TBRNews.org

TBR News August 11, 2006

Notice! Our new security system prevents email messages coming through the AOL server from being delivered to our address. This is because of the probability of unwelcome and problematical attachments to messages from this source, coupled with the fact that AOL’s voluntary cooperation with various American, and foreign, law enforcement groups makes contact with them in any form a risky business. Correspondents wishing to contact TBR News are suggested to use another server. To prevent unwanted correspondence from this source, simply put ‘aol.com’ on your block list. Ed. Announcing TBR Ebooks! Starting with a new publication concerning the background behind the 9/11 attacks, TBR News will be presenting a series of interesting, informative and definitive works for our readers. Future titles will include the complete Voice of the White House with much more added material that was considered too controversial to post, the heavily-censored Armenian Holocaust of 1916, the Bush-Lay private correspondence, the Assassination of JFK,Pearl Harbor intrigues and rare documents, Malaparte’s inside study of the making of revolution, sensational selected articles from the German Rudolf historical revision files, unpublished before Rudolf’s arrest and forced deportation to Germany, World War II studies of holocaust history, taken from secret German files and much more. Please see the title page for more information. The Editors Descending Into Darkness: The Harring Report A well-researched study into the background of the 9/11 attack: Who knew what and when did they know it. Russian and German intelligence material, not published before show that the U.S. had ample warning...and did nothing about it. THE VOICE OF THE WHITE HOUSE The full collection of the twice-weekly commentary of what is really going on inside the corrupt Bush White House. The spectrum includes the Gannon scandal, the planned invasion of Iran, many stories of stupidity and corruption coupled with biting sarcasm. Interesting to note that many, if not most, of the predictions have come true. REGICIDE The Official Assassination of John F. Kennedy A landmark book that sold very well in hardback, this work contains actual intelligence documents concerning the inside U.S. plans to kill Kennedy; the reasons, the methods and the results. The Final Reckoning: An Analysis of Demographics in Holocaust Literature By Harold Kreig, Lt.Col, AUS ret. This is the first rational, heavily documented work on the subject of the Holocaust. Colonel Krieg has taken thousands of documents, including the official SS concentration camp records from 1935 through 1945 and official U.S. government postwar analysis of the system and the casualties and causes of death and produced a book that is highly informative and readable. Heavily footnoted and annotated, ‘The Final Reckoning’ is logical and compelling and is an historical work that should be read through by any student of the period and subject. Coup D’Etat: The Technique Of Revolution By Curzio Malaparte First published in Italy by Curzio Malaparte in 1928, this is a seminal work on historical seizures of power from Napoleon through Hitler. Gestapo-Chief: The CIA & Heinrich Müller by Gregory Douglas In 1948, the former head of Hitelr’s Gestapo was interviewed by senior officials of the CIA in Switzerland where Müller had been in hiding since the end of the Second World War. His interview, for Colonel James Critchfield of the CIA’s Gehlen Organization, runs to nearly a thousand pages and for years was hidden in the CIA’s files. This is a translation of a part of the interview, which was initially conducted in German and then translated into English for CIA use. It is a fascinating series of historical episodes covering both the Axis and Allied sides with comments on Hitler, Stalin, Roosevelt, Henry Wallace, Winston Churchill, the 20^th of July bomb plot against Hitler, Bishop von Galen’s heroic, and successful, attacks on the Nazis and their euthanasia program, the concentration camps, the Duke of Windsor, the Roger Casement diaries and many more fascinating and insightful views of a man who ran the most effective counter-intelligence agency in modern times. There is also extensive information on the attempts on the part of the CIA to silence or discredit the fact that the Gestapo Chief worked for the United States and eventually came to live in Washington, D.C. as part of the notorious “Operation Paperclip.” Fascinating inside views of many top Nazis and CIA officials. The CIA COvenant: Nazis in Washington by Gregory Douglas * From the end of World War II, the American CIA imported thousands of Nazis into the United States to work for them, many on the list of wanted war criminals One of the most important of these was Heinrich Mueller, once head of Hitler's Gestapo. Mueller was recruited by Colonel James Critchfield who ran the CIA's "Gehnel Organization' in Munich. Mueller kept journals and this book is a translation of three years (1948-1951) of notes and observations made of top CIA officials, President Truman, top U.S. government officials, plans for murder, thefts, kidnappings, wholesale thefts of public money and a terrifying pattern of uncontrolled ambition, unchecked by any person or agency. * Also included are CIA and other agency's activities that have never been revealed. Mueller's deals in stolen Nazi art for the CIA are covered in detail. Also to be found are the steps the frightened CIA have taken to prevent the publication, sales or distribution of this work. An Essay on the Principle of Population by Thomas Malthus The 1798 classic study of how supplies of food do not keep up with an expanding population Malthus' theory is that population growth is geometric while the food supply increase is arithmetic. A very literate and current study that clearly highlights present and current population problems With the world's population higher than ever before, this is a work of great and current interest CONSPIRACIES for Fun and Profit Contents The Evil Catholics Murdered Abraham Lincoln TWA Flight 800: The Gathering of the Nuts The Real Truth About the Kennedy Assassination! The Great 9-11 Plot Who is Sorcha Faal? The Bush Indictments Faked Conspiracy photos The Sinking of the MV Estonia The German Guy and the Destruction of Houston The Great Contrail Conspiracy Planet X Remote Viewing unveiled Notice! Our new security system prevents email messages coming through the AOL server from being delivered to our address. This is because of the probability of unwelcome and problematical attachments to messages from this source, coupled with the fact that AOL’s voluntary cooperation with various American, and foreign, law enforcement groups makes contact with them in any form a risky business. Correspondents wishing to contact TBR News are suggested to use another server. Ed. “As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people, On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken “That we are to stand by the president, right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” -Theodore Roosevelt “Mass movements do not usually rise until the prevailing order has been discredited. The discrediting is not an automatic result of the blunders and abuses of those in power, but the deliberate work of men of words with a grievance.” -Eric Hoffer The True Believer In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. America’s Enemies! There are four entities who represent the most dangerous enemies to American liberties since George III. They are: 1. The Neocons or Likudists who owe their personal allegiance to another country and now completely control our foreign policy. They lied and deceived us into the Iraq war and are demanding that more and more American soldiers die to preserve their own country and ideals. 2. The Christian Evangelical right who is trying to force the United States into becoming a theocracy under their rule. They know in their hearts that they alone can restructure a secular humanist America into their idea of Heaven on Earth. 3. An element of American society that call themselves Patriots and are obsessively militaristic and great admirers of the corporate or fascistic state. Many of these have been very minor members of the American military and as a counterbalance to their reserve or rear area tours of duty, are rabidly in favor of draconian military action, the bloodier the better. Usually these drumbeaters are too old, or too fat, to fight and have no sons of draft age. 4. George W. Bush, who is the worst president in the history of the United States and directly responsible for the huge death tolls in Iraq, is determined to rule the United States until God puts a stop to him and is even more determined to force the American people into becoming obedient, Christian and self-sacrificing lemmings who worship at his shrine and march in step. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes The Voice of the White House Washington, D.C., August 10, 2006: “Here, as promised, is an interesting conversation that somehow accidentally got intercepted and transcribed. There are lots more where this came from!” Transcription of telephone conversation on August 3, 2006 from Israeli Embassy, Washington D.C. Telephone Number (202) 364-5582. to unidentified individual at AIPAC, Washington D.C., Telephone Number (202) 639-5201 Commenced 1821 hrs, concluded 1826 hrs. Speaker A Reuven Azar - Counselor for Political Affairs, Embassy of Israel Speaker B Unidentified individual located at AIPAC headquarters A. Well, things are going as well as expected, better perhaps than expected. There is military progress there (Lebanon) and we have wonderful cooperation here. B. For sure, but don’t forget the dangers in having too much cooperation. All right for this moment but in the long run, this can certainly backfire on us. You know, we are seen as being too much influential with the Bush people. A. I wouldn’t worry too much about that. The media is certainly not to worry about and most Americans really do not care about things there (Lebanon) The main point is that by the time the U.S. makes itself felt at the UN, we will have accomplished our goals and established the buffer we need. B. Absolutely but…there is still the future to think about. A. Who cares? Once we establish the buffer, the rest is just shit. It will all be hidden soon in the coming press reports of Arab ‘attacks’ on the U.S. This is for the voting in November. You know, ‘many Arab groups will for sure attack American targets.’ They (the U.S. Government) will choose so-called target areas where they need the most support. We don’t need to worry about Miami, Skokie or Beverly Hills after all. (Laughter) and this is a little crude but the public here is terribly stupid and the warning color days worked before, didn’t they? B. Yes, but there are second thoughts on all of that. If you go to the well too often, there are problems. People lose interest. A. The British are being such swine about this, aren’t they? They are causing trouble about the bombs these days. B. Just a few troublemakers. The press here does not cover that and who reads the foreign media? Most Americans can’t read anyway. But there is danger that the U.N. might be motivated to move a peace keeping force into Lebanon and this might negate our purposes. Hesbollah must be utterly wiped out and Syria must be made to realize…with force if necessary…that it cannot supply the terrorists with more Iranian rockets. Maybe an accidental airstrike on Syrian military units could say to them to mind their own business. We have done this before. A. It is too bad that we cannot teach Tehran a lesson. The ultimate goal would be to have America attack Iran but I am afraid the American military is dead set against this… B. They are all Jew-haters up there. A. For sure but we know that Americans can bomb the shit out of Tehran and hopefully kill off a number of the militants, probably disrupt their atomic program and teach all of the area that the U.S. means business. We support them, they support us. But they cannot send in ground troops and if we did that, our losses would not be borne at home. As it is, there are the usual malcontents bleating about the Lebanon business. B. They are just afraid they will get a rocket on their house and there are the same ones here. The Lieberman business is not that good, after all. Yes, of course he is a liberal Democrat but his support of us is too obvious. He could be a little critical too. We see the Bush people doing this, just to keep the people quiet. Yes, they say, see, we too are actually critical of Israel…. A. But not too critical, right? B. No, never that. Too many pictures of dead jerks for example. We need to see more pictures of grieving Israelis, mourning lost sons and children. Can’t we get more of those? Fuck the Arabs. A. I feel sorry for the American mediA. Their instincts are to defend dead Arab children… B. But nits make lice, don’t they? Who mourns dead Israeli children? A. I’m sure there would be more on this but not enough children are dead. B. Not yet, anyway. But if they rocket Tel Aviv… A. Well, then, for sure. B. We should have pictures all ready if that happens. Do you think it will? A. Tehran directs that part of the business. We don’t have as much inside gen on them there… B. The fucking Russians are on their side. A. We have always had trouble with those Slavic pricks. First weapons… B. The Chinese assholes also do this, don’t forget. A. No one around here will forget that, be assured. The time will come when we get them too. Say we cut off their oil from the Gulf? What then? They will dance to our tunes then, not Tehran’s. B. If we had oil… A. But we do not. The filthy Putin has the oil. They should get rid of him while they are at it. Our people almost had it but he forced them out. B. They can always come back. The people here would really support this. We put our people back in after we get rid of Putin and then a guaranteed flow of oil to America. A. And Russia is off the chessboard too. B. They all want that badly here, too. Cheney is the strongest supporter of cutting the nuts off of RussiA. The military here are against fishing in troubled waters. A. They can’t be replaced, Bush can’t sack them all. B. Set an example. Sack a few more of the assholes and the rest will shut up. They always do. So, send me your latest list and I’ll see what I can do here. A .Send someone to pick it up. The mail here is awful. It will take a week if some black doesn’t steal it, throw it away or wipe his ass with it. B. Tomorrow for sure. A. OK. And one other matter. We feel very strongly that if the current people get kicked out in November, as it looks like they might, we owe them to help them stay right where they are. It has taken a long time and much money to get all the ducks lined up and we don’t want to have to start in again. We can generally rely on sympathy from the Democrats but they will not support any more military ventures over there. That’s for sure. B. Then what do you suggest? A. The terrorism card works wonders. We were going to release a statement that Arabs were going to attack an El Al plane on takeoff, with rockets…. A. Probably leftovers from the CIA businesses in Afghanistan. A. Let’s not get into that now. But this scare would only affect flights to Israel and we don’t think it would have any impact on the election. B. Well then, why not have these attacks aimed at American aircraft? Where would they attack from? A. Say at the perimeter fence lines at airports. Or better still, why not a plan cooked up to smuggle explosives on board transatlantic flights to or from America? Something clever that will catch the public imagination…. B. That stupid bomb in the shoe routine? A. Don’t knock it. It worked, didn’t it? We can always find some suckers with a bent to this we can fill up with real enthusiasm and then turn them in, complete with plans. They actually believe they are going to paradise and fuck virgins and we have another propaganda coup. Let’s give this some effort. You know, a terrified public will not want to change horses in mid stream. So far, the Rove people have a good line: If you’re against the Republicans, you’re encouraging the evil terrorists sthick. B. Well, they did that with the alert warnings and it worked…more or less. A. Face it, they aren’t too bright here. They ran it into the ground, had to fire Ridge and Ashcroft, one of our very best friends ever, and put those things on ice. They need to discover a huge plot but in America A. You know, as you said, infiltrate a group of crazies, plant things on them, call the FBI… B. Oh, they do that themselves. That business in Florida was pathetic… A. But it worked, didn’t it? B. For about ten minutes at six o’clock for about three days. A. Well, think about it and get back to me. B. Right. A. What’s the situation with your two people? Are they going to be tried or not? B. Probably not, as far as the Bush people are concerned. But it is up to the courts and we are very careful not to fuck with them. They are expected to have the charges thrown out soon… A. Well, I’ll pray for them. I have to go now so I’ll get back to you later. Don’t forget to send someone for the list B. OK. (Conversation terminated) This is just the tip of a very large iceberg. Other inside information will be published in upcoming editions. On Monday, August 14, I will put up a complete listing of all members of Congress who have received money from AIPAC, state by state, amount by amount. Dear old crazy, and defeated, Lieberman, shrieking with rage at seeing all his extra income flowing down the drain, has received over $227,758 so far from AIPAC. Tell me, children, what did he do for all that money? There are many more names and amounts to entertain you as well as to give you a concrete guide as to your voting in November next. As far as the recent stories about “terrorist attacks” coming from England, don’t believe them. It is well known around the White House that this invented story is designed to offset the crushing defeat of the Administration’s darling liberal, Lieberman. This theme, by the way, according to position papers circulating here, is the main theme of the November elections. The thesis? Why the Iron Trio of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld have protected, and will continue to protect, innocent America from evil terrorist threats. Of course, if you vote Democratic, all bets are off and armies of rabid Muslim (read non Christian) fascists will at once invade America, to rape, loot and pillage while setting off bombs in the Des Moines Public Library. Please note that in spite of all the shit the Bush people have spread around about “proctecting America” there has not been one proven incident of any real terrorist group caught or no attack thwarted. The WMD lies were the father and the “terrorist threats” and the illegitimate child of this corrupt and dangerous gang.” Lamont's Victory -- A Media Defeat August 9, 2006 by Jeff Cohen CommonDreams.org Besides defeating Sen. Joe Lieberman, challenger Ned Lamont has also registered a triumph over much of the Washington press corps that had rallied so ridiculously to Lieberman’s defense. A victory over the old-guard incumbents of the D.C. media elite is one that all progressives should savor. Lieberman is not just the favorite Democrat of the White House and corporate interests; he’s also a favorite of conservative pundits and Fox News and Sean Hannity, who proposed “Conservatives for Lieberman” and has volunteered to campaign and fundraise for Joe in Connecticut. Election coverage saw conservative columnists feverishly denouncing a “liberal inquisition” against Lieberman; they attacked “Ned’s nutcases” and “crazies.” Given the invective aimed at Lamont’s grassroots and Netroots supporters, it was fun to see Fox News pundit Mort Kondracke whining that Lieberman’s defeat could mean the end of “civility in American politics” and a victory for “hatred politics” and “savage Internet-based attacks.” Persecuted Lieberman was “The Last Honest Man,” according to the headline of a Washington Post column. Mainstream media reports during the campaign talked routinely about a party “purge” of Lieberman -- confusing a free and open democratic contest with a backroom expulsion Many reports evoked fears of progressive bloggers raising out-of-state money for Lamont -- a wealthy cable TV entrepreneur who matched the donations out of his own pocket. Only a few articles mentioned that Lieberman is a top recipient of out-of-state cash in the form of corporate PAC donations; Matt Taibbi’s brilliant Rolling Stone piece was one of the few that chronicled the favors Lieberman has bestowed on corporate America. The prospect of a Lamont victory had some Beltway pundits in a frenzy. On ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, Cokie Roberts waxed on about how a Lamont victory would be a “disaster” for Democrats, especially with “liberal blogs and all that taking over the party.” And all that? In the Washington Post, David Broder – the “dean” of political journalists -- denigrated Lamont’s “elitist insurgents” and argued that a Lieberman primary defeat could push Democrats “toward a stronger antiwar stand” and troubles in general elections. Broder didn’t mention the latest polling that shows 63% of Americans saying the war isn’t worth the cost, with only 30% saying it is. Similarly, Jonathan Alter wrote in Newsweek that bloggers had “noisily intervened” in Connecticut’s primary because they “brook no dissent” on Iraq; he warned of “a cannabilistic distraction” among Democrats. Given that the mainstream media spectrum often extends from the far-right to the corporate center, Lieberman also has many friends in what passes for the “left” end of elite media. Media “liberals” didn’t whole-heartedly endorse Lieberman, but most attacked antiwar Democrats and stressed what a great guy Joe is. In Time magazine, Joe Klein called Lieberman “one of the finest men I’ve known in public life” and hailed him for “facing down extremists of both parties.” Liberal Al Hunt effused that Lieberman is a “thoroughly decent, intelligent, compassionate public figure” possessed of “independent integrity.” Despite promoting the extreme agenda of America’s top-tier corporate interests, Lieberman was constantly called a “moderate.” Why is “Beltway Pundits for Lamont” such a tiny club? It’s because principled progressives are typically locked out of mainstream punditry, especially on television, in favor of tepid liberals whose motto could be “I’m not a leftist, but I play one on TV.” As I detail in my insider’s book, “Cable News Confidential” Fox News didn’t invent Hannity-Colmes syndrome. The standard format of pairing ferocious rightwingers with backpedaling liberals was invented way before Fox. . .by CNN and PBS. For years, CNN used Joe Klein and Al Hunt as stand-ins for the “left” against hardcore rightists. Believe it or not, even the insufferable Kondracke appeared on CNN’s Crossfire as the co-host “from the left” years ago. (And, no, he was no more progressive then.) The defeat of Lieberman is not just a victory for grassroots politics and independent media, but a rejection of mainstream punditry. It’s a far cry from the Iowa presidential caucuses of 2004, when a media and Beltway drumbeat of “weak on defense” and “hot under the collar” helped defeat Howard Dean’s insurgent campaign. No one seems more clueless about the events in Connecticut than Joe Lieberman himself. He’d infuriated Democrats last year with his Karl Rove-ian statement to Bush critics that “in matters of war, we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.” On the eve of the election, he told a sympathetic Fox News correspondent that his defeat would send a dangerous message that there’s “no room” in the Democratic Party for “strong-on-security Democrats.” In echoes of Rove, Lieberman is saying that Democrats who voted for Lamont somehow don’t care about their own security. Lieberman has apparently convinced himself that by cheering on reckless ideologues in the White House to launch and continue a destabilizing war in Iraq, he has made America more secure. Connecticut voters have sent a message that elite media seem unwilling to hear: It’s that many Americans believe the Bush (and Lieberman) approach to “national security” makes our country less secure, more despised and more vulnerable. Jeff Cohen is a recovering TV pundit (CNN, Fox News and MSNBC). His new book is “Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media. He founded the media watch group FAIR. The White House: ‘Democrats' extreme left defeated Lieberman’ August 9, 2006 Reuters CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - The White House accused the Democratic Party on Wednesday of catering to the extreme left after Connecticut voters defeated Sen. Joe Lieberman in a primary election over his support of the Iraq war. Foreshadowing a debate likely to play itself out in November congressional elections, White House spokesman Tony Snow called the election a defining moment for the Democratic Party. "I know a lot of people have tried to make this a referendum on the president. I would flip it. I think instead it's a defining moment for the Democratic Party whose national leaders now have made it clear that if you disagree with the extreme left in their party, they're going to come after you," he said. Leading Democrat loses nomination August 9, 2006 BBC News One of the Democrats' most prominent figures has announced he will stand as an independent candidate after losing mid-term primaries in Connecticut. Senator Joe Lieberman, who stood for vice-president in 2000, lost to anti-war newcomer Ned Lamont. He spoke against "partisan bickering" and vowed to campaign for "a new politics of unity and purpose". Mr Lieberman, a senator for 18 years, has been harshly criticised in his home state for his support for the Iraq war. Ned Lamont, founder of a cable television company and a political novice, capitalised on the war's unpopularity in Connecticut to leap over Mr Lieberman. Mr Lieberman, who was Al Gore's running mate in 2000 and who also ran for president in 2004, has been labelled by some Democrats as being too close to Republicans and President George W Bush. But his defeat sends a message to politicians of all colours that Iraq is becoming a political liability - an impression backed up by a recent opinion poll, reports the BBC's Nick Miles in Washington. The poll, conducted for the Washington Post and ABC Television, suggests only 53% of people are happy with their representatives in Congress - almost identical to the situation in 1994, the year Democrats lost control of both houses of congress. Then, the economy was the deciding factor - but the poll suggests the issue today is the Iraq war, our correspondent says. Many more Democrats than Republicans are unhappy about the war, suggesting that support for the war could prove particularly costly to some Democrat congressmen. Primaries were also held in four other states. Colorado, Missouri, Michigan and Georgia have also been voting to choose candidates who will contest this November's elections to Congress. In Georgia, Representative Cynthia McKinney - known for the conspiracy theories about the September 11 terror attacks - lost in her bid to win the Democratic nomination. Attorney Hank Johnson beat her with 59% of the vote. Voters Ready to Dump Incumbents in Congress: Poll August 8, 2006 by Alison Langley Reuters American voters are as ready to dump incumbent lawmakers as they were just before they handed control of Congress to Republicans in 1994, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll released on Monday. Republicans, who control both houses of Congress, stand to lose the most in the November elections because of strong anti-incumbent sentiment and they trail Democrats in support among registered voters, the poll showed. Fifty-three percent of those surveyed called themselves "anti-incumbent" -- nearly the same as the 54 percent who identified themselves as such in the summer of 1994 when Congress was still under the Democrats' control. While the percentage of anti-incumbent Republicans was lower in the poll than the percentage of anti-incumbent Democrats in 1994 (33 percent versus 46 percent), the share of anti-incumbent independents rose to 61 percent from 57 percent in 1994. The telephone poll, which has a 3 percentage point margin of error, was taken between August 3 and August 6 among 1,002 adults. Among registered voters, 52 percent said they would support the Democrat in their congressional district if the election were held today. Only 39 percent said they would vote for the Republican, the poll showed. Republicans are being hurt by Americans' anti-war sentiment, the poll showed. Thirty-eight percent of those polled said they would be more likely to oppose a candidate who supports President George W. Bush's Iraq policy, compared with only 23 percent who would back such a candidate. But the poll also showed that Democrats have yet to win over Americans, who remain evenly split on whether the party offers the country a clear direction that differs from that offered by Republicans. Comment: But wait, my friends, if you vote out the Republicans, you are voting against America and for a great surge of terrible terrorism in this country! If you don’t believe this, just ask Karl Rove who even now is working on the press releases telling us all about it! God, I can’t wait! In Ireland, the Americans are viewed as idiots for believing such crap. BH Controlling the News New York City, August 11, 2006: “It is generally known in the newsrooms of most major American papers that the DoD has been deliberately underreporting the number of the military dead in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The official tallies are closing in on 3,000 but the actual ones are upwards of 10,000. Now, we have the same game being played about the carnage in Lebanon. We have reporters both in Beirut, Damascus and Tel Aviv so we get the on-site reports almost as soon as they happen. I will cite you a specific case: Hezbollah rocketed Haifa recently; blanketing it with rocket fire. Israelis reported that “very minor damage was suffered and three lives were lost.” In actual fact, the equivalent of three square blocks were flattened and the death toll reached 55 by the next day. On the other hand, an IDF patrol was lured into a trap inside Lebanon and in the fire-fight that followed, 32 IDF personnel were killed outright and 29 seriously wounded as well as two personnel carriers obliterated and one tank set on fire. The official Israeli report stated that “a brief encounter with fleeing Hezbollah resulted in thirty of the terrorists being killed with an Israeli loss of one truck and six soldiers.” No one knows how many Hezbollah were killed but given the total dishonesty of Israeli reporting, probably three died. Of course we know better here but we do not dare to publish any of this or we all lose our jobs. Thank God for the Internet!”