Originally posted by nightbringr
And im not making any claims. Simply saying that we have no reason to believe in the Samson Option, because it has never been proved nor verified by
someone who would know about it. What cant you grasp about this simple fact?
I'm not saying Hersh is the best source for this. He's a popular writer and a leftist to boot. I'm just saying he wrote a complete book on the
subject. Citing Wikipedia to bash Hersh is like citing Wikipedia as a definitive source on Climate Change. It gets you a D grade. It's not
definitive. If you don't believe Hersch, take a look at Mordocai Vanunu or a host of other people who corroborate the issue.
And why can't you grasp the simple fact that hiding behind an official policy of "no comment" means nothing? I would not expect anyone in authority
to touch the subject at all. It's about as likely as the US government saying, "Gee, we knew about Roswell all along and here's all we know about
it and, BTW, we signed a treaty with the Greys in the fifties." That kind of policy alternative is unlikely to get leaked.
Besides which, this part of the argument is almost beside the point. We know, for certain, that the Sampson Option is possible. We know where the
Isaraeli's got their fissionable material. We know where their atomic research center is. We know how they hid it from the west (Read "Gideon's
Spies; the secret history of the Mossad" for the details). We know they are capable of hitting western capitals directly with the Jericho III rocket
(Range of over 7,000 mi) We know they have sea launch nuclear capability, thanks to Germany's Dolphin submarines. Whether or not anyone in authority
in Israel has said, "This is an option," it's still an option and they and we know it.
And it's not as if influential Israelis have never floated the balloon. It's out there. Martin Van Creveld, a professor of military history at the
Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has been quoted as saying: "Most European capitals are targets for our air force....We have the capability to take
the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under." (Quoted by David Hirst in “The War Game, a
controversial view of the current crisis in the Middle East,” The Observer Guardian, September 21, 2003.
The LA Times, published an opinion piece by David Perlmutter, a Louisiana State University professor where he said: "What would serve the Jew-hating
world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace
activists to join us in the ovens? For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away--unlike
the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans--have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?" -- “Israel: Dark
Thoughts and Quiet Desperation,” Los Angeles Times, April 7, 2002.
General Moshe Dayan (You remember him!) was quoted as saying “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.” This was reported by
Seymour Hersh. Contrary to your opinion, he has not been discredited.
The point is that to claim the Sampson Option is not an option because no Prime Minister or Defense Minister has overtly said it was is faulty logic.
It’s definitely on the radar—regardless if anyone talks about it. It does not good to stick your fingers in your ears, yelling, "La la la! I
can't hear you."