Barry Chamish attempts to suppress rare article about Rabin’s assassination
by Salvador Astucia, April 28, 2002
On Friday, April 26th, I received a curt email from Barry Chamish complaining about an article which I posted on my website, written by Guela Amir, mother Yigal Amir, the young man who shot Yitzhak Rabin in November 1995. The late John F. Kennedy Jr allowed the article to be published in the March 1997 edition of George Magazine. Kennedy’s decision to publish the controversial piece reportedly created a rift between him and his Jewish partner, Michael J. Berman, co-founder and president of the magazine. Berman resigned shortly after the article was published.
Kennedy also wrote an editorial note in that edition which explained how he was contacted by Ms. Amir. To my astonishment, he suggested that he did not believe the Warren Report. To my knowledge, he was the only close relative to his father to publicly acknowledge the possibility of a conspiracy. This is what he wrote:
|
… On another, more sober note, in this issue is the first-person account of Geula Amir (the mother of Yigal Amir, the convicted assassin of Yitzhak Rabin). She describes the strange events surrounding the death of Israel’s prime minister. Several months ago, representatives of the family contacted the editors of George and asked whether we were interested in the piece. They were, no doubt, hoping that my own family history would bring added attention to their story, and they were probably right. … |
(JFK, Jr, George, March 1997, Editor’s Letter, p. 18)
Some of you may ask, Where did Kennedy suggest that he did not believe the Warren Report? The last sentence contained a strong signal that he believed there was a conspiracy. Here it is again: "They were, no doubt, hoping that my own family history would bring added attention to their story, and they were probably right." I interpret this to mean that Kennedy believed Amir’s story was similar to the assassinations of his father and uncle. This is significant because in Amir’s article, she wrote that Rabin’s death was the result of a governmental conspiracy. She challenged the government’s official position that her son was a lone assassin and there was not a conspiracy to kill Rabin. Comparably, the Warren Commission concluded that one man, Oswald, killed President Kennedy and there was not a conspiracy.
Amir charged that Avishai Raviv, agent provocateur for Shin Bet—Israel’s equivalent of the FBI and Secret Service combined into one agency—had goaded her son into shooting Rabin. Amir added that rumors had been circulated that her son’s gun was loaded with blanks when he fired at Rabin; however, Amir clearly stated that this was not the case. She openly acknowledged that her son shot and killed the Israeli prime minister. Her main point of contention was that he did not act alone, that there was a widespread conspiracy.
This brings us back to my recent emails from Barry Chamish who is upset that I published Ms. Amir’s article. He is claiming that she changed her story and now believes her son is completely innocent, that he did not shoot Rabin at all. On three different occasions, I asked Mr. Chamish to provide hard evidence that Guela Amir has changed her story, but he has refused.
Still it is clear that he wants me to take down Amir’s controversial article. The big question is "Why?"
The following are the email exchanges between Barry Chamish and myself in the order they were sent.
Date: [April 26, 2002]
From: "Barry Chamish" <chamish@netvision.net.il>
Subject: Rabin
To: salvador_astucia@yahoo.com
Look guy, I wrote the book Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin and did real research on the subject. You did none whatsoever. Rabin was NOT murdered because he wanted to surrender land to Arabs. He was murdered because he stopped the suicide of Israel. His real murderer was not Yigal Amir, it was his bodyguard Yoram Rubin. Peres organized the hit with French intelligence. Scroll down and see that even a highschool kid has better understanding than you.
Barry Chamish
[Chamish also attached an article, about 10 pages long, entitled Enemies Within, Enemies Without. Do a google search to read it.]
Date: [April 26, 2002]
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Rabin
To: "Barry Chamish" <chamish@netvision.net.il>
Mr. Chamish,
For someone who claims to be interested in truth, you are an awfully nasty little weasel. First of all, why are you so upset? I only presented an article (in Appendix B) written by Guela Amir, mother Yigal Amir. Her article was printed in the March 97 edition of John F. Kennedy Jr's Magazine, George. That fact alone is relevant for obvious reasons.
Secondly, to know of the article's existence took a degree of research. In addition, actually finding a copy of the magazine and scanning the article so it could be presented to the public was an additional layer of research.
Thirdly, it is quite obvious to me that you are upset because I presented Ms. Amir's article on the Internet. Ever since JFK Jr's death, it has been suppressed. If you are such a great researcher, why have you never presented the article?
Fourthly, Ms. Amir is quite knowledgeable of the assassination and, as Yigal's mother, she is obviously concerned for his welfare. Yet she acknowledges that he was the trigger man. The point of her article is that he did not act alone. Why would an informed person like her do this if he is innocent as you claim?
Until you can answer that one point, your so-called research is of little value.
Salvador
Date: [April 26, 2002]
From: "Barry Chamish" <chamish@netvision.net.il>
Subject: Re: Rabin
To: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
See that's my problem. I work six years, convince half my country that Amir was NOT the trigger man and you say Geula says he was. Number one, she doesn't. She has told the truth, he shot blanks, on numerous occasions. In NY last May she told a small gathering, and I have witnesses, that if her boys talk, they'll start killing her girls.
That's my problem. Years getting to the truth that Amir shot blanks and you didn't even look to see the evidence before you wrote he didn't. It's not weasly. Your work looks pretty important so I'm just disappointed.
Barry
Date: [April 26, 2002]
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Rabin
To: "Barry Chamish" <chamish@netvision.net.il>
--- Barry Chamish <chamish@netvision.net.il> wrote:
> See that's my problem. I work six years, convince
> half my country that Amir was NOT the trigger man
> and you say Geula says he was. Number one, she
> doesn't.
WRONG!! In the article Geula Amir wrote for George Magazine (March 97), she stated in no uncertain terms that Yigal was the gunman. Here is an excerpt:
----------
As Rabin walked past, the young man drew a pistol, slipped into the crowd of towering security agents, and fired three rounds at the prime minister. Two of them hit Rabin's exposed back, and one shot wounded his bodyguard. As the shots rang out, someone at the scene shouted, "Blanks! Blanks!" as if to reassure the others that the bullets were not real. But the shots were not blanks. Rabin, mortally wounded, was rushed to nearby Ichilov Hospital. Curiously, as Leah Rabin was whisked away by car to Shin Bet headquarters, one of the agents assured the prime minister's wife that the gunman had actually used "a toy gun" and that her husband was fine. The reality was that Rabin lay dying in an emergency room.
The gunman was my son Yigal. The shooting seemed to be an open-and-shut case of assassination. An amateur videotape of the event clearly showed Yigal walking up to the prime minister and shooting him. So how could anyone at the scene have thought that Yigal was shooting blanks? Why was another guard so certain that the gun wasn't real? And how is it that minutes after the shooting, even before the details of the incident were broadcast, Israeli TV received a phone call from a man who claimed to represent a right-wing Jewish organization. He confidently declared, "This time we missed. Next time we won't." Other journalists simultaneously received messages on their pagers with the same statement.
-----------------------
> She has told the truth, he shot blanks, on
> numerous occasions.
That is NOT what she wrote in the March 97 article in George Magazine. If she said or wrote that later, then her story has changed. But I doubt that it has. I believe you are trying to deceive people. It looks to me like you've been evoking Protocol V, "Despotism and Modern Progress." That's the one where you guys present so many different versions of an event that the dumb Goys (and in this case, Israeli Jews too) decide not to form an opinion.
Here's an excerpt from Protocol V:
----------
[9.] We shall assume to ourselves the liberal physiognomy of all parties, of all directions, and we shall give that physiognomy a VOICE IN ORATORS WHO WILL SPEAK SO MUCH THAT THEY WILL EXHAUST THE PATIENCE OF THEIR HEARERS AND PRODUCE AN ABHORRENCE OF ORATORY.
[10.] IN ORDER TO PUT PUBLIC OPINION INTO OUR HANDS WE MUST BRING IT INTO A STATE OF BEWILDERMENT BY GIVING EXPRESSION FROM ALL SIDES TO SO MANY CONTRADICTORY OPINIONS AND FOR SUCH LENGTH OF TIME AS WILL SUFFICE TO MAKE THE "GOYIM" LOSE THEIR HEADS IN THE LABYRINTH AND COME TO SEE THAT THE BEST THING IS TO HAVE NO OPINION OF ANY KIND IN MATTERS POLITICAL, which it is not given to the public to understand, because they are understood only by him who guides the public. …
-------------
Look familiar?
> In NY last May she told a small gathering, and I
> have witnesses, that if her boys talk, they'll start
> killing her girls.
>
> That's my problem. Years getting to the truth that
> Amir shot blanks and you didn't even look to see the
> evidence before you wrote he didn't. It's not
> weasly. Your work looks pretty important so I'm just
> disappointed. Barry
Again, I only presented an article written by the mother of Rabin's assassin (at least the guy in jail for the crime). In that article, she explained the blanks, but her explanation was quite different from yours. She also stated clearly that her son was the shooter. If her story has changed, then please give me some hard evidence. If you cannot do that, then you are wasting my time, GUY!
Salvador
Date: [April 27, 2002]
From: "Barry Chamish" <chamish@netvision.net.il>
Subject: Re: Rabin
To: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
That was in 1996. Ask her now. Barry
Date: [April 27, 2002]
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Rabin
To: "Barry Chamish" <chamish@netvision.net.il>
Wrong again, GUY! Geula Amir's article was NOT published in 1996. It was published in March of 1997. For a self-proclaimed expert on the subject, you don't keep track of details very well.
Also, I do not need to ask Geula Amir anything. Her 97 article was quite clear. Has she publicly retracted it? I seriously doubt it.
For the second time, if you have any hard evidence to back up your claim that she has, please direct me to it. So far, you haven't shown me anything.
Salvador
Date: [April 27, 2002]
From: "Barry Chamish" <chamish@netvision.net.il>
Subject: Re: Rabin
To: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Come on, she was interviewed in October 1996 by Avi Leitner who did the writing. Please, I know my subject. Barry
Date: [April 28, 2002]
From: "Salvador Astucia" <salvador_astucia@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Rabin
To: "Barry Chamish" <chamish@netvision.net.il>
Third request: If you have any hard evidence that Geula Amir has changed her opinion about her son's involvement in Rabin's assassination since her March 1997 article in George Magazine, please direct me to it. To keep you on track, I want to know if you have hard evidence that she believes her son did not shoot and kill Rabin. That was her position in March 1997 [that her son DID shoot and kill Rabin]. You claim it has changed. Prove it.
Salvador
END
To read Guela Amir’s controversial article, "A Mother’s Defense," clear here.