REAL HISTORY REVEALED: ASSASSINATION MONOPOLY!
Remember my children,
that all the Earth must belong to us Jews,
and that the Gentiles,
being mere excrements of animals,
must possess nothing.
~ Mayer Amschel Rothschild on his deathbed, 1812
I have long said that as a true student of real history, I am sickened by the lies that
are being taught to our children in our failed education
system... It has therefore been one of my primary goals to bring real historical facts forward in this blog for
everyone to see for themselves....
I came across the following article, from my friend Whitewraithe,
who writes the blog, Pragmatic Witness, at www.pragmaticwitness.com.
It is written by John Kaminski, and is entitled: "Assassination
Monopoly". It contains some very important and truthful history of
some of the major assassinations of major world leaders carried out over the last few centuries, and the
real reasons why these men
were murdered. I have that entire article
right here for everyone to see for themselves, and I have my own thoughts and comments to follow:
They murdered 8 U.S. presidents,
5 Russian czars, the kings of England, France and many other
countries, and are still killing. Who are they? THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE OBVIOUS ANSWER!
By John Kaminski
The official history of presidential
assassinations depicts them as random events performed by lone nuts who blow
their tops and start shooting. But when we look at the pattern of murdered U.S. presidents, a disturbing pattern
All the U.S. presidents who
died in office were all killed by the same mysterious
the same mysterious reason ~ control of the money supply.
John F. Kennedy, in 1963, was jacked for challenging the hegemony of Israel, the mob,
and the Federal Reserve; William McKinley,
in 1900, was gut shot
for opposing creation of the Federal Reserve; James Garfield, in 1881, was shot in the back shortly after
uttering the assessment that bankers controlled everything; and Abraham Lincoln,
was unceremoniously terminated for creating an independent
currency, as Kennedy did a century later.
In addition to the four well-known murders of American presidents, four other assassinations
~ William Henry Harrison (1841),
Zachary Taylor (1850), Warren Harding (1926),
and Franklin Roosevelt (1945) ~ are well documented
outside the mainstream
record of history, which is controlled by the people who hire these assassins.
All were liquidated for opposing the plans of the international
bankers who have controlled the world since history began.
When you correlate the corpses of national leaders and their
cause of death to their public statements, you discover the identity
the killers in every single case is Jewish, even if the actual assassins are non Jewish proxies. This even
includes the killing of promising presidential candidate Huey Long in 1935, by
a Jewish doctor named Carl Weiss.
When it comes to non presidential
assassinations committed by Jews, the numbers run into the thousands. Some significant Judeo hits,
all of which involved control of the money supply or suppression of other Jewish
crime schemes, include Rep. Lewis McFadden in 1933,
James Forrestal in 1949, and pop superstar Michael Jackson in 2009, all for trying to warn us about the Jewish takeover
of the world.
this horrible phenomenon extends far beyond the United States.
Four of five Russian czars of the 19th century (as well as a fifth in 1917) were
assassinated by Jews ~ the same perfect record Jews own with
Track this recurring political tool back as far as you like
in history and you’ll find the same circumstances pertain to the assassinations of
King Charles I of England and King Louis XVI of France, as well as innumerable kings of countless other countries,
as far back in history as you care to look.
THE ASSASSINATION OF ALL 8 U.S. PRESIDENTS
WAS DONE BY JEWS!
The first attempted U.S. presidential assassination occurred in 1835, when our 7th president, Andrew
Jackson, successfully shut down
the national bank, by which
the European Jewish bankers controlled America. Would be assassin
Richard Lawrence fired twice, but both shots misfired. Jackson promptly beat him with his cane.
ASSASSINATION NO 1.
Our 9th president, killed by doctors.
An official report at the time stated Harrison died not of pneumonia, which is
the mainstream story, but really died from the treatment
he was subjected
to for “an ordinary winter cold.” In the Currier lithograph depicting Harrison’s death bed scene,
Daniel Webster is
shown giving an enthusiastic thumbs up. The
August 1841 edition of the Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, published just a
few months after Harrison’s death, suggests that it was the medical treatment that Harrison received, and not
any virus or bacteria,
which caused his demise. Vice President Tyler
then broke all Harrison’s campaign promises and became a pariah to both parties.
ASSASSINATION NO. 2.
1850: ZACHARY TAYLOR
Our 12th president, poisoned by a bowl of cherries and milk.
general of the Mexican war, Taylor disagreed with the Democrats over the concept of a strong national bank and opposed
extension of slavery. They exhumed Taylor’s body in 1991
and found traces of arsenic in his bones. Vice President Fillmore reversed all his policies.
Remember, 1848 was the year Karl Marx wrote the Communist manifesto and didn’t mention
ASSASSINATION NO. 3.
1865: ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Our 16th president, was shot in the head and murdered in Ford’s Theater, Washington.
The popular mainstream version is that Lincoln
by John Wilkes Booth (a Jew) for opposing the plans of Rothschild bankers who were funding the Confederacy.
Alternative versions of the story include the Jesuits had him killed out of revenge,
Secretary of State Edwin Stanton arranged it,
and the Lincoln was
really the son of a North Carolina Jew named Springsteen. The key fact seems to be the Greenbacks currency
Lincoln created when the bankers wanted 36 percent interest on loans to finance
the North in the War Between the States.
ASSASSINATION NO. 4.
1881: JAMES GARFIELD
Our 20th president was shot
down in a Washington railroad station,
after saying bankers ran everything from behind
the scenes. “
Whoever controls the volume of money in any country
is absolute master of all industry and commerce.”
Two weeks later, Garfield was shot in the back by a delusional named Charles Guiteau, who supposedly
was miffed about not being
named ambassador to France. By the
time Garfield died after 2 1/2 months of agony, his doctors had turned a three-inch-deep,
harmless wound into a 20-inch-long contaminated canyon stretching from his ribs to his groin and oozing more
pus each day. After
Garfield’s death his physicians submitted
a bill of $85,000 to the Senate. The Senators authorized a payment of only $10,000.
Many of them referred to the doctors as quacks.
ASSASSINATION NO. 5.
Our 25th president
was shot at point blank range in Buffalo, N.Y, by
a Jewish anarchist who got his gun from the notorious Emma Goldman
in a Brooklyn Workingman’s Hall. Polish Jew Leon Czolgosz pumped two slugs into the president’s stomach
at the World’s Fair
while the president shook hands with citizens.
Afterwards, a speech by Goldman was found in the assassin’s pocket.
Bro. Nathanael Kapner writes:
was known as a “hard money” man. This was because he advocated a gold standard. Unlike his opponent,
William Jennings Bryan, McKinley was against “easy money”
with no backing ~ printed by Jewish lenders at interest to
~ namely the US government. But by fighting against “easy money,” (translate Jew-coined & printed-at-interest
money) McKinley sealed his death warrant. A death warrant
signed, sealed, and delivered by the powerful
House of Rothschild,
criminals in bankers’ suits.”
ASSASSINATION NO. 6.
1923: WARREN G.
Our 29th president died in San Francisco after being poisoned for opposing Simon Guggenheim’s oil-related land grab in Alaska.
Robust and healthy at age 57, Harding
was the first U.S. president to visit Alaska. On the way back, he developed food poisoning.
After lingering for a week in a
San Francisco hotel room, he suddenly died. Four doctors attending to him could not agree on his cause
of death. He was embalmed within
the hour. Rumors blamed his jealous wife for avenging her husband’s infidelity, but Harding is
most infamous for his complicity
in the Teapot Dome scandal, after which his Interior secretary Albert Fall went to jail for selling multibillion
rights to oilman Harry Sinclair.
1945: FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT
32nd president was murdered by his top adviser, Henry Morgenthau, for refusing to drop atomic bombs on Japan and his
alleged reluctance to support the creation of the state
of Israel. One week before his death, in a letter dated April 5, 1945, Roosevelt
promised King Saud that he, as president of the United
States, would take no hostile action against the Arabs and that the
United States would not change its basic policy toward
the Palestine issue without prior consultations with both Arabs and Jews.
Roosevelt’s policy was reversed by his successor,
Harry Truman, who later recognized the State of Israel 11 minutes after it declared itself a nation.
numerous reports claimed FDR shot himself.
“My mother always claimed that she was shopping in Bloomingdales
in NYC at the time the news of FDR’s death was announced.
She said that the announcement over the store intercom that
day, right after it happened, clearly stated that he’d shot himself in
the head. She also said that not long after, the story
given out by the news media suddenly changed to his death having been
of natural causes.”
ASSASSINATION NO. 8
1963: JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY
Our 34th president was gunned down in Dallas by multiple unknown assailants. The nation’s only Catholic
was snuffed by a corrupt coalition of many (including Lyndon Johnson and George H.W. Bush) for Israel, the
mob and the
Reserve. Jennifer Lake writes: “Suggested reading on the JFK assassination: the book FINAL JUDGEMENT
Collins Piper (downloadable)
Piper makes a case that JFK was thwarting
the nuclear-weapons ambition of Israel. He writes
its nuclear weapons capabilities precisely because of the assassination of President Kennedy.”
He notes an American Free Press headline: “New Evidence Ties Israel’s
Nuclear Weapons Program to the New Orleans Connection
in the JFK Conspiracy“.”
And then there was also the not-so-little matter of his creating currency in an attempt to
disempower the Federal Reserve.”
In addition, there were failed assassination
attempts against presidents Andrew Johnson,
FDR, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan, all attributed to ‘lone nuts.’
well-documented historical pattern of Jewish homicidal mania against leaders who refused
to knuckle under to bribes and blackmail extends across much of the world throughout
After the U.S., the second-most glaring example of the persistence
of Jewish killers is what happened to Russia in the 1800s. Jewish anarchists
killed all but one of five Russian czars in
the 19th century, and culminated their murderous rampage by butchering the last czar and his
whole family during the Bolshevik
Revolution in 1917, which was wholly the work of Jews funded by well-known Jewish bankers,
principally Jacob Schiff, an agent
of the Rothschilds.
1801: PAUL I
Catherine the Great was a German woman who engineered the killing of her husband Tsar
Peter III and birthed Paul, whose
father was her court lover. Paul first married the daughter of the Landgrave of Hesse,
who furnished troops to
England to suppress the American Revolution.
Nevetheless, Paul was a sincere king, who was eventually killed by
his mother’s corrupt co-conspirators, as well as his own son.
His big mistake appears to have been changing the rules
of succession, depriving the nobility of its privileges, and prohibiting women from
ever again being named monarch.
1825: ALEXANDER I .
Catherine’s favorite grandson conspired in the murder
of his father and, according to official records eventually died of typhus.
But Count Cherep Spirodovich reveals that he was poisoned during a lunch with Jews, and never recovered.
(p. 114, The Hidden Hand).
Shortly thereafter, Nathan Rothschild tried
to foment revolution in Russia, as his children did in 1830 and 1855.
1855: NICHOLAS I .
England, France and Germany (by this time, all taken over
by Jews: Disraeli in England, the poseur Napoleon III in France, and
Bismarck in Germany) all joined together to prosecute the Crimean War in the south of Russia. It failed, but
later, the czar, who had been called a demigod by a number
of English writers, was poisoned by his own Jewish doctor.
1881: ALEXANDER II
Perhaps the saddest
of all was the fate of a handsome prince known as the Tsar Liberator. He freed the Russian serfs in 1861,
four years before Lincoln did the same. Most
notably, he answered President Lincoln’s call for help and sent ships to
San Francisco and New York to help save the Union during
the War Between the States.
Later he gave Alaska to the U.S. for practically nothing. He survived seven assassination
attempts before being blown up by
the Jews he did his level best to liberate. And it took two bombs to do it: while Alexander
was riding in his carriage, a bomb
went off devastating a whole neighborhood. The king leapt out to help the survivors,
and as he did, another bomb killed him.
1917: NICHOLAS II
czar and his family were foully murdered by the Jews who were sent from America by the Jewish banker Jacob Schiff.
the same thing the Jews had done to Russia for hundreds of years, only this time they succeeded in taking over the
They created the Soviet Union, which killed
(ED: at LEAST) 66 million Russian natives. The moral nature of Judaism is so insane that
almost a hundred years after the man called a demigod, Nicholas I, was poisoned by his Jewish doctor, the
very savage who killed
more Russians than any other, Joseph Stalin,
was himself poisoned by a Jewish doctor when he was of no more use to the Hidden Hand.
In practically every nation on this Earth, the Jewish Hidden Hand has killed legitimate leaders
and replaced them with Rothschild-manipulated
This story does not even include most of the world and the sabotage of legitimate governments and monarchies.
The list would be too long for one story. As much as I’d like to write more about the
Jewish subversion of the 500 year old Habsburg Dynasty,
or the intrigues
of ancient Greece, Rome and Egypt, let’s just consider two more signal examples of this unending Jewish murder
1793: KING LOUIS XVI OF FRANCE
The ugliest revolution of all was the French Revolution, in which people
all over France killed each
other for reasons they themselves
did not understand (a situation about to happen today in the United States).
International Jewish money-lenders plotted and planned the Great French Revolution of 1789,
exactly the same way as they had plotted and planned and financed the English Revolution of 1640-1649.
of these same International Jewish Financiers have been The Secret Power behind every war and revolution
from 1789 onwards. The king and his wife, the
much maligned but thoroughly slandered Marie Antoinette,
were eventually beheaded by Rothschild’s subversives, and France
has never been the same since.
A recent president of France, Sarkozy, was an actual CIA Mossad agent.
KING CHARLES I OF ENGLAND
Jews were expelled from England in 1290, both for typical usurious criminality and for killing
Christian children and draining them
of their blood for
Talmudic rituals. But in the 1600s, Dutch Jewish bankers bribed Oliver Cromwell to overthrow
a weak King Charles I, and by manipulating the parliament, Cromwell succeeded. Charles was beheaded.
takeover of the world by Jews had begun, and the principal Jewish
criminals of the world set up shop in the City
of London, where they
now coordinate the ruination and enslavement of the entire world.
who had been a major general in the czar’s army, reveals
many things in his 1926 book, “The Secret World Government,
Hidden Hand’”. Among those secrets were:
“The first Jesuits were Jews; that
mysterious Russian Diplomacy, which so alarms Western Europe, is organized and carried on by Jews ;
that mighty revolution (of 1848) which is at this moment preparing in Germany,
is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who
the professional chairs of Germany”.
“From all these
numerous proofs that the Jews are the organizers of all the bloodshed, as CHRIST pointed it out (St. John, VIII,44)
could we not deduce without the smallest doubt, that it will
be Jews, who will plunge the United States into an ocean of blood in the
nearest future, unless the Americans open their eyes and drop their blind groundless optimism….”
“Since the American Revolution the Jews have also been the real rulers of America
and their power is constantly growing and
becomes deadly in
every sense, as the Jews themselves confirm it.”
So there you have the basic story
of the greatest assassins the world has ever known,
who have destroyed
all the great nations of the world by their manipulations and corruptions.
Today, under the white noise coma of public
media completely controlled by Jews, we have two U.S. presidential candidates whose staff
are dominated by warmongering Israeli Jews and corrupt Hebrew bankers. The world has been
and most societies destroyed, by the most evil people ever
to walk the Earth ~ Talmudic Jews.
the Jews are utterly destroyed, and all traces of their perfidy
and perversions totally
erased, the world will never know peace.
John Kaminski is a writer who lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida, constantly trying to figure out
why we are destroying ourselves, and
pinpointing a corrupt
belief system as the engine of our demise. Solely dependent on contributions
from readers, please support his work by mail: 250 N. McCall Rd. #2, Englewood FL 34223 USA.
Major General Count Cherep-Spirodovich,
The Secret World Government, or ‘The Hidden Hand’,
Sons of Liberty Books, ISBN: 0-89562-166-5
William Guy Carr, Pawns in
NTS Notes: I want to thank
John Kaminski for this fabulous
article, and his tireless work in this fight for our very survival...
It does appear, readers, that if you dig deep enough into some of the greatest
criminality in human history, you always find members of the "Chosen ones" involved....
When will people ever learn? These criminals have always wanted the world
and have no qualms in carrying out acts of murder to achieve their long sought goal..
Please take these facts and show them to everyone so that they can see for themselves exactly
responsible for the murder of important world leaders over the last few centuries...
Mossad's Bloody Trail of Assassinations of Leading Americans
...and Others Should Infuriate You
By Ron Unz
Another extraordinary article from Ron Unz. It looks like the Soleimani murder
is just part
of a decades long pattern, as American statecraft
blends indistinguishably with Israel's penchant
for the underhanded
Kennedys, senior American polticians and bureaucrats - they even seriously
considered assassinating the elder George Bush in 1991, when he was president! J
aw dropping stuff.
"The sheer quantity of such foreign assassinations was really quite remarkable, with the
knowledgeable reviewer in the New York Times suggesting that
the Israeli total
over the last half-century or so seemed far greater
than that of any other nation."
"I might even go farther: if we excluded domestic killings, I wouldn’t be surprised if the
body-count exceeded the combined total for that of all other major countries
in the world.
I think all the lurid revelations of lethal CIA
or KGB Cold War assassination plots that I have
seen discussed in
newspaper articles might fit comfortably into just a chapter or two of
Bergman’s extremely long book."
"The extent to which the agents of the Jewish state and its Zionist predecessor organizations
have engaged in the most rampant international crime and violations of the accepted
of warfare is really quite extraordinary, perhaps having
few parallels in modern world history."
"Their use of political assassination as a central tool of their statecraft even recalls the notorious
activities of the Old Man of the Mountains of the 13th century Middle East,
whose deadly techniques
gave us the very word “assassin.”"
From the Peace of Westphalia to the Law of the Jungle
The January 2nd American assassination of Gen. Qassem
Soleimani of Iran was an event of enormous moment.
Soleimani had been the highest-ranking military figure in his nation of 80 million,
and with a storied career of 30 years, one of the most universally popular and highly regarded.
Most analysts ranked him second in influence only to Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei, Iran’s elderly
and there were widespread reports that he was being urged to run for the
presidency in the 2021 elections.
The circumstances of his peacetime death were also quite
remarkable. His vehicle was
incinerated by the missile
of an American Reaper drone near Iraq’s Baghdad international
airport just after he had arrived there on a regular commercial flight for peace negotiations
originally suggested by the American government.
Our major media hardly ignored the gravity of this sudden, unexpected killing of so
high-ranking a political and military figure, and gave it enormous attention.
A day or so
later, the front page of my morning New
York Times was almost entirely filled with
of the event and its implications, along with several inside pages devoted to
the same topic. Later that same week, America’s national newspaper of record allocated
more than one-third of all the pages of its front section to the same shocking
But even such copious coverage by teams of veteran journalists failed to provide the
with its proper context and implications.
Last year, the Trump Administration had declared
the Iranian Revolutionary Guard “a terrorist
organization,” drawing widespread criticism and
even ridicule from national security experts appalled at the notion of classifying a major branch
of Iran’s armed forces as “terrorists.” Gen. Soleimani was
a top commander in that body,
and this apparently
provided the legal figleaf for his assassination in broad daylight while
on a diplomatic peace mission.
But consider that Congress has been considering legislation declaring Russia an official
state sponsor of terrorism, and Stephen Cohen, the eminent Russia scholar, has argued
that no foreign leader since the end of World War II has been so massively demonized
by the American media as Russian President Vladimir Putin. For years, numerous
pundits have denounced Putin as “the new Hitler,” and some prominent figures have even
called for his overthrow or death. So we are now only a step or two removed from undertaking
a public campaign to assassinate the leader of a country whose nuclear arsenal could
quickly annihilate the bulk of the American population. Cohen has repeatedly
the current danger of global nuclear
war may exceed what which we faced during the
of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, and can we entirely dismiss his concerns?
Even if we focus solely upon Gen. Solemaini’s
killing and entirely disregard its dangerous
there seem few modern precedents for the official public assassination of
a top-ranking political figure by the forces of another major country. In groping for past
examples, the only ones that come to mind occurred almost three generations ago
World War II, when Czech agents assisted
by the Allies assassinated Reinhard Heydrich
Prague in 1941 and the US military later shot down the plane of Japanese admiral Isoroku
Yamamoto in 1943. But these events occurred in the heat of a brutal global war, and
leadership hardly portrayed them as official
government assassinations. Historian David Irving
that when one of Adolf Hitler’s aides suggested that an attempt be made to assassinate
Soviet leaders in that same conflict, the German Fuhrer immediately forbade such
obvious violations of the laws of war.
The 1914 terrorist assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the throne of
Austria-Hungary, was certainly organized by fanatical elements of Serbian Intelligence,
but the Serbian government fiercely denied its own
complicity, and no major European power
directly implicated in the plot. The aftermath of the killing soon led to the outbreak
of World War I, and although many millions died in the trenches over the next few years,
it would have been completely unthinkable for one
of the major belligerents to consider
the leadership of another.
A century earlier, the Napoleonic Wars had raged across the entire continent
of Europe for
most of a generation, but I don’t
recall reading of any governmental assassination plots during
that era, let alone in the quite gentlemanly wars of the preceding 18th century when Frederick
the Great and Maria Theresa disputed ownership of the wealthy province of Silesia
military means. I am hardly a specialist in modern
European history, but after the 1648
Peace of Westphalia
ended the Thirty Years War and regularized the rules of warfare,
no assassination as high-profile as that of Gen. Soleimani comes to mind.
Wars of Religion during previous centuries did see their share of assassination
schemes. For example, I think that Philip II of Spain supposedly encouraged various plots
to assassinate Queen Elizabeth I of England on grounds that she
was a murderous heretic,
and their repeated failure
helped persuade him to launch the ill-fated Spanish Armada;
but being a pious Catholic, he probably would have balked at using the ruse of peace-negotiations
to lure Elizabeth to her doom. In any event, that was more than
four centuries ago, so America
has now placed itself
in rather uncharted waters.
Different peoples possess different political traditions, and
this may play a major role in
influencing the behavior
of the countries they establish. Bolivia and Paraguay were created
in the early 18th century as shards from the decaying Spanish Empire, and according to
Wikipedia they have experienced nearly three dozen successful coups in their
the bulk of these prior to 1950, while
Mexico has had a half-dozen. By contrast, the U.S.
Canada were founded as Anglo-Saxon settler colonies, and neither history records
even a failed attempt.
During our Revolutionary War, George Washington,
Thomas Jefferson, and our other
fully recognized that if their effort failed, they would all be hanged as
rebels by the British. However, I have never heard that they feared falling to an assassin’s
blade, nor that King George III ever considered such an underhanded
means of attack.
During the first century and more
of our nation’s history, nearly all our presidents and
other top political leaders traced their ancestry back to the British Isles, and political
assassinations were exceptionally rare, with Abraham Lincoln’s death being
the very few that come to mind.
At the height of the Cold War, our CIA did involve itself in various secret assassination
plots against Cuba’s Communist dictator Fidel Castro and other foreign
hostile to US interests. But
when these facts later came out in the 1970s, they evoked
such enormous outrage from the public and the media, that three consecutive American
presidents—Gerald R. Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan—issued successive
Executive Orders absolutely
prohibiting assassinations by the CIA or any other
agent of the US government.
Although some cynics might claim that these public declarations represented mere
window-dressing, a March 2018 book review in the New York Times strongly suggests otherwise. Kenneth M. Pollack spent years as a CIA analyst
and National Security Council staffer, then went on to publish a number of influential books on foreign policy and military
strategy over the last two decades. He had originally joined the CIA in 1988, and opens his review by declaring:
One of the very first things I was taught when I joined
the CIA was that we
It was drilled into new recruits over and over again.
Yet Pollack notes with dismay that over the
last quarter-century, these once solid prohibitions
have been steadily eaten away, with the process rapidly accelerating after the 9/11 attacks of
2001. The laws on our books may not have changed, but
it seems that all that is left of this policy is a euphemism. We don’t call them assassinations
anymore. Now, they are “targeted killings,” most often performed by drone strike,
and they have
become America’s go-to weapon in the war on
Bush Administration had conducted 47 of these assassinations-by-another-name,
while his successor Barack Obama, a constitutional scholar and Nobel Peace
had raised his own total to 542.
Not without justification, Pollack wonders whether assassination
has become “a very effective drug, but [one that] treats only the symptom and so offers no cure.”
Thus over the last couple of decades American policy has followed a disturbing trajectory
in its use of assassination as a tool of foreign policy, first restricting its
application only to
the most extreme circumstances,
next targeting small numbers of high-profile “terrorists”
hiding in rough terrain, then escalating those same such killings to the many hundreds.
And now under President Trump, the fateful step has been taken of America claiming
the right to assassinate any world leader not to
our liking whom we unilaterally
declare worthy of
Pollack had made his career as a Clinton Democrat, and is best known for his 2002 book
The Threatening Storm that strongly endorsed
President Bush’s proposed invasion of Iraq
and was enormously influential in producing bipartisan support for that ill-fated policy.
I have no doubt that he is a committed supporter of Israel, and he probably
falls into a category that I would loosely describe as “Left Neocon.”
But while reviewing a history of Israel’s own long use of assassination as a mainstay of
its national security policy, he seems deeply disturbed that America might be
that same terrible path. Less than
two years later, our sudden assassination of a top
Iranian leader demonstrates that his fears may have been greatly understated.
and Kill First"
The book being reviewed was Rise and Kill First by New
York Times reporter Ronen Bergman,
study of the Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence service, together with its sister
agencies. The author devoted six years of research to the project, which was based
upon a thousand personal interviews and access to an enormous
number of official documents
As suggested by the title, his primary focus was Israel’s long history
of assassinations, and across his 750 pages and thousand-odd source
references he recounts the details of an enormous number of such incidents.
sort of topic is obviously fraught with controversy, but Bergman’s volume carries
glowing cover-blurbs from Pulitzer Prize-winning authors on espionage matters, and
official cooperation he received is indicated
by similar endorsements from both a former
chief and Ehud Barak, a past Prime Minister of Israel who himself had once led
assassination squads. Over the last couple of decades, former CIA officer Robert Baer has
become one of our most prominent authors in this
same field, and he praises the book as
down” the best he has ever read on intelligence, Israel, or the Middle East.
The reviews across our elite media were equally laudatory.
I had seen some discussions of the book when it appeared, I only got around to
reading it a few months ago. And while I was deeply impressed by the thorough and
meticulous journalism, I found the pages rather grim and depressing
reading, with their
endless accounts of Israeli agents
killing their real or perceived enemies in operations that
sometimes involved kidnappings and brutal torture, or resulted in considerable loss of life
to innocent bystanders. Although the overwhelming majority of the attacks described
place in the various countries of the Middle
East or the occupied Palestinian territories of
West Bank and Gaza, others ranged across the world, including Europe. The narrative
history began in the 1920s, decades before the actual creation of the Jewish
Israel or its Mossad organization, and extended down to the present
The sheer quantity of such foreign assassinations was really quite remarkable, with the
knowledgeable reviewer in the New York Times suggesting
that the Israeli total over the
or so seemed far greater than that of any other nation. I might even
go farther: if we excluded domestic killings, I wouldn’t be surprised if the body-count
exceeded the combined total for that of all other major countries in the world.
I think all
the lurid revelations of lethal CIA
or KGB Cold War assassination plots that I have seen
discussed in newspaper articles might fit comfortably into just a chapter or two of
Bergman’s extremely long book.
National militaries have always been nervous
about deploying biological weapons, knowing
well that once released, the deadly microbes might easily spread back across the
border and inflict great suffering upon the civilians of the country that deployed them.
Similarly, intelligence operatives who have spent
their long careers so heavily focused
organizing, and implementing what amount to officially-sanctioned murders
may develop ways of thinking that become a danger both to each other and to the larger
society they serve, and some examples of this possibility leak out here and there
Bergman’s comprehensive narrative.
In the so-called “Askelon Incident” of 1984, a couple of captured Palestinians were beaten
to death in public by the notoriously ruthless head of the Shin
Bet domestic security agency
and his subordinates.
Under normal circumstances, this deed would have carried no consequences,
but the incident happened to be captured by the camera by a nearby Israeli photo-journalist,
who managed to avoid confiscation of his film. His resulting scoop sparked
media scandal, even reaching the
pages of the New York Times, and this forced a governmental
investigation aimed at criminal prosecution. To protect themselves, the Shin Bet leadership
infiltrated the inquiry and organized an effort to fabricate evidence pinning
the murders upon
ordinary Israeli soldiers and a
leading general, all of whom were completely innocent. A senior
Shin Bet officer who expressed misgivings about this plot apparently came close to being
murdered by his colleagues until he agreed to falsify his official testimony.
that increasingly operate like mafia
crime families may eventually adopt similar cultural norms.
Israeli operatives sometimes even contemplated
the elimination of their own top-ranking
whose policies they viewed as sufficiently counter-productive. For decades,
Gen. Ariel Sharon had been one of Israel’s greatest military heroes and someone of
extreme right-wing sentiments. As Defense Minister in 1982, he orchestrated the
invasion of Lebanon, which soon turned into
a major political debacle, seriously damaging
international standing by inflicting great destruction upon that neighboring country
and its capital city of Beirut. As Sharon stubbornly continued his military strategy
problems grew more severe, a group of disgruntled
officers decided that the best means
Israel’s losses was to assassinate Sharon, though the proposal was never carried out.
even more striking example occurred a decade later. For many years, Palestinian leader
Yasir Arafat had been the leading object of Israeli antipathy, so much so that at one
Israel made plans to shoot down an international
civilian jetliner in order to assassinate
after the end of the Cold War, pressure from America and Europe led Prime
Minister Yitzhak Rabin to sign the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords with his Palestinian foe. Although
the Israeli leader received worldwide praise and shared a Nobel Peace Prize
for his peacemaking
efforts, powerful segments of
the Israeli public and its political class regarded the act as a
betrayal, with some extreme nationalists and religious zealots demanding that he be killed for
his treason. A couple of years later, he was indeed shot dead by a lone gunman
ideological circles, becoming the first
Middle Eastern leader in decades to suffer that fate.
his killer was mentally unbalanced and stubbornly insisted that he acted alone,
he had had a long history of intelligence associations, and Bergman delicately notes that
gunman slipped past Rabin’s numerous bodyguards
“with astonishing ease”
in order to fire
his three fatal shots at close range.
Many observers drew parallels between Rabin’s
assassination and that of our own president
three decades earlier, and the latter’s heir and namesake, John F. Kennedy, Jr.,
developed a strong personal interest in the tragic event. In March 1997, his glossy
magazine George published
an article by the Israeli assassin’s mother, implicating her
own country’s security services in the crime, a theory also promoted by the late Israeli-Canadian
writer Barry Chamish. These accusations sparked a furious international
debate, but after
Kennedy himself died in an unusual
plane crash a couple of years later and his magazine
folded, the controversy soon subsided. The George archives are not online
nor easily available, so I cannot easily judge the credibility of the charges.
Having himself narrowly avoided assassination by Israeli operatives, Sharon gradually
regained his political influence, and did so without compromising his hard-line
even boastfully describing himself as a “Judeo-Nazi”
to an appalled journalist. A few years
death, he provoked major Palestinian protests, then used the resulting violence
to win election as Prime Minister, while once in office, his very harsh methods led to a
widespread uprising in Occupied Palestine. But Sharon merely
redoubled his repression, and
after world attention
was diverted by 9/11 attacks and the American invasion of Iraq, he
began assassinating numerous top Palestinian political and religious
leaders in attacks that sometimes inflicted heavy civilian casualties.
object of Sharon’s anger was Palestine President Yasir Arafat, who suddenly
took ill and died, thereby joining his erstwhile negotiating partner Rabin in permanent
repose. Arafat’s wife claimed that he had been poisoned
and produced some medical
evidence to support this
charge, while longtime Israeli political figure Uri Avnery published
numerous articles substantiating those accusations. Bergman simply reports the categorical
Israeli denials while noting that “the timing of Arafat’s death was quite peculiar,” then
emphasizes that even if he knew the truth, he couldn’t publish
since his entire book was written under strict
This last point seems an extremely important one, and although it only appears
one time in the body of the text, the
disclaimer obviously applies to the entirety of the long
volume and should always be kept in the back of our minds. Bergman’s book runs some
350,000 words and even if every single sentence were written with the most scrupulous
honesty, we must recognize the huge difference between “the
Truth” and “the Whole Truth.”
Another item also raised my suspicions. Thirty years
ago, a disaffected Mossad officer
named Victor Ostrovsky
left that organization and wrote By Way of Deception, a highly
critical book recounting numerous alleged operations known to him, especially those
contrary to American and Western interests. The Israeli government and its pro-Israel
advocates launched an unprecedented legal campaign to block publication,
produced a major backlash and media uproar,
with the heavy publicity landing it as #1
on the New
York Times sales list. I finally got around to reading his book about a decade
ago and was shocked by many of the remarkable claims, while being reliably informed
that CIA personnel had judged his material as probably
accurate when they reviewed it.
Although much of Ostrovsky’s information was impossible
to independently confirm, for
more than a quarter-century
his international bestseller and its 1994 sequel The Other Side
of Deception have heavily shaped our understanding of Mossad and its activities, so I naturally
expected to see a detailed discussion, whether supportive or
critical, in Bergman’s exhaustive
work. Instead, there was only a single reference to Ostrovsky buried in a footnote on
p. 684. There we are told of Mossad’s utter horror at the numerous deep secrets
Ostrovsky was preparing to reveal, which led
its top leadership to formulate a plan to assassinate
him. Ostrovsky only survived because Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, who had formerly
spent decades as the Mossad assassination chief, vetoed the proposal on the grounds
“We don’t kill Jews.” Although
this reference is brief and almost hidden, I regard
it as providing considerable support for Ostrovsky’s general credibility.
acquired serious doubts about the completeness of Bergman’s seemingly
comprehensive narrative history, I noted a curious fact. I have no specialized expertise
in intelligence operations in general nor those of Mossad in particular, so
I found it quite
remarkable that the overwhelming
majority of all the higher-profile incidents recounted
by Bergman were already familiar to me merely from the decades I had spent closely reading
the New York Times every morning. Is it really plausible that
six years of exhaustive research
and so many personal
interviews would have uncovered so few major operations that had
not already been known and reported in the international media? Bergman obviously provides
a wealth of detail previously limited to insiders, along with numerous unreported
of relatively minor individuals,
but it seems strange that he came up with so few surprising revelations.
Indeed, some major gaps in his coverage are
quite apparent to anyone who has even
the topic, and these begin in the early chapters of his volume, which
include coverage of the Zionist prehistory in Palestine prior to the establishment of the Jewish state.
Bergman would have severely damaged his credibility if he had failed to include the i
nfamous 1940s Zionist assassinations of Britain’s Lord Moyne or U.N. Peace
Count Folke Bernadotte. But he unaccountably
fails to mention that in 1937 the more
Zionist faction whose political heirs have dominated Israel in recent decades
assassinated Chaim Arlosoroff, the highest-ranking Zionist figure in Palestine. Moreover,
he omits a number of similar incidents, including some of those
Western leaders. As I wrote last year:
Indeed, the inclination of
the more right-wing Zionist factions toward assassination, terrorism,
and other forms of essentially criminal behavior was really quite remarkable. For example, in 1943
Shamir had arranged the assassination of his factional rival, a year after
the two men had escaped together
from imprisonment for a bank robbery in which bystanders had been killed, and he claimed he had acted to avert the planned
assassination of David Ben-Gurion, the top Zionist leader and Israel’s future founding-premier. Shamir and his faction
certainly continued this sort of behavior into the 1940s, successfully assassinating Lord Moyne, the British Minister for
the Middle East, and Count Folke Bernadotte, the UN Peace Negotiator, though they failed in their other attempts to kill American President Harry Truman and British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin, and their plans to assassinate Winston Churchillapparently never moved past the discussion stage. His group also pioneered the use of terrorist car-bombs and other explosive attacks against innocent civilian targets, all long before any Arabs or Muslims had ever thought of using similar tactics; and Begin’s larger and more “moderate” Zionist faction did much the same.
As far as I know, the early Zionists had a
record of political terrorism almost unmatched in world history, and in 1974 Prime Minister Menachem Begin once even boasted to a television interviewer of having been the founding father of terrorism across the world.
the aftermath of World War II, Zionists were bitterly hostile towards all Germans, and
Bergman describes the campaign of kidnappings and murders they soon unleashed, both
in parts of Europe and in Palestine, which claimed as many as
two hundred lives. A small
ethnic German community
had lived peacefully in the Holy Land for many generations, but
after some of its leading figures were killed, the rest permanently fled the country, and their
abandoned property was seized by Zionist organizations, a pattern which would
be replicated on a vastly larger scale with
regard to the Palestinian Arabs.
These facts were new to me, and Bergman seemingly treats this
wave of vengeance-killings
with considerable sympathy,
noting that many of the victims had actively supported the
German war effort. But oddly enough, he fails to mention that throughout the 1930s, the main
Zionist movement had itself maintained a strong economic partnership with Hitler’s
whose financial support was crucial to
the establishment of the Jewish state. Moreover,
the war began a small right-wing Zionist faction led by a future prime minister of Israel
attempted to enlist in the Axis military alliance, offering to undertake a campaign
and terrorism against the British military
in support of the Nazi war effort. These undeniable
historical facts have obviously been a source of immense embarrassment to Zionist partisans,
and over the last few decades they have done their utmost to expunge them from
awareness, so as a native-born Israeli now
in his mid-40s, Bergman may simply
be unaware of
"Who Killed Zia?"
Bergman’s long book contains thirty-five
chapters of which only the first two cover the
prior to the creation of Israel, and if his notable omissions were limited to those,
they would merely constitute to a blemish on an otherwise reliable historical narrative.
But a considerable number of major lacunae seem evident across
the decades that follow,
though they may be less
the fault of the author himself than the tight Israeli censorship
he faced or the realities of the American publishing industry. By the year 2018, pro-Israeli
influence over America and other Western countries had reached such enormous
proportions that Israel would risk little international damage
by admitting to numerous
of various prominent figures in the Arab world or the Middle East.
But other sorts of past deeds might still be considered far too damaging to yet acknowledge.
1991 renowned investigative journalist Seymour Hersh published The Samson Option,
describing Israel’s secret nuclear weapons development program of the early
which was regarded as an absolute national
priority by Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion,
are widespread claims that it was the threatened use of that arsenal that later
blackmailed the Nixon Administration into its all-out effort to rescue Israel from the brink
of military defeat during the 1973 war, a decision
that provoked the Arab
Oil Embargo and led to many
years of economic hardship for the West.
The Islamic world quickly recognized the strategic imbalance
produced by their lack of
nuclear deterrent capability,
and various efforts were made to redress that balance,
which Tel Aviv did its utmost to frustrate. Bergman covers in great detail the widespread
campaigns of espionage, sabotage, and assassination by which the Israelis successfully
forestalled the Iraqi nuclear program of Saddam
Hussein, finally culminating in the long-distance
1981 air raid that destroyed his Osirik reactor complex. The author also covers the destruction
of a Syrian nuclear reactor in 2007 and Mossad’s assassination campaign
that claimed the
lives of several leading Iranian
physicists a few years later. But all these events were reported
at the time in our major newspapers, so no new ground is being broken.
Meanwhile, an important story not widely known is entirely missing.
seven months ago, my morning New York Times carried a glowing 1,500 word tribute
to former U.S. ambassador John Gunther Dean,
dead at age 93, giving that eminent diplomat
sort of lengthy obituary usually reserved these days for a rap-star slain in a gun-battle
with his drug-dealer. Dean’s father had been a leader of his local Jewish community
Germany, and after the family left for America
on the eve of World War II, Dean became
citizen in 1944. He went on to have a very distinguished diplomatic career,
notably serving during the Fall of Cambodia, and under normal circumstances, the piece
would have meant no more to me than it did to nearly all its other readers. But
I had spent
much of the first decade of the 2000s
digitizing the complete archives of hundreds of our
leading periodicals, and every now and then a particularly intriguing title led me to read the
article in question. Such was the case with “Who Killed Zia?” which
appeared in 2005.
Throughout the 1980s, Pakistan had been the lynchpin of America’s opposition
Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, with its
military dictator Zia ul-Haq being one of our
important regional allies. Then in 1988, he and most of his top leadership died in
a mysterious plane crash, which also claimed the lives of the U.S. ambassador and
an American general.
deaths might have been accidental, Zia’s wide assortment of bitter enemies
led most observers to assume foul play, and there was some evidence that a nerve gas
agent, possibly released from a crate of mangos, had been
used to incapacitate the crew and thereby cause the crash.
At the time, Dean had reached the pinnacle of his career, serving as our ambassador
in neighboring India, while the U.S. ambassador killed in the crash, Arnold Raphel,
been his closest personal friend, also Jewish.
By 2005, Dean was elderly and long-retired,
he finally decided to break his seventeen years of silence and reveal the strange
circumstances surrounding the event, saying that he was
convinced that the Israeli Mossad had been responsible.
few years before his death, Zia had boldly declared that the production of an “Islamic atomic bomb”
was a top Pakistani priority. Although his primary motive was
the need to balance India’s small
arsenal, he promised to share such powerful weapons with other Muslim countries,
including those in the Middle East. Dean describes the tremendous alarm Israel expressed
at this possibility, and how pro-Israel members of Congress began
a fierce lobbying campaign
to stop Zia’s efforts.
According to longtime journalist Eric Margolis, a leading expert on South
Asia, Israel repeatedly tried to enlist India in launching a joint all-out attack against Pakistan’s
nuclear facilities, but after carefully considering the possibility, the Indian government
This left Israel in a quandary. Zia was a proud and powerful military dictator and
his very close
ties with the U.S. greatly strengthened
his diplomatic leverage. Moreover, Pakistan was 2,000
miles from Israel and possessed a strong military, so that any sort of long-distance bombing raid
similar to the one used against the Iraqi nuclear program was impossible. This
as the remaining option.
Given Dean’s awareness of the diplomatic atmosphere prior to Zia’s death, he immediately
suspected an Israeli hand, and his past personal experiences
supported that possibility.
Eight years earlier,
while posted in Lebanon, the Israelis had sought to enlist his personal
support in their local projects, drawing upon his sympathy as a fellow Jew. But when he
rejected those overtures and declared that his primary loyalty was to America,
was made to assassinate him, with the
munitions used being eventually traced back to Israel.
Although Dean was tempted to immediately disclose
his strong suspicions regarding the
of the Pakistani government to the international media, he decided instead to
pursue proper diplomatic channels, and immediately departed for Washington to share
his views with his State Department superiors and other top Administration officials.
But upon reaching DC, he was quickly declared mentally
incompetent, prevented from
returning to his India
posting, and soon forced to resign. His four decade long career in
government service ended summarily at that point. Meanwhile, the US government refused
to assist Pakistan’s efforts to properly investigate the fatal crash and
instead tried to convince
a skeptical world that
Pakistan’s entire top leadership had died because of a simple mechanical
failure in their American aircraft.
This remarkable account would surely seem
like the plot of an implausible Hollywood movie,
the sources were extremely reputable. The author of the 5,000 word article was Barbara
Crossette, the former New York Times bureau chief for South Asia,
who had held that post at the
time of Zia’s
death, while the piece appeared in World Policy Journal, the prestigious quarterly
of The New School in New York City. The publisher was academic Stephen
of famed historian Arthur J. Schlesinger,
Jr. One might naturally expect that such explosive
charges from so solid a source might provoke considerable press attention, but Margolis
noted that the story was instead totally ignored and boycotted by the entire North
media. Schlesinger had spent a decade at
the helm of his periodical, but a couple
later he had vanished from the masthead and his employment at the New School
came to an end. The text is no longer available on the World Policy Journal website,
but it can still be accessed via Archive.org, allowing those so interested to read it
The complete historical blackout of that incident has continued down to the present
Dean’s detailed Times obituary
portrayed his long and distinguished career in highly
flattering terms, yet failed to devote even a single sentence to the bizarre
circumstances under which it ended.
At the time I originally read that article a dozen or
so years ago, I had mixed feelings about the
of Dean’s provocative hypothesis. Top national leaders in South Asia do die by
assassination rather regularly, but the means employed are almost always quite crude,
usually involving one or more gunman firing at close
range or perhaps a suicide-bomber.
the highly sophisticated methods apparently used to eliminate the Pakistani
government seemed to suggest a very different sort of state actor. Bergman’s book
catalogs the enormous number and variety of Mossad’s assassination technologies.
Given the important nature of Dean’s accusations and the highly reputable venue in
which they had appeared, Bergman must certainly have been aware of the story,
wondered what arguments his Mossad sources
might provide to rebut or debunk them.
I discovered that the incident appears nowhere in Bergman’s exhaustive
volume, perhaps reflecting the author’s reluctance to assist in deceiving his readers.
also noticed that Bergman made absolutely no mention of the earlier assassination attempt
against Dean when he was serving as our ambassador in Lebanon, even though the serial
numbers of the anti-tank rockets fired at his armored
limousine were traced to a batch sold
However, sharp-eyed journalist Philip Weiss did notice that the shadowy organization
claimed credit for the attack was revealed by Bergman to have been a Israel-created
front group used for numerous car-bombings and other terrorist attacks.
This seems to confirm Israel’s responsibility in the assassination plot.
Let us assume that this analysis is correct and that there is a good likelihood that Mossad
was indeed behind Zia’s death. The broader implications are considerable.
Pakistan was one of the world’s largest countries in 1988, having a population that was already
over 100 million and growing rapidly, while also possessing a
powerful military. One of America’s
War projects had been to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan, and Pakistan had played
the central role in that effort, ranking its leadership as one of our most important
The sudden assassination of President
Zia and most of his pro-American government, along
our own ambassador, thus represented a huge potential blow to U.S. interests. Yet when
one of our top diplomats reported Mossad as the likely culprit, the whistleblower was
purged and a major cover-up begun, with
no whisper of the story ever reaching our media
our citizenry, even after he repeated the charges years later in a prestigious publication.
Bergman’s comprehensive book contains no hint of the story, and none
of the knowledgeable reviewers seem to have noted this lapse.
If an event of such magnitude could be totally ignored by our entire media and
omitted from Bergman’s book, many other incidents may also have escaped notice.
"By Way of Deception"
A good starting point for such investigation
might be Ostrovsky’s works, given the desperate
of the Mossad leadership at the secrets he revealed in his manuscript and their
hopes of shutting his mouth by killing him. So I decided to reread his work after
a decade or so and with Bergman’s material now reasonably
fresh in my mind.
Ostrovsky’s 1990 book runs
just a fraction of the length of Bergman’s volume and is
written in a far more casual style while totally lacking any of the latter’s copious source
references. Much of the text is simply a personal narrative, and
although both he and Bergman
had Mossad as their
subject, his overwhelming focus was on espionage issues and the
techniques of spycraft rather than the details of particular assassinations, although a certain
number of the latter were included. On an entirely impressionistic level, the
style of the
Mossad operations described seemed
quite similar to those presented by Bergman, so
so that if various incidents were switched between the two books, I doubt that anyone could
easily tell the difference.
In assessing Ostrovsky’s credibility,
a couple of minor items caught my eye. Early on,
states that at the age of 14 he placed second in Israel in target shooting and at 18
he was commissioned as the youngest officer in the Israeli military. These seem like
factual claims, which if true would
help explain the repeated efforts by Mossad to recruit him,
while if false would surely have been used by Israel’s partisans to discredit him
as a liar. I have seen no indication that his statements were ever disputed.
Mossad assassinations were a relatively minor focus of Ostrovsky’s 1990 book, but it is
interesting to compare those handful of examples to the many hundreds of lethal
covered by Bergman. Some of the differences
in detail and coverage seem to follow a pattern.
For example, Ostrovsky’s opening chapter
described the subtle means by which Israel
the security of Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons project of the late 1970s,
successfully sabotaging his equipment, assassinating his scientists, and eventually destroying
the completed reactor in a daring 1981 bombing raid.
As part of this effort, they lured one
of his top
physicists to Paris, and after failing to recruit the scientist, killed him instead.
Bergman devotes a page or two to that same incident, but fails to mention that the French
prostitute who had unwittingly been part of their scheme was
also killed the following
month after she became
fearful at what had happened and contacted the police. One
wonders if numerous other collateral killings of Europeans and Americans accidentally caught
up in these deadly events may also have been carefully airbrushed out of Bergman’s
even more obvious example comes much later in Ostrovsky’s book, when he describes
how Mossad became alarmed upon discovering that Arafat was attempting to open
peace negotiations with Israel in 1981, and soon assassinated
the ranking PLO official
assigned to the task. This
incident is missing from Bergman’s book,
its comprehensive catalog of far less significant Mossad victims.
One of the most notorious assassinations on
American soil occurred in 1976, when a
in the heart of Washington D.C. took the lives of exiled former
Chilean Foreign Minister Orlando Letelier and his young American assistant. The Chilean
secret service were soon found responsible, and a major international scandal
especially since the Chileans had already
begun liquidating numerous other perceived
across Latin America. Ostrovsky explains how Mossad had trained the Chileans
in such assassination techniques as part of a complex arms sale agreement, but Bergman
makes no mention of this history.
One of the leading
Mossad figures in Bergman’s narrative is Mike Harari, who spent some
fifteen years holding senior positions in its assassination division, and according to the
index his name appears on more than 50 different pages. The author generally
Harari in a gauzy light, while admitting
his central role in the infamous Lillehammer Affair,
in which his agents killed a totally innocent Moroccan waiter living in a Norwegian town
through a case of mistaken identity, a murder that resulted in the conviction and
of several Mossad agents and severe
damage to Israel’s international reputation. By contrast,
Ostrovsky portrays Harari as a deeply corrupt individual, who after his retirement became
heavily involved in international drug-dealing and served as a top henchman
Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega.
After Noriega fell, the new American-backed government
announced Harari’s arrest, but the ex-Mossad officer somehow managed to escape
back to Israel, while his former boss received a thirty year sentence in American federal
Widespread financial and sexual impropriety within the Mossad hierarchy was a recurrent
theme throughout Ostrovsky’s narrative, and
his stories seem fairly credible. Israel had been
founded on strict socialistic principles and these still held sway during the 1980s, so that
government employees were usually paid a mere pittance. For example, Mossad case
officers earned between $500 and $1,500 per month
depending upon their rank, while
larger operational budgets and making decisions potentially worth millions
to interested parties, a situation that obviously might lead to serious temptations. Ostrovsky
notes that although one of this superiors had spent his whole career working
government on that sort of meager salary,
he had somehow managed to acquire a huge
estate, complete with its own small forest. My own impression is that although
intelligence operatives in America may often launch lucrative private careers after they retire,
any agents who became conspicuously wealthy while still working
for the CIA would be
facing serious legal risk.
Ostrovsky was also disturbed by the other sorts of impropriety he claims to have encountered.
He and his fellow trainees allegedly discovered that their top leadership sometimes
late-night sexual orgies in the secure areas
of the official training facilities, while adultery was
within Mossad, especially involving supervising officers and the wives of the agents
they had in the field. Moderate former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was widely disliked
the organization and one Mossad officer regularly
bragged that he had personally brought
government in 1976 by publicizing a minor violation of financial regulations.
This foreshadows Bergman’s far more serious suggestion of the very suspicious circumstances
behind Rabin’s assassination two decades later.
Ostrovsky emphasized the remarkable nature of Mossad as an organization, especially when
compared to its late Cold War peers that served the two superpowers. The KGB
worldwide employees and the CIA tens
of thousands, but Mossad’s entire staff barely numbered
1,200, including secretaries and cleaning personnel. While the KGB deployed
an army of 15,000 case officers, Mossad operated with merely 30 to 35.
This astonishing efficiency was made possible by Mossad’s heavy reliance on a huge network
of loyal Jewish volunteer “helpers” or sayanim scattered
all across the world, who could be
called upon at
a moment’s notice to assist in an espionage or assassination operation,
immediately lend large sums of money, or provide safe houses, offices, or equipment.
London alone contained some 7,000 of these individuals, with the
worldwide total surely
numbering in the many tens
or even hundreds of thousands. Only full-blooded Jews were
considered eligible for this role, and Ostrovsky expresses considerable misgivings about a s
ystem that seemed so strongly to confirm every traditional accusation that Jews
as a “state within a state,”
with many of them being disloyal to the country in which they held
their citizenship. Meanwhile, the term sayanim appears nowhere in Bergman’s 27 page index,
and there is almost no mention of their use in his
text, although Ostrovsky plausibly
argues that the
system was absolutely central to Mossad’s operational efficiency.
Ostrovsky also starkly portrays the utter
contempt that many Mossad officers expressed
their purported allies in the other Western intelligence services, trying to cheat their
supposed partners at every turn and taking as much as they could get while giving
as possible. He describes what seems a
remarkable degree of outright hatred, almost
towards all non-Jews and their leaders, however friendly. For example, Margaret
Thatcher was widely regarded as one of the most pro-Jewish and pro-Israel prime ministers
in British history, filling her cabinet with members of that
tiny 0.5% minority and regularly praising
little Israel as a rare Middle Eastern democracy. Yet the Mossad members deeply hated
her, usually referred to her as “the bitch,” and were convinced that she
was an anti-Semite.
If European Gentiles were regular objects of hatred, peoples from other, less
of the world were often ridiculed
in harshly racialist terms, with Israel’s Third World allies
sometimes casually described as “monkeylike” and “not long out of the trees.”
Occasionally, such extreme arrogance risked diplomatic disaster as was suggested by an
amusing vignette. During the 1980s, there was a bitter civil war in Sri Lanka
Sinhalese and the Tamils, which also
drew in a military contingent from neighboring India.
At one point, Mossad was simultaneously training special forces contingents from all three
of these three mutually-hostile forces at the same time and in the same facility,
so that they
nearly encountered each other, which
surely would have produced a huge diplomatic black
eye for Israel.
The author portrays his increasing disillusionment with an organization that
he claimed was
subject to rampant internal factionalism
and dishonesty. He was also increasingly concerned
the extreme right-wing sentiments that seemed to pervade so much of Mossad, leading
him to wonder if it wasn’t becoming a serious threat to Israeli democracy and the very
of the country. According to his account,
he was unfairly made the scapegoat for a failed
and believing his life at risk, he fled Israel with his wife and returned to his
birthplace of Canada.
After deciding to write his book, Ostrovsky
recruited as his co-author Claire Hoy, a prominent
Canadian political journalist, and despite tremendous pressure from Israel and its partisans,
their project succeeded, with the book becoming a huge international best-seller,
nine weeks as #1 on the New York
Times list and soon having over a million copies in print.
Although Hoy had spent 25 years as a highly
successful writer and this book project
was by far
his greatest publishing triumph, not long afterwards he was financially bankrupt
and the butt of widespread media ridicule,
having suffered the sort of personal misfortune
that so often seems to visit those who are critical of Israel or Jewish activities. Perhaps
as a consequence, when Ostrovsky published his 1994 sequel, The Other
Side of Deception,
no co-author was listed.
"The Other Side of Deception"
contents of Ostrovsky’s first book had mostly been rather mundane, lacking any
shocking revelations. He merely described the inner workings of Mossad and recounted
some of its major operations, thereby piercing the
veil of secrecy that had long shrouded
one of the
world’s most effective intelligence services. But having established his reputation
with an international bestseller, the author felt confident enough to include numerous
in his 1994 sequel, so that individual
readers must decide for themselves whether these
factual or merely a product of his wild imagination. Bergman’s comprehensive bibliography
lists some 350 titles, but although Ostrovsky’s first book is included,
his second is not.
Portions of Ostrovsky’s original narrative had certainly struck me as rather
vague and odd.
Why had he supposedly been scapegoated
for a failed mission and drummed out of the
And since he had left Mossad in early 1986 but only began work on his book
two years later, I wondered what he had been doing during the intervening period. I also
found it difficult to understand how a junior officer had obtained such a wealth
information about Mossad operations
in which he himself had not been
There seemed many missing pieces to the story.
These explanations were all supplied in the opening
portions of his sequel, though they are
impossible to verify. According to the author, his departure had occurred as a
byproduct of an ongoing internal struggle at Mossad, in which a moderate dissident faction
intended to use him to undermine the credibility of the organization
thereby weaken its dominant leadership, whose
policies they opposed.
Reading this second book eight or nine years ago, one of the earliest claims
totally outlandish. Apparently, the director
of Mossad had traditionally been an outsider
by the prime minister, and that policy had long rankled many of its senior figures,
who preferred to see one of their own put in charge. In 1982, their furious lobbying
an internal promotion had been ignored,
and instead a celebrated Israeli general had
named, who soon made plans to clean house in support of different policies. But instead
of accepting this situation, some disgruntled Mossad elements instead arranged his
in Lebanon just before he was scheduled
to officially take office. Some evidence of the
plot immediately came to light and was later confirmed, igniting a subterranean
factional conflict involving both Mossad personnel and some members
of the military, a struggle that ultimately drew in Ostrovsky.
This story came towards the beginning of the book, and struck me as so wildly implausible
that I became deeply suspicious of everything that followed. But after reading
authoritative volume, I am now not
so sure. After all, we know that around the same time,
a different intelligence faction had seriously considered assassinating Israel’s defense minister,
and there are strong suspicions that security operatives orchestrated the later
of Prime Minister Rabin. So perhaps
the elimination of a disfavored Mossad director-designate
is not so totally absurd. And Wikipedia does indeed confirm that Gen. Yekutiel Adam,
Israel’s Deputy Chief of Staff, was named
Mossad Director in mid-1982 but then killed
just a couple of weeks before he was scheduled to take office, thereby becoming the
highest-ranking Israeli ever to die on the battlefield.
to Ostrovsky and his factional allies, powerful elements within Mossad were
transforming it into a dangerous, rogue organization, which threatened Israeli democracy
and blocked any possibility of peace with the Palestinians. These individuals
act in direct opposition to the top Mossad
leadership, whom they often regarded as
Early in 1982, some of the more moderate Mossad elements backed by the outgoing
director had tasked one of their officers in Paris
to open diplomatic channels with the
and he did so via an American attache whom he enlisted in the effort.
But when the harder-line faction discovered this plan, they frustrated the project by assassinating
both the Mossad agent and his unlucky American collaborator,
while throwing the blame
upon some extremist Palestinian
group. I obviously can’t verify the truth of this remarkable
story, but the New York Times archive does confirm Ostrovsky’s account of the mysterious
1982 killings of Yakov Barsimantov and Charles Robert Ray, puzzling incidents that left
for a motive.
Ostrovsky claims to have been deeply shocked and disbelieving when he was initially
of this history of hard-line Mossad elements
assassinating both Israeli officials and their own
colleagues over policy differences, but he was gradually persuaded of the reality. So as
a private citizen now living in Canada, he agreed to undertake a campaign to disrupt
existing intelligence operations,
hoping to sufficiently discredit the organization that the
dominant factions would lose influence or at least have their dangerous activities curtailed
by the Israeli government. Although he would receive some assistance by the
elements that had recruited him, the project
was obviously an extremely dangerous
one, with his
life very much at risk if his actions were discovered.
Presenting himself as a disgruntled former
Mossad officer who was seeking revenge against
past employer, he spent much of the next year or two approaching the intelligence
services of Britain, France, Jordan, and Egypt, offering to assist them in uncovering
the Israeli espionage networks in their countries in exchange
for substantial financial payments.
knowledgeable Mossad defector had ever previously come forward, and although
some of these services were initially suspicious, he eventually won their trust, while the
information he provided was quite valuable in breaking up various local Israeli
most of which had previously been unsuspected.
Meanwhile, his Mossad confederates
kept him informed
of any signs that his activities had been detected.
The detailed account of Ostrovsky’s
anti-Mossad counter-intelligence campaign occupies well
half the book, and I have no easy means of determining whether his stories are real or
fantasy, or perhaps some mixture of the two. The author does provide copies of his
tickets to Amman, Jordan and Cairo, Egypt,
where supposedly he was debriefed at length by
local security services, and in 1988 a major international scandal did erupt when the British
very publicly closed down a large number of Mossad safe-houses and expelled numerous
agents. Personally, I found most of Ostrovsky’s
account reasonably credible, but perhaps
who possess actual professional expertise in intelligence
operations might come to a different conclusion.
Although two years of these attacks against
Mossad intelligence networks had inflicted
damage, the overall political results were much less than desired. The existing
leadership still held a firm grip on the organization and the Israeli government gave no
sign of taking action. So Ostrovsky finally concluded that a
different approach might be
more effective, and
he decided to write a book about Mossad and its inner workings.
His internal allies were initially quite skeptical,
but he eventually won them over, and they
in the writing project. Some of these individuals had spent many years
at Mossad, even rising to a senior level, and they were the source of the extremely detailed
material on particular operations in the 1990 book, which had seemed far
beyond the knowledge of a very junior officer such as Ostrovsky.
Mossad’s attempt to legally suppress the book was a terrible blunder and generated the
massive publicity that made it an international bestseller. Outside observers
that the Israelis had adopted such
a counter-productive media strategy, but according to
his internal allies had helped persuade the Mossad leadership to take that approach.
They also tried to keep him abreast of any Mossad plans to abduct or assassinate him.
During the production of the 1990 book, Ostrovsky and his allies had discussed numerous
past operations, but only a fraction of these were ultimately included in the
text. So when the
author decided to produce his
sequel, he had a wealth of historical material to draw upon, which
included several bombshells.
The first of these came with regard to Israel’s
major role in the illegal sales of American
equipment to Iran during the bitter Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, a story that eventually
exploded into the headlines as the notorious “Iran-Contra Scandal,” although
our media did its utmost to hide Israel’s
central involvement in the affair.
The arms trade with Iran was an extremely lucrative one for Israel,
soon expanded to the
training of military pilots.
The deep ideological antipathy that the Islamic Republic held
for the Jewish State required that this business be conducted via third parties, so a smuggling
route was established through the small German state of Schleswig-Holstein. However,
an effort was later made to enlist the support
of the state’s top elected official, he rejected
the proposal. The Mossad leaders were fearful that he might interfere in the business, so
they successfully fabricated a scandal to unseat him and install a more pliable
politician instead. Unfortunately, the disgraced
official raised a fuss and demanded public
to clear his name, so Mossad agents lured him to Geneva, and after he rejected
a large bribe to keep quiet, killed him, disguising the death so that police ruled it a suicide.
During my original reading, this very lengthy and detailed incident, which ran over 4,000
words, seemed quite doubtful to me. I’d never previously heard of Uwe
Barschel, but he
was described as a close personal
friend of German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, and I found
it totally implausible that Mossad had so casually removed a popular and influential European
elected official from office, then afterward murdered him. My deep suspicions
regarding the rest of Ostrovsky’s book were
However, in recently revisiting the incident, I discovered that seven months after the book
the Washington Post reported that the Barschel case had been reopened, with
Spanish, and Swiss police investigations finding strong indications of a murder
committed exactly along the lines previously suggested by Ostrovsky. Once again, the
surprising claims of the Mossad defector had apparently checked
out, and I now became
much more willing to believe
that at least most of his subsequent revelations
probably correct. And there were quite a long list of those.
(As an aside, Ostrovsky noted one of the crucial
sources of Mossad’s growing internal
in Germany. The threat of domestic German terrorism led the German government
to regularly send large numbers of its security and police officials to Israel for training,
and these individuals became ideal targets for intelligence recruitment, continuing
with their Israeli handlers long
after they had returned home and resumed their careers.
although the topmost ranks of those organizations were generally loyal to their country,
the mid-ranks gradually became honeycombed with Mossad assets, who could be used
for various projects. This raises obvious concerns
about America’s post-9/11 policy of sending
large numbers of our own police officials to Israel for similar training, as well as the
tendency for nearly all newly elected members of Congress to travel there as well.)
I vaguely recalled the early 1980s controversy surrounding UN Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim,
who was discovered to have lied about his World War II military service, and
under a dark cloud, with his name becoming
synonymous with long-hidden Nazi war-crimes.
according to Ostrovsky, the entire scandal was fabricated by Mossad, which placed
incriminating documents obtained from other files into that of Waldheim. The UN leader
had become increasingly critical of Israel’s military attacks
on South Lebanon, so the
falsified evidence was used
to launch a smear campaign in the media that destroyed him.
And if Ostrovsky can be credited, for many
decades Israel itself had engaged in activities
would have occupied center-stage at the Nuremberg Trials. According to his account,
from the late 1960s onward, Mossad had maintained a small laboratory facility at Nes Ziyyona
just south of Tel Aviv for the lethal testing of
nuclear, chemical, and bacteriological compounds
upon hapless Palestinians selected for elimination. This ongoing process of deadly testing
allowed Israel to perfect its assassination technologies while also upgrading its
arsenal of unconventional weapons that
would be available in the event of war. Although
the 1970s, the American media endlessly focused on the terrible depravity
of the CIA, I don’t ever recall hearing any accusations along these lines.
one point, Ostrovsky had been surprised to discover that Mossad agents were
accompanying Israeli doctors on their medical missions to South Africa, where they
treated impoverished Africans at an outpatient clinic in Soweto. The explanation
received was a grim one, namely that private Israeli
companies were using the unknowing
blacks as human
guinea-pigs for the testing of medical compounds in ways that could not
legally have been done in Israel itself. I obviously have no means of verifying this claim,
but I had sometimes wondered how Israel eventually came to dominate so much
generic drug industry, which naturally
relies upon the cheapest and most efficient
of testing and production.
Also quite interesting was the story he told of the rise and fall of British
press tycoon Robert Maxwell,
a Czech immigrant of
Jewish background. According to his account, Maxwell had closely
collaborated with Mossad throughout his career, and the intelligence service had been crucial
in facilitating his rise to power, lending him money early on and deploying
their allies in labor
unions and the banking industry
to weakened his media acquisition targets. Once Maxwell’s
empire had been created, he repaid his benefactors in ways both legal and illegal, supporting
Israel’s policies in his newspapers while also providing Mossad with a
slush fund, secretly
financing their off-the-books
European operations with cash from his corporate pension account.
Those latter outlays were normally meant to be serve as temporary loans, but in 1991
Mossad was slow in returning the funds and he grew financially desperate as his
empire tottered. When he hinted at the dangerous
secrets he might be forced to reveal
unless he were
paid, Mossad killed him instead and disguised it as suicide.
Once again, Ostrovsky’s claims cannot
be verified, but the dead publisher was given a
funeral in Israel, with the serving Prime Minister deeply praising his important services
to the Jewish State while three of his predecessors were also in attendance, and
was buried with full honors in the Mount
of Olives. Most recently, his daughter Ghislaine
the headlines as the closest associate of notorious blackmailer Jeffrey Epstein,
and the woman is widely believed to have been a Mossad agent, now hiding in Israel.
But Ostrovsky’s most potentially dramatic story occurred in late 1991 and filled one of
the last short chapters. In the aftermath of America’s great military victory
in the Gulf War, President George H.W.
Bush decided to invest some of his considerable
political capital in finally forcing peace in the Middle East between Arabs and Israelis.
Right-wing Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was bitterly opposed to any of the proposed
concessions, so Bush began placing financial pressure
upon the Jewish State, blocking
despite the efforts of America’s powerful Israel Lobby.
Within certain circles, he was soon vilified as a diabolical enemy of the Jews.
explains that when faced with strong opposition by an American president,
pro-Israel groups have traditionally cultivated his Vice President as a backdoor means of
regaining their influence. For example, when President Kennedy fiercely opposed
nuclear weapons development program
in the early 1960s, the Israel Lobby focused their
upon Vice President Lyndon Johnson, and this strategy was rewarded when the
latter doubled aid to Israel soon after taking office. Similarly, in 1991 they emphasized
their friendship with Vice President Dan Quayle, an easy task since his chief
of staff and top advisor
was William Kristol, a
leading Jewish Neocon.
However, an extreme faction in Mossad settled upon a much more direct means of
Israel’s political problems, deciding
to assassinate President Bush at his international peace
conference in Madrid while throwing the blame upon three Palestinian militants. On
October 1, 1991, Ostrovsky received a frantic call from his leading Mossad collaborator
informing him of the plan and desperately seeking
his assistance in thwarting it. At first
disbelieving, finding it difficult to accept that even Mossad hard-liners would consider
such a reckless act, but he soon agreed to do whatever he could to publicize the
somehow bring it to the attention of the
Bush Administration without being dismissed as
mere “conspiracy theorist.”
Since Ostrovsky was now a prominent author, he was frequently
invited to speak on
Middle East issues to elite
groups, and at his next opportunity, he emphasized the
hostility of Israeli right-wingers to Bush’s proposals, and strongly suggested
that the president’s life was in danger. As it happened, a member of the small
brought those concerns to the attention
of former Congressman Pete McCloskey, an
of the president, who soon discussed the situation with Ostrovsky by phone,
then flew to Ottawa for a lengthy personal meeting to assess the credibility of the threat.
Concluding that the danger was serious and real, McCloskey immediately began
his DC connections to approach members of
the Secret Service, finally persuading them
Ostrovsky, who explained his inside sources of information. The story was
soon leaked to the media, generating extensive coverage by influential columnist Jack
Anderson and others, and the resulting publicity caused the assassination plot
to be abandoned.
Once again I was quite skeptical after reading this account, so I decided to
contact a few
people I knew, and they informed me
that the Bush Administration had indeed taken
warnings about the alleged Mossad assassination plot very
seriously at the time, which seemingly confirmed most of the author’s story.
his publishing triumph and his success in foiling the alleged plot against the
life of President Bush in late 1991, Ostrovsky largely lost touch with his internal Mossad
allies, and instead focused on his own private
life and new writing career in Canada.
the June 1992 Israeli elections brought to power the much more moderate
government of Prime Minister Rabin, which seemed to greatly reduce the need for any
further anti-Mossad efforts. But government shifts may sometimes have unexpected
consequences, especially in the lethal world of
where personal relationships
are often sacrificed to expediency.
After the publication of his 1990 book, Ostrovsky had become fearful
of being abducted or
killed, so as a consequence
he had avoided crossing the Atlantic and visiting Europe. But
in 1993, his former Mossad allies began urging him to travel to Holland and Belgium to promote
the release of new translations of his international bestseller. They firmly
assured him that
the political changes in Israel
meant that he would now be perfectly safe, and he finally
agreed to do so despite misgivings. But although he took some reasonable security
precautions, an odd incident in Brussels convinced him that he had narrowly escaped
Mossad kidnapping. Growing alarmed, he called
his senior Mossad contact at home, but
getting any reassurance, he received a strangely cold and unfriendly response,
which included a reference to the notorious case of a individual who had once betrayed
Mossad and then been killed together with his wife and three children.
Rightly or wrongly, Ostrovsky concluded that the fall of Israel’s hard-line government had
apparently given the more moderate Mossad faction a chance of gaining control
organization. Tempted by such power, they
now regarded him as a dangerous and expendable
end, someone who might eventually reveal their own past involvement in
anti-Mossad intelligence activities as well as the highly damaging book project.
his former allies now wanted to eliminate him, he quickly began work on his
sequel, which would put the full story into the public record, thereby greatly reducing the
benefits of shutting his mouth. I also noticed that his new text repeatedly
secret possession of a comprehensive
collection of the names and photos of Mossad’s
operatives, a claim that whether true or not might serve as a life-insurance
policy by greatly increasing the risk of Israel taking any action against him.
short description of events closed Ostrovsky’s second book, explaining why the volume
was written and contained so much sensitive material that had been excluded from
the previous one.
"Final Judgement" on
the JFK Assassination
Ostrovsky’s sequel was released late in 1994 by HarperCollins, a leading publisher.
But despite its explosive contents, this time Israel and its allies had learned
and they greeted the work with near-total
silence rather than hysterical attacks, so it received
relatively little attention and sold only a fraction of the previous number of copies.
Among mainstream publications, I could only locate one short and rather negative
capsule review in Foreign Affairs.
However, another book published at the beginning of
that same year on related issues
suffered from a
far more complete public blackout that has now still endured for over a
quarter-century, and this was not merely because of its obscure source. Despite the
severe handicap of such a near-total media boycott, the work went on to become
underground bestseller, eventually having over
40,000 copies in print, widely read
discussed in certain circles, but almost never publicly mentioned. Final Judgment
by the late Michael Collins Piper set forth the explosive hypothesis that Mossad
a central role in the most famous assassination
of the twentieth century, the 1963
killing of President
John F. Kennedy.
While Ostrovsky’s books drew upon his personal knowledge of Israel’s
service, Piper was a journalist
and researcher who had spent his entire career at Liberty
Lobby, a small activist organization based in DC. Being sharply critical of Israeli policies and
Zionist influence in America, the group was usually portrayed
by the media as part of
the far right anti-Semitic
populist fringe, and almost entirely ignored by all mainstream outlets.
Its weekly tabloid Spotlight, which usually focused on controversial topics, had once reached
a remarkable circulation of 300,000 in the unsettled times of
the late 1970s, but then declined
in readership during the more placid and optimistic Reagan Era that followed.
Lobby had never much delved into JFK assassination issues, but in 1978 it published
an article on the subject by Victor Marchetti, a prominent former CIA official, and as a
was soon sued for defamation by E. Howard
Hunt of Watergate fame, with the lawsuit
its survival. In 1982 this ongoing legal battle attracted the involvement of
Mark Lane, an experienced attorney of a leftist Jewish background who had been the
founding father of JFK conspiracy investigations. Lane won the case at
trial in 1985 and thereafter remained a close ally of the organization.
Piper gradually became friendly with Lane and by the early 1990s he himself had grown
interested in the JFK assassination. In January 1994, he published his major
work, Final Judgment,
an enormous body of circumstantial evidence backing his theory that Mossad
had been heavily involved in the JFK assassination. I summarized and discussed the
Piper Hypothesis in my own 2018 article:
For decades following the 1963 assassination, virtually no suspicions
had ever been directed
towards Israel, and as a consequence none of the hundreds or
thousands of assassination
conspiracy books that appeared during the 1960s, 1970s,
and 1980s had hinted at any role for the Mossad, though nearly every other possible culprit, ranging from the Vatican to
the Illuminati, came under scrutiny. Kennedy had received over 80% of the Jewish vote in his 1960 election, American Jews
featured very prominently in his White House, and he was greatly lionized by Jewish media figures, celebrities, and intellectuals
ranging from New York City to Hollywood to the Ivy League. Moreover, individuals with a Jewish background such as Mark Lane
and Edward Epstein had been among the leading early proponents of an assassination conspiracy, with their controversial
theories championed by influential Jewish cultural celebrities such as Mort Sahl and Norman Mailer. Given that the Kennedy
Administration was widely perceived as pro-Israel, there seemed no possible motive for any Mossad involvement, and bizarre,
totally unsubstantiated accusations of such a monumental nature directed against the Jewish state were hardly likely to
gain much traction in an overwhelmingly pro-Israel publishing industry.
However, in the early 1990s highly regarded
journalists and researchers began exposing
surrounding the development of Israel’s nuclear weapons arsenal.
Seymour Hersh’s 1991 book The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American
Foreign Policy described the extreme efforts of
the Kennedy Administration to force Israel
international inspections of its allegedly non-military nuclear reactor at Dimona,
and thereby prevent its use in producing nuclear weapons. Dangerous Liaisons:
The Inside Story of the U.S.-Israeli Covert
Relationship by Andrew and
appeared in the same year, and covered similar ground.
hidden from public awareness at the time, the early 1960s political conflict
between the American and Israeli governments over nuclear weapons development had
represented a top foreign policy priority of the Kennedy Administration, which
nuclear non-proliferation one of its central
international initiatives. It is notable that John
Kennedy’s choice as CIA Director, had previously served on the Atomic Energy
Commission under Eisenhower, being the individual who leaked the
fact that Israel was building a nuclear reactor to produce plutonium.
pressure and financial aid threats secretly applied to Israel by the Kennedy Administration
eventually became so severe that they led to the resignation of Israel’s founding
Minister David Ben-Gurion in June 1963. But
all these efforts were almost entirely halted
reversed once Kennedy was replaced by Johnson in November of that same year. Piper
notes that Stephen Green’s 1984 book Taking Sides: America’s Secret Relations
a Militant Israel had previously
documented that U.S. Middle East Policy completely reversed
itself following Kennedy’s assassination, but this important finding had attracted little attention at
Skeptics of a plausible
institutional basis for a JFK assassination conspiracy have often
noted the extreme continuity in both foreign and domestic policies between the Kennedy
and Johnson Administrations, arguing that this casts severe doubt on any such
motive. Although this analysis seems largely
correct, America’s behavior towards Israel
and its nuclear weapons program stands as a very notable exception to this pattern.
An additional major area of concern for Israeli officials may have involved the efforts of
the Kennedy Administration to sharply restrict the activities of pro-Israel
During his 1960 presidential
campaign, Kennedy had met in New York City with a group
of wealthy Israel advocates, led by financier Abraham Feinberg, and they had offered
enormous financial support in exchange for a controlling influence in Middle Eastern
Kennedy managed to fob them off with vague
assurances, but he considered the incident
that the next morning he sought out journalist Charles Bartlett, one of his
closest friends, and expressed his outrage that American foreign policy might fall under
the control of partisans of a foreign power, promising that if he became president,
rectify that situation. And indeed, once
he had installed his brother Robert as Attorney
the latter initiated a major legal effort to force pro-Israel groups to register themselves
as foreign agents, which would have drastically reduced their power and influence.
JFK’s death, this project was quickly
abandoned, and as part of the settlement,
pro-Israel lobby merely agreed to reconstitute itself as AIPAC.