| http://www.americanfreepress.net/12_08_01/Ashcroft_Talking/ashcroft_talking.html
Ashcroft Talking in Tongues—Again? Don’t let media headlines about “rumors from the Muslim world” distract you: At least several Israelis have been held by FBI as possible suspects in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Exclusive To American Free Press By Michael Collins Piper Attorney General John Ashcroft has released an Israeli suspect in the Sept. 11 terrorist events who “had trouble” with a seven-hour polygraph test administered by the FBI—but who “did better on a second try.” In other words, the suspect still flunked both times. That’s not some “rumor” from the Muslim world. That remarkable admission appeared in the Nov. 21 is sue of The New York Times. The Times reported the suspect, Paul Kurzberg, “refused on principle to divulge much about his role in the Israeli army or subsequently working for people who may have had ties to Israeli intelligence.” Yet, Ashcroft sent Kurzer home to Israel. The Forward, a Jewish newspaper, reported on Nov. 23 that “top-ranking Israeli diplomats” had intervened with Ashcroft on behalf of Kurzer and four other young Israelis—evidently all former members of the Israeli Army—who had been taken into custody by the FBI in New Jersey after being seen acting suspiciously in the aftermath of the World Trade Center attack. The Times said that witnesses had seen Kurzer and his four colleagues “going to unusual lengths to photograph the World Trade Center ruins” and, significantly, “making light of the situation”—hardly the response one would expect from American allies. The five were carrying multiple passports, $4,000 cash and box cutters when apprehended. It is said that the Israelis had box cutters only because they worked for a moving company and that it is only a coincidence that the “Arabs” who hijacked the planes had used box cutters. What has not been reported in the U.S. media—with the exception of American Free Press’s Oct. 1 issue—was that on Sept. 18, the mother of one of the detainees told an Israeli newspaper, Ha’aretz, that the FBI had questioned her son as to whether he was an agent of Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad. Why the FBI would suspect that Mossad agents may have been involved in the so-called “Arab terrorist” attack is a logical question that has never been raised in the mainstream media. Ironically, the Sept. 28-30 issue of USA Today cited the story of the five Israelis, calling them simply “Jews” and not identifying their nationality, as one of the “unsubstantiated rumors that implicate Israel” and of which “many in the Muslim world are endlessly chewing over and recycling.” This “rumor” turned out to be true. But there’s much more to the story than just these five suspects. On Nov. 23, The Washington Post rocked many of its readers by reporting that among a total of some 60 young Israeli Jews picked up by the FBI in the wake of the attacks, there are at least a handful being held on suspicion of involvement in the terrorist acts. The cautiously written article by Post staff writer John Mintz pointed out that while most of the Israelis arrested and detained since Sept. 11 were held on immigration charges and not suspected of any involvement in terrorism, there were exceptions. According to Mintz: In several cases, such as those in Cleveland and St. Louis, INS officials testified in court hearings that they were “of special interest to the government,” a term that federal agents have used in many of the hundreds of cases involving mostly Muslim Arab men who have been detained around the country since the terrorist attacks. An INS official who requested anonymity said the agency will not comment on the Israelis. He said the use of the term “special interest” means the case in question is “related to the investigation of Sept. 11.” What is interesting about each of the 60 Israeli detainees is that, according to the Post, all are supposedly “observing a time-honored tradition in their country—touring the world after their mandatory service in the Israeli military.” In addition, the Post revealed that “a number of them had served in counter-terrorist units in Israel.” The Post was careful to refer to Israel as a “close U.S. ally in the fight against terrorism.” However, the Post article still pointed out that although one Israeli detainee, Liron Diamant, said that he and his friends had first been mistaken as Arabs, the FBI conducted an “hours-long” interrogation of the young ex-military men and that they were “questioned in detail about their Israeli military service.” It seems unlikely that the FBI would have continued to quiz the young men so intensely, after identifying them as “allies”—that is, Israelis—unless the FBI had reason to believe that Israeli elements may have been linked to the events of Sept. 11—or other potential terrorist actions in the offing. On Feb. 5, 2001, writing in the now-defunct Spotlight and citing Ashcroft’s ties to the Israeli lobby, the late Andrew St. George prophetically asked “Would Ashcroft Cover ‘Best Ally’s’ Crimes?” Ashcroft’s conduct in the 9-11 investigation may answer that question. * |
