This is a rather amusing series of e-mail exchanges between a fellow calling himself "The Mad Revisionist" and the folks at the Institute for Historical Review, who call themselves Holocaust revisionists (or, more generally, historical revisionists). Ted O'Keefe finally catches on that his chain is being pulled, at which time he backs out of the dialogue. But this "made revisionist" is rather clever and entertaining. Enjoy:

http://www.reptiles.org/~madrev/The-Mad-Revisionist.htm

This letter is floating around the net and will be appreciated by this readership. I didn't get the author's name and I'm certain Dr. L herself has no intention of responding.

Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear prescription glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

American Atheists, Inc.
For Immediate Release June 2, 2000
http://www.atheists.org
http://www.americanatheist.org

In a unanimous decision, a jury in Austin, Texas, has convicted Gary Karr of involvement in a conspiracy to kidnap and rob American Atheists founder Madalyn Murray O'Hair, her son Jon Garth Murray, and her daughter Robin Murray O'Hair. The three disappeared in September, 1995.

Madalyn Murray O'Hair was a plaintiff in the historic MURRAY v. CURLETT Supreme Court ruling which in 1963 helped to end mandatory, unison prayer recitation and coercive Bible verse reading in the public schools.

"Despite the tragic circumstances, we feel that the trial and conviction is a major step forward in bring resolution and justice in this case," said Ellen Johnson, President of American Atheists.

"We look forward to indictments of any other individuals who are linked to the disappearance and possible murder of the Murray O'Hair family."

Ms. Johnson added that testimony in the trial vindicated the O'Hairs on a number of irresponsible charges, including accusations that the family had absconded with over $500,000 in gold, or was fleeing the country for personal and financial reasons.

"The testimony in this case established that the gold ended up in the hands of other individuals, and was extorted under duress from the Murray O'Hairs," Ms. Johnson said. "Other testimony clearly indicated that the family had already reached a resolution with the Internal Revenue Service over a series of minor discrepancies, and was not fleeing the country to avoid prosecution or anything else."

Ms. Johnson pointed to documents, testimony and other evidence indicating that the Murray O'Hairs "were doing business as usual for the organization when a kidnapping and extortion plot involving Mr. Karr and others was carried out."

"There are other individuals who were mentioned during the trial who are linked to this case, and we fully expect that the justice system will move forward with additional indictments and prosecutions," said Ms. Johnson.

For more information, please contact:
Ellen Johnson, President
(973) 334-5110

American Atheists, Inc.
P.O. Box 5733
Parsippany, NJ 07054-6733
Tel: (908)276-7300
Fax: (908)276-7402

Subject: USAF Documents Shed New Light On Rendlesham Case
Date: Fri, Jun 2, 2000 10:51 AM
From: Markdoggie on aol/astronomy discussion group

Posted with permission of Michael Lindemann and CNI News:

[British researcher and journalist James Easton (media@newscentral.co.uk), editor of "Voyager" newsletter, has devoted several years to investigating the famous UFO events alleged to have occurred in the vicinity of Bentwaters and Woodbridge RAF in December, 1980. This text is based on a news release circulated by Easton on May 19, 2000.]

On December 26 and 27, 1980, the joint U.S. Air Force bases at RAF Bentwaters and RAF Woodbridge in Suffolk experienced a series of unexplained "UFO" sightings, which gave rise to one of the UK's most celebrated mysteries. Researcher James Easton has now published copies of official USAF documents he has uncovered, which shed significant new light on events which began at 3:00 a.m on the morning of Dec 26, 1980.

A security patrol at the "east gate" sentry point reported they were observing unusual light activity within Rendlesham Forest, which separated the twin-base complex. Three members of the 81st Security Police Squadron then received permission to investigate and pursued the elusive light source through dense forest and surrounding farmlands.

Their original witness testimonies confirm how the officer in charge, Staff Sergeant Jim Penniston, reported an unidentified object visible within the forest; and that it was "definitely mechanical in nature".

"There's no question about this," says Easton. "Radio communications were being monitored, and I also obtained a copy of the original witness affidavit provided by Fred Buran, a senior officer at Central Security Control (CSC), who confirmed that 'They appeared to get very close to the lights, and at one point SSgt Penniston stated that it was a definite metallic object. Due to the colors they had reported, I alerted them to the fact that they may have been approaching a light aircraft crash scene. I directed SSgt Coffey to check with the tower to see if they could throw some light on the subject. They could not help'."

Easton clarifies one of the most contentious points in the case -- Was nearby Orfordness lighthouse responsible for the lights?

"These early accounts, which were requested by the deputy base commander, Lt. Col. Halt, do confirm that the beacon from Orfordness lighthouse was partly mistaken to be a source of unidentified lights. However, this was clearly subsequent to the patrol having lost sight of the original lights; and, in effect, they eventually picked up the wrong trail," Easton says.

Differences between those light sources is highlighted in the USAF reports, as Buran notes:

"SSgt Penniston reported getting near the 'object' and then all of a sudden said they had gone past it and were looking at a marker beacon that was in the same general direction as the other lights. I asked him, through SSgt Coffey, if he could have been mistaken, to which SSgt Penniston replied that had I seen the other lights I would know the difference. SSgt Penniston seemed agitated at this point."

Penniston's statement also includes a number of sketches [see urls listed at end of this text]. In Easton's view, "The object depicted by Penniston will be something of a surprise for those more familiar with his later story of encountering a small triangular craft in the forest." He adds that the newly acquired USAF reports are not entirely consistent with later recollections of events.

"A mainstay of Penniston's own story in subsequent years was how he examined the apparent craft at close range and for up to twenty minutes. This is borne out by comparative accounts from the other participants and strikingly disagrees with the affidavit submitted to Lt. Col. Halt, marked 'Eyes Only', in which Penniston claims he was never able to get closer than 50 meters to the enigmatic object," Easton says.

There remain unanswered questions which Easton believes are important enough to still warrant a Government investigation.

During the second night's incidents, Lt. Col. Halt was advised of further UFO reports and decided to personally put an end to this matter. Instead, Halt found himself documenting on his microcassette recorder how he was observing unidentified aerial objects, beaming "pencil thin" lights -- possibly lasers -- toward the ground.

In 1998, during an on-line interview hosted by the Microsoft Network, Halt acknowledged that some of these beams were an ostensible threat to weapons security, remarking of one unidentified object, "Then it moved back toward Bentwaters and continued to send down beams of light, at one point near the weapons storage facility. We knew that, because we could hear the chatter on the radio".

Only last year, Easton was contacted by Sergeant Randy Smith, who was stationed at RAF Bentwaters and had security responsibility for the Weapons Storage Area there. Easton subsequently published detailed testimony from Sergeant Smith which confirmed that, contrary to official denials, RAF Bentwaters did store tactical nuclear weapons -- these were, after all, front-line NATO bases.

Sergeant Smith also disclosed that he and several other security personnel in the weapons area had assembled in the security observation tower, sharing binoculars while observing what seemed to be three unidentified aerial objects hovering above the base. This was at about the same time Halt and others were experiencing their encounter. [Sgt Smith's claim of viewing unidentified triangle-shaped aircraft through binoculars in Dec 1980 was reported in
CNI News Vol. 5 No. 4 of April 16, 1999.]

Sergeant Smith, an Honor Graduate from Air Training Command, received a Certificate of Recognition for "Outstanding Contributions" at RAF Bentwaters and went on to have a distinguished career as a marksman and security specialist, receiving a citation from Strategic Air Command for duties involving "47 Primary Nuclear Airlift Force missions".

"Yet, for almost 20 years, he been troubled by something else that night in late December 1980," states Easton. "At one point, he was in a defensive position on top of a structure near the weapons bunker, 'where you'd go if you were under attack'. Curiously, aside from this fleeting memory, he has no recollection of leaving the tower, [nor] why he was actively protecting munitions, nor even of handing in his weapons when the shift ended. All he can next remember is, some hours later, riding home on his bike."

It was subsequent to these bizarre events that Lt. Col. Halt submitted a report to the Ministry of Defence, a copy of which was later released under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. In a letter to Easton, the Ministry note that Halt's memo wasn't received by them until two weeks after the events, and although it was investigated, "nothing had occurred to suggest that the UK Air Defence Region had been breached by unauthorised foreign military activity on the nights in question".

"We can appreciate the Ministry's situation," says Easton. "Some two weeks afterwards, they received what is effectively a UFO report and, with no material evidence of any threat, they presumably weren't too concerned and assumed it all had a rational explanation. "However, as neither Halt nor any of the participants were contacted by the MoD, the Ministry were unlikely to ever have comprehended the full circumstances," Easton suggests.

[CNI News comments: Easton thus joins another leading UK researcher, Nick Pope, in effectively letting the MoD "off the hook". Nonetheless, it seems incredible that the MoD were not more quickly and more thoroughly briefed on the strange events at Bentwaters/Woodbridge. Pope, for one, denies any inkling of a UFO cover-up within the MoD; but CNI News regards this as both over-generous and naive.]

Easton has set up an Internet web site (www.rendlesham.com) with detailed background material on the case. This has facilitated contacts from personnel who were stationed on base at the time and even participated in those incidents.

He summarises: "Aside from an alleged security threat involving nuclear weapons, I have witness statements from USAF personnel who will testify that at daybreak following the initial incident, they observed a number of people in 'white lab coats' searching the area in front of Rendlesham forest where the 'UFO' had been seen and that there was subsequently an exceptional amount of 'flash traffic' -- high-level communications to and from the bases.

"The answers, especially relating to occurrences near the nuclear weapons bunkers, may lie with other participants and witnesses -- many of whose names are known - still to give their accounts."

By publishing these extraordinary USAF documents, Easton hopes they will be a catalyst for these other missing testimonies to be revealed. "We now understand more of the puzzle than ever before," he says, "and if other key pieces were to become available, who knows what the full picture might reveal."

Easton invites anyone with further information to contact him by email at news@rendlesham.com or by telephone at 01896 756264.