Talk:Gerald Bull

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

I have no knowledge of this subject, but it seems highly NPOV to me. Are the Israeli accusations true? -- Zoe

Yep. I'll add a link to the article. What, aren't you familiar with the history of the Mossad? They're like a mini-CIA; they've been active all over the place, and use... well, "controversial" tactics to say the least. Read about what they did to recapture Mordechai Vanunu, for example. Or perhaps read about the Lavon Affair. Or Adolph Eichmann. Or Black September. Or Ahmed Boushiki, or Abu Jihad, or Khalid Meshaal. Heck, there's even some evidence indicating that Elie Hobeika's assasination was committed by the Mossad, although there's not too much evidence. The fact that it came just days after he announced that he was going to testify about Ariel Sharon about the Sabra and Shatila Massacre certainly didn't help, everything else aside. -- Rei
Obviously the Mossad must be smaller than the CIA, but "mini-CIA"? Is Britain a "mini-USA"?
As far as I know, it seems to be an accepted fact that Mossad killed him because the Super Gun had the ability to reach Israel. --24.186.250.37 21:27, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Note that Frank Langella played Bull in a movie, and a "Dr. Brattle" appeared in a Punisher storyline; Mike Baron has admitted that Brattle was based on Bull.

Contents

[edit] Theories on Bull's death

Well I remember watching the Discovery Channel in Canada (when they used to have a show called Discover magazine) that mentioned that the US, Canada, and Israel is implicated in the death of Bull. It might not be the case that the Mossad actually did the work, but my impression from that show was that the agencies in these 3 countries worked together to stop Bull from further corporation with the Iraqis. Suggestions that Bull was killed over Project Babylon didn't make much sense. These are stationary guns that can be easily found if you're a country with a spy satellite. And the Israeli air force is good enough to make sure that this gun is destroyed if anything happened. The same show mentioned that Bull was developing howitzers for the Iraqis in exchange for funding for building a satellite lobbing gun. Calyth 22:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Bull's work on Project Babylon didn't really upset the Israelis, it was his work on improving the range of Iraq's Scud missiles that they didn't like. After all, it was those upgraded Scuds that Saddam fired on Israel during 1991. That said, as the article mentions, Mossad didn't quite have that much motive to kill him as he would give them whatever details they wanted on what he was working on. Still, it cannot be ruled out that they killed him to prevent further work on the Scuds.
There is another theory that the Iraqis killed him because they no longer needed him, and because they were afraid he would reveal too much to the Israelis, but that doesn't appear to have gained much prominence. I think we'll never really know. Imp i 23:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/reference/gerald_bull has the same text. whose is original? The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.54.94.65 (talk • contribs) .

Absolute Astronomy.com is a mirror site, one of many dozens that mirror Wikipedia's content. See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. Rest assured, the original content is here, on this site. — Imp i 18:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed

GabrielF (talk · contribs) removed this, saying it was unsourced. --Gwern (contribs) 19:34 10 February 2007 (GMT)

The most common theories are that either; the Israeli Mossad was responsible due to the method used (small-caliber, sound-suppressed pistols), or that it was Iranian Intelligence VEVAK, who had the motive and capacity to easily have it done. Neither VEVAK nor Mossad representatives have denied responsibility for his assassination. Others, including Bull's son, believe that the Mossad is taking credit for an act they did not commit to scare off others who may try to help enemy regimes. The alternative theory is that Bull was killed by the CIA. There are some reports that Bull was demanding both a presidential pardon and money from the CIA or he would disclose all he knew about illegal CIA activities in South Africa. Unwilling to be extorted, it is claimed that the CIA therefore killed Bull. However most experts and analysts believe that either Israeli Mossad or Iranian VEVAK are the key suspected ones behind the assasination. Both strongly had the capacity and motive to stop Saddam from acquiring such an intimidation/terror weapon. A fictionalized version of this story is in the movie Doomsday Gun. Gerald Bull had worked for so many parties in so many critical defence projects that he became an asset and a liability for several powerful groups at the same time.

[edit] one more impression

I personally found this guy fascinating and followed his career up until he was killed. I, too, was under the impression that several governments may have been complicit in his death but Mossad probably carried it out. Bull had the bad luck (or judgement!) of working with Saddam and Israel considered this new weapon a threat.

From my understanding the correct journalistic way to report his death would be something like, "It is widely believed that Mossad...." or "It is usually assumed that Mossad..." Obviously, if it was a covert operation -- and it likely was -- the public will never know definitively what happened. But it is not reasonable to then not report on the likely truth behind covert operations. --Calan 14:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Customs Seizure

The date for the seizure by UK customs is May 1990 in the Project Babylon Article and November 1990 in the Gerald Bull article. Anyone know a source to clear this up?

[edit] Obviously, if it was a covert operation -- and it likely was -- the public will never know definitively what happened

That may be true - but surely modern day forensics techniques (that only require a nanoliter, ie: one thousandth of a millionth of a litre) of genetic material from bullets, etc... taken from the scene would at least be capable of pinning down the ethnicity of whoever committed the crime (if the individual were on the Police National Computer, then the police could successfully pursue a prosecution). Do the police still have some of the evidence from the scene of the assassination to pursue an investigation?

I don't know about this, but it would answer some interesting questions at least - and I'm guessing someone out there would want to know.

Nukemason


If you want to know the whole truth about Gerald Bull, you should read my book published in 1993, just a few years after Bull's assissination. The title: The Guns of Babylon. Toronto: Lugus Publishing, 1993 If you need a copy, I will send you one. Send me your address and Zip code. Best Jean-Pierre de Villers


I'm not sure that just because a book is written about a subject, the subject is true. And another assumption here is that Bull was actually developing a supergun that could reach Israel. None of these statements about such in ANY of the articles I've found here on Wikipedia are cited correctly. We seem to have a very powerful rumor mill operating here, but it should be made clear in the article's text that these references are merely SPECULATION. As it is, they're neither cited properly nor disclaimed at all.71.61.64.113 18:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

This story about his materials for the supergun being caught was reported many years ago in the mainstream press. No rumor mill there. --Tilman 21:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] About the "Assassination" section

There is a logical unexlained inconsistency in that section. How could the Mossad simultaneously deny responsibility for the assassination and (according to Bull's son) "[take] credit for an act they did not commit to scare off others who may try to help enemy regimes"?

Needless to say, that section is quite unclear, and speculative to boot. It reads like a conspiracy theory. 137.14.10.22 18:41, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

The logical inconsistency, if there is one, is why it took Mossad so long to bump him off!Phase4 20:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I don't see any problem in either. Certainly the first case is entirely common; we often see public figures saying one thing when it is clear they mean another. We call this "politics". Certainly Mossad would find it difficult to officially admit to killing a private citizen in another country. But unofficially? The message is clear enough. As to the second issue, that appears to be Bull's making, not Mossad's. The only thing they cared about was the extended range missiles, the gun was of no concern. According to the reports, they "warned" him repeatedly over a period of time. I don't see anything that suggests there was any sort of extended period of time that requires explanation (yes, I realize the comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek). Maury 21:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
has someone changed the article since this comment. The article as written now has no logical inconsistency. It states that Mossad has not denied responsibility and Bull's son thinks that they are using the belief that they did it to scare off others. 68.40.189.25 21:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think so. The way I understood that was that Mossad could very easily disclaim responsibility, but if they did not do it, a plausible reason for why they have not said as much is that it serves their goals to be thought of as more brutal and murderous than they would actually be. A cheap way to add to a sinister reputation. --Gwern (contribs) 23:02 25 October 2007 (GMT)