Saturday, March 31, 2007

Ex-Partner Of Giuliani May Face Charges

Kerik Counts Said To Include Deception During Cabinet Bid

By John Solomon and Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, March 31, 2007; A01

Federal prosecutors have told Bernard B. Kerik, whose nomination as homeland security secretary in 2004 ended in scandal, that he is likely to be charged with several felonies, including tax evasion and conspiracy to commit wiretapping.

Kerik's indictment could set the stage for a courtroom battle that would draw attention to Kerik's extensive business and political dealings with former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who personally recommended him to President Bush for the Cabinet. Giuliani, the front-runner for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination according to most polls, later called the recommendation a mistake.

Kerik rose from being a warden and police detective to become Giuliani's campaign security adviser, corrections chief, police commissioner and eventual partner in Giuliani-Kerik, a security arm of Giuliani Partners, which Giuliani established after leaving office in 2001. Kerik resigned his positions in Giuliani's firm after he was nominated to the homeland security job.

The former mayor is not in any legal jeopardy, according to legal sources directly familiar with the investigation, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the inquiry is ongoing. He and his consulting firm have cooperated in the FBI's long-running investigation of Kerik.

During a recent meeting, federal prosecutors told Kerik's attorneys that they are preparing to charge Kerik with filing false information to the government when Bush nominated him to the Cabinet, according to the legal sources.

Prosecutors are also prepared to charge Kerik with violating federal tax laws, alleging that he did not declare on his tax returns gifts he received while serving as New York's corrections commissioner, including costly renovations to an apartment he had bought, the sources said. The FBI is investigating loans Kerik received while he was in private business with Giuliani, the sources said, as well as information Kerik had omitted from a mortgage application.

Kerik turned down last month an offer to plead guilty to federal charges that would have required him to serve prison time. His attorney, Kenneth Breen, said in an interview that his client had done nothing wrong.

"He's not going to plead to something that he didn't do," Breen said.

The case against Kerik that federal prosecutors are preparing could generate uncomfortable political attention for Giuliani because it focuses on Kerik's activities while the two men were in government together and were jointly running Giuliani-Kerik, which was paid millions of dollars for advising upstart companies, doing federal work and consulting with clients overseas.

Even as Giuliani prepared to announce his presidential bid, his political team had identified as a political liability the man who had stood stoically by the mayor's side after the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center, according to a strategy memo that surfaced in January.

Kerik's legal troubles could damage the law-and-order image that is the bedrock of Giuliani's campaign, said Republican political consultant Nelson Warfield, who is not aligned with any 2008 candidate. "Kerik has potential to undermine his image as a competent leader and someone best fit to fight terrorism," Warfield said. "Either he had fundamentally bad information about Kerik, or he was reckless in not knowing enough about a man who was that close to him."

Last night, Giuliani's office declined to comment on Kerik, instead referring a reporter to remarks the former mayor made earlier this week in Teaneck, N.J. "I hope, when people evaluate me, they evaluate the things that I think I did that were wrong and that were mistakes and the things that I did that were right, and I think the public record has been one largely of great success," Giuliani said then.

In addition to charges involving false information and tax law, the U.S. attorney's office in New York City is also threatening to charge Kerik with conspiracy to commit illegal wiretapping in his dealings with the 2006 GOP candidate for New York attorney general, Jeanine F. Pirro, the sources said.

After Kerik left the Giuliani firm, Kerik arranged for two off-duty Giuliani firm employees to conduct surveillance on Pirro's husband. Pirro and Kerik also discussed bugging a boat where Pirro suspected her husband was having an extramarital affair. Kerik was heard on a wiretap telling Pirro that he did not want to do the bugging because it was illegal.

About a year earlier, Pirro, then the Westchester County district attorney, ordered the A&P supermarket chain to hire the Giuliani-Kerik security firm as part of a settlement agreement in a case involving underage alcohol sales. The security firm was ultimately paid $43,000, according to a knowledgeable source who spoke about the terms of the contract on the condition of anonymity.

Kerik's legal team has signaled its plan to fight any federal indictment, initiating an internal appeal to Justice Department officials about the possible tax charges -- a move that could delay any indictment for at least several weeks, the legal sources said.

Giuliani and Kerik first met in 1990 at a dinner for a fallen police officer, while Kerik was a narcotics detective. Three years later, Giuliani asked Kerik to be his driver and his mayoral campaign's advance man. After Giuliani was elected, he tapped Kerik to advise his corrections commissioner. Within a year, Kerik had become the commissioner, and his performance helped him become the city's top police official.

Kerik met Bush in the rubble of the World Trade Center. In 2003, he was dispatched by the Bush administration to Iraq to work with the Coalition Provisional Authority, which was helping train and organize a new Iraqi police force. His work in Iraq won personal accolades from the president.

After Bush was reelected, he nominated Kerik to be the nation's second secretary of homeland security.

But a week after his nomination, Kerik was forced to withdraw his name from consideration. The stated reason was his failure to pay Social Security taxes for a nanny. But other issues had also surfaced, including favors he did for romantic partners -- he once dispatched a homicide detective to find his girlfriend's lost cellphone -- and more serious legal concerns.

Within months, Kerik faced New York state charges -- to which he later pleaded guilty -- that he accepted nearly $200,000 in gifts while a public official -- including more than $165,000 spent on renovations to his apartment. The money came from companies affiliated with a New Jersey outfit that federal authorities and state gambling regulators had linked to organized crime.

In the fall of 2005, Kerik asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in refusing to answer questions before a New Jersey gaming regulatory body about his relationship to the people involved in the apartment renovations.

The contract with A&P was one of many deals -- some much more lucrative -- that the Giuliani-Kerik firm arranged using the partners' extensive political connections. The work included a Justice Department contract and multimillion-dollar consulting arrangements with business clients in the technology and security sectors worldwide.

In some cases, Giuliani and Kerik simultaneously advised a private company and the federal agency whose actions could affect it. Giuliani's firm, for instance, was hired by Purdue Pharma to help figure out how to keep sales of its popular painkiller OxyContin from being restricted by the government; street dealers were crushing and converting it into a powerful narcotic offering an instant high. Kerik was personally named to oversee security improvements at a New Jersey manufacturing plant.

At the same time, the Justice Department paid Giuliani-Kerik $1.1 million to conduct a management review of the organized-crime drug task force, whose responsibilities included stemming illegal use of OxyContin.

Likewise, Giuliani, Kerik and other firm partners were hired by cellphone carrier Nextel to win Federal Communications Commission approval for a new, emergency-only wireless spectrum for first responders.

The idea was to solve one problem for Nextel -- it had long been subject to complaints that its wireless signal sometimes interfered with the communications channels used by police, fire and rescue officials -- while creating an even stronger business opportunity for the cellular carrier.

At the same time, Giuliani's firm was brought in by the FCC to participate in a panel that was advising the agency in its efforts to address the future needs of a police, fire and rescue communications system in the aftermath of Sept. 11.

Liberating America From Israel

Saturday, March 31, 2007

Liberating America From Israel by Paul Findley

(written a year after 9-11)

NOTE: Mr. Paul Findley, who served as a Republican congressman from Illinois for 22 years, is the author of 'They Dare to Speak Out' and a member of the American Educational Trust's Foreign Relations Committee.

Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S. government had refused to help Israel humiliate and destroy Palestinian society. Few express this conclusion publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe the catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S. president during the past 35 years had had the courage and wisdom to suspend all U.S. aid until Israel withdrew from the Arab land seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

Nothing can justify 9/11. Those guilty deserve maximum punishment, but it makes sense for America to examine motivations promptly and as carefully as possible. Terrorism almost always arises from deeply-felt grievances. If they can be eradicated or eased, terrorist passions are certain to subside.

No one in authority will admit a calamitous reality that is skillfully shielded from the American people but clearly recognized by most of the world: America suffered 9/11 and its aftermath and may soon be at war with Iraq, mainly because U.S. policy in the Middle East is made in Israel, not in Washington.
read all at link above.

Here's an opinion of Former President Carter's recent book,
"Palestine: Peace not Apartheid," titled, "Carter enters Lion's Den."
Despite criticism, his book is work of a true patriot by Paul Findley. From Chicago Tribune, February,2007.

Is U.S. Government 'Outsourcing Its Brain'?

Someone from MITRE is a regular reader of this blog. Now you know where thet get the brains. :)
---
By Bernard Wysocki Jr.
Companies Featured in This Article: Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Dow Jones

TYSONS CORNER, Va. -- The moment visitors arrive in the lobby of the campuslike headquarters of Mitre Corp., they're asked: Do you have a national-security clearance?

If the answer is yes, Mitre's receptionists tap a few computer keys to verify. If it's no, the visitor gets a special badge and a constant escort. It's the sort of scrutiny one might expect at the Defense Department or a U.S. intelligence agency.

Mitre is one step from that: a private company with one major client, the U.S. government. Mitre does high-tech engineering and other computer work for the Pentagon, various intelligence agencies ...

Excerpts

One flashpoint today is whether contractors hire other contractors without enough controls or competition. In March, Rep. Waxman introduced a bill that would put limits on contracts awarded without competitive bidding. It passed the House by a wide margin and is raising fears among contractors that it could dent their growth. Federal procurement is already expected to slow because of budget constraints and the slowing of the post-9/11 spending boom.

Rep. Waxman's staff, in a Feb. 8 memo, said that "at least one contractor hired to engage in contract oversight on the border project, Booz Allen Hamilton, may have a conflict of interest with Boeing Co.," the prime contractor. Booz Allen has done consulting work for Boeing and has been a member of the Boeing team on other contracts.

Ralph Shrader, chief executive at Booz Allen, flatly denies the charge. "I take the greatest exception to the idea of conflict of interest," Dr. Shrader says, adding that Booz Allen is doing "support" and "coordination" work on behalf of the government, and doesn't "oversee" Boeing. He adds that Booz Allen has for decades taken pains to avoid conflicts of interest, and has a rigorous process to avoid such conflicts. (Dow Jones & Co., publisher of The Wall Street Journal, has hired Booz Allen to help the company with its news strategy.)

Call that humiliation?

No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch.

Terry Jones
Saturday March 31, 2007
The Guardian


I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are.

It is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our captives, they wouldn't be able to talk at all. Of course they'd probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over their head - but at least they wouldn't be humiliated.

And what's all this about allowing the captives to write letters home saying they are all right? It's time the Iranians fell into line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That's one of the many privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay.

The true mark of a civilised country is that it doesn't rush into charging people whom it has arbitrarily arrested in places it's just invaded. The inmates of Guantánamo, for example, have been enjoying all the privacy they want for almost five years, and the first inmate has only just been charged. What a contrast to the disgraceful Iranian rush to parade their captives before the cameras!

What's more, it is clear that the Iranians are not giving their British prisoners any decent physical exercise. The US military make sure that their Iraqi captives enjoy PT. This takes the form of exciting "stress positions", which the captives are expected to hold for hours on end so as to improve their stomach and calf muscles. A common exercise is where they are made to stand on the balls of their feet and then squat so that their thighs are parallel to the ground. This creates intense pain and, finally, muscle failure. It's all good healthy fun and has the bonus that the captives will confess to anything to get out of it.

And this brings me to my final point. It is clear from her TV appearance that servicewoman Turney has been put under pressure. The newspapers have persuaded behavioural psychologists to examine the footage and they all conclude that she is "unhappy and stressed".

What is so appalling is the underhand way in which the Iranians have got her "unhappy and stressed". She shows no signs of electrocution or burn marks and there are no signs of beating on her face. This is unacceptable. If captives are to be put under duress, such as by forcing them into compromising sexual positions, or having electric shocks to their genitals, they should be photographed, as they were in Abu Ghraib. The photographs should then be circulated around the civilised world so that everyone can see exactly what has been going on.

As Stephen Glover pointed out in the Daily Mail, perhaps it would not be right to bomb Iran in retaliation for the humiliation of our servicemen, but clearly the Iranian people must be made to suffer - whether by beefing up sanctions, as the Mail suggests, or simply by getting President Bush to hurry up and invade, as he intends to anyway, and bring democracy and western values to the country, as he has in Iraq.

· Terry Jones is a film director, actor and Python
www.terry-jones.net

Related
Brits in the Gulf and a Doctored British Map? - UPDATED
Easter Surprise: Attack on Iran, New 9/11… or Worse - UPDATED

Allegations that Lord Levy is suffering anti-semitism divide British Jews

Related
Top U.K. official was buying influence, honours, and key government positions in return for generous donations from his lobby group, the Labour Friends of Israel.
---
Susannah Tarbush Al-Hayat - 31/03/07//

The "cash for honours" scandal has taken an ugly turn with allegations from some leading British Jews that a central figure in the scandal, the Labour Party's chief fundraiser Lord Michael Levy, is being targeted because he is a prominent Jew - in other words, that Lord Levy is suffering anti-semitism. But some other Jews strongly reject suggestions that anti-semitism is involved.

In addition to his fundraising role, the unelected Levy is also Prime Minister Tony Blair's personal envoy to the Middle East. He has been arrested twice in the year-long police investigations into whether there was an attempt to "sell" honours in return for secret loans to the Labour Party, and whether some of Blair's staff in Downing Street have tried to cover this up, thereby perverting the course of justice.

Four businessmen who loaned Labour more than £5 million for the 2005 election campaign were nominated for peerages (ie membership of the House of Lords). In all, Labour secretly raised £14 million in secret loans from 12 rich businessmen. Blair himself has been interviewed twice by police, but is thought unlikely to face charges himself.

Matters have grown particularly serious for Lord Levy following the leaking of a document from Blair's director of government relations Ruth Turner, addressed to Blair's chief of staff Jonathan Powell. In the document Turner complains that Lord Levy had asked her to "lie" for him in the police investigations. Like Lord Levy, Turner has been arrested twice during the police investigations. According to the Sunday Times, Lord Levy asked Blair's senior staff in Downing Street to lie to police by saying he had no involvement in the honours system.

Lord Levy issued a statement through his lawyers vehemently denying he has done anything wrong and saying that media reports "which are said to be based on leaked material under consideration by the police are partial, contradictory, confused and inaccurate." It is known that Lord Levy feels betrayed by the Labour Party and by those who are leaking negative material about him.

Lord Levy's rabbi, Yitzchak Schochet, told Channel 4 news: "I know the Jewish community is becoming increasingly more sensitive that there's one Jew seemingly being hung out to dry here." Schochet, who is rabbi at the north London synagogue Lord Levy attends, told the Daily Telegraph that "anti-semitic forces" are out to "get" Levy.

The editor of the weekly Jewish Chronicle newspaper, David Rowan, compares Levy to the fictional financier Augustus Melmotte in the novel "The Way We Live Now" by the 19th century novelist Anthony Trollope. Melmotte funds politics and rises high within the political establishment and high society, but after his downfall he is ostracised and cast aside by his former friends and poisons himself. But Rowan points out that unlike Lord Levy, Melmotte was a swindler.

Rowan told BBC Radio Four's Today programme that the readers of the Jewish Chronicle are concerned that media coverage of Lord Levy seems to "glorify" in aspects of the case that are Jewish. "A reader yesterday wanted to know why some of the newspapers, the Daily Mail in particular, had to inform us that his middle name is Abraham, his parents were devout Jews, and that he first met the prime minister at a party thrown by the Israel Embassy, when we hear nothing about Ruth Turner or Jonathan Powell's middle names or their religious affiliation."

The readers of the Jewish Chronicle are also concerned that for those inside Downing Street, in whose interest it is to distance themselves from Lord Levy, it is all very convenient to play into this "traditional narrative of the Jewish moneyman who comes in from outside and makes a convenient scapegoat." There is "a very convenient, neat little pattern to push Lord Levy into".

Rowan mentioned in this respect Sir Eric Miller, the property developer who helped run the office of Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson and who "committed suicide one day of atonement" and Joseph Kagan, the industrialist who manufactured the Gannex raincoats Wilson wore, and was made a Lord by Wilson. (At the time of his suicide in 1977 Miller was under police investigation for corruption, while Lord Kagan was sent to prison for 10 months in 1980 for stealing from his own companies).

The Guardian newspaper columnist Jonathan Freedland has written that many in Britain's Jewish community have long detected "old fashioned prejudice" in the media descriptions of Lord Levy as a "flamboyant, north London businessman".

The Board of Deputies of British Jews, the community's main representative body, has also sought to defend Lord Levy. The board's chief executive, Jon Benjamin, issued a press release saying that the media should "exercise extreme caution in order to make sure that anti-Semitic stereotypes do not creep into characterisation of Jewish public figures, especially where money is concerned." Journalists should show "the same care in portraying prominent Jews" as they do in covering public figures from other minorities.

But certain other prominent Jews, including some who repeatedly warn of a rise in anti-Semitism in Britain, are highly critical of claims that Lord Levy is being subjected to anti-Semitism. A former president of the Board of Deputies, Dr Lionel Kopelowitz, attacked the board's press release. He told the Jewish Chronicle: "There was no need to issue any such statement because there is no Jewish issue here whatsoever. Why did they send one out?"
The columnist, broadcaster and author Melanie Phillips, who is one of the most vocal British supporters of Israel, wrote in her online diary: "It is to be hoped that this weekend the congregants of Mill Hill synagogue in London will sit on their rabbi Yitzhak Schochet, and wind several yards of tape around the area between his nose and his chin." She added that to say Lord Levy is "the victim of 'anti-semitism' when he is at the centre of an ongoing police investigation in which he has been arrested and bailed is simply outrageous. There is not a shred of evidence to support such an allegation. If Lord Levy is in trouble, this has nothing to do with his ethnic identity."

Phillips warned that the implication that the Jewish community is "circling the wagons" to protect one of their own who is under investigation by the police is "simply appalling. It could also not be more damaging. Have these people really no brain at all? Don't they understand the harm they have done?"

She added: "At a time when there is not only an upsurge of real anti-Jewish prejudice, but the odious claim is made that any Jew who draws attention to it is crying wolf in an attempt to manipulate the agenda to their advantage, for the community to be seen to be doing just that over Lord Levy makes a bad situation even more difficult and leaves British Jews even more exposed than ever."

The columnist and comment editor of the Times newspaper, Daniel Finkelstein, wrote that Rabbi Schochet was making "a terrible error. If you start hinting at anti-Semitism whenever a Jew is in trouble you undermine the very idea. You make people wary of real claims, ones justified by the evidence." Finkelstein asked whether Lord Levy is in the spotlight because he is a Jew, "hung out to dry" because he is the only Jew involved, and whether anti-semitism is the position he finds himself in. Finkelstein answered "no no no no no no no" (seven times in all), adding: "There's enough genuine anti-Semitism about. And it is difficult enough to make people take it seriously."

The commentator Stephen Pollard wrote on his blog: "I screamed 'shut up' when I heard the rabbi. Yes, there have been some traces of anti-Semitism in some of the coverage." However, the basis of the affair is alleged corruption and alleged interference with the investigation into that corruption.

Pollard adds: "It happens that one of the people arrested is Jewish. If the Rabbi thinks Lord Levy would not have been arrested if he was an Anglican, or was only arrested because he is Jewish, then he is living in a parallel universe." He warned that when people throw the label anti-Semitic around without any basis "in fact they play into the hands of those real anti-Semites."

Certainly the alleged growth of anti-semitism in Britain is currently a highly sensitive issue. It is not uncommon for critics of Israeli policies to be accused of anti-semitism. Last September a group of prominent MPs presented to Blair at a meeting at Downing Street the report on their 10-month inquiry into anti-semitism in Britain. The report noted an increase in physical and verbal abuse against Jews in Britain, and alleged that "rage" over Israeli policies had sometimes "provided a pretext" for anti-semitism. It condemned moves by academics and others to boycott links with Israel.

It is often said that the British, for example the "chattering classes" at dinner parties, indulge in a particular form of anti-semitism which is difficult to prove and takes the form of "a nudge and a wink".

The then longest-serving Labour MP in the House of Commons Tam Dalyell caused outrage in May 2003 with his statement in an interview with Vanity Fair magazine that Blair is "unduly influenced by a cabal of Jewish advisers" including Lord Levy, Peter Mandelson and Jack Straw (the latter two do not consider themselves Jewish although they have some Jewish ancestry). Dalyell denied he was anti-semitic, but his statement is often cited as an example of anti-semitism in Britain.

Much of the media, including the BBC, has taken the allegations of anti-semitism against Lord Levy seriously and have reported and investigated them. BBC Radio Four's Today programme interviewed at length a friend of Lord Levy's, the Jewish businessman Sir Alan Sugar.
Sugar said Levy was a scapegoat who has "been set up as a bad guy" in the cash for honours affair. He spoke of Levy's "blind devotion for Tony Blair who he claims is his friend , and looking at the newspaper and television reports at the moment, with friends like him [Blair] you don't need any enemies." Sir Alan said he has a lot of respect for Blair and thinks he has been a "great prime minister and a decent man", but Blair will "go down in my estimation if he allows this nonsense to continue in respect to Levy, because Levy raised a lot of money for his party and assisted him to get elected."

Asked whether there is an anti-semitic angle to some of the media coverage of Lord Levy, Sir Alan said: "The major newspaper that has continually 'hounded' Levy is the Daily Mail. It's a paper which has been accused in the past of being tough on ethnic minorities such as the Jews or the Asians. "
But rather than agreeing that Lord Levy is being subjected to anti-semitism, Sugar said: "personally, I would steer away from the anti-semitism thing. "

Why we're in Iraq

The case is prepared

Israeli media denials of past army war crimes are easily countered, writes Ibrahim Nafie

Israel's media is denying the killing of Egyptian prisoners of war (POWs) at the hands of the Shaked Commando unit in 1967. It says that the documentary shown on Israeli television has no mention of POWs, that those killed were mainly guerrillas, and that Egypt's media and parliamentarians are blowing the matter out of proportion for political reasons.

I beg to differ. The killing of Israeli POWs is not a new thing and several Egyptian groups and organisations have brought it up repeatedly in the past. Also, Israeli commanders have admitted to the killing of Egyptian POWs in both the 1956 and 1967 wars. Even in the 1973 war, there is a possibility that the same thing happened again. So this is not a political matter. It is a legal issue that needs to be dealt with under international law and in keeping with the Geneva Conventions. We're not trying to score political points nor do we wish this matter to impact on the diplomatic ties or peace treaty between Egypt and Israel.

Arabs Against Discrimination (ADD) keeps records of all the crimes committed by Israel against the Palestinians and the Lebanese. The ADD has extensive files on these crimes and is willing to offer them to any authority pursuing the matter legally.

When Israel's Channel One aired The Shaked Spirit -- the documentary containing these allegations of war crimes -- the ADD recorded the film and translated it into Arabic. It also obtained a copy of the book on which the documentary was based and translated it to Arabic. The ADD is also archiving Israeli reactions to the case that may also help any authority pursuing legal action.

The ADD files establish beyond reasonable doubt that the Shaked Commandos, led by Benyamin Ben Eliezer, killed Egyptian POWs. The book on which the documentary was based is called The Shaked Unit: Prevention and Current Security in the History of the Israeli Army. It was written by Uri Milstein and Dov Doron and was published in 1994. It contains numerous testimonies indicating that Egyptian POWs were killed during the 1967 war.

One member of the Shaked Commando unit, Yehuda Malamid, says: "Each time we got a report that Egyptians were hiding in the sand, we landed from the plane near them and liquidated them. Some of them were carrying weapons and others perhaps hid their weapons when they saw us. We killed no less than 250 in three days."

nother member of the same unit says, "we had to liquidate them before they turn into a fifth column in Gaza. Light aircraft were used to locate them and alert helicopters. We killed many of them without batting an eyelid." The book, the film, and the live testimony of Egyptian survivors offer ample evidence in the case. I would therefore suggest that an Egyptian committee of experts be formed to follow up on the matter. The ADD is in a position to provide it with all the documents it may need.

© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved

Al-Ahram Weekly Online