The Guardian’s continuing obsession with Mordechai Vanunu


In 1985 Mordechai Vanunu left his job as a technician at Israel’s nuclear installation in Dimona.  Before leaving, however, he stole several rolls of film about the facility, which he then used to help the UK Sunday Times write a story that purported to expose Israel’s nuclear weapons program.

Vanunu was convicted of treason and espionage in 1988, and was released after serving 18 years in prison.  After his release, he exclaimed that he was proud of what he did.

Vanunu is still subject to travel restrictions (and other limitations) as he continues to be considered a serious danger to Israeli security – owing to the fact that he holds state secrets that have not yet been published, and which he reportedly said he would reveal.  Israeli courts have upheld the legitimacy of the state’s concerns, ruling that Vanunu has not changed his ways and has “repeatedly violated their injunctions” by maintaining ties and contact with the media and other parties.

Naturally, Vanunu is something of a cause celeb at the Guardian, which has published no less than 75 separate pieces (reports and commentary) on the convicted Israeli felon, including an official editorial lauding him, entitled “In Praise of…Mordechai Vanunu.

The latest Guardian entry is a boilerplate pro-Vanunu letter-to-the-editor entitled ‘Mordechai Vanunu’s Suffering‘, April 19, and is signed by the usual cast of UK anti-Zionists, including several Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) ‘Patrons’: Tony Benn (PSC Patron), Ben Birnberg (War on Want), Julie Christie (PSC Patron), Jeremy Corbyn MP (PSC Patron), Kate Hudson (Stop the War Coalition), Bruce Kent (PSC Patron), and Roger Lloyd-Pack (who played Trigger in BBC’s ‘Only Fools and Horses’). 

In a 2004 interview with Amy Goodman, published at the extremist site CounterPunch, Vanunu accused the Israeli government not only of unjustly imprisoning one man, but of “betraying all of humanity and the world”.

Is there really any mystery as to why Vanunu is so admired by the Guardian?

23 replies »

  1. When all else fails – the Guardian has something about Vanunu ..

    What will they ever do for clicks when peace breaks out???

  2. Jim, you asked,
    “After having been away from the Israeli nuclear program for over two decades how could he be a threat to Israel’s security?”

    Answer: ” he [Vanunu] holds state secrets that have not yet been published, and which he reportedly said he would reveal.”
    I hope that answers your question. It’s in the article. Skipped that part?

    • Strange how these people never ask the same question about Jonathan Pollard. They really seem to have a one track, anti-Israel mind that they dress up in very focused “humanitarian” BS.

      • @ AKUS — I used to think that it was outrageous that Jonathan Pollard was jailed for so long for spying for Israel. Since I discovered that he had also offered the material he sold Israel to Pakistan I have no sympathy for him.

          • cba,
            Yes. Can you imagine the mindset of someone so bereft of ethics and morality who would do this sort of thing? Obviously this troll’s parents failed to pass on human traits of morality and empathy when he/she was at a tender age. The damage was done and what we are left with is a real candidate for a straightjacket and a rubber room.

  3. Suppose there were a British counterpart to Vanunu, who was accused of revealing British state secrets. How many articles and letters would there be in the Guardian that laud this person? Just asking.

    • Revealing state secrets, especially UK state secrets, would be Guardian fodder. ‘We’ all know it. The Guardian wants to sow mayhem and anarchy in UK society, (Muslim immigration etc), in preparation for a radical socialist takeover.

      Democracy has failed The Guardian.

  4. Amazing how these klotzes sign a document and expecting to be taken seriously but they are happy for the contract vaanounou signed freely to be scrapped. Maybe they are also happy for any signed property deeds to be scrapped as well like, let’s say, palestinian refugee house deeds?

  5. Jeff you are a real threat to Israel’s security – you have just announced to the world that Israel has not updated its nuclear defense system in the last twenty years. What a give away. I hope they do not arrest you and throw away the key –

    What a joker.

    • Jimmy you shouldn’t pretend that you are twelve years old already. With posts like this everybody will know that you are under ten…
      Jeff wrote :
      he [Vanunu] holds state secrets that have not yet been published, and which he reportedly said he would reveal
      I have to reveal the big secret (just don’t tell mommy please) some of the nuclear related technologies and instruments used and built in the fifties are military or security related secrets in the US, Russia, China, UK, France etc. too.
      And now be a good boy and don’t overload your small brain with things you are too young to know and understand.

    • Jim Hewitt,
      In your first post you’d already given an adequate example of your unsound reasoning – there’s no need for further examples.
      As for the world, I do hope it’s visiting this website to see the truth about about the Guardian and some of the rabid anti-Semites, like you, that it attracts, like flies to shit.

    • Never realised talking to yourself is interesting. You lost your point when you use the bogus term IOF…

      • Just take a look at the website she leads to

        “We’ll make a pastrami sandwich of them. We’ll insert a strip of Jewish settlement, right across the West Bank, so that in 25 years time, neither the United Nations, nor the United States, nobody, will be able to tear it apart.” -Ariel Sharon to Winston Churchill III in 1973

        Well, for people in contact with the otherworld Sharon might have spoken to Churchill in 1973, we as blinded by reality are so dumb to believe in natural death, in case of Churchill we would even believe in a date of death, 24 January 1965.

        I can send the screenshots of the coming of the Lord Winston, in case of sceptics.

          • There was no WINSTON CHURCHILL III.
            If you mean his grandson, say so.
            And I am sure you can provide the source of the citation or did your contact to the otherworld produce the citation?
            Don`t come up with other websites, but with the direct source.