The British are obsessed with Germany - and not always in a funny way'

By Elizabeth Day


It was 1977 when Thomas Matussek first came to England as a 30-year-old German diplomat on his first posting to London. Leo Sayer and David Soul were enjoying Number One hits in the UK charts. The Labour government had recently passed the Sex Discrimination Act. British voters had backed the UK's continued membership of the European Economic Community by a 67 per cent majority. At first glance, an overseas visitor to Britain would be forgiven for thinking that it was a generous, broad-minded and outward-looking country. But Mr Matussek's impressions were slightly different.


"It struck me as rather odd that I was constantly confronted in newspapers, radio and television, with lots of material about the Nazi period and the Second World War," he says. "I was a little astonished because I did not encounter this in other European countries. But [in the 1970s] you also had many people in this country who knew Germany, through the British army on the Rhine or British tourists who travelled to Germany; that was all there, there was always a reality check."

Thirty years later, on the 60th anniversary of the Allied victory in Europe, Britain has changed and so has Mr Matussek. He was appointed German ambassador to London three years ago and Britain, he says, is in danger of contracting a terminal case of cultural ignorance. Whereas previously our interest in the Hitler and the Second World War was at least tempered by some personal knowledge of Germany as a tourist destination, now there is no such "reality check".

Today, much of the country will be reverberating to the sound of 1940s tribute bands and the throaty drone of Lancaster bombers, wheeled out of retirement for a World War Two "re-enactment". Newspapers are carrying self-congratulatory colour supplements commemorating the "British victory". War-time parties, offering canapés cooked with ration-book ingredients, are being held in village town halls strewn with Union Jack bunting. Amid the party-popping patriotism, it would be all too easy to forget that VE Day was not an exclusively British event.

"VE Day was the end of a very tragic and bloody war with enormous sacrifices and this anniversary is a way of honouring the dead and respecting this," Mr Matussek says. "Of course, it was the defeat of the German army on one hand, but it was also the defeat of Nazi oppression and forced us to start from scratch."

For most Germans, VE Day also marks the defeat of totalitarianism and the start of a long, painful reconstruction that would force a nation to confront its past on a daily basis. But many Germans who live and work in positions of influence in Britain today fear - like Mr Matussek - that Britons are still obsessed with Nazism, to the detriment of a truer knowledge of the "modern democracy" that Germany has become since World War Two.

"Now, I have found this great interest in and obsession with the Nazi period is still there but there are very few people who actually know Germany," he says. "People don't take holidays there. Youth exchange is a one way street. Schoolchildren hardly learn German at school. History teaching about Germany post-45 is practically non-existent. Our younger generations are slowly drifting apart and are listening less to each other.

"I can only speculate as to why this is. But I talk to a lot of British people and one answer that comes up repeatedly is that every country needs to go through an identity-building process. In 1940, Britain was practically confronted with an overpowering enemy and through the sheer mustering of British virtues, Britain finally managed to turn it round. That is very important in the collective psyche: to look back and think you really can do it.

"Like the conquering of the west is part of the American myth, so it is the same with Britain and the defeat of Nazism. That coincided with Britain losing her Empire, which certainly rankled with some people and led to this obsession with Germany and not always in a very funny way.

"We have to make a distinction between the clichéd stereotypes that are outright funny - like in Dad's Army or Fawlty Towers - and something that goes a little deeper. The humour stops when I hear that German children are regularly beaten up and abused by British youngsters who don't know what Germany's about."

It is an opinion backed up by a series of recent findings. Last July, the British Council published the results of the 2003-2004 British-German Youth Survey which questioned 1000 16 to 25-year-olds. Only 37 per cent had been to Germany, compared with 52 per cent of Germans who had travelled to the UK. Similarly, a mere 22 per cent could speak a word of German while 97 per cent of Germans in the survey said they had a knowledge of English.

Another recent survey found that when British 10 to 16-year-olds were asked what they associated with Germany, 78 per cent said the Second World War and 50 per cent mentioned Hitler. And a report published in 1998 by Aberdeen University showed how, especially above the age of 12, a sample of children would react much more negatively to a photograph when told that it was of a German than when shown the same photograph two weeks previously without any mention of nationality.

It is, says Mr Matussek, a peculiarly British ignorance and there was no greater symbol of this depressing phenomenon than the infamous photograph, published in The Sun in January, showing Prince Harry attending a fancy dress party in a Nazi uniform. An accompanying editorial said that the image would have "his great grandmother, the Queen Mum, turning in her grave. With King George VI, she defied Nazi bombs during the Blitz and inspired this country to defeat Hitler's evil Reich". "I would be delighted to tell you [what I thought] if it wasn't a member of the Royal Family," Mr Matussek says, wryly.

"If it were a normal teenager, I would like an opportunity to tell him what Germany is really about. This attitude isn't prevalent in other countries. A lot of our neighbours suffered much, much more than the British. But among young Russians, young Poles or young Czechs, you don't get this. Perhaps a country with nine neighbours is constantly forced to make compromises and is much more in contact than a country that lives as an island.

"It's not anti-German sentiment precisely, but it's because we know too little about each other. Ignorance can breed xenophobia, which can breed hatred. That's what we've learnt in Germany."

It is, perhaps, surprising for an ambassador to be so forthright in his public pronouncements. But Mr Matussek's carefully worded opinions (he makes clear his great affection and respect for the Anglo-German relationship) have struck a nerve. They are echoed by other prominent figures, not least his own brother, Matthias, the London correspondent for Der Spiegel newspaper, who - unconstrained by diplomatic niceties - is far more outspoken.

"I know this is a sensitive topic and must be talked about in the appropriate context. I love Britain. But we Germans also consider VE Day the day when the Hitler terror was finally vanquished," he writes in the online magazine, Open Democracy. "We Germans confront the guilt and shame of our past daily, and more thoroughly and obsessively than probably any other nation on earth has done.

"The British behave as if they had conquered Hitler's hordes single-handedly. And they continue to see us as Nazis, as if they have to refight the battles every evening. They are enchanted by this Nazi dimension."

Gisela Stuart, the German-born Labour MP for Edgbaston, who was re-elected on Thursday night, said that the Matusseks were "quite right to say the British are still obsessed with the Nazi period".

She points to the perpetuation of German stereotypes as an example, citing the media's treatment of the new Pope, Benedict XVI. The Pope's membership of the Hitler Youth in 1930s Germany was repeatedly referred to, but without the necessary contextualisation.

"It was lazy journalism. I have to say I found some of the reporting when the German Pope was elected a little bit depressing. It would not have happened if he had been any other nationality."

Or, as Matthias Matussek puts it: "The British love to hate us Germans. So much so that my 10-year-old son was chased by English school kids chanting 'Nazi, Nazi'. In fact, the hunt for Nazis has become a neurotic English parlour game. The British really enjoy raking over the German past."

Perhaps, as the Matusseks suggest, it is time for Britain to question her own assumptions. The defeat of fascism is a cause for rightful celebration. But amid the flag-waving jubilation of today's anniversary, it would be all too easy to forget that the victory over Nazism was not just a British one. It was - and is - a German one too.

CHASTE-Y RETREAT

By HEIDI SINGER in Gainesville, Ga., and JEANE MacINTOSH in New York

Bolting bride Jennifer Wilbanks was chaste away — by her fiancé's insistence on abstinence, friends of the sex-deprived couple claim.

"She told people the fact that she and [husband-to-be John Mason] were not having sex was upsetting," a friend of Wilbanks' told People magazine, which hits newsstands today.

Mason was once a "wild" guy who "dated a lot," his running pal Ted King said.

But he became a born-again virgin — eschewing premarital sex — five years ago after pledging himself to his Baptist faith, friends said.

"He's been saving himself for the right woman," Mason's friend Andy Parsons told the magazine.

And friends say that likely drove the marathon enthusiast to run — from the altar.

In Wilbanks' hometown of Gainsville, girlfriends told The Post the 32-year-old woman had once enjoyed a very active social life — regularly dating men from a local gym as well as firemen.

Wilbanks — who got breast implants before meeting Mason — "had lots of boyfriends," a friend told People.

Yesterday, Wilbanks admitted her cross-country jaunt had "nothing to do with cold feet."

"I cannot fully explain what happened to me last week," the runaway bride wrote in a rambling statement read by her pastor at a press conference.

There were "a host of compelling issues which seemed out of control."

Some of Wilbanks' pals said she grew increasingly anxious as her wedding approached, complaining the plans were "frustrating."

But in her statement, Wilbanks said her friends knew "how excited I was about the spectacular wedding we planned, and how I could not wait to be Mrs. John Mason."

Wilbanks, whom authorities said planned her getaway in advance by buying a bus ticket and cutting her hair, added:

"In my mind, it was never about the timing, however unfortunate. I was simply running from myself and from certain fears controlling my life."

Pastor Tom Smiley said Wilbanks is undergoing "professional therapy" and has "postponed" her wedding. She and Mason, he said, "are extremely together."

Meanwhile, it was revealed yesterday the runaway bride claimed to have been raped during her "kidnapping."

"She made accusations she had been sexually assaulted during the course of her abduction," Albuquerque Police Sgt. Trish Ahrensfield told reporters.

Wilbanks reportedly submitted to a rape exam even though investigators did not request one. She later recanted both the rape and kidnapping claims.

Additional reporting by Josh Williams

Scientists protest as school chiefs put Darwin on trial

From James Bone in New York

CHARLES DARWIN’S theory of evolution is facing a new challenge in America from Christians who argue that life shows an “intelligent design”.

The Kansas Board of Education has begun taking evidence from anti-evolution scientists in a bid to rewrite the state’s teaching standards to ensure that pupils learn alternatives to evolution that suggest a guiding hand in the origin of life.

Kansas is one of a growing number of states to consider authorising schools to teach religious alternatives to Darwin — but a four-day hearing of the Kansas board has outraged mainstream scientists, who are boycotting the meeting and holding protests outside.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science declined an invitation to testify, arguing that the hearings would confuse rather than educate the public.

“This is a showcase trial,” Jack Krebs, vice-president of Kansas Citizens for Science, said. “They have hijacked science and education.”

On the first day of testimony in Topeka, the audience heard lectures on “primordial soup”, fruit-fly mutations and whether human beings were related to worms as six anti-evolution scientists argued that the theory of evolution could not explain gaps in the fossil record, the complexity of DNA or the origin of life itself.

William Harris, a professor of medicine who specialises in omega-3 fatty acids and co-founded the Intelligent Design Network, said that Darwinism clashed with the biblical teaching that life was created by God. “Part of our overall goal is to remove the bias against religion that is currently in schools,” he said. “This is a scientific controversy that has powerful religious implications.”

Other witnesses included Jonathan Wells, an embryologist and senior fellow at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, who described himself as “an old Berkeley antiwar radical”. “The way Darwinian evolution is usually presented is that the evidence is overwhelming, and there is no controversy about it,” he said. “That’s clearly not the case.”

Dr Wells, who holds PhDs in theology from Yale University and in biology from the University of California, Berkeley, confirmed under cross-examination that he was a member of Sun Myung Moon’s Unification Church.

Pro-Darwin scientists distributed an internet posting outside the hearing in which Dr Wells declares: “Father’s words, my studies and my prayers convinced me that I should devote my life to destroying Darwinism.”

The anti-evolution scientists faced sharp questioning from Pedro Irigonegaray, a lawyer defending Darwin at the hearings. He said that he fantasised that he was defending John Scopes, a Tennessee biology teacher who in 1925 was found guilty of illegally teaching evolution at what became known as the “Monkey Trial”.

“The delicious fantasy of being in a courtroom-like environment, with the overhead fan slowly twisting and being able to question witnesses about all of these issues, is very appealing,” he said.

The US Supreme Court outlawed the teaching of biblical beliefs, or “creationism”, in state schools in an Arkansas case in 1987, forcing Christians to embrace “intelligent design”.

All three members of the Kansas sub-committee support a change in the standards to tell students that evolution is only a theory, not a fact, and to include alternatives. The full Kansas school board, which is controlled by a 6-4 conservative majority, is expected to rewrite the standards in June, joining Ohio, which took a similar step three years ago. Legislators in Alabama and Georgia are also considering Bills to allow teachers to challenge Darwin in class.

Apocalypse Soon

By Robert S. McNamara

May/June 2005

Robert McNamara is worried. He knows how close we’ve come. His counsel helped the Kennedy administration avert nuclear catastrophe during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Today, he believes the United States must no longer rely on nuclear weapons as a foreign-policy tool. To do so is immoral, illegal, and dreadfully dangerous.

It is time—well past time, in my view—for the United States to cease its Cold War-style reliance on nuclear weapons as a foreign-policy tool. At the risk of appearing simplistic and provocative, I would characterize current U.S. nuclear weapons policy as immoral, illegal, militarily unnecessary, and dreadfully dangerous. The risk of an accidental or inadvertent nuclear launch is unacceptably high. Far from reducing these risks, the Bush administration has signaled that it is committed to keeping the U.S. nuclear arsenal as a mainstay of its military power—a commitment that is simultaneously eroding the international norms that have limited the spread of nuclear weapons and fissile materials for 50 years. Much of the current U.S. nuclear policy has been in place since before I was secretary of defense, and it has only grown more dangerous and diplomatically destructive in the intervening years.

Today, the United States has deployed approximately 4,500 strategic, offensive nuclear warheads. Russia has roughly 3,800. The strategic forces of Britain, France, and China are considerably smaller, with 200–400 nuclear weapons in each state’s arsenal. The new nuclear states of Pakistan and India have fewer than 100 weapons each. North Korea now claims to have developed nuclear weapons, and U.S. intelligence agencies estimate that Pyongyang has enough fissile material for 2–8 bombs.

How destructive are these weapons? The average U.S. warhead has a destructive power 20 times that of the Hiroshima bomb. Of the 8,000 active or operational U.S. warheads, 2,000 are on hair-trigger alert, ready to be launched on 15 minutes’ warning. How are these weapons to be used? The United States has never endorsed the policy of “no first use,” not during my seven years as secretary or since. We have been and remain prepared to initiate the use of nuclear weapons—by the decision of one person, the president—against either a nuclear or nonnuclear enemy whenever we believe it is in our interest to do so. For decades, U.S. nuclear forces have been sufficiently strong to absorb a first strike and then inflict “unacceptable” damage on an opponent. This has been and (so long as we face a nuclear-armed, potential adversary) must continue to be the foundation of our nuclear deterrent.

In my time as secretary of defense, the commander of the U.S. Strategic Air Command (SAC) carried with him a secure telephone, no matter where he went, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. The telephone of the commander, whose headquarters were in Omaha, Nebraska, was linked to the underground command post of the North American Defense Command, deep inside Cheyenne Mountain, in Colorado, and to the U.S. president, wherever he happened to be. The president always had at hand nuclear release codes in the so-called football, a briefcase carried for the president at all times by a U.S. military officer.

The SAC commander’s orders were to answer the telephone by no later than the end of the third ring. If it rang, and he was informed that a nuclear attack of enemy ballistic missiles appeared to be under way, he was allowed 2 to 3 minutes to decide whether the warning was valid (over the years, the United States has received many false warnings), and if so, how the United States should respond. He was then given approximately 10 minutes to determine what to recommend, to locate and advise the president, permit the president to discuss the situation with two or three close advisors (presumably the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), and to receive the president’s decision and pass it immediately, along with the codes, to the launch sites. The president essentially had two options: He could decide to ride out the attack and defer until later any decision to launch a retaliatory strike. Or, he could order an immediate retaliatory strike, from a menu of options, thereby launching U.S. weapons that were targeted on the opponent’s military-industrial assets. Our opponents in Moscow presumably had and have similar arrangements.

The whole situation seems so bizarre as to be beyond belief. On any given day, as we go about our business, the president is prepared to make a decision within 20 minutes that could launch one of the most devastating weapons in the world. To declare war requires an act of congress, but to launch a nuclear holocaust requires 20 minutes’ deliberation by the president and his advisors. But that is what we have lived with for 40 years. With very few changes, this system remains largely intact, including the “football,” the president’s constant companion.

I was able to change some of these dangerous policies and procedures. My colleagues and I started arms control talks; we installed safeguards to reduce the risk of unauthorized launches; we added options to the nuclear war plans so that the president did not have to choose between an all-or-nothing response, and we eliminated the vulnerable and provocative nuclear missiles in Turkey. I wish I had done more, but we were in the midst of the Cold War, and our options were limited.

The United States and our NATO allies faced a strong Soviet and Warsaw Pact conventional threat. Many of the allies (and some in Washington as well) felt strongly that preserving the U.S. option of launching a first strike was necessary for the sake of keeping the Soviets at bay. What is shocking is that today, more than a decade after the end of the Cold War, the basic U.S. nuclear policy is unchanged. It has not adapted to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Plans and procedures have not been revised to make the United States or other countries less likely to push the button. At a minimum, we should remove all strategic nuclear weapons from “hair-trigger” alert, as others have recommended, including Gen. George Lee Butler, the last commander of SAC. That simple change would greatly reduce the risk of an accidental nuclear launch. It would also signal to other states that the United States is taking steps to end its reliance on nuclear weapons.

We pledged to work in good faith toward the eventual elimination of nuclear arsenals when we negotiated the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968. In May, diplomats from more than 180 nations are meeting in New York City to review the NPT and assess whether members are living up to the agreement. The United States is focused, for understandable reasons, on persuading North Korea to rejoin the treaty and on negotiating deeper constraints on Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Those states must be convinced to keep the promises they made when they originally signed the NPT—that they would not build nuclear weapons in return for access to peaceful uses of nuclear energy. But the attention of many nations, including some potential new nuclear weapons states, is also on the United States. Keeping such large numbers of weapons, and maintaining them on hair-trigger alert, are potent signs that the United States is not seriously working toward the elimination of its arsenal and raises troubling questions as to why any other state should restrain its nuclear ambitions.

A Preview of the Apocalypse
The destructive power of nuclear weapons is well known, but given the United States’ continued reliance on them, it’s worth remembering the danger they present. A 2000 report by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War describes the likely effects of a single 1 megaton weapon—dozens of which are contained in the Russian and U.S. inventories. At ground zero, the explosion creates a crater 300 feet deep and 1,200 feet in diameter. Within one second, the atmosphere itself ignites into a fireball more than a half-mile in diameter. The surface of the fireball radiates nearly three times the light and heat of a comparable area of the surface of the sun, extinguishing in seconds all life below and radiating outward at the speed of light, causing instantaneous severe burns to people within one to three miles. A blast wave of compressed air reaches a distance of three miles in about 12 seconds, flattening factories and commercial buildings. Debris carried by winds of 250 mph inflicts lethal injuries throughout the area. At least 50 percent of people in the area die immediately, prior to any injuries from radiation or the developing firestorm.

Of course, our knowledge of these effects is not entirely hypothetical. Nuclear weapons, with roughly one seventieth of the power of the 1 megaton bomb just described, were twice used by the United States in August 1945. One atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. Around 80,000 people died immediately; approximately 200,000 died eventually. Later, a similar size bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. On Nov. 7, 1995, the mayor of Nagasaki recalled his memory of the attack in testimony to the International Court of Justice:

Nagasaki became a city of death where not even the sound of insects could be heard. After a while, countless men, women and children began to gather for a drink of water at the banks of nearby Urakami River, their hair and clothing scorched and their burnt skin hanging off in sheets like rags. Begging for help they died one after another in the water or in heaps on the banks.… Four months after the atomic bombing, 74,000 people were dead, and 75,000 had suffered injuries, that is, two-thirds of the city population had fallen victim to this calamity that came upon Nagasaki like a preview of the Apocalypse.

Why did so many civilians have to die? Because the civilians, who made up nearly 100 percent of the victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, were unfortunately “co-located” with Japanese military and industrial targets. Their annihilation, though not the objective of those dropping the bombs, was an inevitable result of the choice of those targets. It is worth noting that during the Cold War, the United States reportedly had dozens of nuclear warheads targeted on Moscow alone, because it contained so many military targets and so much “industrial capacity.”

Presumably, the Soviets similarly targeted many U.S. cities. The statement that our nuclear weapons do not target populations per se was and remains totally misleading in the sense that the so-called collateral damage of large nuclear strikes would include tens of millions of innocent civilian dead.

This in a nutshell is what nuclear weapons do: They indiscriminately blast, burn, and irradiate with a speed and finality that are almost incomprehensible. This is exactly what countries like the United States and Russia, with nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert, continue to threaten every minute of every day in this new 21st century.

No Way To Win
I have worked on issues relating to U.S. and NATO nuclear strategy and war plans for more than 40 years. During that time, I have never seen a piece of paper that outlined a plan for the United States or NATO to initiate the use of nuclear weapons with any benefit for the United States or NATO. I have made this statement in front of audiences, including NATO defense ministers and senior military leaders, many times. No one has ever refuted it. To launch weapons against a nuclear-equipped opponent would be suicidal. To do so against a nonnuclear enemy would be militarily unnecessary, morally repugnant, and politically indefensible.

I reached these conclusions very soon after becoming secretary of defense. Although I believe Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson shared my view, it was impossible for any of us to make such statements publicly because they were totally contrary to established NATO policy. After leaving the Defense Department, I became president of the World Bank. During my 13-year tenure, from 1968 to 1981, I was prohibited, as an employee of an international institution, from commenting publicly on issues of U.S. national security. After my retirement from the bank, I began to reflect on how I, with seven years’ experience as secretary of defense, might contribute to an understanding of the issues with which I began my public service career.

At that time, much was being said and written regarding how the United States could, and why it should, be able to fight and win a nuclear war with the Soviets. This view implied, of course, that nuclear weapons did have military utility; that they could be used in battle with ultimate gain to whoever had the largest force or used them with the greatest acumen. Having studied these views, I decided to go public with some information that I knew would be controversial, but that I felt was needed to inject reality into these increasingly unreal discussions about the military utility of nuclear weapons. In articles and speeches, I criticized the fundamentally flawed assumption that nuclear weapons could be used in some limited way. There is no way to effectively contain a nuclear strike—to keep it from inflicting enormous destruction on civilian life and property, and there is no guarantee against unlimited escalation once the first nuclear strike occurs. We cannot avoid the serious and unacceptable risk of nuclear war until we recognize these facts and base our military plans and policies upon this recognition. I hold these views even more strongly today than I did when I first spoke out against the nuclear dangers our policies were creating. I know from direct experience that U.S. nuclear policy today creates unacceptable risks to other nations and to our own.

What Castro Taught Us
Among the costs of maintaining nuclear weapons is the risk—to me an unacceptable risk—of use of the weapons either by accident or as a result of misjudgment or miscalculation in times of crisis. The Cuban Missile Crisis demonstrated that the United States and the Soviet Union—and indeed the rest of the world—came within a hair’s breadth of nuclear disaster in October 1962.

Indeed, according to former Soviet military leaders, at the height of the crisis, Soviet forces in Cuba possessed 162 nuclear warheads, including at least 90 tactical warheads. At about the same time, Cuban President Fidel Castro asked the Soviet ambassador to Cuba to send a cable to Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev stating that Castro urged him to counter a U.S. attack with a nuclear response. Clearly, there was a high risk that in the face of a U.S. attack, which many in the U.S. government were prepared to recommend to President Kennedy, the Soviet forces in Cuba would have decided to use their nuclear weapons rather than lose them. Only a few years ago did we learn that the four Soviet submarines trailing the U.S. Naval vessels near Cuba each carried torpedoes with nuclear warheads. Each of the sub commanders had the authority to launch his torpedoes. The situation was even more frightening because, as the lead commander recounted to me, the subs were out of communication with their Soviet bases, and they continued their patrols for four days after Khrushchev announced the withdrawal of the missiles from Cuba.

The lesson, if it had not been clear before, was made so at a conference on the crisis held in Havana in 1992, when we first began to learn from former Soviet officials about their preparations for nuclear war in the event of a U.S. invasion. Near the end of that meeting, I asked Castro whether he would have recommended that Khrushchev use the weapons in the face of a U.S. invasion, and if so, how he thought the United States would respond. “We started from the assumption that if there was an invasion of Cuba, nuclear war would erupt,” Castro replied. “We were certain of that…. [W]e would be forced to pay the price that we would disappear.” He continued, “Would I have been ready to use nuclear weapons? Yes, I would have agreed to the use of nuclear weapons.” And he added, “If Mr. McNamara or Mr. Kennedy had been in our place, and had their country been invaded, or their country was going to be occupied … I believe they would have used tactical nuclear weapons.”

I hope that President Kennedy and I would not have behaved as Castro suggested we would have. His decision would have destroyed his country. Had we responded in a similar way the damage to the United States would have been unthinkable. But human beings are fallible. In conventional war, mistakes cost lives, sometimes thousands of lives. However, if mistakes were to affect decisions relating to the use of nuclear forces, there would be no learning curve. They would result in the destruction of nations. The indefinite combination of human fallibility and nuclear weapons carries a very high risk of nuclear catastrophe. There is no way to reduce the risk to acceptable levels, other than to first eliminate the hair-trigger alert policy and later to eliminate or nearly eliminate nuclear weapons. The United States should move immediately to institute these actions, in cooperation with Russia. That is the lesson of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

A Dangerous Obsession
On Nov. 13, 2001, President George W. Bush announced that he had told Russian President Vladimir Putin that the United States would reduce “operationally deployed nuclear warheads” from approximately 5,300 to a level between 1,700 and 2,200 over the next decade. This scaling back would approach the 1,500 to 2,200 range that Putin had proposed for Russia. However, the Bush administration’s Nuclear Posture Review, mandated by the U.S. Congress and issued in January 2002, presents quite a different story. It assumes that strategic offensive nuclear weapons in much larger numbers than 1,700 to 2,200 will be part of U.S. military forces for the next several decades. Although the number of deployed warheads will be reduced to 3,800 in 2007 and to between 1,700 and 2,200 by 2012, the warheads and many of the launch vehicles taken off deployment will be maintained in a “responsive” reserve from which they could be moved back to the operationally deployed force. The Nuclear Posture Review received little attention from the media. But its emphasis on strategic offensive nuclear weapons deserves vigorous public scrutiny. Although any proposed reduction is welcome, it is doubtful that survivors—if there were any—of an exchange of 3,200 warheads (the U.S. and Russian numbers projected for 2012), with a destructive power approximately 65,000 times that of the Hiroshima bomb, could detect a difference between the effects of such an exchange and one that would result from the launch of the current U.S. and Russian forces totaling about 12,000 warheads.

In addition to projecting the deployment of large numbers of strategic nuclear weapons far into the future, the Bush administration is planning an extensive and expensive series of programs to sustain and modernize the existing nuclear force and to begin studies for new launch vehicles, as well as new warheads for all of the launch platforms. Some members of the administration have called for new nuclear weapons that could be used as bunker busters against underground shelters (such as the shelters Saddam Hussein used in Baghdad). New production facilities for fissile materials would need to be built to support the expanded force. The plans provide for integrating a national ballistic missile defense into the new triad of offensive weapons to enhance the nation’s ability to use its “power projection forces” by improving our ability to counterattack an enemy. The Bush administration also announced that it has no intention to ask congress to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), and, though no decision to test has been made, the administration has ordered the national laboratories to begin research on new nuclear weapons designs and to prepare the underground test sites in Nevada for nuclear tests if necessary in the future. Clearly, the Bush administration assumes that nuclear weapons will be part of U.S. military forces for at least the next several decades.

Good faith participation in international negotiation on nuclear disarmament—including participation in the CTBT—is a legal and political obligation of all parties to the NPT that entered into force in 1970 and was extended indefinitely in 1995. The Bush administration’s nuclear program, alongside its refusal to ratify the CTBT, will be viewed, with reason, by many nations as equivalent to a U.S. break from the treaty. It says to the nonnuclear weapons nations, “We, with the strongest conventional military force in the world, require nuclear weapons in perpetuity, but you, facing potentially well-armed opponents, are never to be allowed even one nuclear weapon.”

If the United States continues its current nuclear stance, over time, substantial proliferation of nuclear weapons will almost surely follow. Some, or all, of such nations as Egypt, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Taiwan will very likely initiate nuclear weapons programs, increasing both the risk of use of the weapons and the diversion of weapons and fissile materials into the hands of rogue states or terrorists. Diplomats and intelligence agencies believe Osama bin Laden has made several attempts to acquire nuclear weapons or fissile materials. It has been widely reported that Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood, former director of Pakistan’s nuclear reactor complex, met with bin Laden several times. Were al Qaeda to acquire fissile materials, especially enriched uranium, its ability to produce nuclear weapons would be great. The knowledge of how to construct a simple gun-type nuclear device, like the one we dropped on Hiroshima, is now widespread. Experts have little doubt that terrorists could construct such a primitive device if they acquired the requisite enriched uranium material. Indeed, just last summer, at a meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, former Secretary of Defense William J. Perry said, “I have never been more fearful of a nuclear detonation than now.… There is a greater than 50 percent probability of a nuclear strike on U.S. targets within a decade.” I share his fears.

A Moment of Decision
We are at a critical moment in human history—perhaps not as dramatic as that of the Cuban Missile Crisis, but a moment no less crucial. Neither the Bush administration, the congress, the American people, nor the people of other nations have debated the merits of alternative, long-range nuclear weapons policies for their countries or the world. They have not examined the military utility of the weapons; the risk of inadvertent or accidental use; the moral and legal considerations relating to the use or threat of use of the weapons; or the impact of current policies on proliferation. Such debates are long overdue. If they are held, I believe they will conclude, as have I and an increasing number of senior military leaders, politicians, and civilian security experts: We must move promptly toward the elimination—or near elimination—of all nuclear weapons. For many, there is a strong temptation to cling to the strategies of the past 40 years. But to do so would be a serious mistake leading to unacceptable risks for all nations.

Robert S. McNamara was U.S. secretary of defense from 1961 to 1968 and president of the World Bank from 1968 to 1981.

Holy War

	On June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the convictions of two Texas men arrested for having sex. Writing for the majority in Lawrence v. Texas, Justice Anthony Kennedy said that the two men were "entitled to respect for their private lives." The state, he declared, "cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime." The decision was unusually popular. A national survey found that 75% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats wanted to see sodomy laws struck down. But not everyone cheered. "Six lawyers robed in black have magically discovered a right of privacy that includes sexual perversion," said Jan LaRue, chief counsel for Concerned Women for America. "This opens the door to bigamy, adult incest, polygamy and prostitution," said Ken Connor, president of the Family Research Council. For anti-gay crusaders, who have been fighting gay rights for three decades, Lawrence was the most unsettling court decision since Roe v. Wade. Fundamentalist groups had filed 15 briefs supporting Texas' sodomy laws, only to see their arguments — that gay sex was a threat to public health and "traditional family values," and that gay people do not deserve equal rights — shot down. And with the Massachusetts Supreme Court widely expected to rule that fall (as it did) that gay citizens had a right to marry under that state's constitution, anti-gay leaders realized the time was ripe to ratchet up their call to arms. "America stands at a defining moment," said Lou Sheldon, founder of the Traditional Values Coalition. "The only comparison is our battle for independence." The anti-gay movement was about to show why many believe it is, in the words of longtime religious right observer Frederick Clarkson, "the best-organized faction in politics." Immediately after the Lawrence decision, D. James Kennedy, president of Coral Ridge Ministries, issued a call to arms. Now that America's courts were "officially off-limits to the moral framework that has allowed us to enjoy freedom and prosperity," Kennedy said the holy war on gay rights should be renewed on the battlefront of public opinion, pressing for a federal marriage amendment. For right-wing evangelical ministries like Coral Ridge, which brings in more than $35 million annually, the stakes were never higher. Since the late 1970s, attacks on gay people and their "agenda" had helped to fuel, and pay for, the fundamentalist right's unprecedented rise to political power. From Lawrence to Election Day, when 11 states voted on anti-gay marriage amendments, groups like Coral Ridge and Focus on the Family spent millions on ad campaigns and get-out-the-vote efforts, while gay marriage and "family values" became staples of cable-TV and talk-radio crossfire. These anti-gay messages were nothing new. For almost 30 years, the religious right in America has employed a variety of strategies, inside the courtroom and outside, in its efforts to beat back the increasingly confident gay rights movement. Many of its leaders have engaged in the crudest type of name-calling, describing homosexuals as "perverts" with "filthy habits" who seek to snatch the children of straight parents and "convert" them to gay sex. They have continually bandied about disparaging "facts" about gays that are simply untrue — assertions that are remarkably reminiscent of the way white intellectuals and scientists once wrote about the "bestial" black man. But never has the anti-gay movement had the momentum it has now, and never has it been so close to achieving its larger, ultimate goal. That goal is winning, in the words of Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, a "second civil war" for control of the U.S. government. The Power of the Sword At the height of the civil rights movement, in 1965, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, an ambitious young minister in Lynchburg, Va., gave a sermon called "Ministers and Marches." Falwell laid into Christian leaders who were actively supporting civil rights, reminding them of a Bible verse that fundamentalists often invoked as evidence that God did not want them to participate in politics: "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh" (II Corinthians 10:13). Fourteen years later, Falwell co-founded the Moral Majority, the first national effort to stimulate fundamentalist political participation and elect candidates who would, in the words of co-founder Paul Weyrich, "Christianize America." What explained this apparent sea change? While fundamentalist Christians had long stayed out of electoral politics, Falwell and many others were "extremely unhappy with the 'rights' movements that had sprung up in the '50s and '60s," says Didi Herman, author of The Antigay Agenda. "First black people, then women, now gay people? The frustration had been mounting. Their actions were catching up with their view." Falwell was plain enough about his views; in 1964, he told a local paper that the Civil Rights Act had been misnamed: "It should be considered civil wrongs rather than civil rights." His "Old Time Gospel Hour" TV program hosted prominent segregationists like Govs. Lester Maddox of Georgia and George Wallace of Alabama. But Falwell, like other fundamentalists, worried about "tainting" his religious message by mixing it with politics. The Rev. Mel White (see also A Thorn in Their Side), an evangelical writer and filmmaker who ghostwrote Falwell's autobiography, says Falwell was led to politics in part by Dr. Francis Schaeffer, a rebellious fundamentalist who had begun spreading the word about "dominion theology" and who many see as the father of the anti-abortion movement. Dubbed the "Guru of Fundamentalists" by Newsweek in 1982, Schaeffer believed that Christians are called to rule the U.S. — and the world — using biblical law. That meant winning elections. "Dr. Schaeffer," says White, "convinced Jerry there was no biblical mandate against joining with 'nonbelievers' in a political cause." Schaeffer was admired by a radical group of fundamentalist thinkers called Christian Reconstructionists. Led by Orthodox Presbyterian minister R.J. Rushdoony, the Reconstructionists argued that the Second Coming couldn't occur until the faithful established a "Biblical kingdom." Democracy, which Rushdoony called "the great love of the failures and cowards of life," would be replaced by strict Old Testament law — meaning the death penalty for homosexuality, along with a host of other "abominations," including heresy, astrology, and (for women only) "unchastity before marriage." D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Ministries, like James Dobson of Focus on the Family and other Christian Right luminaries, unwaveringly preaches "dominion Christianity" and hosts an annual conference devoted to "Reclaiming America for Christ." Kennedy also is a longtime benefactor of former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, known for the Ten Commandments monument he installed in the rotunda of that state's judicial building — and for being thrown out of office after refusing to obey federal court orders to remove it. In 2002, Moore wrote a lengthy concurrence in a custody case involving a lesbian mother. After describing homosexuality as "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature," Moore asserted that "[t]he State carries the power of the sword, that is, the power to prohibit [homosexual] conduct with physical penalties, such as confinement and even execution. It must use that power to prevent the subversion of children toward this lifestyle." Fear Mongering to the Fore While conservative Christians have led historic crusades against a number of "evils" in America — witchcraft, alcohol, communism, feminism, abortion — gay sex was never more than a minor concern until 1969, when protests in New York City launched the contemporary gay-rights movement. In Where We Stand, Susan Fort Wiltshire recalls some early stirrings of a new crusade: "Around 1970, ambitious small-town preachers in the Northwest Texas Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church began to exploit 'the gay issue.' They saw that virulent anti-gay rhetoric could fill football stadiums for revivals in such tiny Panhandle towns as Tulia and Clarendon and Higgins and Perryton." The crusade went national in 1977, courtesy of Anita Bryant. The perky spokesperson for Coca-Cola, Tupperware and Florida orange juice, Bryant had converted a runner-up finish in the 1959 Miss America pageant into a lucrative career singing "wholesome family music." Bryant later said she knew next to nothing about gay people when she attended a 1977 revival at Miami's Northside Baptist Church. The preacher railed against a new ordinance in Dade County that protected gay people from discrimination, saying he'd "burn down his church before he would let homosexuals teach in its school." Bryant was so impressed by the dangers of this new "homosexual agenda" that she launched an initiative to overturn the anti-discrimination ordinance, winning with a 70% vote. Bryant then founded a national group called Save Our Children and took her anti-gay message on the road, helping fundamentalists organize anti-gay ballot campaigns in the handful of American cities that had passed gay rights laws. These ballot initiatives would become the single most important organizing tool for the fundamentalist right, transforming thousands of previously apolitical churchgoers into grassroots activists. Save Our Children's primary tactic was fear mongering. Gay people were "sick," "perverted," "twisted," and a threat to American families. "Homosexuals cannot reproduce," Bryant often said, "so they must recruit. And to freshen their ranks they must recruit the youth of America." Save Our Children distributed a press kit with a paper titled, "Why Certain Sexual Deviations Are Punishable By Death." Homosexuality was, of course, among those deviations. So was "racial mixing of human seed." Save Our Children collapsed in 1979, after Bryant had a well-publicized divorce and breakdown, but not before her success in getting national publicity and large donations caught the eye of new-right strategists like Paul Weyrich and Richard Viguerie, the pioneer of right-wing direct-mail fundraising. "Their other issues just weren't nearly as popular," says Rob Boston, assistant communications director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State and author of Close Encounters with the Religious Right. "Most Americans supported abortion rights. Nobody believed communism inside the U.S. was really a threat. Slamming feminists, you risked alienating half the population. But gay people? Anita Bryant showed that gay-bashing could bring in some real money." Bryant had also outlined a new gay stereotype, one far removed from the old cliché of limp-wristed "fruits." Inspired by Bryant, budding "family activist" Tim LaHaye painted a full-blown portrait in his 1978 book, The Unhappy Gays. LaHaye, now famous for co-authoring the blockbuster Left Behind series of end-of-the-world thrillers, wrote that succumbing to the demands of the gay-rights movement would be a mistake of apocalyptic proportions — literally. "The mercy and grace of God seem to reach their breaking point when homosexuality becomes normal," LaHaye said. "Put another way, when sodomy fills the national cup of man's abominations to overflowing, God earmarks that nation for destruction." The cover of The Unhappy Gays featured a close-up photograph of rusty chains, symbolizing the "captivity" of homosexuality. "Moral fidelity among homosexuals is almost unknown," LaHaye wrote, citing as evidence "one psychologist writer" (unnamed) who "suggests that is not uncommon for a homosexual to 'have sex' with as many as 2,000 different people in a lifetime." This "incredible promiscuity" leads to a life of lonely, selfish desperation, said LaHaye, but there is hope: "Homosexuals are made, not born!" and can be cured by being "born again." Facts and Fiction There was something missing from these dark depictions of gay people and their "agenda": evidence. It was one thing, after all, to claim that homosexuals were child "recruiters," disease-ridden, and mentally unstable. It was quite another to prove it. Enter Paul Cameron. After losing his job teaching psychology at the University of Nebraska, Cameron set himself up as an independent sex researcher in the late 1970s, churning out scores of anti-gay pamphlets that were largely distributed in fundamentalist churches. Cameron's "studies" falsely concluded that gay people were disproportionately responsible for child molestation, for the majority of serial killings, and for the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Gay people, according to Cameron's research, were obsessed with consuming human excrement, allowing them to spread deadly diseases simply by shaking hands with unsuspecting strangers or using public restrooms. "Of all the vices," Cameron concluded in a pamphlet called Medical Aspects of Homosexuality, "only homosexuality constitutes a conspiracy against society." Cameron's brand of "science" echoed Nazi Germany. "These themes of disease and seduction are strongly reminiscent of older, anti-Semitic discourse," writes Didi Herman in The Antigay Agenda. "Jews historically were associated with disease, filth, urban degeneration, and child stealing." When the AIDS crisis broke out in the early 1980s, Cameron claimed gay people had unleashed "an octopus of infection spreading across the world," and had done it on purpose. (Jerry Falwell put it in simpler terms; he called AIDS "the gay plague.") In several newspaper and magazine exposés, Cameron's studies were revealed to be anything but scientific. In one particularly egregious instance, Cameron published a 1983 study claiming lesbians were 29 times more likely than heterosexual women to intentionally infect their sex partners with venereal diseases. It was later discovered that Cameron's "scientific sample" for this conclusion consisted of just seven women. After being expelled from the American Psychological Association in 1983 for violating ethical standards in his anti-gay publications Cameron began referring to himself as a sociologist — until the American Sociological Association passed a 1986 resolution declaring, "Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and [this group] condemns his constant misrepresentation of sociological research." But despite the crackpot nature of Cameron's theories and methodology, his "research" was extolled by many in the religious right. In 1986, Summit Ministries, a right-wing Christian group in Colorado, distributed a booklet called Special Report: AIDS, co-written by Cameron, Summit leader David Noebel and Wayne Lutton (Lutton would later be an editor for an anti-immigrant hate group, the Social Contract Press, and act as editorial advisor to the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens). Special Report argued for a drastic solution: locking up "practicing homosexuals" in the name of public health. After all, the authors wrote, "During World War II we exiled Americans of Japanese ancestry simply because we felt they were a national threat during time of war." Since AIDS has made gay people a "threat to our national survival," they wrote, "We might well prepare holding camps for all sexually active homosexuals with special camps for homosexuals with AIDS." Right-wing commentator Pat Buchanan and William Bennett, secretary of education in the Reagan administration, were publicly embarrassed when they touted Cameron's 1993 study claiming that gay men have only a 42-year life expectancy. As reporters soon discovered, Cameron had based the study on obituaries printed in gay newspapers — hardly a valid sample. Even so, just like many of Cameron's other "findings," the life-expectancy study continues to be cited as an established fact by anti-gay leaders like Focus on the Family's James Dobson, whose grasp of the facts was called into question earlier this year after Dobson warned that the popular cartoon character SpongeBob SquarePants, who lives in a pineapple under the sea, was being used by gay rights proponents to promote the acceptance of homosexuality. (Dobson made the comments at a Jan. 19 black-tie dinner in Washington, D.C., where Focus on the Family political allies, including several members of Congress, celebrated last November's election results. "The video itself is innocent enough and does not mention anything overtly sexual," Dobson wrote in a statement released amidst the SpongeBob furor. "But while the video is harmless on its own, I believe the agenda behind it is sinister.") Victory and Defeat To the dismay of the anti-gay crusaders, polls showed rising public support for gay rights throughout the '80s and '90s. As a result, the crusaders began to rethink their message. "They finally started to realize the 'diseased pervert' rhetoric wasn't going to win over the majority of Americans," says Close Encounters with the Religious Right author Rob Boston. In Colorado Springs, home to more than 50 Christian Right organizations by 1991, a whole new anti-gay strategy was being cooked up by Colorado For Family Values, organizers of Amendment 2, a statewide ballot initiative that would overturn gay anti-discrimination laws that had been passed by three Colorado towns and prevent any such future protections from being passed. Realizing the old arguments weren't working, one of Amendment 2's organizers, a born-again "ex-hippie" attorney named Tony Marco, produced a fresh argument: "special rights." "What gives gay militants their enormous power are money and the operative presumption that gays represent some kind of 'oppressed minority,'" Marco wrote. He recommended "demolishing the presumption that gays are an 'oppressed minority.'" The best way to do that, Marco believed, was to drum up resentment against gay people — particularly among African Americans and working-class whites — by portraying them as wanting "special rights." In a 1992 issue of Focus on the Family's Citizen magazine, Marco began making an economic case that gay people already had privileges that most Americans could only dream of. "Homosexuals have an average household income of $55,340," he wrote, "versus $32,144 for the general population and $12,166 for disadvantaged African-American households." Marco's numbers were grossly misleading and, like Cameron's crackpot science, reminiscent of anti-Semitic propaganda about Jews. His source for gay income was a 1988 survey of gay magazine readers — a skewed sample, The Antigay Agenda author Didi Herman notes, because "readers of glossy gay men's magazines are likely to be among the most affluent members of the gay and lesbian community." Amendment 2 got a major boost in 1991, when James Dobson began to push it on his daily radio show. Dobson had moved his multimedia empire to a campus in Colorado Springs that same year. Known to most Americans as a soft-spoken purveyor of homespun parenting advice, Dobson was now displaying a much tougher side. In 1990, Focus' Citizen magazine had published a special issue, declaring the '90s "the Civil War Decade." With the fall of Soviet communism, Dobson wrote, the Cold War would be replaced by a "culture war" fought on three fronts: abortion, public education and homosexuality. "Children are the prize to the winner of this second civil war," wrote Dobson and his Washington lobbyist, the Family Research Council's Gary Bauer, in Children at Risk, also published that same year. "We are to be intolerant of evil," Dobson told his radio audience in 1994. "Romans 12:9 says, 'Learn to be sincere. Hate what is evil'" (Dobson's emphasis). When Dobson began pushing Amendment 2, its organizers had been struggling to get enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. Overnight, the campaign was flooded with volunteers and money. Amendment 2 won by a 53%-47% margin. The anti-gay movement had won a major round — in the court of public opinion, at least. In 1996, Amendment 2 was overturned by the u.s. Supreme Court in Evans v. Romer. Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority decision began with a pointed reference to Plessy v. Ferguson, the 1896 decision that allowed "separate but equal" treatment of black people and ushered in the Jim Crow era. The Colorado amendment, Kennedy wrote, imposed a "special disability" on gay men and lesbians, and constituted "a bare ... desire to harm a politically unpopular group." But by then, the anti-gay movement had been thoroughly energized. In 1994, in what The Washington Times called "two days of top-secret meetings," around 35 state and national anti-gay leaders had convened in Colorado Springs. Bringing "greetings from Dr. Dobson," Focus on the Family's John Eldridge led things off by presenting a five-point plan to spread the anti-gay message. "We must never appear to be mean-spirited or bigoted," he said. But as he wound up his exhortation, Eldridge sounded a different note. "I would not say this in other cultural contexts," he said, "but the gay agenda has all the elements of that which is evil. It is deceptive at every turn. It is destroying the souls and lives of those who embrace it." Calling Names Old-school gay-bashing did not die away with the rise of the "special rights" strategizing. If anything, the rhetoric was ratcheted up in the 1990s, when President Bill Clinton's proposal to lift the ban on gay military service inspired a verbal arms race. Gary Bauer took the lead, sprinkling his fundraising appeals and Web-site columns with references to gay people as "perverts" and "weirdness on parade." On "The 700 Club," Pat Robertson said Clinton's proposal would give "preferred status to evil." Jerry Falwell worried aloud that if the ban were lifted, "our poor boys on the front lines will have to face two different enemies, one from the front and one from the rear." Fundraising appeals became increasingly outrageous. In January 1998, Christian Action Network founder Martin Mawyer wrote: The title character in the ABC-TV sitcom Ellen came out of the closet ... AND DUMPED HER FILTHY LESBIAN LIFESTYLE RIGHT IN THE CENTER OF YOUR LIVING ROOM!! IT'S THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF NETWORK TV THAT THE LEAD CHARACTER IS A SODOMITE!! ... Do you think TV ever portrays homosexuals as they really are? Having sex with hundreds of perverts in 'one-night stands' ... spreading their filthy sex diseases to millions of people ... molesting innocent children ... flaunting their grotesque lifestyle ... committing murder and sex crimes more than any other group of people. In July 1998, Pat Robertson warned the citizens of Orlando, Fla., that if Disney World didn't cancel "Gay Day," their city would be subject to God's wrath, in the form of "terrorist bombs, earthquakes, tornadoes and possibly a meteor." That same July, D. James Kennedy's Center for Reclaiming America, the Christian Coalition, Focus on the Family and other anti-gay groups launched a million-dollar ad campaign to promote "ex-gay" ministries specializing in "curing" lesbians and gay men of their sexual orientation (see Curious Cures). The ex-gay campaign was partly designed to reinforce the message that fundamentalists truly "love the sinner but hate the sin." Ex-gay people were also an essential part of the "special rights" campaign, their existence cited as proof that homosexuality was not genetic, but a matter of choice. Most of the ex-gay ministries promoted in the campaign, including Focus on the Family's Exodus International, practiced "reparative therapy," a collection of methods that had long been thoroughly discredited in the world of psychology. Still, the ex-gay ads made a splash. John and Anne Paulk, the ex-gay Focus on the Family employees who were featured in the campaign, landed on the cover of Newsweek, which asked, "Gay for Life?" A year later, John Paulk was photographed hurrying out of Mr. P's, a gay bar in Washington, D.C., joining dozens of other ex-gay leaders who had suffered embarrassing relapses. Focus on the Family leaders quickly removed Paulk as chairman of Exodus International despite his protestations that he had "no sinful intentions" in visiting Mr. P's. 'The Ultimate Ex-Gay' On Oct. 6, 1998, one day before D. James Kennedy's anti-gay coalition put out a second round of ex-gay TV ads, 21-year-old college student Matthew Shepard was savagely murdered in Wyoming. Journalists jumped on the connection between the ex-gay campaign and the prejudice that fuels hate crimes. "You call a group of people evil and sick and immoral often enough and some nutcase out there is going to act on it," wrote columnist Donald Kaul in the Des Moines Register. The Advocate, a gay newsmagazine, pointedly called Shepard "the ultimate ex-gay." A counter-attack was not long in coming. In an Orlando Sun-Sentinel op-ed, Gary Bauer accused the "militant homosexual lobby" of a "new McCarthyism" with its claims that anti-gay rhetoric leads to violence. Pat Buchanan agreed: "The left is now using Mr. Shepard's murder both to diabolize Christian teachings on homosexuality and to impose on society its own moral code." The Family Research Council, along with other anti-gay groups, had often cited a similar fear of being demonized as its rationale for opposing hate-crime laws, asserting that hate crimes legislation would lead to "thought crime" prosecutions of Christians. In 1996, sparked by the fact that Hawaii seemed to be close to legalizing gay marriage, a related argument was deployed — the idea that legalization ultimately would lead to hate crimes prosecutions of Christians who opposed homosexuality. In January of that year, more than 20 anti-gay groups, including Focus on the Family and the Christian Coalition, sent representatives to a church cellar in Memphis, Tenn., for the first secret meeting of the National Pro-Family Forum. The Forum, which continued to meet every three months, scored a symbolic victory that fall, when its members convinced Congress to pass the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Writing in support of DOMA, Bauer predicted that gay marriage would have dire consequences for Americans of faith: "If they succeed, all distinctions based on sex may fall, and the worst aspects of the rejected Equal Rights Amendment will be imposed. Homosexuals will gain the 'right' to adopt children; ... churches will be pushed outside civil law; and government power will be wielded against anyone who holds the biblical view of homosexuality." Forest Fire After the Supreme Court legalized sodomy in 2003, the gay marriage battle was on, with anti-gay crusaders once again sharpening their knives of dire rhetoric. "Our great nation is under violent attack from within," said Stephen Bennett, Christian singer and ex-gay minister. "We are now at the 11th hour, a point of no return." "What's at stake here," said Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, "is the very foundation of our society, not only of America but all Western civilization." "I've never seen a man in my life I wanted to marry," said the Rev. Jimmy Swaggart. "And I'm gonna be blunt and plain: if one ever looks at me like that, I'm gonna kill him and tell God he died." From the 2003 Texas sodomy decision until Election Day 2004, the gay-marriage debate seemed to bring out the warrior in everyone. The anti-gay campaign, said Human Rights Campaign Executive Director Cheryl Jacques, was marked by "the highest level of intensity and aggression ever." In the 11 states where anti-gay marriage measures were on the ballot, television ads urged voters to "defend marriage." In Ohio, Phil Burress' anti-gay group gathered 575,000 signatures in fewer than 90 days to put their constitutional amendment on the ballot. "It's a forest fire with a 100-mile-per-hour wind behind it," Burress told The New York Times. Just five months after Lawrence vs. Texas, the Pew Research Center found that opposition to gay marriage had climbed from 53 to 59%. A new majority of Americans, 55%, now characterized gay sex as a sin. Thirty years of anti-gay crusades had begun to pay. As Election Day drew near, James Dobson was taking no chances. His political spin-off group, Focus on the Family Action, organized large rallies in six cities last fall, attracting crowds even Anita Bryant couldn't muster. Three weeks before the election, about 150,000 turned out for Dobson's "Mayday for Marriage" rally in Washington, D.C. On Oct. 22 in Oklahoma City, Dobson brought the crowd to its feet with a message that Bryant might have delivered in 1977. "Homosexuals are not monogamous," he said. "They want to destroy the institution of marriage. It will destroy marriage. It will destroy the earth." On Nov. 2, the anti-gay marriage amendments passed handily in all 11 states — including Ohio, the state that ultimately swung the election in George W. Bush's favor. Many commentators argued that the huge voter turnout in that pivotal battleground state — and therefore George W. Bush's victory — was due largely to the anti-gay amendment driving conservative voters to the polls in record numbers. "Just a year ago, justices of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that same-sex couples have the legal right to marry. George W. Bush is thanking them today," Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi wrote November 4. The week after the election, Burress called anti-gay leaders together in Washington to start planning for 10 state amendment campaigns in 2005, while other fundamentalist power brokers made it clear to Bush as he prepared for his second term that they expected some return for their considerable investment, including his unwavering support for an amendment to the United States Constitution banning gay marriage nationwide. "In your re-election, God has graciously granted America — though she doesn't deserve it — a reprieve from paganism," wrote Bob Jones II, President of Bob Jones University, in an open letter of congratulations to President Bush. "You have been given a mandate. We the people expect your voice to be heard with the clear and certain sound of a trumpet. Undoubtedly you will have the opportunity to appoint many conservative judges and exercise forceful leadership with the Congress in passing legislation that is defined by biblical norms regarding the family and sexuality. "You have four years to leave an imprint for righteousness upon this nation that brings with it the blessings of Almighty God."

Band banned from covering Louie Louie

A middle school marching band in Benton Harbor, Michigan was banned from performing Louie Louie. The Associated Press reports that the school superintendent thinks the song is inappropriate, even though the band is playing an instrumental version. There are many variations of the lyrics floating around, but, according to the Louie Louie Pages, the following rendition was apparently (one of several) transcribed in 1964 during a 30-month FBI investigation:

Oh, Louie Louie, oh no
Get her way down low
Oh, Louie Louie, oh baby
Get her down low

A fine little girl a-waiting for me
She's just a girl across the way
We'll take her and park all alone
She's never a girl I lay at home

At night at ten I lay her again
Fuck you girl, oh all the way
Oh my bed and I lay her there
I meet a rose in her hair

Okay, let's give it to them right now!

She's got a rag on I'll move above
It won't be long she'll slip it off
I'll take her in my arms again
I'll tell her I'll never leave again

Get that broad out of here!

Link to Associated Press article

UPDATE: To further point out the idiocy of banning the song, several readers ask that I post the "real" (and quite tame) published lyrics of Louie Louie by Richard Berry. From The Straight Dope:

"Louie Louie, me gotta go. Louie Louie, me gotta go. A fine little girl, she wait for me. Me catch the ship across the sea. I sailed the ship all alone. I never think I'll make it home. Louie Louie, me gotta go . Three nights and days we sailed the sea. Me think of girl constantly. On the ship, I dream she there. I smell the rose in her hair. Louie Louie, me gotta go. Me see Jamaican moon above. It won't be long me see me love. Me take her in my arms and then I tell her I never leave again. Louie Louie, me gotta go." (By Richard Berry. Copyright 1957-1963 by Limax Music Inc.)"

Israel, Iran, Mossad and a Nuclear False Flag Attack

by R. Leland Lehrman
505.982.3609 - leland@33o.com

April 18th, 2005 - Public Advisory

New information and threats, including this commercial video (available from the Iran Freedom Foundation home page) and other neoconservative rants regarding an "Iranian" nuclear threat have prompted an essential update to this piece regarding the extensive record of recently arrested Israeli, not Iranian operatives, often around nuclear facilities in America.

This campaign designed to prepare the American people to blame Iran for a possible upcoming nuclear terrorist attack fits the description of a Mossad false flag operation, especially because of Israel's numerous, even flagrant recent violations of American nuclear security.

Israel's long record of using terrorism and especially "false flag" terrorism - covert military operations designed to pin blame on an enemy - is extensive and well documented, beginning with the bombing of the Hotel King David by Menachem Begin's Irgun fighters, through the Lavon Affair and recently includes the bust up of a phony al Qaeda cell that was in reality manufactured by the Mossad.

For those still under the illusion that Israel has always been a US ally, please note the USS Liberty Incident , wherein Israeli fighter planes and torpedo boats nearly sunk an unarmed US intelligence vessel in international waters, and also the US Army War College's assesment of the Mossad: "Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target US forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act." - Washington Times . Even the US army acknowledges that Israel can and does engineer "false flag" attacks.

Here's why they say history repeats itself. America, doesn't this sound a bit too familiar: "As during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, the neocons have embarked on another inane search for monarchic exile groups to prop up as future leaders of a "free and democratic" Iran. This effort, according to the Financial Times, is led by a gruesome twosome -- Iran-Contra scumlord, Michael Ledeen, and Swift Boat washup, Jerome Corsi -- along with AIPAC and a laundry list of wingers in congress." - Max Blumenthal

"A prominent backer of the Alliance [for "Democracy" in Iran - forerunner to the Iran Freedom Foundation] is Jerome Corsi, well known for his role in the Swift Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth campaign against John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate... The Alliance says it is in partnership with the rightwing Hudson Institute. Alliance members are also inspired by Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, an influential neoconservative policy group, who is a veteran campaigner for regime change. " - Financial Times

The Hudson Institute, the ultraconservative, organic food bashing home of neocon all star Meyrav Wurmser, co- author of the famous Project for a New Pearl Harbor, I mean Project for a New American Century document, Rebuilding America's Defenses provides insitutional cover for this poorly disguised covert intelligence operation. Hudson Institute features the Bilderberger criminal, "Lord" Conrad Black as one of its trustees. Here's what New World Order genius-in-chief Henry Kissinger has to say about the Hudson Institute:

“Hudson Institute is today one of America's foremost policy research centers, in the forefront of study and debate on important domestic and international policy issues, known and respected around the globe, a leader in innovative thinking and creative solutions to the challenges of the present and the future.” - Henry A. Kissinger

This recent propaganda effort streaming through wild-eyed right-wing rags like World Net Daily is well-organized and may perhaps indicate that the "provocation" designed to legitimate the planned June 2005 war with Iran, is about to occur. Neocon bullhorn World Net Daily blares: "NUCLEAR WAR-FEAR: Iran nuke commercial hits TV markets. Spot depicting atomic terror attack in NYC to be seen in 20 cities."

Citizens can afford to waste no time informing the President, the Pentagon, Congress, State Officials, FBI Counter Intelligence and the press that we are aware of the intent of this propaganda campaign and are not fooled. Recent Israeli and US efforts to publicly distance themselves from war plans for Iran may be part of a campaign to appear peaceful, such that a terrorist attack falsely blamed on Iran with the full force of the international media will look all the more brutal and undeserved.

We have seen these types of "terrorist attacks" both real and imagined used to legitimate foreign military adventures that are deceptively sold to an unwitting public as if they were in our "National Interest," or "Promote Democracy." No, no, as Major General Smedley Butler put it in 1935: War is a Racket.When was the last time this Administration warned us about mushroom clouds over US cities? Where are those weapons of mass destruction today?

Read on for the details of the Israeli agents arrested near US nuclear facilities or in other suspicious circumstances. All instances documented in mainstream press. External articles rendered in Arial Font.

---

Israeli nationals, recently arrested all around the country, may be part of a possible false flag attack on the United States, perhaps even involving nuclear weapons or an attack on nuclear facilities. These attacks may be designed to frame Muslim nations in order to legitimate resource and world domination wars.

Look at the below published news reports and documents.

1. King's Bay Naval Nuclear Facility

The most recent incident was at King's Bay Naval Nuclear Facility. The news reports in that case describe the fact that the dogs were alerted to the scent of explosives and that there was a remote control robot in a suitcase in the van.

Here's one article:

Movers Who Prompt Kings Bay Lockdown To Be Deported
POSTED: 1:44 pm EDT May 25, 2004
http://www.news4jax.com/news4georgia/3344771/detail.html

ST. MARYS, Ga. -- Two Israeli men working for a moving-and-storage company who attempted to enter Kings Bay Submarine Base Friday are being held for deportation.

The two entered the Franklin gate about 10:30 a.m. Friday to pick up some items in base housing, base spokesman Ed Buczek said.

Neither was able to present valid work permits to security personnel, and one had an expired passport. Base personnel and bomb-sniffing dogs inspected the van, prompting a lockdown of the base.

St. Marys police closed access to an area one-half mile surrounding the base and called in a bomb squad, Buczek said.

"The military dogs were alerted to a scent in the cab of the truck," Buczek said. "Guards closed access to the base and notified the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service."

Nothing was found in the van, but both men, Tamir D. Sason, 24 and Daniel Levy, 23, both of Metar, Israel, were turned over to federal immigration officers as undocumented aliens. They are being held for deportation.

Here's another:

Security scare shuts Kings Bay
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/052204/geo_15672724.shtml
Bomb suspected after an Israeli was unable to give credentials for entry.
by LIZ HAMPTON
Times-Union correspondent

ST. MARYS, Ga. -- Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base was locked down for security reasons Friday after two Israelis were detained for questioning.

Base spokesman Ed Buczek said two Israeli men attempted to enter the base about 10:30 a.m. They were hired by a moving-and-storage company to pick up some household goods in base housing, he said....

"The military dogs were alerted to a scent in the cab of the truck," Buczek said. "Guards closed access to the base and notified the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service."

St. Marys police closed access to an area one-half mile out surrounding the base, and a bomb squad was called in, Buczek said. A briefcase was removed from the vehicle with a remote control robot, but nothing was found in it.

Daniel Hopsicker provides additional details here and and here.

Additional investigative reporting here at libertypost.org. An excerpt:

"Thankfully there was one subject on which the Navy spokesman was prepared to wax eloquent... The bomb-sniffing guard dogs at the base were filled with the right stuff, and possessed a high level of skill & accuracy.

"The military dogs were alerted to a scent in the cab of the truck," a base spokesman had stated. "Guards immediately closed access to the base.”

“Do they often test false positives?” we inquired.

Not at all. “The idea that they would pick up a false positive is highly unlikely,” sniffed the base spokesman."

The American Free Press actually contacted the Department of Homeland Security. Here's what they found out:

"Marc Raimondi, spokesman at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in Washington, told AFP that both Sason and Levy will be deported. Raimondi said ICE had taken custody of the two individuals and checked them out through immigration and known criminal databases. Their only offense, Raimondi said, was that they had worked illegally on visitor visas.

"Perhaps the conspiracy theory has merit," Raimondi said when asked why Israeli agents involved in criminal activities were being deported on visa violations. Raimondi was unable to answer when asked if DHS was concerned about the network of Israeli-owned moving companies in the United States, some with proven ties to Israeli intelligence.

He said the agency welcomes any information that could be helpful."

2. Nuclear Fuel Services Plant, Erwin, Tennessee

Prior to the King's Bay incident, Israeli "movers" including the son of the Likud Party spokesperson Shmuel Dahan were busted in Tennessee near the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in Erwin.

Here is the AP report:

Two men arrested after high-speed chase in Tennessee

The Associated Press

ERWIN, Tenn. (AP) - Two Israeli men who led the Unicoi County sheriff on a high-speed chase in a rented moving truck were placed under arrest and are being investigated by the FBI, local officials said.

SHMUEL DAHAN and Almaliach Naor, both from Israel, were being held without bond Sunday afternoon at the Unicoi County Jail. The truck, rented from a Ryder office in Mars Hills, N.C., was being held in the county garage pending an FBI investigation, officials said.

Dahan is charged with reckless driving, littering, false identification and evading arrest, while Naor faces charges of false identification and evading arrest, an officer with the Unicoi County Sheriff's Department who would not give his name said Sunday.

An investigation by the FBI is ongoing and more charges are possible, he said. A woman who answered the phone at the FBI's Knoxville office said there was no one available to answer questions about the arrest.

The incident began late Saturday afternoon when Sheriff Kent Harris noticed a rental truck traveling at a high speed along former U.S. Highway 23, a lightly-traveled highway near the North Carolina state line.

"I was really concerned because the driver would not stop after I flashed my headlights for nearly three miles," Harris said. "He was weaving back and forth and I was wondering what a large (rental truck) was doing on the two-lane highway late Saturday afternoon instead of the faster I-26 Interstate."

Harris said he saw the men throw something from the truck while they were being pursued. Officers scouring the area later found a vial containing an unknown substance along the roadway, he said.

Once the men were apprehended, officers also found a "Learn to Fly" brochure in the truck, leading Harris and others to express concern about security at the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in Erwin.

"I GOT A SICK FEELING WHEN I SAW IT," Harris said.

Dahan also gave authorities a fake Florida driver's license issues in Plantation, Fla., he said, while Naor produced a fake identification card.

Harris subsequently contacted the FBI, the federal Bureau of Tobacco and Firearms and other local authorities to look into the situation.

"We're not overreacting," Harris said. "We have a responsibility to protect the citizens of Unicoi County and that's what I'm going to do at any cost. I'd rather overreact, if that's what you call it, than be sorry later."

More details on that investigation, with notes on other incidents involving Israeli "movers" can again be found at Daniel Hopsicker's website:

"...the 'learn to fly in Florida' business card is that of Nissan Giat, also an Israeli military veteran, he said, as well as a free-lance flight instructor in the Miami area, working out of the Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport."

3. Plymouth, Pennsylvania with a video of the Sears Tower:

2 found with video of Sears Tower

MICHELLE MOWAD, Special to The Mercury October 17, 2001
PLYMOUTH (PA) -- Two men whom police described as Middle Eastern were detained in the township by federal immigration authorities after being found with detailed video footage of the Sears Tower in Chicago.

Plymouth Police encountered the men after an officer responded to Pizzeria Uno on West Ridge Pike at 2:40 p.m. Thursday for a report of illegal dumping.

A manager there advised the police officer that a tractor-trailer was observed backed up to the dumpster at the rear of the restaurant. The manager noticed a freshly dumped pile of furniture adjacent to the Dumpster, according to police. The manager confronted the vehicle's operator, a Middle Eastern man, police said.

The man, who later identified himself as Moshe Elmakias, 30, denied that he did anything and fled the scene, heading west on West Ridge Pike... The manager was able to provide township police with the Florida registration number of the tractor-trailer and said that a sign posted on the side of the vehicle read "Moving Systems Incorporated" police said.

The area was searched by township police, and the vehicle was spotted parked on the curb in front of John Kennedy Ford on Ridge Pike. An officer proceeded to make contact with the occupants of the truck by knocking on the cab, according to reports.

A Middle Eastern man, later identified as Ron Katar, 23, exited the sleeper area of the cab and said that the operator was across the street as he pointed toward the Don Rosen Porsche dealer, reports said.

Elmakias and a white female, Ayelet Reisler, 23, were approaching the vehicle from the dealership, but the female then began walking in a different direction, acting as if she were not with Elmakias, according to reports. Reisler was detained and checked for identification. She had a German passport in her name and medication in a different name, police said. Plymouth Police Sgt. Thomas Longo was notified and responded to the incident.

Elmakias allegedly admitted to being behind Pizzeria Uno, although he said that he did not dump furniture, he was only turning around. Elmakias said that his destination was New York and that he was also coming from New York. He said he was in Plymouth because he was supposed to make a pickup in the morning and pointed toward the Storage USA facility on Belvoir Road , police said. Elmakias could not, however, provide a name or telephone number of the customer.

Township police dispatched a request for a Motor Carrier Program Inspector. Officer Gerald Schwartz of the Whitpain Police Department responded. Schwartz discovered through his investigation that the operator's log had been falsified and put the truck out of service due to violations. Inspection of the tractor-trailer's contents revealed a load three-quarters full containing household items, including furniture and boxes. Among the items in the truck was a Sony video camera. Plymouth Police Officer David McCann reviewed the tape found inside the camera. The tape had video footage of Chicago with zoomed-in shots of the Sears Tower, according to police.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation was notified of the incident and all three subjects were transported to the Plymouth Police station. FBI Agents James Sweeney and Richard Tofani arrived at the station and proceeded to investigate both the subjects and their belongings with the assistance of Immigration and Naturalization Services. All evidence collected by Plymouth and Whitpain officers was transferred to federal facilities. Special Agent Linda Vizi, a spokeswoman for the Philadelphia FBI, could not be contacted for comment on further investigations.
Mirror: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/sears2.html

4. Whidbey Island Naval Station
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=49488

On May 7th, 2002, two Israeli "movers" were arrested for speeding after midnight near the Whidbey Island Naval Air Station and Oak Harbor, Washington. The Jerusalem Post gives the cover story:

FBI clears Israelis suspected of carrying explosives

Jerusalem Post; 5/15/2002; MELISSA RADLER

Wednesday, May 15, 2002 -- NEW YORK - The two Israelis arrested last week in Washington State on charges of having traces of explosives in their rental truck were cleared by the Federal Bureau of Investigation yesterday. The FBI said further tests found no trace of explosives.

Officials attributed the false positive to the presence of diesel fuel, which was used to fill up the van.

News of the incident spread like wildfire on Fox News and TV stations in Israel.

The Israelis' saga began on May 8 when they were pulled over in Oak Harbor, Washington, and a trace amount of TNT and the plastic explosive RDX was apparently found on the gear shift and steering wheel of their vehicle and on one of the Israeli's clothes, Fox News reported yesterday.

According to an FBI spokesman in Seattle, Ray Lauer, local police who pulled the Israelis over for speeding became suspicious after one of the men was found to be in possession of an altered passport, and the other was unable to produce any identification other than an Israeli driver's license. Suspicions were heightened since the Israelis were close to Whidbey Island Naval Station, and the driver insisted they were moving furniture - a claim that did not seem to mesh with the late hour.

Military personnel who were called in from Whidbey Island to conduct tests on the vehicle dispatched sniffer dogs and ionizers that indicated the presence of explosives in the car. The men denied any connection to explosive material and were hauled off to INS custody for violating immigration laws.

"They did not have explosives on them," Lauer said. "The tests that they conducted appear to be false positives."

The Israelis are currently being held in INS custody on immigration violations, including entering the country illegally and working without proper documentation, according to Garrison Courtney, a spokesman in Seattle's INS office.

"The two gentlemen that were stopped were held on immigration violations. They are in the custody of the INS. We are only charging them with immigration violations," Courtney said.

Since September 11, dozens of Israelis have been detained by the INS and deported to Israel for violating a variety of immigration laws, including overstaying their visa and working without a permit.

The Israeli consulate in San Francisco, which has jurisdiction over Washington State, did not return calls seeking comment.

The Palestine Chronicle gives the detail:

"...The report by Carl Cameron goes into detail about the event and the facts as they unfolded after the stop by the local Oak Harbor Police Department.

The report states that the police stopped a Budget Rental truck for speeding after midnight just outside the entrance to the NAS facility and close enough that the military left the base and participated in the investigation on a public Oak Harbor street and that Naval Intelligence is involved in the subsequent investigation. The question that comes to mind is just why and under what authority, would the MP's leave a military facility to assist the local police in a routine stop for speeding on a city street? Why? Why would Naval Intelligence get involved in the investigation, given the wording of the final report as it was provided to me this afternoon, by those close to the investigation? If there was nothing to be made of any of it, why are they interested?

According to the report of Carl Cameron and confirmed to me by investigating authorities, a bomb-sniffing dog was called to the scene. For a speeding violation? Now here comes the sketchy parts.

The dog did - as reported by several sources - detect the presence of explosives in the cab of the truck and on one of the men. At that point High-Tech detection equipment was brought in and it was determined that traces of TNT and RDX (plastic explosives) were found. What aroused the suspicions to bring in a bomb-sniffing dog in the first place? Just because a truck was speeding? It confirmed the presence of explosives as did the high-tech stuff. The 'official' spin that I got today from those involved with the investigation was that the dog did not react at all to anything. There was nothing and a completely benign reaction. It was confirmed that the high-tech equipment was used, but no mention of those results were offered.

Upon further questioning it was then stated that the dog did in fact have a reaction, but that the investigators (those reportedly involved were all of the intelligence branches/authorities - FBI, ATF, Naval Intelligence, Counter Terrorism and some unidentified participants) did a 'swab' test of the suspected contaminated areas and it was determined that the traces of explosives were just residue of diesel fuel. Boy, that is a stretch. First the dog had a reaction, then it didn't, then it did, but what it detected was plain old diesel fuel oil. If that were the case, the dog would have had a reaction just passing by the vehicles fuel tank which was full of diesel. This particular dog would be of no value as a sniffing detector if it would react to the presence of diesel fuel. Almost all of the vehicles it would be required to respond to are diesel powered type vehicles. IT would react positively every time it scented diesel. Then it was explained to me that the composition of TNT is similar and easily confused with diesel fuel.

Here's the rub. Just the fact that TNT and RDX were mentioned as being present is extremely worrisome. These two compounds together are used strictly in military explosive configurations. Projectile boosters, landmines and 'special' clandestine type explosive arrangements. Why was a dog brought to the scene? Why such a determined effort to determine the presence of explosives and who made the TNT/RDX connection, that it was present and did they all ready suspect, or even know that these explosives and these two detainees had these type explosives and they were being pursued? Who concocted the story? There is absolutely no other way to spin the events, they must have happened and they are now trying to cover tracks, or public awareness for some unknown reason.

It was easy to dismiss the reaction of the dog, it can't argue back. But their explanation that the dog confused military explosives with diesel fuel is absurd. What gave them away is that the way to test for the presence of TNT/RDX is through swabbing, or a gauze wipe test with acetone. It will determine the presence of this extremely powerful explosive compound, but cannot determine whether diesel fuel is present. Why was the dog brought in and then backed up with high-tech detection equipment and then gauze wipe tests performed if it was just diesel fuel? Why was the military off base in the middle of a routine speeding stop, already being handled by the Oak Harbor Police and who called them, they certainly didn't? Why was the truck speeding away from the Naval Air Station and why was Naval Intelligence involved? Pursuit? Had they been involved in a theft on base? What exactly was going on?

I asked about the moving furniture story and was told that the investigators claimed that they followed up on this angle and said that they did talk to an elderly lady at an elderly care housing facility that claims that she had furniture delivered in the middle of the night by some guys whose description fit those of the two stopped for speeding, but there again is another confusing explanation. Supposedly this lady was angry because the two tried to extort money from her for the moving of her furniture, but she angrily refused and the two just dumped her furniture outside on the ground. Just how did she manage to get it all inside and so quickly in the middle of the night? Or is it all a ruse?

The information I got was provided by the Oak Harbor Police Department and they were highly skeptical of the explanations and versions they were instructed to give to anyone that asked. Apparently the two arrested individuals - both of whom were Israeli nationals, one here illegally and the other on an expired and altered visa - were remanded to the custody of the INS and disposition is unknown at this time. However, the Oak Harbor Police informed me that the only charges against these two were probably going to be minor.

Calls to the Border Patrol/INS, ATF, FBI and others have gone unreturned. I tried to contact Naval authorities, but they claim they have absolutely no record of the incident and referred me to the Naval Public Affairs Office...

5. Cloudcroft, New Mexico

Excellent work regarding the Cloudcroft and other Israeli arrests can be found in the article, Mossad and Moving Companies: Masterminds of Global Terrorism? With Commentary by Laura Knight-Jadczyk

Here's the news story:

Cloudcroft chief stops Israelis with suspicious cargo
By Michael Shinabery
Staff Writer, Alamogordo Daily News

CLOUDCROFT — That they were speeding through the school zone first got his attention.

That they had Israeli driver's licenses and expired passports made him suspicious.

Cloudcroft Police Chief Gene Green stopped the 2-ton van on Thursday, for speeding. Initially, Green thought the truck was commercial because of exterior markings. But when he found it was out of Chicago, he asked for documentation such as logs books and manifests.

"They said this is a U-Haul truck and handed me a rental agreement (for) in-town delivery only in Illinois, (which) had expired two days before," Green said.

He called for backup, and Otero County Sheriff's Deputy Billy Anders, who patrols the Sacramento Mountains, arrived, along with Capt. Norbert Sanchez and Det. Eddie Medrano.

"We got them out and started digging a little deeper," Green said, "got permission to search the truck. They claimed they were hauling furniture from Austin to Chicago."

When officers advised the men they were not exactly en route from one town to another, Green said the two men claimed they were Deming bound.

"But they couldn't give us an address in Deming they were going to," he said. "Once we got into the truck, they had some junk furniture I wouldn't have given to Goodwill."

Also inside the vehicle were, Green said, "50 boxes" they claimed was a "private" delivery, but the men insisted they had no "idea what was in them."

At that point, the officers called for drug-sniffing and bomb-sniffing dogs. The men were turned over to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and U-Haul recovered the truck. Contents of the boxes remain unknown, pending investigation.

6."The Midwest"

Right after September 11th, a group of Israeli operatives carrying boxcutters and "other equipment" were detained and released in "the Midwest." Here's the story:

Nuclear Plants Tighten Security

FBI seeking 6 men seen in Midwest

By Martin Merzer, Curtis Morgan and Lenny Savino
The Miami Herald
October 3, 2001

WASHINGTON -- As the nation stands on high alert, the FBI is searching for six men stopped by police in the Midwest last weekend but released -- even though they possessed photos and descriptions of a nuclear power plant in Florida and the Trans- Alaska pipeline, a senior law enforcement official said Tuesday.

The Federal Aviation Administration imposed new flight restrictions around nuclear plants nationwide Tuesday, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission advised the nation's 103 nuclear plants late Monday to fortify security. On Tuesday, agency spokesmen said the FAA's flight restrictions and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's security recommendations were based on Ashcroft's general alert rather than a specific threat. Ashcroft warned that Americans could be struck by another terrorist attack this week.

The incident in the Midwest apparently contributed to the new warning. The six men stopped by police were traveling in groups of three in two white sedans, said a senior law enforcement official, who requested anonymity.

SUSPICIOUS MATERIAL

In addition to the photographs and other suspicious material, they carried "box cutters and other equipment,'' the official said. They appeared to be from the Middle East and held Israeli passports. They were let go after the Immigration and Naturalization Service determined that the passports were valid and that the men had entered the United States legally, the official said.

The FBI declined to comment. An INS spokesman called the report unfounded. "We have absolutely no information at this point in time to substantiate that story,'' said the agency's Russ Bergeron. It could not be learned in what state the six men were stopped or how they aroused suspicion. It was not known whether their true identities matched those on the passports, or why the FBI was not releasing their names or descriptions.

Investigators think the men almost certainly have changed cars by now and have fled to Canada or elsewhere. Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller were ``furious'' that the INS allowed the men to be released without consulting the FBI, the official said. Ashcroft and Mueller appeared Monday evening at a news conference to announce that the government had ``credible'' but vague information that another wave of terrorist attacks could strike Americans within a week.

ON ALERT

Spokeswoman Rachel Scott said FPL's plants remained at the highest level of alert. "We are in very close communication with all levels of law enforcement, including the FBI, to ensure we have the security measures in place to protect the plants,'' she said. Also Tuesday, the FAA restricted all flights below 18,000 feet and within 10 miles of 86 "sensitive nuclear sites'' , the agency said. Exceptions can be made for law enforcement, medical and firefighting flights. The 800-mile-long Trans-Alaska Pipeline runs from Prudhoe Bay on the Arctic Ocean to Valdez on the Pacific.


7. New York City, 9/11

A huge amount has been written about "The Dancing Israelis," caught, arrested and jailed for dancing and photographing themselves with the World Trade Center burning in the background. It was later determined that at least two of them were Mossad operatives again connected to a moving company, Urban Moving Systems. Something is clearly wrong here. Michael Rivero's whatreallyhappened.com website does a good job of covering this scandal.

Dominic Suter, the head of the moving company to which the Mossad agents were attached ended up on an FBI terrorist watch list distributed to the Italian banking authorities.

8. The DEA Report

Israeli "art students" operating a spy-ring in Florida and around the country are documented in this DEA/FBI report. The spy ring maintained residences close enough to the purported 9/11 hijackers so that official sounding stories now parrot the official line that these Mossad operatives were watching the 9/11 hijackers with the cooperation of the US government. This German Intelligence Report goes much farther, stating that in fact they were the operators of the "al Qaeda" cell in America:

"The role of the Israeli Mossad in the terrorist attacks

Note: The following two sections are considered to be extremely sensitive due to the special relationship between the Federal Republic [of Germany] and its Jewish citizens as well as the State of Israel. This material is compiled from German and American sources.

During the term of President George HW Bush, the government of Israel made an official, but very secret, request to the American president. This request was to permit agents of the Mossad, Israeli Foreign Intelligence, to enter the United States and conduct surveillance operations against various Arab groups residing in that country.

The stated purpose of this surveillance was to permit Israeli early warning of terrorist plots against their country. Permission for this surveillance was granted with the caveat that the Mossad would have a liaison with the FBI and report any and all finding to that agency.

However, these conditions were not observed. The Mossad not only did not inform the FBI of any of its findings, it is known to have engaged in commerce with several groups of Israeli criminals of Russian backgrounds. These groups were engaged in extensive criminal activities inside the United States, to include the smuggling of the Ecstasy drug. Mossad agents were able to subvert American criminal investigations through their knowledge of American telephone surveillance of such groups.

It is very evident from surveillance conducted against Mossad agents in the Federal Republic as well as interceptions of Israeli diplomatic communication from the Federal Republic to Tel Aviv, that the Mossad has successfully penetrated various extremist Arab groups in both the Federal Republic and the United States.

These investigations disclosed in late May of 2001 that an attack was to be made against certain specified targets in the American cities of Washington and New York. But it was apparent that the Mossad was not only fully aware of these attacks well in advance but actually, though their own agents inside these Arab groups, assisted in the planning and the eventual execution of the attacks.

That the Israeli government was fully aware of these attack is absolutely certain and proven. Diplomatic traffic between the Israeli Embassy in the Federal Republic and the Israeli Foreign Office made it very clear that Minister President Sharon was fully aware of this pending attack and urgently wished that no attempt was made to prevent the attacks.

Although the Israeli officials were instructed to warn the American intelligence community that some kind of an attack might be possible, at no time were the specific dates and targets (known at that time to Israeli officials) to be given to the Americans.

The rationale for this attitude was expressed in a conversation on August 1, 2001, between the Israeli Military Attaché in the Federal Republic to a member of the Israeli General Staff. There it was stated that Israel believed an attack on the continental United States would so inflame American public opinion that they would permit Israel to "cleanse" their state of "Arab terrorists and those who support such terrorists". This "cleansing" was explained as the expulsion of all Arabs, and even Christian groups, from the Palestine area.

American intelligence officials have repeatedly expressed great concern in meeting with our people that the Israeli government, through a company called Amdocs, was able to conduct surveillance of all telephone communications within the United States. It was categorically stated that this Israeli-based firm was given the American contract with 25 of the largest American telephone companies. This contract was granted over the objections and concerns of the American intelligence community.

The official reason given for this extraordinary arrangement that permitted Israeli agencies to observe all highly confidential investigative telephone calls was that the United States has a "special relationship" with the State of Israel and they had requested this."

This information is completely credible because Israel is famous for impersonating or manipulating Arab criminals into terrorist activites such that they can legitimate their genocidal land grab in Palestine.

"Other allegations involved Israelis claiming to be art students who had backgrounds in signal interception and ordnance. " - Forward Magazine

Ordnance? Is that bombs? Signal Interception. Is that spying?

Here's a synopsis of the DEA Report by John Sugg of Creative Loafing, one of the people involved in breaking the story:

A major international espionage saga is unfolding across the United States, with some of its roots right here in the Atlanta area. It's been pretty hush-hush so far, largely because the implications could be a major embarrassment for the government.

The spy story is even more touchy because it isn't Saddam, Fidel, Osama or even what passes nowadays for the KGB spying on America -- but our "friend" in the war against "evil," Israel.

The basis of the spy allegations is a 60-page document -- a compilation of field reports by Drug Enforcement Administration agents and other U.S. law enforcement officials.

Creative Loafing last week obtained a copy of the report from intelligence sources with long-term contacts among both Israeli and American agencies. The government has attempted to deflect attention from earlier leaks about the spy scandal. However, while declining to confirm or deny the authenticity of the document, a spokesman for the DEA, William Glaspy, did acknowledge that the agency had received many reports of the nature described in the 60 pages.

A source familiar with the creation of the document has told CL that the 60-page memo was a draft intended as the base for a 250-page report. The larger report has not been produced because of the volatile nature of suggesting that Israel spies on America's deepest secrets.

Another DEA spokesperson, Rogene Waite, told Associated Press a draft document had been compiled and forwarded to other agencies.

The validity of the scenarios described in the document is attested to in at least one official mention. The Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive, in a March 2001 summary, reported on "suspicious visitors to federal facilities" and noted the type of "aggressive" activity recounted in the document obtained by the Planet.

The nation's most prominent Jewish newspaper, the New York-based Forward, also has confirmed portions of the vast spying network -- although stating that the Israelis were monitoring Arabs in the United States, not trying to access U.S. secrets. Referring to the arrest of five Israeli employees of a New Jersey moving company who were arrested and held for two months after the Sept. 11 attack, Forward on March 15 stated: "According to one former high-ranking American intelligence official, who asked not to be named, the FBI came to the conclusion at the end of its investigation that the five Israelis ... were conducting a Mossad surveillance mission and that their employer, Urban Moving Systems of Weehawken, N.J., served as a front."

Forward also reported that a counterintelligence probe concluded two of the men were operatives of Mossad, Israel's spy service.

Reports of the spying were first made public in December broadcasts by Fox News reporter Carl Cameron. It isn't clear whether he had the 60-page document or was only told its contents. A French online news service has obtained the report, and Le Monde in Paris has advanced the story. However, in the United States, the media ignored the original Fox broadcast, and only a handful of publications. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution hasn't reported the story although another Cox-owned paper, The Palm Beach Post has.

The absence of reporting hasn't gone unnoticed. The authoritative British intelligence and military analysis service, Jane's Information Group, on March 13 chided: "It is rather strange that the U.S. media ... seem to be ignoring what may well prove to be the most explosive story since the 11 September attack, the alleged breakup of a major Israeli espionage operation in the United States which aimed to infiltrate both the Justice and Defense departments and which may also have been tracking al-Qaida terrorists before the aircraft hijackings took place."

In flat language and sometimes excruciating bureaucratic detail, the document relates scores of encounters between federal agents and Israelis describing themselves as art students. The implication is that the seemingly innocuous cover was used to gain access to sensitive U.S. offices and military installations. For example, Paragraph 82 of the document states that MacDill Air Force Base intelligence officers were warned in March 2001 of the art students' efforts. A month later, a special alert was issued about a "possible intelligence collection effort" at Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma City. Among other activities, the base houses AWACS surveillance planes and repairs B-1 bombers.

The author of the document is not identified. However, many DEA and other law enforcement agents are named. CL has contacted some of the named agents, and three federal employees have confirmed the incidents described in the report. None disputed the authenticity of the report. One senior DEA official, when read paragraphs that mentioned him, said: "Absolutely, that's my report," adding, however, that he didn't think the incidents were sufficient to prove an ongoing spy operation. All of the federal employees said they could not be quoted by name.

The specific incidents are richly chronicled, down to names, drivers' license numbers, addresses and phone numbers of the Israelis.

Perhaps most intriguing, the Israelis' military and intelligence specialties are listed: "special forces," "intelligence officer," "demolition/explosive ordnance specialist," "bodyguard to head of Israeli army," "electronic intercept operator" -- even "son of a two-star (Israeli) army general."

"The activities of these Israeli art students raised the suspicion of (the DEA's Office of Security Programs) and other field offices when attempts were made to circumvent the access control systems at DEA offices, and when these individuals began to solicit their paintings at the homes of DEA employees," the document states. "The nature of the individuals' conduct, combined with intelligence information and historical information regarding past incidents (involving Israelis leads the DEA) to believe the incidents may well be an organized intelligence gathering activity."

The document also links the Israelis to possible drug investigations. The report states: "DEA Orlando has developed the first drug nexus to this group. Telephone numbers obtained from an Israeli Art Student encountered at the Orlando (district office) have been linked to several ongoing DEA MDMA (Ecstasy) investigations in Florida, California, Texas, and New York."

Much of the Israeli activity, according to the report, centered on Florida. In addition to attempting to gain access to government installations, the document states that the Israelis approached many intelligence agents, prosecutors and federal marshals at their homes -- including one incident on Davis Islands.

In researching this story, the CL has learned of other encounters not included in the 60-page report. For example, a member of Congress from Georgia recounted to CL of being targeted by the art students on two occasions. A Tampa state court judge was also approached. Neither the member of Congress nor the judge wanted to be named.

In an era where CNN CEO Walter Issacson says it would be "perverse" to televise Afghan babies killed by U.S. bombs, it's not surprising some stories go unnoticed by a press that embraces "patriotism" by ignoring sacred cows.

One such sacred cow is what's happening in Israel and Palestine. Reporters know that to criticize Israel -- to point out, for example, that wanton killing of innocents is equally devilish, whether committed by Ariel Sharon's soldiers flying U.S.-made helicopters, or by a Hamas suicide bomber who pushes the button -- is to risk being called an anti-Semite. It's a tired canard meant to bludgeon debate into silence, but it's often effective.

Even with that background, however, it's a little hard to understand the media's avoidance of the spy story. In 1999, word began spreading among intelligence agencies about bands of Israeli "students" doing very strange things, such as popping up around federal buildings and military establishments marketing artwork.

According to CL intelligence sources, low-level alerts began being flashed around to offices of the FBI, DEA, federal prosecutors and others. By March 23, 2001, counterintelligence officials had issued a bulletin to be on the watch for Israelis masquerading as "art students." The alert stated that there was an "ongoing 'security threat' in the form of individuals who are purportedly 'Israeli National Art Students' that are targeting government offices selling 'artwork.'"

At the same time, American intelligence services were increasingly worried by the dominance of many highly sensitive areas of telecommunications by Israeli companies. Comverse Infosys (now called Verint) provides U.S. lawmen with computer equipment for wiretapping. Speculation is that "catch gates" in the system allowed listeners to be listened to. Software made by another Israeli outfit, Amdocs, provided extensive records of virtually all calls placed by the 25 largest U.S. telephone companies. The relationship of those companies to the detained Israelis is detailed in the 60-page document.

The DEA's intense interest in the case stems from its 1997 purchase of $25-million in interception equipment from Israeli companies, according to a March 14 report by Intelligence Online, a French Web-based service that first revealed the existence of the 60-page document.

"In assigning so many resources to the inquiry (all DEA offices were asked to contribute)," Intelligence Online stated. "The agency was clearly worried that its own systems might have been compromised."

Often the Israeli "students" sold their artwork on street locations near federal buildings. In Tampa on March 1, 2001, a DEA agent heard a knock on his office door. According to the government report: "At the door was a young female who immediately identified herself as an Israeli art student who had beautiful art to sell." Knowing about the security alert, the agent began questioning the "student." After several contradictory statements, the agent concluded "her responses were evasive at best."

Elsewhere, the document notes that the students were "persistent" in trying to gain access to the homes of law enforcement personnel.

On other occasions, the "students" showed up at homes of intelligence agents, judges and other government employees. The report describes a December 2000 incident when a man and a woman knocked on the door of an Atlanta DEA agent. "Both subjects claimed to be Israeli art students," the document states. "The Special Agent examined some of the artwork, but became suspicious when the students would not provide him with a contact telephone number.... Subsequently, the Special Agent saw someof the exact same artwork for sale at [a]kiosk in the Mall of Georgia."

Many of the apparent operatives had set up shop at addresses only stones' throws from Arabs in San Diego, Little Rock, Irving, Texas, and in South Florida. The Planet also has obtained a watch list of mostly Arabs under scrutiny by the U.S. government. The addresses of many correspond to the specific areas where the Israelis established bases.

For example, an address for the Sept. 11 hijacking leader, Mohammad Atta, is 3389 Sheridan St. in Hollywood, Fla., only a few blocks and a few hundred feet from the address of some of the Israelis, at 4220 Sheridan.

A dozen Israelis, including the alleged surveillance leader, had been based in Hollywood, Fla., between January and June last year -- quite possibly watching Arabs living nearby who are suspected of providing logistical support to Osama bin Laden's network. Especially in Florida, where 10 of the 19 Sept. 11 terrorists lived, the revelations about the Israeli activities bolster speculation, reported by a Fox news reporter, that the students-cum-spies might have gained advance knowledge of aspects of the Sept. 11 terrorists -- and not passed on that critical intelligence to the United States. CL sources with Israeli connections suggest that the information might have been relayed to U.S. agencies, but might have been ignored or overlooked.

Despite the highly suspect behavior of the Israelis, the media hadn't picked up on the story.

Then came Sept. 11. While America was mesmerized by the "War on Terrorism," the media went out to a four-martini lunch when it came to skeptical reporting.

With a few commendable exceptions. One of those is Carl Cameron, a gutsy reporter for Fox News. On Dec. 12, Cameron broke the blockbuster spy story. He said at the time: "Since Sept. 11, more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained, either under the new PATRIOT anti-terrorism law, or for immigration violations. A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States."

Fox also reported the Israeli "students" "targeted" U.S. military bases -- which is bolstered by the report obtained by the CL.

In the rest of the world -- Europe, Arab countries and Israel, especially -- the story made headlines. Even the official Chinese news agency perked up. Not in our well-defended (against disturbing news) homeland, however.

Cameron, in an interview, said he doesn't believe the conspiracy theories about why the story was ignored here. An honest scribe, he points to a shortcoming in his own work -- one hammered on by Israeli critics at the time -- conceding "there were no (on the record) interviews. I didn't tell other reporters where to find the documents. They couldn't do instant journalism."

Others at Fox confirm there was intense pressure on the network by pro-Israeli lobbying groups, such as the Anti-Defamation League and the misnamed Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting (CAMERA).

"These charges are arrant nonsense unworthy of the usually reliable Fox News," CAMERA huffed in a Dec. 12 release.

Cameron reported Dec. 13 that federal agents were afraid to criticize Israel. "Investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying ... is considered career suicide."

Cameron told me in similar language that's what journalists also can face. And, what's clear is that Fox quickly removed the story from its Web site. (It was reposted this month by Fox after other media began showing interest in the story.)

After Cameron's initial reports, the story pretty much evaporated in the United States before Christmas. Then, all hell broke loose in the last few weeks. Intelligence Online in France obtained the same 60-page June 2001 federal report that CL has. The French Web site reported that 120 Israelis had by now been detained or deported by U.S. authorities.

Let's repeat that: 120 potential spies. This isn't worth press curiosity?

Few papers have given the story significant space. Many, like the AJC, haven't uttered a peep.

Some of what has seeped out is disturbing. The Oklahoman, prompted by the French articles, reported last week that 10 months ago four Israelis peddling artwork (but carrying military IDs) were detained near sensitive Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma. Le Monde in Paris recounted that six intercepted "students" had cell phones purchased by an Israeli vice consul in the United States. Sources told me that many of the phones had a walkie-talkie feature that was virtually impossible to intercept.

Bush administration shills were quick to try to spin the story -- perhaps to minimize damage should it turn out the government did have information in advance about the people or activities that led to the Sept. 11 attack. A Justice Department spokesperson, Susan Dryden, called the spy report an "urban myth," and other federal flacks trumpeted that no Israeli had been charged with or deported for spying. Of course, in the Great Game, "friendly" spies are seldom embarrassed by being called by their true colors. The Israelis who have been deported have been given the boot because of visa expirations and other minor violations.

The Washington Post, which apparently doesn't have the 60-page document, nonetheless reported March 6 that unnamed law enforcement officials had told the paper that a "disgruntled" DEA agent had compiled the report after other federal agencies didn't react to the Israelis' suspicious behavior. The Post, however, also quoted a DEA spokesman who acknowledged that the large number of incident reports had been combined into a draft memo. As with CL's inquiry, the DEA spokesman wouldn't confirm for the Post whether the memo was the 60-page document.

Predictably, Israeli Embassy spokesman Mark Reguev derided the Intelligence Online report as "nonsense."

And, pro-Israeli apologists such as anti-Arab ideologue Daniel Pipes quickly took the field with strident polemics. Pipes, who makes no claim of having seen the 60-page document, nonetheless claimed in a March 11 column that the story was a "dangerous falsehood" and that "U.S. journalists found not a shred of evidence to support" it.

The fact that reporters were beginning to piece together real shreds was blithely ignored by Pipes.

Israel in the past has belligerently denied wrongdoing until long after the truth was obvious. Israel claimed Jonathan Pollard -- a super spy who did horrendous, deadly damage to the United States until arrested in 1985 - wasn't an agent. And, Israel has stubbornly contended its 1967 attack on the USS Liberty, in which 35 American sailors were slaughtered, was an accident -- a lie exposed in recent reports including one last fall on the History Channel. A recent authoritative book, Body of Secrets, by James Bamford, concludes that National Security Agency officials "were virtually unanimous in their belief that the attack was deliberate."

With the purported art students, it's likely that denial will reach screeching levels. The Bush administration would find it difficult to explain why it either ignored or discounted such a large espionage operation."

Here's the full DEA report with supporting documents.

The four part Fox News TV series that got pulled is here.

Recently, the National Enquirer ran a story that "MI5 and Mossad are alleging that al Qaeda has planted weapons around the USA." Moshe Cohen, a non-Zionist Jew from New York reveals the strategy behind that poor attempt at population conditioning. The Mossad has a history of planting misleading rumors in the press prior to their attacks. Documentation for that claim appears in Mossad whistleblower Victor Ostrovsky's books, By Way of Deception and The Other Side of Deception. The Mossad is much more involved than distributing rumors. Check out this operation in which Ostrovsky documents how the Mossad actually engineereed false intelligence that resulted in the bombing of Libya. Notice the similarity to the Office of Special Plans that engineered the false intelligence on Iraq. Ostrovsky documented this pattern and predicted the destruction of Saddam back in the eighties and nineties:

"Ephraim had spelled it all out for me and confirmed some of the information I'd already known. He then went on. "After the bombing of Libya, our friend Qadhafi is sure to stay out of the picture for some time. Iraq and Saddam Hussein are the next target. We're starting now to build him up as the big villain. It will take some time, but in the end, there's no doubt it'll work."

"But isn't Saddam regarded as moderate toward us, allied with Jordan, the big enemy of Iran and Syria?"

"Yes, that's why I'm opposed to this action. But that's the directive, and I must follow it. Hopefully, you and I will be done with our little operation before anything big happens. After all, we have already destroyed his nuclear facility, and we are making money by selling hlm technology and equipment through South Africa."

In the following weeks, more and more discoveries were made regarding the big gun and other elements of the Saddam war machine. The Mossad had all but saturated the intelligence field with information regarding the evil intentions of Saddam the Terrible, banking on the fact that before long, he'd have enough rope to hang himself. It was very clear what the Mossad's overall goal was. It wanted the West to do its bidding, just as the Americans had in Libya with the bombing of Qadhafi. After all, Israel didn't possess carriers and ample air power, and although it was capable of bombing a refugee camp in Tunis, that was not the same. The Mossad leaders knew that if they could make Saddam appear bad enough and a threat to the Gulf oil supply, of which he'd been the protector up to that point, then the United States and its allies would not let him get away with anything, but would take measures that would all but eliminate his army and his weapons potential, especially if they were led to believe that this might just be their last chance before he went nuclear.

Ostrovsky knows that being famous keeps him alive."

Dick Cheney and other members of the Administration keep saying they "KNOW" there will be another terrorist attack. Maybe they have inside information. The top level of the US administration (Feith, Wolfowitz, Libby, Luti, Perle, Zakheim) has very close ties to Israel, some of them even being dual nationals. Perle, Wolfowitz and Feith have all either been caught or investigated spying for Israel.

Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski's pieces on the Israeli generals in Doug Feith's office reveal the extent of Israeli penetration at the Pentagon.

Here's a picture of one of the meetings between Paul Wolfowitz and Israeli Defense Chief Shaul Mofaz.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot the AIPAC spy probe. Two officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) were recently arrested distributing classified information from Larry Franklin, the Defense Intelligence Agency specialist on Iran. They've both now been fired, but shouldn't they be in custody?

Altogether, the QUANTITY of Israeli or dual nationals both in and out of government arrested spying and or possibly moving explosives (of the 120 Israeli nationals deported prior to 9/11, many were expert in explosives or signals intelligence (also check DEA report for confirmation) prior to and after 9/11 warrants a thorough investigation and interdiction. Especially given the high-level Israeli infiltration of the US civilian and military command.

Other links worth checking out:

1. Additional details linking Mossad to 9/11
2. Regarding a possible Israeli false flag attack on a US aircraft carrier
3. Daniel Hopsicker's archives
4. More info on the Israeli spyring
5. More info on Larry Silverstein, the Zionists and the WTC attacks
6. Latest article from Joseph Farah on Iran "nuclear threat"
7. Al Jazeera on Israel 911 Connection

Comment on Rense.com
From Pat
6-12-4

Hello again, Jeff. Am reading the article "Israeli Nationals, Nukes..." posted at your website. Do you know what is frighteningly close to Whitpain, PA? The Limerick Nuclear Power Facility.

http://www.nucleartourist.com/us/limerick.htm

You bet I want to know about this information. I live just outside of the evacuation zone and drive within spitting distance of the power plant weekly.

The link from the article on your website fails to mention the close proximity of Limerick to the Whitpain area where the suspects were detained. Thought you might want to know.

Addendum: Selections from a letter I wrote contains some additional evidence and analysis regarding the Zionist connection to 911.

Understanding Before Action
The Israeli Connection Must Be Understood
Calling Zionist Research Anti-Semitic Curtails Legitimate Inquiry

It is accepted among many with Jewish heritage who have done the research that the Jewish people themselves are one of the most common sacrificial lambs of the Zionists. Zionist political wolves, like their kind in all religions, do not care whose people are sacrificed on the march to Greater Israel. Witness the Masonic Pyramid with the all-seeing Eye (top left in photo) on top of the Supreme Court of Israel:

My understanding is that the Masonic Pyramid is a New World Order symbol that looks towards a day when "they" control the globe from the top of their pyramid. It even says New World Order under the Masonic Pyramid on the US dollar bill. Whether the New World Order is Zionist or British or transnational or American is beside the point. The Israeli Supreme Court Building, designed and paid for by the central banker Rothschilds, promotes it. Those on the receiving end of Globalization now have a terrific advocate in John Perkins, whose new book, Confessions of an Economic Hitman exposes Globalization and the New World Order for what it really is: a transnational, transreligious, corporate crime syndicate whose major criminal enterprises are known as banks, intelligence services and "Defense" departments.

According to Andreas von Bulow, the former German Parliamentarian with whom Mike Ruppert has appeared in Germany:

Von Bulow told AFP that he believes that the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad, is behind the September 11 terror attacks. These attacks, he said, were carried out to turn public opinion against the Arabs, and boost military and security spending...At this level, he said, the organization doing the planning, such as Mossad, is primarily interested in affecting public opinion. The architectural level planners use corrupt "guns for hire" such as Abu Nidal, the Palestinian terrorist who von Bulow called "an instrument of Mossad," high-ranking Stasi (former East German secret service) operatives, or Libyan agents who organize terror attacks using dedicated people, for example Palestinian and Arab "freedom fighters." The terrorists who actually commit the crimes are what von Bulow calls "the working level," such as the 19 Arabs who allegedly hijacked the planes on September 11. "The working level is part of the deception," he said. "Ninety-five percent of the work of the intelligence agencies around the world is deception and disinformation," von Bulow said, which is widely propagated in the mainstream media creating an accepted version of events. "Journalists don't even raise the simplest questions," he said adding, "those who differ are labeled as crazy."

Just as important is the Zionist ideology, well summarized by Yitzhak Shamir, former Israeli Prime Minister:

"Neither Jewish morality nor Jewish tradition can be used to disallow terror as a means of war... We are very far from any moral hesitations when concerned with the national struggle. First and foremost, terror is for us a part of the political war appropriate for the circumstances of today..."

These documents should convince any intelligent reader of the importance of examining the possible Zionist connection to the 9/11 terror attacks. There is much more evidence, and those with questions and interest in additional documentation are welcome to request it. Equating legitimate research and critique of those shielding Zionists from public inquiry using the canard of anti-semitism is a typical attack of people who, ironically, are unashamedly racist, anti-Arab and in some cases as documented in the Talmud, anti-Gentile. Instead, those same people should be denouncing the racist Zionist doctrines and distancing themself from Jewish religious teachings that promote or allow racism.