Free Vanunu now

by Seáinín Wed Aug 06, 2003 20:17

A traitor to is country. Let him rot in jail too.

by Mark Wed Aug 06, 2003 21:02

Yes, this man is a traitor. Let him stay where he is.

by kokomero Thu Aug 07, 2003 00:16

Vannunu is a hero and pacifist committed to nuclear dissarmament. In many ways he is the Mandela of Israel and will no doubt make a big political impact when he is eventually released.

Had Mr. Vannunus Iraqi equivalent exposed Saddams pathetic attempt at and WMD programme rather than Israels highly successful one (it has produced between 200 and 400 as well as inter-continental missiles capable of delivering them over a 10000km range) Seanin and Mark would have called him a hero!

Instead the Israelis fabricated evidence of Iraqi WMD and passed it on to the credulous US/K. Meanwhile they torture and intern their own people both Arab and dissenting Jews like the brave Mr. Vannunu without trial and claim to be a democracy.

by Mark Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:11

Jumping up and down about nukes in the possession of democratic countries like Israel, the US and the UK, and deafening silence about PC countries like China and Russia that have them and rogue countries like Libya, Iran and North Korea that are about to acquire them.

And by the way, what do you suggest the democratic countries should do - disarm unilaterally and leave the world to be dominated by nuclear-armed tyrannies? Hello???

BTW, Kokomero, your information about Israel is highly inaccurate, if not grossly distorted.

by kokomero Thu Aug 07, 2003 15:41

Specifically which of the following points I made are innacurate/distorted?

- That Israel has 200-400 nukes: You've admitted that Israel has them and there is ample intelligence on the web and in print to support the claim

- That Israel has ICBMs: there is ample material on the web and in print about Israel & South Africas joint ICBM project and the proof if it were required that they exist is that Israel has launched her own spy satellites into geosynchronous orbit

- That Israel fabricated/distorted "intelligence" about Iraqs supposed WMD: Read the Guardian article of July 17th 2003 about how it happened
- That Mr. Vannunu is interned without trial in solitary confinement with no right to parole: You cant deny that

- That Israel tortures and assassinates political opponents and interns them without trial: Amnesty are well aquianted with your methods

By the way my objection to WMD is not specific to Israel. However Israel is particularly hypocritical in that she points the finger, as you do, at her neighbours who have risible WMD programmes aimed at restoring the balance with Israel, while all the while she probably has the 4th largest nuclear arsenal after the US, CIS and China with independent ICBM capability neither the Brits nor the French have!

A typical example of what happens when a power in a particular area of the globe goes nuclear is that her neighbours do likewise, it goes with the territory so get used to it. An example of this are long term antagonists India and Pakistan but you didn't mention them in your one-sided piece of propaganda did you?

BTW even they both have nukes they haven't used them though they have fought as often as Israel and her neighbours, so there is no reason to believe that if Israels neighbours acquired WMD it would make any difference either.

What this is really about is Israel using the US to maintain her military superiority by pointing a gullible, terror-obsessed and oil-thirsty US government at Israels rivals using suspect and fabricated "intelligence".

It keeps both Israel and the US happy after all, n'est pas?

by Mark Thu Aug 07, 2003 16:27

The purpose of the Israeli nuclear option was always to guarantee the survival of the country if its borders were overrun. Given its size, this could have, and still could, happen in any of its wars, and could very rapidly be lethal to the entire state.

Its purpose was not to dominate the Middle East with a machismo show of Jewish brainpower. Hence the need for secrecy. However, by divulging the existence of the Israeli nuclear programme, Vanunu is single-handedly responsible for setting off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. He has not made the region safer, he has made it far, far more dangerous. There is no doubt that a nuclear device in the hands of Hezbollah or some other lunatic Islamic terrorist gang will be used against us sooner or later. To emphasise this the cult of suicide bombing demonstrates amply that the classic theory of nuclear deterrence will not work in the Middle East. This is why Vanunu is so hated.

Moreover, he has refused to sign a pledge to keep quiet after release. Therefore, he will be kept in jail FOR HIS OWN PROTECTION indefinitely.

Finally, unlike those of larger nations, Israel's nuclear options are very subtle, affording a far greater degree of flexibility. However, we all hope to G-d, these terrible weapons will never need to be used.

by kokomero Thu Aug 07, 2003 18:05

After 17 years incarceration the information Vanunu is privy too is hopelessly out of date. In any case it has been known since the late 1960s Israel had a nuclear programme, he simply provided confirmation of its' existence. Admit it, the purpose of keeping him in jail is to discourage other Israeli dissidents from doing likewise.

As for Israels bomb it was built not by Israelis alone in a display of intellectual machismo as you suggest, but with the collaboration of well-intentioned Jewish and non-Jewish Scientists using stolen American and Russian technology, who are now no-doubt reassured at the continued existence of Israel, but equally many may now be dissilusioned with the lack of political progress just like Vanunu.

by Chekov Thu Aug 07, 2003 19:27

"Its purpose was not to dominate the Middle East with a machismo show of Jewish brainpower. Hence the need for secrecy"

I don't know where you get your hences from, but they're obviously not from the same place as the rest of us get them.

Have you seen doctor strangelove? There is a scene at the end when the doctor becomes apoplectic at the stupidity of the russians in having a SECRET nuclear deterrent. As the doctor explains, the only point in having a deterrent is if everybody knows about it. If you had written, "hence the need for publicity", that would make sense or if you'd written "it's purpose _was_ to dominate the middle east...hence the need for secrecy", then that might pass, but what you have written makes absolutely no sense at all.

For what it's worth your allusion to Israel being overrun is laughable. As you know well, the countries that Israel borders are several million times more likely to be overrun than Israel is - it just comes down to the military hardware available. Or are you so naive to think that it merely comes down to the size of the populations? I mean you hardly expect to see India conquering the USA any day soon, do you?

by Jingo Thu Aug 07, 2003 20:03

Hmmm, the smooth talking Israeli ambassador to Ireland. The poisonous words drip from his lips like honey. Check this out: "Israel's nuclear options are very subtle".
Say no more.

by Mark Thu Aug 07, 2003 20:05

In 1967 and 1973, we were not far off from being overrun. I know. I was there. You weren't.

The nuclear option was designed as a last use deterrent. In other words, its existence was intended to be revealed, and if necessary, demonstrated, at the appropriate point in time and not before. Vanunu destroyed this strategy.

Incidentally, what do you think happens to people alleged of being traitors at the PA? After a kangaroo trial of say, 30 minutes (generally with no defence counsel), they are immediately dragged out to a wall at the back of Arafat's compound and shot dead.

by kokomero Thu Aug 07, 2003 22:10

You might well have been there Mark but it was 36 and 30 years in the past, respectively. As for your assertion that Israel was close to being overrun few military historians would agree with you, even the Israeli ones. As for your claim that Israel wished to pull the nuclear white rabbit out of the hat when they had already been overrun this is quite frankly incredible.

The secrecy has much more to do with preventing outside powers from impeding progress with inspections etc., remember the fake control panels built to hide what was going on in Dimona from UN instectors? As for nukes being subtle, given the 9 miles minimum depth of Israeli territory setting off even a low yield tactical nuke or neutron bomb would render a large part of Israeli territory uninhabitable.

Israels real strategy is and always has been pre-emptive action, so the secrecy around the nuclear programme is highly anomalous, except as I mentioned before, in the case the Israelis wanted to have the bomb in their hands without interference for strategic reasons.

The reason for Vanunus continued internment is as a deterrent to like minded individuals who might be tempted to spill the beans on Israels chemical and biological weapons programmes, espionage against their allies or assination squads etc.

by Justin Morahan - Peace People Fri Aug 08, 2003 01:35

It's frightening to read in Mark's comment that the Israeli authorities intend to keep Dr Vanunu in jail "indefinitely" - "for his own protection"!
Did he ask for this protection?
I understood that his release date is April 2004, but if Mark is in the know, his imprisonment will be forever.
If this is true, then we have a long hard slog of protest ahead of us outside Israeli embassies.
The word "traitor" applied, in the first comment, to a man who conscientiously objects to all nuclear missiles is a cheap shot. A traitor, in this context, is someone who behaves disloyally to his or her country, but we know the associations the word has in Irish history and in religion.
To behave disloyally to one's country is not in itself a crime. If there is just cause, one is duty bound to act "disloyally". In certain circumstances, to so act disloyally for a higher motive, is bravery and heroism.
If a German soldier acted disloyally to Hitler, because his conscience told him that what Hitler was doing was evil, he would have been regarded as a a traitor to Germany - the Germany of that time - but he would be a hero in the Germany of today and in most of the civilised world for all time.
Dr Vanunu is a hero, however hated Mark thinks he might be to some Israelis.
I suspect that there are other Israelis who believe he is a hero.
Meanwhile his imprisonment up till now has been a disgrace, given that he was in solitary confinement for eleven years and nine months.
Demanding his release is not being done as an offence to the Jewish people. It is being done on behalf of a pacifist who has no weapons of any kind to defend his own freedom and who has been deprived of that freedom for revealing secrets in his own country about weapons of mass destruction.
And he has done this, non-violently, and for reasons of conscience.
Restore some decency and free him now.