Trending Topics:

When a U.S. president demanded inspections of a nuclear facility in the Middle East (and failed)

on 51 Comments

In July 1963, President Kennedy demanded of the newly-elected Israeli Prime Minister that he allow U.S. inspections of the Israeli nuclear facility at Dimona to make sure that the plant was “devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes.” U.S. support for Israel would be “seriously jeopardized” if the U.S. could not get information on doings at the facility, Kennedy said.

Kennedy stated his demands in a letter to Levi Eshkol dated July 5, 1963, less than ten days after Eshkol became prime minister of Israel. The document is in the Israel State Archive, and is online at the National Security Archive, in a section titled Israel and the Bomb.

Kennedy Eshkol letter, page 1

Kennedy Eshkol letter, page 1


Kennedy-Eshkol letter, page 2

Kennedy-Eshkol letter, page 2

Kennedy Eshkol letter, page 3

Kennedy Eshkol letter, page 3

Text below (thanks in part to the Jewish Virtual Library).

Avner Cohen, author of Israel and the Bomb, writes at the National Security Archive:

Not since President Eisenhower’s message to [David] Ben Gurion, in the midst of the Suez crisis in November 1956, had an American president been so blunt with an Israeli prime minister. Kennedy told Eshkol that the American commitment and support of Israel ‘could be seriously jeopardized’ if Israel did not let the United States obtain ‘reliable information’ about Israel’s efforts in the nuclear field. In the letter Kennedy presented specific demands on how the American inspection visits to Dimona should be executed. Since the United States had not been involved in the building of Dimona and no international law or agreement had been violated, Kennedy demands were indeed unprecedented. They amounted, in effect, to American ultimatum.

What’s the larger context?

In The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy (1991), Seymour Hersh reports that Kennedy was dead-set against Israel getting the bomb and frequently pressured David Ben-Gurion, Eshkol’s predecessor, to agree to inspections at Dimona. Kennedy even sold out his concerns about Palestinian refugees’ return in order to gain concessions on Dimona– much to the consternation of the State Department. Hersh says that the Israelis misled American inspectors at the site, which had gone “critical” in 1962 with the help of the French. And some members of Congress undercut Kennedy’s policy in private communications with the Israelis.

Lyndon Johnson succeeded Kennedy as president on November 22, 1963, of course. He was also opposed to Israel getting the bomb, Hersh says. “A nuclear Israel was unacceptable.” But Johnson was in the end more accommodating: “By the middle 1960s, the game was fixed: President Johnson and his advisers would pretend that the American inspections amounted to proof that Israel was not building the bomb, leaving unblemished America’s newly reaffirmed support for nuclear nonproliferation.”

“Unlike Kennedy, Johnson was not eager for a confrontation,” Michael Karpin writes in The Bomb in the Basement. “He preferred compromise.” Israel achieved nuclear capability in 1966, he says.

Both Karpin and Hersh attribute Johnson’s winking acceptance of Israel into the nuclear club to his sensitivity to the Jewish experience in the Holocaust and the effect of what both men call “the Jewish lobby.” Hersh mentions Johnson’s dependence on financial contributions from Abraham Feinberg.

Here is that Kennedy letter:

“Dear Mr. Prime Minister:

“It gives me great personal pleasure to extend congratulations as you assume your responsibilities as Prime Minister of Israel. You have our friendship and best wishes in your new tasks. It is on one of these that I am writing you at this time.

“You are aware, I am sure, of the exchanges which I had with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion concerning American visits to Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona. Most recently, the Prime Minister wrote to me on May 27. His words reflected a most intense personal consideration of a problem that I know is not easy for your Government, as it is not for mine. We welcomed the former Prime Minister’s strong reaffirmation that Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel’s willingness to permit periodic visits to Dimona.

“I regret having to add to your burdens so soon after your assumption of office, but I feel the crucial importance of this problem necessitates my taking up with you at this early date certain further considerations, arising out of Mr. Ben-Gurion’s May 27 letter, as to the nature and scheduling of such visits.

“I am sure you will agree that these visits should be as nearly as possible in accord with international standards, thereby resolving all doubts as to the peaceful intent of the Dimona project. As I wrote to Mr. Ben-Gurion, this government’s commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to peace as the question of Israel’s effort in the nuclear field.

“Therefore, I asked our scientists to review the alternative schedules of visits we and you had proposed. If Israel’s purposes are to be clear beyond reasonable doubt, I believe that the schedule which would best serve our common purposes would be a visit early this summer, another visit in June 1964, and thereafter at intervals of six months. I am sure that such a schedule should not cause you any more difficulty than that which Mr. Ben-Gurion proposed in his May 27 letter. It would be essential, and I understand that Mr. Ben-Gurion’s letter was in accord with this, that our scientists have access to all areas of the Dimona site and to any related part of the complex, such as fuel fabrication facilities or plutonium separation plant, and that sufficient time be allotted for a thorough examination.

“Knowing that you fully appreciate the truly vital significance of this matter to the future well-being of Israel, to the United States, and internationally, I am sure our carefully considered request will have your most sympathetic attention.


“John F. Kennedy”


Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

51 Responses

  1. Scott on July 27, 2015, 12:12 pm

    Excellent historical post. Amusingly, National Review recently ran an interview with Elliot Abrams in which he waxed nostalgic about the tough minded “pro-West” Kennedy in contrast to the third worldish, guilt obsessed Obama. Abrams was faking, of course.

    • lysias on July 27, 2015, 12:50 pm

      The neoconservatives also have a habit of misrepresenting Martin Luther King.

  2. lysias on July 27, 2015, 12:54 pm

    It looks as if Pollard’s release is imminent. Washington Post: Jonathan Pollard eligible for ‘mandatory parole’ in November:

    Jonathan Pollard, the U.S. intelligence analyst who spied for Israel and was sentenced to life in prison, could be released as early as November when he becomes eligible for mandatory parole, according to the Justice Department. His release would eliminate a long-standing wedge in U.S.-Israel relations at a time of increased tensions between the countries over a nuclear deal with Iran.

    The Justice Department said Friday that although Pollard was ordered to serve life in prison after being convicted of selling U.S. secrets to the Israeli government, the terms of his sentence require that he be released after 30 years — a date that will arrive this fall — unless the government can prove that he violated rules in prison or is likely to commit additional crimes.

    In a statement, the Justice Department signaled that the government was not planning to oppose the release, noting that Pollard is “presumptively eligible for mandatory parole.”

    If he is released, and he is then lionized when he gets to Israel, I think that will further discredit Israel in the eyes of Americans.

    • just on July 27, 2015, 1:32 pm

      Absolutely correct, lysias. It’s a disgrace that for some others sentenced to life, they serve it and this treasonous and terrible person gets out after 30 yrs. He’s already lionized in Israel.

      Then there’s that little question of Netanyahu and some switches.

      Here’s an interesting article by Julian Borger from 2014:

      “The truth about Israel’s secret nuclear arsenal

      Israel has been stealing nuclear secrets and covertly making bombs since the 1950s. And western governments, including Britain and the US, turn a blind eye. But how can we expect Iran to curb its nuclear ambitions if the Israelis won’t come clean?”

      Anyway, thanks for the great article, Phil.

      “And some members of Congress undercut Kennedy’s policy in private communications with the Israelis.”

      hmmm, some things never change.

      Looks like Kennedy “failed” because his life and Presidency were ended prematurely.

      • Citizen on July 27, 2015, 3:21 pm

        Didn’t Ruby say he shot Oswald before Oswald could be interrogated because he was acting in behalf his fellow Jews? BTW, Johnson not only allowed Israel to get the bomb, he also covered up the attack on the USS Liberty; he was worried about his POTUS seat because the Vietnam war was not going well & he felt the need to bribe the Jewish establishment in the media, not to mention gaining zionist dollars.

    • a blah chick on July 27, 2015, 2:17 pm

      If he’s parole there could still be restrictions on his movements.

      Here’s what should happen: Israel gets Pollard in exchange for letting Vanunu leave the country. If they don’t like that then put the same restrictions on Pollard that Vanunu has: no interviews, no freedom of movement and no leaving the country.
      That’ll teach them.

    • echinococcus on July 28, 2015, 12:56 pm

      If he is released, and he is then lionized when he gets to Israel, I think that will further discredit Israel in the eyes of Americans

      Not so sure. What is dead certain is that it will further discredit the US in the eyes of the Israelians.

  3. Grumpy Gremlin on July 27, 2015, 12:58 pm

    There are a number of us who believe that JFK was killed because of his opposition to Israeli nukes. LBJ was complicit, with key figures in the CIA and Mossad. JFK also wanted AIPAC to register as a foreign lobby. All of this got overturned when LBJ took power. Jewish money had a lot to do with it, as it did with the creation of Israel.

    • lysias on July 27, 2015, 3:13 pm

      Reactor at Dimona went critical on December 26, 1963.

      Interesting date, especially for anyone who thinks LBJ was really opposed to Israel’s acquiring nukes.

    • Citizen on July 27, 2015, 3:23 pm

      Bobby Kennedy was who JFK appointed to make the Zionist predecessor of AIPAC register as agent of a foreign country under FARA. Oddly, he too was murdered while attempting this.

      • Herb Glatter on July 27, 2015, 7:13 pm

        guess who assassinated Bobby Kennedy? On this day in 1969, Sirhan Sirhan, a Palestinian immigrant born in Jerusalem into a Christian family in 1944, was sentenced to die in the gas chamber after being convicted of killing Sen. Robert F. Kennedy (D-N.Y.).

        Read more:

      • lysias on August 26, 2015, 3:10 pm

        There are lots of problems with the story that Sirhan Sirhan was the lone shooter who killed Bobby Kennedy. Starting with ballistics: the shots that killed RFK did not come from where Sirhan was standing; there were traces of far more bullets in the room than Sirhan could possibly have fired. Also, Sirhan behaved just like a man under hypnosis-induced compulsion.

    • lysias on July 27, 2015, 4:01 pm

      That’s not how I look at it. If Israel and its lobby were involved in the conspiracy, as I think they probably were, I think they were junior partners. The assassination was largely organized by the CIA. If LBJ gave the go-ahead, as I think he probably did, he was a prime participant in the conspiracy. LBJ certainly was a prime mover in organizing the cover-up, as was J. Edgar Hoover. The botched autopsy was the work of the military (who got their Vietnam war, with the prospect of officers’ promotions). The assassination could not have succeeded without cooperation from the Secret Service.

      If you want to read a book that argues that Israel’s role in the assassination was more central than I am inclined to believe, read JFK: An American Coup D’etat: The Truth Behind the Kennedy Assassination by retired British military intelligence officer Colonel John Hughes-Wilson. I am not convinced, but he does make a case.

      • Jabberwocky on July 28, 2015, 6:32 am

        Final Judgement by Michael Piper lays out the case for a pivotal role by Israel in the JFK assassination because of his ‘existential’ threat to the nuclear program.

        This was handled via Meyer Lansky and the mafia in co-ordination with CIA interests who were supportive of Israel.

      • Boomer on July 28, 2015, 10:29 am

        re: “If LBJ gave the go-ahead, as I think he probably did . . . ”

        You may well be right. He had motivation. Whether he had the will, is another matter. Obviously, I don’t know what happened, but I would imagine that if he were involved in advance, it would have been done with “wink and a nod,” with plenty of plausible deniability.

        For example, the suitably connected Mr. X complains to LBJ about what the Kennedy brothers are doing. LBJ commiserates. He would like to help, but explains that there is nothing he can do about it, even as VP, and from what he hears, he probably won’t be VP much longer.

        As for flawed investigation, it seems clear that LBJ’s primary concern was that the country (and he) could move on without creating even more of a crisis. The country and the world seemed to be in a dangerous condition then. Whether he knew of details that might have impeded moving on, I don’t know. It is possible that he knew or suspected certain things, but–in any event–I don’t think getting the truth out was his over-riding concern. Of course, if he had been involved, even to the extent of a wink and a nod, he would have a personal compelling motive to move on without a thorough investigation. That does not imply that he actually was involved.

        As for the CIA, again I don’t know, but I suspect that it is not accurate to think of “the CIA” as a unitary entity in this context. (Your comment does not imply that you do either, of course.) The man at the top certainly can’t know what everyone connected with the CIA does. But I suspect the conspiracy, if there was one (as seems likely to me) wasn’t an institutional one per se.

      • ckg on July 28, 2015, 2:00 pm

        Interesting, But if Meyer Lansky and elements of the Government of Israel were involved in the plot, why would the latter deny the former RoR and send him back to the U.S. when persued on federal tax evasion charges?

    • JWalters on July 27, 2015, 7:47 pm

      The CIA has no intrinsic motivation to commit crimes against America. That motivation comes from Big Money people, who take control of various government agencies. The biggest money guys are the bankers, and war is one of their biggest profit centers.

      The Big Money behind Israel has been successfully covering up Israel’s crimes for decades. So they had the media and political control in place to cover up the facts about JFK’s assassination. An enormous amount of information about the assassination has come out subsequent to the Warren Commission report. The evidence is now overwhelming that MANY facts about the assassination were not considered in the Warren Commission investigation, and some intentionally withheld.

      We now know the reason the Warren Commission went along with the rushed investigation, which allowed so much information to go unconsidered. They were told the alternative was a likely nuclear war with the Soviets, resulting in tens of millions of Americans dead. It may be no coincidence that a nuclear threat claim was used to launch the war against Iraq, and is now being used in an effort to launch a war against Iran.

      Johnson went along with the assassination because he was under investigation for murder in Texas, and as president he could squash that investigation. Johnson then helped the Israelis cover up the USS Liberty attack because they could blackmail him on the JFK assassination.

      If this all sounds like a game of thrones, that’s because it is. Democracy, ideally, would put an end to this sh*t. This is why the anti-oligarchy forces are so important in the 2016 election. “Income inequality” is merely the tip of the iceberg.

    • RoHa on July 27, 2015, 10:10 pm

      Kennedy pissed off the Mafia. They thought they had bought a president, only for him to start clamping down on them.
      Kennedy wanted to rein in the CIA. The CIA did not like this.
      He showed a distinct reluctance to bomb anywhere, which led some of the military to doubt that he was a true, patriotic, American.
      He tried to bring U.S. currency under the control of the U.S. government. The private bankers of the Federal Reserve did not share his enthusiasm.
      He opposed Israel’s plans for nuclear weapons.
      And, of course, he was shagging lots of beautiful women and getting away with it.

      So the Kennedy Reduction Programme had plenty of support from very powerful people.

    • Boo on July 29, 2015, 1:02 pm

      Many, many moons ago when I was in a fraternity, one of the things we’d do at a party would be to toast each US President in succession. These toasts were mostly spontaneous and different each time, but when we got to JFK, the invariable toast was “John F. Kennedy — Felled by an assassin’s bullet!”

      And then LBJ: “Lyndon Johnson — The man who hired the assassin!”

  4. JLewisDickerson on July 27, 2015, 1:23 pm

    RE: “When a U.S. president demanded inspections of a nuclear facility in the Middle East (and failed)”

    SEE: “How Israel Out-Foxed US Presidents”, By Morgan Strong (A Special Report),, 5/31/10

    [EXCERPT] ● Secret Nukes and JFK
    . . . Even as it backed down in the Sinai [following its invasion in 1956], Israel was involved in another monumental deception, a plan for building its own nuclear arsenal.
    In 1956, Israel had concluded an agreement with France to build a nuclear reactor in the Negev desert. Israel also signed a secret agreement with France to build an adjacent plutonium reprocessing plant.
    Israel began constructing its nuclear plant in 1958. However, French President Charles de Gaulle was worried about nuclear weapons destabilizing the Middle East and insisted that Israel not develop a nuclear bomb from the plutonium processing plant. Prime Minister Ben-Gurion assured de Gaulle that the processing plant was for peaceful purposes only.

    After John F. Kennedy became President, he also wrote to Ben-Gurion explicitly calling on Israel not to join the nuclear-weapons club, drawing another pledge from Ben-Gurion that Israel had no such intention.
    Nevertheless, Kennedy continued to press, forcing the Israelis to let U.S. scientists inspect the nuclear reactor at Dimona. But the Israelis first built a fake control room while bricking up and otherwise disguising parts of the building that housed the plutonium processing plant.
    In return for allowing inspectors into Dimona, Ben-Gurion also demanded that the United States sell Hawk surface-to-air missiles to the Israeli military. Kennedy agreed to the sale as a show of good faith.
    Subsequently, however, the CIA got wind of the Dimona deception and leaked to the press that Israel was secretly building a nuclear bomb.
    After Kennedy’s assassination, President Lyndon Johnson also grew concerned over Israel’s acquiring nuclear weapons. He asked then-Prime Minister Levi Eshkol to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
    Eshkol assured Johnson that Israel was studying the matter and would sign the treaty in due course. However, Israel has never signed the treaty
    and never has admitted that it developed nuclear weapons. [For details, See “Israel and The Bomb” by Avner Cohen.] . . .


    P.S. ALSO SEE: “How Israel Hid Its Secret Nuclear Weapons Program”, By Avner Cohen and William Burr,, April 15, 2015
    An exclusive look inside newly declassified documents shows how Israel blocked U.S. efforts to uncover its secret nuclear reactor.
    LINK –

  5. Citizen on July 27, 2015, 3:31 pm

    Who benefitted more from the murder of the Kennedy brothers than Israel? Who benefitted more from 9/11? Just asking. Who’d benefit more from a US attack on Iran? Didn’t BB say Israel benefited from 9/11? & ditto re Iraq?

    • wondering jew on July 27, 2015, 3:55 pm

      Putting the assassination of the Kennedy brothers in the same paragraph with suspicions of Israel regarding 9/11, Iran and Iraq, is the work of a propagandist. Not someone interested in truth. A lover of rumors and innuendo.

      • Kris on July 27, 2015, 7:13 pm

        How is it propaganda to ask who benefitted the most from these events? Is putting them in the same paragraph the same as putting the Holocaust and fears about Iran’s nuclear program in the same paragraph? Cui bono? (who benefits?) “is the key forensic question in legal and police investigation to find who has a motive for a crime.”

        Cui bono (/kwiː ˈboʊnoʊ/), literally “to whose benefit?”, is a Latin phrase which is still used.[1]

        It is the key forensic question in legal and police investigation to find who has a motive for a crime.

        It is a Latin adage that is used either to suggest a hidden motive or to indicate that the party responsible for something may not be who it appears at first to be.[2]

        Commonly the phrase is used to suggest that the person or people guilty of committing a crime may be found among those who have something to gain, chiefly with an eye toward financial gain. The party that benefits may not always be obvious or may have successfully diverted attention to a scapegoat, for example.

      • Mooser on July 27, 2015, 7:18 pm

        “A lover of rumors and innuendo.”

        A lover of fine rumors and vintage innuendos. Get it right, Yonah.
        Look, at least he’s not asking his “dead friend” to back him up!

      • Citizen on August 26, 2015, 2:52 pm

        @ Mooser
        Who would my dead friend be?

      • Mooser on August 26, 2015, 3:03 pm

        “Who would my dead friend be?”

        I’m sorry, Citizen. Not your dead friends, it’s Yonah who has appealed to the authority of his dead friend. But I think he was only a half-Jewish friend.

    • Bandolero on July 27, 2015, 6:06 pm

      Who benefits from a big crime like the Kennedy murders or 9/11 is purely accidential and shall in no way be included in a final judgement on who did it. Who says anything else can only be an anti-semite. Just look at Operation Susannah or the USS Liberty to see how these anti-semitic conspiracy terrorists work to delegitimize the single and only jewish state on earth.

      That is, while the true role of the sole Jewish State is totally different. Israel doesn’t do such things like terror, but provides valuable intelligence on significant acts of terror like the valuable intelligence provided by Israeli intelligence proving that the Syrian government perpetrated the Ghouta chemical attack, to which POTUS almost responded by bombing Syria:

      But than POTUS decided otherwise and made the Chemical deal with the Syrian government and the Iran deal instead, thereby displeasing Israel. So he thanked Israel for what she does.

      • hardteachings on July 27, 2015, 10:03 pm

        “Israel doesn’t do such things like terror…”
        oh for goodness sake bandolero, get a library card…h

      • Kris on July 27, 2015, 10:58 pm

        @Bandolero: “Who benefits from a big crime like the Kennedy murders or 9/11 is purely accidential and shall in no way be included in a final judgement on who did it. Who says anything else can only be an anti-semite.”

        Bandolero, this post is oddly unlike the other posts in your archive, which are fluently written and critical of Israel. I must be missing something here. You seem to be saying that (1)Jews benefitted from the Kennedy murders and 9/11, but only accidentally, and (2) Jews, unlike others who might have benefitted, should not be included in the group of suspects to be investigated, because (3) it is “anti-semitic” to suspect Jews of crimes? Is that right?

      • RoHa on July 27, 2015, 11:07 pm

        Turn on your sarcasm detector, Kris.

      • Kris on July 28, 2015, 12:13 am

        Thanks, RoHa.

      • Bandolero on July 28, 2015, 3:40 am

        Turn on your sarcasm detector, Kris.

        Thanks, RoHa.

        What we have in the case of the Zionist movement and Israel is a pattern of a serial perpetrator of murder, mass murder and terror. This is a well established fact. That pattern started well before the creation of Israel, see eg the murder of Jacob Israël de Haan on 30/6/1924 or the King David Hotel bombing on 22/7/1946. That murderous pattern continued after the creation of Israel, see for the early days for example the murder of Folke Bernadotte on 17/9/1948 and then read “Israel’s sacred terrorism” based on Moshe Sharett’s Personal Diary:

        Since the early days of Zionism there are so many proven Zionist and Israeli state sponsored murders that it is hard to keep tracking them all. The murderous pattern of Israeli behaviour continues to the very recent time, think for example of the attampted assassination of Khaled Mashal on 25/9/1997, the car bomb killing Imad Mughniyah on 12/2/2008, the murder of Brig Gen Mohammed Suleiman on 1/8/2008 (which was just recently proven by US documents to be an Israeli job), the assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh on 19/1/2010 or the recent serial murder of Iranian scientists.

        The murder of Jacob Israël de Haan proves that the Zionist movement targeted also jews. It was not a single case. Naeim Giladi wrote in detail about his role as a Zionist in attacking Iraqi jews on behalf of Israel in his book: Ben-Gurion’s Scandals: How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews. We also know from things like Operation Susannah and the attempt to sink the USS Liberty that Israel also has already attacked US targets in the past.

        Generally I’ld say Israeli murders and terrors fit in two motive categories: either Israel committed state sponsored murders to get rid of anactual or perceived enemy like Khaled Mashal or Imad Mughniyah or someone deemed otherwise harmful to Israeli interests like Folke Bernadotte, or Israel committed acts of terror and murder with the intention of blaming the crime on someone else, ie perpetraiting “false flag operations”, like it was the case with attacking Iraqi jews or Operation Susannah. One regular motivation for Israeli false flag ops was to enlist the US in fighting Israel’s real or perceived enemies, ie starting US-led wars of aggression in the service of Israel. AIPAC/WINEP operatives publicly talk about using such “options” in the service of starting wars Israel wanted to get started:

        A typical Israeli method to ensure false blame was faking signal intelligence. Victor Ostrovsky wrote about how the Mossad did falsely blame Libya of terror in his time with radio signal boxes placed by the Mossad in Libya for that purpose. In the case of the Ghouta chemical false flag terror attack, Israel simply provided the US with faked signal intelligence, essentially saying to Obama: now you must go to war, because we proved hereby that Syria crossed your chemical red lines.

        So, now comes the funny thing. Despite this whole record of serial Israeli murder, terror and false flag terror targeting likewise enemies and friends, terrorists and innocents, Arabs and Westerners, Muslims, Christians and Jews, Syrians and Americans, and clear motives for Israel to perpetrate the crimes, there still exists a big taboo of talking about and investigating a possible Israeli sponsorship of the JFK murder and 9/11. It’s even deemed anti-semitic to speak about this.

  6. Citizen on July 27, 2015, 8:41 pm

    “Who benefits from a big crime like the Kennedy murders or 9/11 is purely accidental and shall in no way be included in a final judgement on who did it. ”

    All crimes not immediately solved begin with investigation into who most likely benefited from the crime.

  7. on July 27, 2015, 10:05 pm

    The potential role of Israel in these assassinations is well explored in several books. Perhaps the best is the book by Michael Collins Piper in 1998 entitled “Final Judgment – The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy”. I lived in Louisiana for many years and given my personal experiences, I was particularly impressed with his analysis of the many colorful players from Louisiana and Texas and how they were connected to Meyer Lansky and various international Zionist figures. This book is a must read in my opinion. I found it to be enlightening in many areas even though I had previously read dozens of other books about the JFK assassination. Piper’s theory is that the plot was carried out by Meyer Lansky’s mafia cartel in cooperation with the Mossad and other Zionist forces who were all angry with JFK. The CIA passively supervised the entire operation with the blessing of the military/industrial machine. The Kennedy family feud with organized crime in the liquor business and other areas also plays a role combined with JFK’s obvious lack of zealotry for Israel and his disposition towards peace as opposed to war. The basic revelation in this book is that JFK and his father Joe had a lot of diverse enemies including ZIonists, Mafia, military, political, CIA and industrial. Secondly, Meyer Lansky was more of a overall mafia kingpin than is widely appreciated, with huge international skills and abilities. And thirdly, Lansky was prominently and financially connected to Israel and Zionist networks at the highest level. Piper’s book does not make strident claims, it just explains a lot of connections in great detail and in a new light, that astonished even me. He explores the Mossad, Zionist, Israel connection in a very well informed, sophisticated but uninhibited way.

    • Bornajoo on July 28, 2015, 1:13 pm

      Thanks for the great summary of this book by Michael Collins Piper. I’ve been recommended this book before but I think it’s out of print and the only copies available are very expensive. I’ve seen a YouTube documentary based on this book and it definitely seemed to connect the dots!

      I’m now going to renew my search for the book!

  8. Marnie on July 28, 2015, 12:09 am

    John Kennedy made this strongly worded request to the new Israeli prime minister in July 1963 to allow inspections of Dimona’s nuclear facility. Four months later he was assasinated. No other president since JFK has even broached this subject. Israel is a rogue state, a member of the UN, yet continues to deny access to its facilities. I hope that changes very, very soon. I would also hope that Jonathan Pollard never be released from prison and if he is, that he is never allowed to leave the US.

    • Marnie on July 28, 2015, 12:47 am

      – continued

      “I am sure you will agree that these visits should be as nearly as possible in accord with international standards, thereby resolving all doubts as to the peaceful intent of the Dimona project. As I wrote to Mr. Ben-Gurion, this government’s commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to peace as the question of Israel’s effort in the nuclear field.”

      Geez, it’s hard to believe a US president ever spoke to an Israeli PM man to man and without alot of crap. I wonder what a second JFK term would have been like and what would the US look like today but even more, what would Israel look like? Would he have effectively cut the strings attached to the relationship between the 2 countries? It sure sounds like he wasn’t going to be a president who was going to treat the Israelis with kid gloves. But again, since his presidency, has any other US president had a spine? Guess it doesn’t really matter since the president doesn’t get to do anything substantive WRT Israel or Palestine except murmur.

      Also have to wonder if this letter to Eshkol infuriated the Israelis. I read this paragraph and thought of Iran and when thinking about Iran one can’t help but think about he whose name shall not be typed and his demands, threats, fears, propaganda, war-mongering, etc., towards Iran. He suffers from that illness where he accuses others of having the same demons he himself has.

    • ckg on July 28, 2015, 2:28 pm

      I would also hope that Jonathan Pollard never be released from prison and if he is, that he is never allowed to leave the US.

      This afternoon, Pollard’s lawyers say he will be paroled on Nov 21. The lawyers said under the terms of his parole, Pollard must remain in the U.S. for five years, although he has petitioned to be able to move to Israel immediately.

      • Marnie on July 29, 2015, 12:52 am

        “although he has petitioned to be able to move to Israel immediately.” Of course, where he would be welcomed as a hero. How much harder can diplomacy be with the zionist state anyway – they treat US enemies as heros?

  9. RobertB on July 28, 2015, 7:22 am

    Israel’s Secret Weapon — A BBC Documentary (Video)

    Which country in the Middle-East has undeclared nuclear weapons?

    Which country in the Middle-East has undeclared biological and chemical capabilities?

    Which country in the Middle-East has no outside inspections?

    Its NOT Iraq, its NOT Iran…..its Israel

    A BBC Video:

    • Kay24 on July 28, 2015, 7:49 am

      Thanks for that link. I started watching it and found it v. interesting. I must watch it in installments since it is a bit long. I have said this before, it is IRAN that must fear the nation that has nuclear weapons, has attacked it’s neighbors, and is a threat to the region. It has been accused of being the criminals who killed Iranian scientists, and is even capable of going into other nations to carry out their deadly crimes. It is ironic that the American people are given scary stories about Iran, and how deadly they are, since the reality is totally different, and it seems we are supporting and protecting the biggest culprit.

  10. NickJOCW on July 28, 2015, 11:05 am

    It was not the US that ‘negotiated’ the recent deal with Iran, it was the members of the Security Council and Germany. Nor was the impetus from the US, it was from France, Germany and the United Kingdom who had been working to limit Iran’s nuclear activities since 2003 (the US joined them three years later). The US Congress cannot overthrow the deal, it can only denounce it and maintain its own sanctions.

    Israel doesn’t like it, and understandably since Iran is a potential game changer in the ME; Iran can do more to stabilise the area than anyone and that is what worries Netanyahu et al.

    The Iranian Foreign Minister in Baghdad:

    We (ME countries) may have different opinions regarding developments in Syria, Iraq and Yemen, but we stress that the security of each and every country in the region is like our own security and we will work to boost this collective security–Ibrahim-alJaafari-Baghdad

    and then there is the EU etc., Federica Mogherini, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy who chaired the negotiations clearly regards the agreement as the beginning of something rather than the end.

    It’s not difficult to see all this as a prelude to a more coherent and determined effort to tidy up in the ME. With Israel next of the list?

  11. CigarGod on July 28, 2015, 11:11 am

    Aren’t we close to the date when some or all files are supposed to be released?
    It’s been 53 years…I thought they were sealed for 50.

  12. crypticvalentin on July 29, 2015, 12:13 am

    Mordecai Vanunu says Mossad killed JFK, because of his stance towards Israeli nuclear program..

    • Kathleen on July 30, 2015, 11:11 am

      Only logical to consider. Oswald’s trips to Russia. Who he was in contact with? Jewish Russian mob? Ruby’s (Rubenstein’s) connection? One has to wonder.

      The Kennedy’s had quite an assortment of enemies.

  13. Boomer on July 29, 2015, 9:01 am

    Philip, thanks for this reminder. This, like so many items reported here, is a reminder of the real double standard. How ironic that those who support Israel’s policies, and want the U.S. to continue to support Israel’s policies, often complain about a “double standard” being applied to Israel. It’s true, but in just the opposite way they imply.

    This, like so many items reported here, also is a reminder of the immense hypocrisy of American politicians, pundits, and other “leaders.” And of the immense ability of our media to ignore facts they wish to ignore, to distort reality, and to support American complicity.

  14. Kathleen on July 30, 2015, 11:07 am

    Been linking these exchanges between Kennedy and Ben Gurion at other MSM websites for over a decade now. Kennedy last President to push for Israel to come clean on their nuclear weapons program.

    Amazing how often we hear Richard Haas and many others talk about how Iran has “cheated” during their alleged pathway towards a nuclear weapon. Cheated used to describe Iran’s alleged actions. Yet never hear “cheated” used in reference to Israel’s nuclear weapons program. Never

    Great piece Phil

  15. jake41 on October 27, 2017, 3:02 pm

    Blackmail in the 1st degree The Samson Option

    “The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 was amended by the Symington Amendment (Section 669 of the FAA) in 1976. It banned U.S. economic, and military assistance, and export credits to countries that deliver or receive, acquire or transfer nuclear enrichment technology when they do not comply with IAEA regulations and inspections. This provision, as amended, is now contained in Section 101 of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA).”'s_Nuclear_Arsenal_and_American_Foreign_Policy

Leave a Reply