Majorityrights Central > Category: That Question Again

My thanks go to Geoff for pointing me in the direction of this Guardian article.

Britain secretly supplied Israel with plutonium during the 1960s despite a warning from military intelligence that it could help the Israelis to develop a nuclear bomb, it was disclosed last night. The deal, made during Harold Wilson’s Labour government, is revealed in classified documents released under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained by BBC2’s Newsnight programme.

The documents also show how Britain made hundreds of shipments to Israel of material which could have helped in its nuclear weapons programme, including compounds of uranium, lithium, beryllium and tritium, as well as heavy water.

Israel asked Britain in 1966 to supply 10mg of plutonium. Israel would have required almost 5kg of plutonium to build an atomic bomb, but British defence intelligence officials warned that 10mg had “significant military value” and could enable the Jewish state to carry out important experimental work to speed up its nuclear weapons programme.

Documents show that the decision to sell plutonium to Israel in 1966 was blocked by officials in both the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office, who said: “It is HMG’s policy not to do anything which would assist Israel in the production of nuclear weapons.” But the deal was forced through by a Jewish civil servant, Michael Michaels, in Tony Benn’s Ministry of Technology, which was responsible for trade in nuclear material, according to Newsnight.

Peter Kelly, who was British defence intelligence’s expert on the Israeli nuclear weapons programme, knew Mr Michaels. He told Newsnight he believed Mr Michaels knew that Israel was trying to build an atomic bomb, but that he had dual loyalties to Britain and Israel.

Mr Benn told the programme that civil servants in his department kept the deals secret from him and his predecessor, Frank Cousins.

He had always suspected that civil servants were doing deals behind his back, but he never thought they would sell plutonium to Israel. He told Newsnight: “I’m not only surprised, I’m shocked. It never occurred to me they would authorise something so totally against the policy of the government.

“Michaels lied to me, I learned by bitter experience that the nuclear industry lied to me again and again.”

READ MORE...

David Irving, an impoverished 68-year old British historian who disputes the official version of World War Two and, within that, the Jewish narrative known as the Holocaust, has been jailed today for 3 years by

the inquisition

a court in Austria.  His crime consisted in refutational remarks made in speeches to Austrian nationalist groups in 1989 in Vienna and the southern town of Leoben.

I do not believe in the Great 1960’s Narrative either.  I consider myself free to weigh the evidence as I have gathered and understood it, imperfectly or otherwise, and to believe what I will.  I consider myself free to speak to my fellow Man about this, as any, belief.  I consider that any racial or elite group that removes this basic right of free speech from me and threatens incarceration if I disobey to be fundamentally evil.

Am I wrong?  What is your opinion?

UPDATE, 21.02.06

The Austrian prosecutor has reacted to Irving’s filing of an appeal by moving to appeal the sentence.

A spokesman for the prosecutor’s office said it had lodged an appeal to have the sentence increased.

Michael Klackl, the state prosecutor, said Irving was a serial “falsifier of history” and had been cast as a martyr for free speech by neo-Nazis who would not grant such rights if they were in power.

A new hearing is not likely before the second half of 2006.

Irving expressed his unfashionable opinions in Vienna and Leoben three years before the legislation under which he has now been prosecuted was even on Austria’s statute books.  At the time, then, he was not committing a crime in Austria.  It’s grim enough that this legislation is so repressive ... worse that it is retrospective.  But that it is also apparently the Law of Schadenfreud, whereby the wretched Irving can be tormented at will post-trial, is alien to all civilised standards.

I have never much interested myself in Irving’s colourful career.  Certainly, I never considered him a sympathetic figure, much less a martyr.  But that is what he will increasingly become to many observers shocked, like me, by the cold power of the state that has been employed against him.

The following, very detailed and highly relevant, biographical assertions about Flemming Rose were added on 2/10/06 (by a presumed anti-Zonist) and removed the next day (by a presumed Zionist).

Flemming Rose born 3/14/1956 into a Jewish family in the Ukraine has a major in Russian language and literature from University of Copenhagen. From 1990 to 1996 he was the Moscow correspondent for the newspaper Berlingske Tidende. Between 1996 and 1999 he was the correspondent for the same newspaper in Washington, D.C.. In 1999 he became Moscow correspondent for the newspaper Jyllands-Posten and January 2005 the cultural editor of that paper (KulturWeekend). He fled Denmark where he was under police protection to Miami, Florida in fear for his life where he is currently in hiding.

The reason I feel this is valuable to look at is the fact that Rose’s commissioning of Muhammad-mocking cartoons has been portrayed as a conflict between European values and the values of Islam.  This biographical detail makes it seem to be more a conflict between Zionists and Muslims waged on our soil and we are the ultimate losers for having allowed either of these peoples to step foot on our soil.

Given the, literally, hundreds of movies and documentaries about the Holocaust, it struck me as rather odd that there wasn’t a comparable body of work about the Holodomor—the Ukrainian Famine of 1932-1933.  I finally found one 55 minute documentary about it.  But then I found something more disturbing ...

READ MORE...

Why do we beat ourselves up so much over the JQ?  Cui bono?

It seems to me that this must stop, and the nature and extent of the Jewish influence on our history and our way of life today must become a matter of intelligent but perfectly routine and unexceptional debate.  How else, anyway, can obsession be separated from legitimate concern, xenophobia from self-love?  How else, essentially, can we be sure that we really are as free as we think we are - and, if not, why not?

On Saturday a small step towards open and free discussion of the JQ was taken at VDare.  Peter Brimelow’s site is certainly not associated with the original sin of anti-semitism.  So I think one can read Kevin MacDonald’s latest authoritative article safe in the knowledge both that the JQ should on occasion be discussed among decent, thinking people and

this

is how to do it.

With thanks to Geoff for the link.

Simon Weisenthal has passed away in his sleep at home in Vienna.  He was 96.  Today’s obit pages will lead with his passing.  Everybody will have something important to say about justice and guilt and those damned Nazis.

Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean and founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Los Angeles, leads the pack.  He is quoted in the Telegraph saying, “I think he’ll be remembered as the conscience of the Holocaust.  When the Holocaust ended in 1945 and the whole world went home to forget, he alone remained behind to remember. He did not forget. He became the permanent representative of the victims, determined to bring the perpetrators of the history’s greatest crime to justice.”

Weisenthal himself said, “When history looks back I want people to know the Nazis weren’t able to kill millions of people and get away with it.

Speaking purely for myself, I want people to know that there is a certain inflation in what we “know”, hammered into public consciousness - and conscience - by the incessant repetition of statements such as Hier’s.

History’s greatest crime?  Debatable.