I'm happy to post dox under this Anonymous moniker. If I were to send you them via private message I would dox myself. And I can't do that because I am worried about Mossad spies given the highly sensitive subject matter, and more importantly because I find you curiously attractive as a person even though I am quite certain you are not stuck in a loveless marriage with $cientology's smallest movie star. What can I say, I'm attracted to strong women who don't afraid of anything. And you're clearly not remotely afraid of confronting the things that most Israelis would have a very difficult time accepting. So thank you for that. It is a small matter in the bigger picture but it maintains my interest. And 84 percent of Israeli women are super-hot for a variety of reasons so it does make for a far more engaging thread even with the occasion intervention of ignorant haters with an anti-semitic agenda. I have no intention of revealing my non-Anon login because I prefer to keep such matters private, reluctantly. I hope the mods will respect that too. The dangers of the Dimona reactor, particularly the outdated cooling system were spelled out by Dr. Uzi Even in the Jerusalem Post back in March this year following the Japanese situation. http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=212621 Negotiating with the USA will be a requirement if Israel has any hope of replacing the old Dimona reactor core with a modern and safer system that has far less risk and far more sophisticated cooling and monitoring systems in place. Even the Magnox system designed by the British at the same time was much safer that the French design that Dimona was based upon, and even the Magnox plants have long become obsolete, the last plant decommissioned in 1993 I think. It will not be a tenable situation for the USA to permit or supply Israel with reliable 21st century equipment unless Israel signs the non-proliferation treaty. This is logically explained. With the situation in the Mid-East very different now that Egypt, Libya and of course Syria (arguably Israel's foremost threat now that Iraq has been neutralized according to the wishes of the Jewish lobby groups) are in transitional periods politically, and attention and special diplomacy being granted to new regimes emerging from the Arab Spring, it would be desirable for the USA to maintain stability for as long as possible until oil resources are shored up and the dollar retains its buying power. Agreeing to construct nuclear facilities in Israel without any agreements in place would not be a sign of stability in the region. Obama has to tread very carefully here. Comments such as those in the OP by Ehud Barak are never going to encourage the USA to grant special permission to Israel to go ahead with what would be a major plan to build at least two large scale reactors, perhaps the CANDU systems, the construction of which would take a minimum of five years to bring online for basic core reaction. And in order for such work to go ahead, a comprehensive study of current behavior would need to be undertaken. International treaties in relation to nuclear fission must now be strictly obeyed. It is not 1960, and the geopolitical landscape is very different. If it is found that, as is currently suspected, half the waste has been buried in tar barrels near Dimona, and the other half used for effectively genocidal means near the borders of disputed territories such as the Golan or Gaza Strip, then nobody in their right mind will entrust such a project capable of officially making weaponized atomic material to Israel. Of course one could argue that it need not be the USA that provides the materials, perhaps Russia could be persuaded instead given the power of pro-Israeli lobbying groups there, but the Russians have their own problems with nuclear waste disposal, much of which has now been funded by American loan guarantees and in many cases, the dilapidated Murmansk shipyards now have facilities to process heavy water and other waste products from submarines and medical equipment thanks solely to American money after the extent of the problem was made clear after the fall of the Soviet Union. France will never risk such a venture again given the political risk and an emerging South America will not be keen to assist for the same reasons. I can provide documents that would support this but I would prefer that you researched it for yourself. It is not a good idea to search for such material on the internet from certain countries for obvious reasons, and I would definitely advise exercising caution if doing so from Israel. The example of Mr Vanunu is surely proof enough of this. This is no game. Please be careful if curiosity is getting the better of you. Also, all of the above is my own opinion based upon very limited knowledge and does not take into consideration the new atomic ambitions of countries such as UAE, Turkey, Vietnam, Belarus and Jordan. I post this merely as food for thought. I hope you understand that such a subject matter is highly sensitive and open to vast interpretation of intent, but I hope I have explained for my part a deeper sense of anxiety and indeed thrown some light on why it would not be a good idea for Israel to undertake a major upgrade of a largely unrequired and expensive project that was established without the expressed will of the democratic process in 1960's Israel to begin with.