentiles. I said that some Jews claimed, and claim, that that was the purpose.

[Gimel]

94. Discussion?

I'm not sure I follow you. You need a good teacher, one who know the laws, not one who is trying to get around the laws or obliterate them.

[Darranar]

97. I've had plenty of teachers who knew the laws...

and followed them, and tried to impart (or shove down the throat) that love of laws to me.

Did they succeed? Not quite, as you can see.

[Gimel]

95. The only sources

are people who really know the laws, authentic religious Jews. What sources do you mean?

plenty of other sources for law

[Darranar]

96. You think Joseph Caro made it up? n/t

[The Magistrate]

85. This, Sir

Is one of those instances where a little knowledge is a dangerous thing....

It is not to prevent conversion through socializing, but to prevent participation in pagan worships, that many of these rules were created, and from the point of view those who created them, and those who followed them, many many centuries ago, this was a desperately serious matter, as nothing was so sure to provoke the wrath of the deity. It is difficult for modern persons, even religioud ones, to appreciate just how saturated in religion the ancient world was. Virtually every act of life had some sacred component, and was in a real sense a religious ritual, in which anything from high gods to guardian spirits to ancestors would be invoked. The boiling of meat in milk was more than a meal in old Canaan, it was a religious sacrifice, as some of the result was invariably dedicated by setting aside to the dieties of the land. Some tace is always left in the cooking pot, and thus the conditions of the sacrifice might have been fulfilled....

[Darranar]

87. There was some of that in the origins of the laws, yes...

but the Rabbinical expansions of the law do seem to aim towards resistance of all assimilation, not only with the Canaanite pagan varieties but also with the Greek and Roman, and later on, of course, in regard to Christianity.

For instance, there is a prohibition on eating at the same table with a non-Jew. I doubt that the integration between Hebrew and Canaanite was to such an extent in ancient Canaan, but the integration in other times certainly was.

[The Magistrate]

88. Fair Enough, Sir

My interest being more in origins, my familiarity with early forms is greater than with later developments.

Two points come to mind. First, the remorseless pattern of logic extended over time: reasoning in the style of "if this is so, then this must follow" has a tendency to press most anything to the point of absurdity when avidly pursued, and often reaches points with no more connection to the foundation than a homeopathic remedy to its purported ingredient. Second, in medieval Europe particu;arly, pressure for abjuration of the religion was so strong that special steps against the danger could be expected to arise.

[Darranar]

75. What does that have to do with the subject of Zionism? n/t

[Vladimir]

49. Excuse me??

In the same league as communism? you do realise that communists the world over are among the most viscious anti-zionists, don't you?

Why is it that whenever people want to attack something, they compare it to communism? For a start, kibbutz or no kibbutz, communism is secular and materialist in nature.

V

[Liberal Classic]

93. Goodness gracious

I'm always suprised the lengths people will go to imply that Jews are evil.

I wonder when did anti-semitism infect the left, or was it always there?

[RapidCreek]

33. Not with my tax dollar it doesn't.

RC

[Muddleoftheroad]

35. Fortunately, Congress would disagree

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

36. You mean against the Arab nations it would seek to destroy, right?

[LagaLover]

41. Seems to me that if Israel

REALLY wanted to destroy an Arab nation, it could do so pretty damn easily. Do you think for a minute that if the situation was reversed (i.e., an Arab nation had nukes), that the Arabs would not destroy Israel in a heartbeat?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

51. If they could get away with it, they would

Fortunately, the rest of the world is not as deluded about Israel as the United States is.

[Muddleoftheroad]

55. Fortunately, the U.S. is not deluded about the PA

[LagaLover]

58. The rest of the world would prefer

to see Israel cease to exsist, IMHO

[rman]

59. ah yes, and ie Iran, N Korea do not have the right to defend itself

against certain western nations.

[LagaLover]

61. Uhhh, not if they are signatories to the NNPT

If they are, they are not supposed to be developing nukes.

[Walt Starr]

56. So who is the biggest Terrorist Sponsoring Nation in the world?

Israel, hands down.

[CabalBuster]

62. Amen to that n/t

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

63. terrorism is only a matter of perspective

One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.

[Muddleoftheroad]

65. Nope

It doesn't work that way, marketing notwithstanding. If you deliberately kill civilians to terrorize, you are a terrorist.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

66. So that makes the Israeli gov't a terrorist organization

Thank you for your help in defining exactly what they are.

[Muddleoftheroad]

67. Not at all

Israel targets terrorist just the same as police target criminals.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

68. Since when

Since when do police fire missiles into crowded downtown areas in order to assassinate one SUSPECT? Since when do the police use flechette rounds to kill or injure anyone near their intended targets? Since when do the police bulldoze the homes of SUSPECTS even though there might be innocent people inside?

[Muddleoftheroad]

71. Police get in gun battles with thugs and murderers

Bystanders get killed and wounded. Police chase suspects. Again, bystanders get killed and wounded. Different places, different weapons. Same tactics. Same reality.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Noon_Blue_Apples]

77. yup, like getting shot 40 times for reaching for the wallet

defending the indefensible.

Corrupt police - no never

Gung-ho police - no never

racist police - no never

"Different places, different weapons. Same tactics. Same reality." - no shit

wwkd - what would king do

[Muddleoftheroad]

78. So now you indict all police?

Sure there are bad guys in every field of endeavor. Bad cops, bad politicians, bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad Republicans and bad Democrats.

So?

[Noon_Blue_Apples]

79. what a joke. 'all police'

My stars, muddle thinks there are bad cops and bad politicians...there is something new. Do these include israelis and americans?

what a joke - the only people you are fooling with the circular rhetoric are freeper eyes here.

pathetic, "so now you indict all police"

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

70. Abandoning your argument?

[lefty_mcduff]

72. That's a rather simplistic argument.

If, in the pursuit of terrorists, the IDF know that there's a 100% chance of inflicting civillian casualties, then they are DELIBERATELY killing civilians.

Guess what that makes the IDF?

[Scurrilous]

69. Poraz forbids Vanunu from leaving Israel for one year

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/417038.html

<snip>

"Interior Minister Avraham Poraz signed an injunction Monday forbidding nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu from leaving Israel for one year, Israel Radio reported.
Poraz has been persuaded by security officials' contention that if Vanunu were to leave the country, he would damage security interests, the radio reported. Vanunu is due to be released from an Israeli jail on Wednesday after serving 18 years for revealing details of Israel's previously covert nuclear facility in Dimona to Britain's Sunday Times newspaper in October 1986.

Earlier Monday, Attorney General Menachem Mazuz instructed the media not to broadcast a videotape of an interview with nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu that was made by the Prisons Service.

Vanunu has filed a complaint with defense officials against releasing the videotape, saying that he was told that there would be no infringement of his privacy.

Nonetheless, an audio tape of an interview with Vanunu that was made about a month ago, in which Vanunu says he does not believe that his actions constitute treason or espionage, will be broadcast Monday night on Israeli television."

[kalian]

80. "I am defending the Arab world," he said

:wow:

[saigon68]

81. kick