Order Online


Recent Titles

The Spokesman


Bertrand Russell


Philosophical Writings


Socialist Renewal


Peace & 

Human Rights


Socialist Classics

Labour History


New Thinkers' Library


Noam Chomsky

Kurt Vonnegut

Tony Benn

Ken Coates


Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation




A-Z by Author

A-Z Books





Contact Us



How to Lose a War


The Spokesman, 90


Vanunu Reports


Mordechai Vanunu, who blew the whistle on the Israeli nuclear weapons programme, has been harassed by the Israeli authorities ever since his release from prison in 2004. He sent this account of a day in court in March 2006.


‘Today, the trial continued at 13:00, in the same court in Jerusalem. Mr Feldman could not come to the hearing so Michael Sfard was my lawyer. Few supporters were with me in the court. Jerry Levin was there plus three people from Norway and one from Belgium. No press or any media people. The judge was Mr Yoel Zur, who already this week gave a decision that the court will not accept all the evidence from the Internet and from ‘Internet Chats’ taken without any authority from my computer by the police.


Sfard cross-examined the policeman Peterburg, who interrogated me months ago in the police station. He especially asked about his methods of going through my computers to see my e-mails and chats, and going to court to ask for my arrest, and permission to search my room. Sfard proved to the court, according to the police documents, that they asked Microsoft to give them details of my Hotmail account, my passwords, and the internet protocol address. All this was after the police went to the court, asking the judge for the right to go to my e-mails.


Microsoft obeyed these orders and gave them all the details, but not the passwords. This took place on 12 August 2004, three months before arresting me and taking my computers. Sfard pointed out that it is strange to ask Microsoft to give this information before they have the court’s order to listen to my private conversations. It means they wanted to go to my e-mails in secret or maybe even help the secret services, Shaback and Mossad, but not as the police stated, by Peterburg, that he went to my e-mail account and all his material came only from my computer.


The most important revelation was that the police each time went to the court claiming that I was suspected of spying activity, not with just breaking my restrictions. So Mr Sfard asked the police to tell the court what kind of espionage I was involved in. The policeman did not have any answers and said that he brought all the evidence to the court. When Sfard asked again about any material related to the ‘espionage’ accusation, Peterburg had no answers.


It was also revealed that the state came to the court with two special secret Government orders, which allowed the prosecution to keep documents related to the court hearing secret. One was from the Minister of Internal Security and one from the Minister of Defence. What is this about? We don’t know. One thing is clear – the secret cooperation between the police and Shaback/Mossad. So Sfard proved that the police had misled the judges with false accusations; who then gave orders to arrest me, to search my room, to go to my e-mail, confiscate my computers (for almost a year), and also mislead Microsoft to believe they are helping in a case of espionage, otherwise Microsoft would not have cooperated with such orders? All this case, interrogations, arrests, confiscations of private properties and more, all done from the start under the false and misleading statements to the courts of “suspicion of espionage”, and yet they are not charging me with spy crimes.


The judge also asked questions. He wanted to know what the police said to the judges when they asked for all these orders, and how the proceedings had been conducted. Peterburg, most of the time, said he did not remember. It looked like he did not want to answer a lot of questions. The prosecutor wants the court to have the tapes, where they video me in secret when I was interrogated by the police in their offices. The court decided to give time until May 1st, for each side to write their arguments for and against “No case to answer”. Meanwhile, there will be other hearings between now and then.


That was it for today. Please, anyone who could suggest prominent names who could testify on the subject of freedom of expression and hopefully could come to testify or write on the matter etc? Any ideas or help in this matter, my right to freedom of speech, and that I have not committed any crimes, including donations for legal expenses, would be very welcome. Thank You.’



ISBN 0 85124 724 5 - £5.00






Independent News Collective


Spokesman Books,

 Russell House,

Bulwell Lane,




contact us


tel: 0115 970 8318 | fax: 0115 942 0433