Quote:

---

During the Six Day War between Israel and the Arab States, the American intelligence ship USS Liberty was attacked for 75 minutes in international waters by Israeli aircraft and motor torpedo boats. Thirty-four men died and 174 were wounded. . .

Israel claims they mistook our ship for the out-of-service Egyptian horse carrier El Quseir and that we brought the attack upon ourselves by operating in a war zone without displaying a flag. Not so. We were in international waters, far from any fighting, and flew a bright, clean, new American flag. . .

"To suggest that they [the IDF] couldn't identify the ship is ... ridiculous. ... Anybody who could not identify the Liberty could not tell the difference between the White House and the Washington Monument."
-- Admiral Thomas Moorer, Chief of Naval Operations and later Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, quoted in The Washington Post, June 15, 1991, p. 14

(Read more here.)
http://www.ussliberty.org/index.html

---

Quote:

---

the United States had publicly announced to the world at the United Nations Security Council only two days before June 8, 1967 that it had no warships within hundreds of miles of the combat zone. The chain of reactions were started by an Israeli army report of explosions at El Arish. Since Israel controlled the air and the ground, they made the assumption that they were being shelled from the sea and a warship was in eye view. In view of the U.S. public announcement, it seems more logical for the Israelis to have assumed that a haze grey warship sailing within eye view of the ongoing combat was an enemy vessel rather than a U.S. ship. . . .

(Read the rest here.)
http://hnn.us/articles/369.html

---

Quote:

---

To sum up these last counts, my conclusion is that in all the circumstances of the case, the conduct of anyone of the naval officers concerned in this incident cannot be considered unreasonable, to an extent which justified commital for trial. http://www.ussliberty.com/excuse.htm

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
As usual, let's boil it down to one single question, then.

If it was a case of mistaken identity, why did they jam US Armed Forces radio frequencies during the attack ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Another point. Even with accidents, someone is held accountable for whatever mistakes were made, esp when the accident involved the extent of damage and casualties as the USS Liberty. The accidental attack lasted 75 minutes and resulted in Capt McGonagle earning a Medal of Honor. A Medal of Honor!! (How many of those have been awarded for conduct under friendly fire?)

---

Quote:

---

Here is Israel's response for their "mistake":

Quote:

---

To sum up these last counts, my conclusion is that in all the circumstances of the case, the conduct of anyone of the naval officers concerned in this incident cannot be considered unreasonable, to an extent which justified commital for trial. http://www.ussliberty.com/excuse.htm

---

Our soldiers died and were wounded without a single person answering for it. Doesn't anyone care?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_friendly_fire_incident

Fairly similar situation where the 'firees' did nothing wrong and the 'fireers' were not really held accountable.

---

Quote:

---

On September 11, 2002, the U.S. pilots, Majors Harry Schmidt and William Umbach were officially charged with 4 counts of negligent manslaughter, 8 counts of aggravated assault, and 1 count of dereliction of duty. Umbach's charges were later dismissed. Schmidt's charges were reduced (on June 30, 2003) to just the dereliction of duty charge. On July 6, 2004 U.S. Lt.-Gen. Bruce Carlson found Schmidt guilty of dereliction of duty in what the U.S. military calls a "non-judicial hearing" before a senior officer. Schmidt was fined nearly $5,700 in pay and reprimanded. The reprimand, written by Lt. Gen. Carlson said Schmidt had "flagrantly disregarded a direct order," "exercised a total lack of basic flight discipline", and "blatantly ignored the applicable rules of engagement." Umbach was reprimanded for leadership failures and allowed to retire.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
IMHO, The victims of the friendly fire incidents should all get Medal's of Honor.

---

Quote:

---

What could possibly be Israels rationale for deliberatly attacking their greatest ally?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
The Israelis didn't even have a trial. Doesn't anybody care?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
in fact what the Israelis did do was immediately call off the attack and go to the US embassy and apologize

---

Quote:

---

By patching together different systems, the ship’s radio operators had ultimately been able to send a brief distress message that was received and acknowledged by United States Sixth Fleet forces present in the Mediterranean. Upon receipt of that message the aircraft carriers USS Saratoga and USS America each launched aircraft to come to the aid of USS Liberty. The reported attacking aircraft were declared hostile and the rescue aircraft were authorized to destroy them upon arrival. The rules of engagement, authorizing destruction of the attackers, were transmitted to the rescue aircraft "in the clear" (i.e., they were not encrypted).

Shortly after the Sixth Fleet transmission of the rules of engagement to its dispatched rescue aircraft, the Israeli torpedo boats suddenly broke off their attack and transmitted messages asking if USS Liberty required assistance. At the same time, an Israeli naval officer notified the US Naval Attaché at the American Embassy in Tel Aviv that Israeli forces had mistakenly attacked a United States Navy ship and apologized. The Naval Attaché notified the United States Sixth Fleet and rescue aircraft were recalled before they arrived at the scene of the attack.
http://www.ussliberty.com/report/report.htm

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Although soldiers were not prosecuted there were several investigations from 1967 to 1991, all of which concluded that the incident was a mistake.

---

Quote:

---

The "Moorer Commission" (Chaired by Adm. Moorer) investigated the attack and made the following findings:

"We, the undersigned, having undertaken an independent investigation of Israel's attack on USS Liberty, including eyewitness testimony from surviving crewmembers, a review of naval and other official records, an examination of official statements by the Israeli and American governments, a study of the conclusions of all previous official inquiries, and a consideration of important new evidence and recent statements from individuals having direct knowledge of the attack or the cover up, hereby find the following:

1. That on June 8, 1967, after eight hours of aerial surveillance, Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against USS Liberty, the world's most sophisticated intelligence ship, inflicting 34 dead and 173 wounded American servicemen (a casualty rate of seventy percent, in a crew of 294);

2. That the Israeli air attack lasted approximately 25 minutes, during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on USS Liberty's bridge, and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels;

3. That the torpedo boat attack involved not only the firing of torpedoes, but the machine-gunning of Liberty's firefighters and stretcher-bearers as they struggled to save their ship and crew; the Israeli torpedo boats later returned to machine-gun at close range three of the Liberty's life rafts that had been lowered into the water by survivors to rescue the most seriously wounded;

4. That there is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew; evidence of such intent is supported by statements from Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Undersecretary of State George Ball, former CIA director Richard Helms, former NSA directors Lieutenant General William Odom, USA (Ret.), Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, USN (Ret.), and Marshal Carter; former NSA deputy directors Oliver Kirby and Major General John Morrison, USAF (Ret.); and former Ambassador Dwight Porter, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon in 1967;

5. That in attacking USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States;

6. That fearing conflict with Israel, the White House deliberately prevented the U.S. Navy from coming to the defense of USS Liberty by recalling Sixth Fleet military rescue support while the ship was under attack; evidence of the recall of rescue aircraft is supported by statements of Captain Joe Tully, Commanding Officer of the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga, and Rear Admiral Lawrence Geis, the Sixth Fleet carrier division commander, at the time of the attack; never before in American naval history has a rescue mission been cancelled when an American ship was under attack;

7. That although Liberty was saved from almost certain destruction through the heroic efforts of the ship's Captain, William L. McGonagle (MOH), and his brave crew, surviving crewmembers were later threatened with "court-martial, imprisonment or worse" if they exposed the truth; and were abandoned by their own government;

8. That due to the influence of Israel's powerful supporters in the United States, the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack from the American people;

9. That due to continuing pressure by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, this attack remains the only serious naval incident that has never been thoroughly investigated by Congress; to this day, no surviving crewmember has been permitted to officially and publicly testify about the attack;

10. That there has been an official cover-up without precedent in American naval history; the existence of such a cover-up is now supported by statements of Rear Admiral Merlin Staring, USN (Ret.), former Judge Advocate General of the Navy; and Captain Ward Boston, USN, (Ret.), the chief counsel to the Navy's 1967 Court of Inquiry of Liberty attack;

11. That the truth about Israel's attack and subsequent White House cover-up continues to be officially concealed from the American people to the present day and is a national disgrace;

12. That a danger to our national security exists whenever our elected officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any foreign nation, and specifically are unwilling to challenge Israel's interests when they conflict with American interests; this policy, evidenced by the failure to defend USS Liberty and the subsequent official cover-up of the Israeli attack, endangers the safety of Americans and the security of the United States.

WHEREUPON, we, the undersigned, in order to fulfill our duty to the brave crew of USS Liberty and to all Americans who are asked to serve in our Armed Forces, hereby call upon the Department of the Navy, the Congress of the United States and the American people to immediately take the following actions:

FIRST: That a new Court of Inquiry be convened by the Department of the Navy, operating with Congressional oversight, to take public testimony from surviving crewmembers; and to thoroughly investigate the circumstances of the attack on the USS Liberty, with full cooperation from the National Security Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency and the military intelligence services, and to determine Israel's possible motive in launching said attack on a U.S. naval vessel;

SECOND: That every appropriate committee of the Congress of the United States investigate the actions of the White House and Defense Department that prevented the rescue of the USS Liberty, thereafter threatened her surviving officers and men if they exposed the truth, and covered up the true circumstances of the attack from the American people; and

THIRD: That the eighth day of June of every year be proclaimed to be hereafter known as

USS LIBERTY REMEMBRANCE DAY, in order to commemorate USS Liberty's heroic crew; and to educate the American people of the danger to our national security inherent in any passionate attachment of our elected officials for any foreign nation.

We, the undersigned, hereby affix our hands and seals, this 22nd day of October, 2003.

Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, USN, Ret.
Former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

(and more undersigned abridged by me.
All emphasis mine.)

http://www.ussliberty.com/report/report.htm

---

Quote:

---

VIDEO DOWNLOAD: Dead in the Water: Israeli Sinking of the USS Liberty

During the Six-Day war, Israel attacked and nearly sank the USS Liberty, claiming mistaken identity. The truth turns out to be more sinister... By BBC News (similar to History Channel)

www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/video_cover-ups.htm
www.ussliberty.org


Video download: TERRORSTORM

A history of false-flag psyops in world history, by Alex Jones.
www.infowars.com

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4757274759497686216

---

Quote:

---

"It is the business of a general to be quiet and thus insure secrecy. He must be able to mystify his officers and men by false reports and appearances, and thus keep them in total ignorance."
—Sun Tzu, The Art of War

"By Way of Deception, thou shalt do War."
-motto of Israeli Mossad

---

Quote:

---

ISRAEL

ISRAEL. The name given to Jacob by an angel at the Jabbok ford. He was on a journey to hold a reunion with his estranged brother, Esau. During the night a stranger wrestled with him till daybreak and then said to him, "Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have been strong AGAINST God." Was the stranger an angel? Jacob himself thought it was God. He named the place Peniel "because I have seen God face to face and I have survived" (Genesis 32:25-32). Later in Genesis, God appeared to Jacob once again and repeated the statement, "Your name is Jacob, but from now on, you shall be named not Jacob but Israel" (Genesis 35:9-10). This was enough in itself to show the unique niche he occupies in Jewish history: he is the personification of the nation of Israel.

Catholic Pocket Dictionary, Jewish Dell Publishing, 666 5th Avenue, NY NY
www.therealpresence.org/cgi-bin/getdefinition.pl

---

Quote:

---

Operation NORTHWOODS

Memo to Secretary of War Robert McNamara

Subject: Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba

March 13, 1962

"We could blow up a drone (unmannded) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters. The presense of Cuban planes or ships merely investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The US could follow with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to "evacuate" remaining members of the non-existant crew.

Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.

We could develop a Communist Cuba terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Flordia cities and even in Washington. The terror campaign could be pointed at Cuban refugees seeking haven in the United States.

Use of MIG-type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping, and destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type palnes would be useful. An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the pilot of the transport were to announce that fact. Hijacking attampts against US civil air and surface craft should be encouraged. It is possible to create an incident which would demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civilian airliner from the United States.

An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be subsituted for the actual civil aircraft and the passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases.

The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.

Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rondevous. From the rondevous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly to an auxiliary airfield at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status.

Meanwhile the drone aircraft will continue to fly the filed flight plan. The drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency "MAY DAY" message stating it is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by the destruction of aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow IACO radio stations to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.

It is possible to create an incident that will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack. On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly Tail-end Charlie. While near the Cuban island this pilot would broadcast that he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. This pilot would then fly at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an Eglin auxiliary.

The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who performed the mission under an alias would resume his proper identity. The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared.

A submarine or small craft would distribute F-101 parts, parachute, etc. The pilots retuning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found."

(declassifed in 2000)

www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

VIDEO - Operation Northwoods - James Bamford from ABC News
http://radio.indymedia.org/news/2005/10/7209.php

---

Quote:

---

UNCENSORED PHOTOS OF ISRAELI MASSMURDER AND WARCRIMES

This is Israel: Qana Massacre 2006 - Uncensored photographs that are censored by the Jewish Media Mafia in Israeli-occupied territory of USA. Hate-filled psychopathic anti-Semitic Jews perp Holocaust upon Christian Semites and Arab Semites during yet another Israeli invasion of Lebannon. July 30, 2006
www.bubbleshare.com/album/51546/1513878/overview

This is Israel: Qana Massacre 1996
http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/300/350/355/april-war/qana/

Do you know what kind of weapons causes this damage?
www.uruknet.info/?p=24885

---

Quote:

---

Fox News video downloads: Massive Israeli Mossad terrorist bomber army and Kosher Nostra organized crime network in USA today

Note that in the first segment of the series a highly placed US investigator states, "evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information." Israeli Mossad controls all US telephone billing and all police wiretaps for Mishpucka Mafiya. Hundreds of Israeli terrorists arrested in USA since 9/11, as thousands of Israeli terrorists escape
www.rense.com/general67/pull.htm

"The FBI has issued a BOLO on suspected terrorists driving a white delivery van from New York City to Mexico. The suspects are using Israeli passports."
—Emergency 911 Dispatch, BOLO (Be On the LookOut), All-Points-Bulletin (APB), City-County Building, Knoxville, Knox County, Tennessee, September 11, 2001, 11am EST

"The following is a partial list of Jews who participated in the Revolutionary War. Major George Bush, Major Louis Bush, Major Soloman Bush."
-National Jewish Welfare Board, Jewish Caalaander for Soldiers and Sailors 1943-1944, "The Jews in the Wars of the United States"
www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/calendar.html

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hardware:
Don't tell me you thought Israel was our friend, right?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
What could possibly be Israels rationale for deliberatly attacking their greatest ally?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
What could possibly be Israels rationale for deliberatly attacking their greatest ally?

---

I've been thinking a lot about this demand for a motive before being willing to say an action was intentional and deliberate.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Until you can produce a motive that explains what Israel had to gain from the attack and Israel’s reaction following the attack, it’s difficult to argue that Israel wanted to attack the US.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
What could possibly be Israels rationale for deliberatly attacking their greatest ally?

---

I've been thinking a lot about this demand for a motive before being willing to say an action was intentional and deliberate.

---

Or you could point out that France not the US was Israel's biggest ally at the time, and prior to 1968 the US consistently refused military aid and equipment and even opposed and threatened Israel during some previous actions.

So unless USS Liberty was a French ship you don't need to come up with a rationale for the Israelis deliberately attacking their greatest ally.

---

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
]

Attacking ones allies happens too often

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_the_French_Fleet_at_Mers-e
l-Kebir

1297 French sailors were killed and about 350 were wounded.

The British Admiral Somerville was less enthusiastic about the action saying that it was “the biggest political blunder of modern times and will rouse the whole world against us…we all feel thoroughly ashamed…”



" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Uh huh. We've been down that road before. I think it dead-ended with your comparing me to Nazis.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Let me turn the tables on you, for argument's sake. If Liberty was an accident, then her survivors lied about seeing reconnaissance flights recognizing them all morning long and all those other details.

---

Quote:

---

Americo Aimetti: Well, again we were in international waters. Early that morning, from 6 a.m. on, Israeli reconnaissance planes had been flying around us, so low we could see the faces of the pilots, over flights and reconnaissance. They were tipping their wings, a friendly gesture.

John Hrankowski: We heard them reporting over radio who we were and how we were sailing and where we were sailing. They saw the flag and everything else.

---

Quote:

---

Jim Ennes: Men trying to aid their wounded shipmates on deck were fired upon. Men fighting fires were fired upon and recall seeing their fire hoses punctured by machinegun fire. . . .Yet I think most convincing of their deliberate intent is that they continued to fire for forty minutes after examining our markings from as close as fifty feet away, did not offer help until nearly two hours after the torpedo explosion, and then lied about it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
No one compared you to the Nazis, so climb down off your cross. It’s not my fault your position on the Israelis appears to be bigoted.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal to CTS on the "Get Real" thread:
First of all, your assertion that Israel as a people holds a policy of targeting civilians to satiate their collective hatred seems to close to an ethnic slur for me to be comfortable with. It sounds too much like the “baby-killing Jew” popularized by the Nazis. . .
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=22875&m=358212#358212

---

Quote:

---

It’s unclear that Israeli jamming occurred. Contrary to common myth, this is not a resolved issue, and remains controversial with some problematic discontinuities in the evidence.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Please do not segue into details of the testimonies or possible motives--I am not looking for whether you think they are lies or what you think the motive is. I am looking for logical consistency to your assertion that motive must be known before arguing whether an event occurred. I want you to put yourself in the shoes you have placed me, and tell me if you think it is reasonable. I believe we need to get this motive hangup out of the way before we can talk about the other issues clearly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Just an observation. The US has gone to war with countries for incidents that were a lot less provocative.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I think you lied to us Finn, and knowingly so - and I would like to know why.
Care to explain ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
Incidentally, here is my response again: I never asserted any such thing. I never said Israel as a people. I never said that they had a policy of targeting civilians. In fact I made it a point to clarify that they didn't have a policy, and the motives I was speaking of were that of their LEADERS.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Attacking ones allies happens too often

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_the_French_Fleet_at_Mers-e
l-Kebir

1297 French sailors were killed and about 350 were wounded.

The British Admiral Somerville was less enthusiastic about the action saying that it was “the biggest political blunder of modern times and will rouse the whole world against us…we all feel thoroughly ashamed…”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Well, I’m not sure why you think you are entitled to a response that you refused to give me in the previous thread.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
And I don’t think you are anti-Semitic;

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
It’s not my fault your position on the Israelis appears to be bigoted.

---

Quote:

---

Instead of accusing me of making statements about your character that I never made, and trying to convince me that Israelis have a preference to kill innocent people because they are psychologically damaged,. . .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
It's like this, Finn. We are at an impasse. You refuse to answer my questions. I have no way to improve on my answer for yours until you answer mine first.

So here are my questions again. I have reworded some and deleted others to simplify them and hopefully make them clearer.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
1. What do the soldiers have to GAIN by lying? (If you read enough eyewitness testimony by enough survivors, you will find many details you cannot explain by calling it "embellishment" or "confusion" or "mistakes." Their stories are in such stark contrast to that of the Israelis that either they are lying or the Israeli govt is lying.)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
2. Assuming they are lying, do you think it would be reasonable for someone to conclude, "Unless you can give me a motive for them to lie, it is difficult to argue that they lied."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
3. The cardinal feature of a hypothesis is that it is falsifiable, that it sets criterion by which it can be proven wrong. Since you call yourself a rational person, is your position falsifiable? Do you have criterion by which you can be proven wrong?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
4. What are your objective standards for distinguishing motives that make sense, and motives that don't make sense? Because without objective standards, you could just be subjectively deciding that NO motives could ever make sense.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
How about you don't mention anti-semitism, bigotism, or racism in our discussions about anything Israeli anymore. You know I am none of those things. It is a distraction from the real issues at hand. Thank you.

---

Quote:

---

posted by canttakesky in the get real thread:
“If they (leaders) had to choose between an empty ex-terrorist village and a civilian-filled ex-terrorist village to target, they would pick the one with civilians.”

---

Quote:

---

posted by canttakesky in the get real thread:
“When [Israelis] look at a house full of Arab civilians, they only see the "Arab" and not the "civilians." They don't see people anymore--just enemies. This is supported by the pattern of abuse and humiliation the IDF dishes out to Palestinian civilians going about their lives in the occupied territories.”

---

Quote:

---

posted by canttakesky in the get real thread:
“I don't believe Israel can see anyone but as an enemy. (See my previous post to Finn about hypervigilance and paranoia.) I think Israel, as a nation, was badly damaged psychologically and cannot trust anyone. She has no friends, seeing only assets to be used and threats to be disposed of.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
You are still refusing to answer the question: Is it reasonable, or rational to make this statement?

"Unless you can give me a motive for them to lie, it is difficult to argue that they lied."

It goes to the LOGIC (not content) of your demand for a motive before determining whether X happened. (X could be mistaken identity, a lie, etc.) It goes to my point that motive and occurrence are two separate issues and are not dependent on each other.

I have nothing more to say until you address this issue of LOGIC.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
What could possibly be Israels rationale for deliberatly attacking their greatest ally?

---

I've been thinking a lot about this demand for a motive before being willing to say an action was intentional and deliberate.

---

Or you could point out that France not the US was Israel's biggest ally at the time, and prior to 1968 the US consistently refused military aid and equipment and even opposed and threatened Israel during some previous actions.

So unless USS Liberty was a French ship you don't need to come up with a rationale for the Israelis deliberately attacking their greatest ally.

---

Quote:

---

Proponents of the accident explanation add that mistakes were inevitable in the tense atmosphere of the Six-Day War, and that no concrete motive existed for Israel to initiate a surprise attack against a country that was quickly becoming its most powerful and important ally.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:
You must have replied while I was editing my post to take the entire question of the the context of the Israelis vs. Liberty survivors.

It is a simple yes or no answer. You still haven't answered.

Yes. Or. No.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
From the Wikipedia article referenced by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

Proponents of the accident explanation add that mistakes were inevitable in the tense atmosphere of the Six-Day War, and that no concrete motive existed for Israel to initiate a surprise attack against a country that was quickly becoming its most powerful and important ally.

---

Just wanted to clarify my statement since you called it into question. Thanks for keeping me honest, I forgot just how detail oriented some people are in this forum.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

Quote:

---

What could possibly be Israels rationale for deliberatly attacking their greatest ally?

---

If you really want to know, read the links I posted. If you have a critique of posited reasons, we can discuss them here.

---

Quote:

---

Several books and the BBC documentary USS Liberty: Dead in the Water tried to prove Liberty was attacked on purpose. They claim that the ship was attacked to prevent the U.S. from knowing about the forthcoming attack in the Golan Heights, which apparently would violate a cease-fire to which Israel's government had agreed.

---

Quote:

---

Critics claim many of the books and documentaries include incorrect assumptions and use fuzzy reasoning. For example, critics note that a document declassified in 1997 indicated that the U.S. Ambassador at the time had reported on the day of the Liberty attack that he "would not be surprised" by an Israeli attack on Syria, and that the IDF Intelligence chief had told a White House aide then in Israel that "there still remained the Syria problem and perhaps it would be necessary to give Syria a blow," which, the critics argue, indicate that Israel was not trying to conceal the planned invasion of Syria from the U.S.

---

Quote:

---

"to cover up a massacre of 1,000 Egyptian prisoners of war" that was supposedly taking place at the same time in the nearby town of El-Arish.

---

Quote:

---

In any event, the possibility of a ship at sea discovering such a crime on land, at or beyond the limit of its visual range, is questionable (according to U.S. accounts, the ship was 14 nautical miles (26 km) from shore at the time of the attack, and did not get much closer to it previously).

---

Quote:

---

In 2003, journalist Peter Hounam wrote Operation Cyanide: How the Bombing of the USS Liberty Nearly Caused World War III, which proposes a completely different theory regarding the incident. In an attempt to explain why there was no support by U.S. forces as backup, Hounam claims that Israel and U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson had secretly agreed on day four of the Six Day War that Liberty would be sunk with complete loss of life. The attack would be blamed on Egypt, allowing the U.S. in turn to attack Egypt, thus helping out Israel. However, according to Hounam's theory, because the Liberty did not sink after two hours, the plan was quickly reversed, Israel apologized for the case of mistaken identity, and a cover-up put into place.

---

Quote:

---

The 1981 book Weapons by Russell Warren Howe asserts that Liberty was accompanied by the Polaris submarine USS Andrew Jackson, which filmed the entire episode through its periscope but was unable to provide assistance. According to Howe: "Two hundred feet below the ship, on a parallel course, was its 'shadow'- the Polaris strategic submarine Andrew Jackson, whose job was to take out all the Israeli long-range missile sites in the Negev if Tel Aviv decided to attack Cairo, Damascus or Baghdad. This was in order that Moscow would not have to perform this task itself and thus trigger World War Three."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by canttakesky:

First, pattern. See, this wasn't like most friendly fire: Bomb, Oops! This was bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, torpedo, torpedo, machine-gun, machine-gun, ooops. The extended nature and relatively close range of the attack makes the Ooops at the end a little less believable. The Ooops should have come sooner, a lot sooner. The pattern is inconsistent with other friendly fire scenarios.

Second, severity. If they made a mistake in identifying the ship, it means they did not conclusively confirm the flag or the markings of Liberty before firing. Without conclusive confirmation, did it warrant 821 holes in the ship, over 100 of which were rocket-sized? Did it warrant napalm canisters, aircraft cannons, rockets, and 5 torpedos? Did it warrant drive-by machine gun shootings on Liberty's firefighters, stretcher-bearers, and life rafts? If it was a mistake, the severity of the attack was unwarranted and someone should be accountable. The severity was inconsistent with the inconclusive information on which the attack was based.

---

Quote:

---

About twenty minutes after the aircraft attack, the ship was approached by three torpedo boats bearing Israeli flags and identification signs. Initially, McGonagle, who perceived that the torpedo boats "were approaching the ship in a torpedo launch attitude,"[1] ordered a machine gun to engage the boats. After recognizing the Israeli standard and seeing apparent Morse code signalling attempts by one of the boats (but being unable to see what was being sent, due to the smoke of the fire started by the earlier aircraft attack), McGonagle gave the order to cease fire. This order was apparently misunderstood in the confusion, and two heavy machine guns opened fire. Subsequently, the Israeli boats responded with fire and launched at least two torpedoes at Liberty (five according to the 1982 IDF History Department report). One hit Liberty on the starboard side forward of the superstructure, creating a large hole in what had been a former cargo hold converted to the ships research spaces, causing the majority of the casualties in the incident.

---

Quote:

---

I don’t think you are anti-Semitic or racist, but your arguments on Israelis killing civilians do appear to be bigoted, by definition.

---

Quote:

---

You believe that the Israelis prefer killing civilians because, for one, they receive defense money from the US. Yet the US’s stated position (and its foreign policy vis-à-vis Israel is consistent with that position) is that the US doesn’t want Israel killing civilians. So therefore how do you explain why you believe that Israelis prefer killing civilians because they will receive defense money from the US?

---

Quote:

---

The popular view is that Israelis bully the Arabs. An objective analysis of Near East history generally suggests the opposite view or at least an equal degree of bullying on both sides,

---

Quote:

---

Note that you didn’t qualify this, your statement is referring to “Israel” not Israel’s leaders.

Quote:

---

posted by canttakesky in the get real thread:
I don't believe Israel can see anyone but as an enemy. (See my previous post to Finn about hypervigilance and paranoia.) I think Israel, as a nation, was badly damaged psychologically and cannot trust anyone. She has no friends, seeing only assets to be used and threats to be disposed of.

---

---

Quote:

---

Your position, at least in the other thread, was that Israelis prefer killing civilians because they are a psychologically damaged people, and you appear to be holding to this view pretty intolerantly. . . Your explanations for this supposed callous almost bloodthirsty behavior is that Israelis are psychologically damaged, like a serial killer I suppose.

---

Quote:

---

We, who sensed how the commands issued to us in the Territories, destroy all the values we had absorbed while growing up in this country.
We, who understand now that the price of Occupation is the loss of IDF’s human character and the corruption of the entire Israeli society.
We, who know that the Territories are not Israel, and that all settlements are bound to be evacuated in the end.
We hereby declare that we shall not continue to fight this War of the Settlements.
We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.
http://www.couragetorefuse.org/defaulteng.asp

---

Quote:

---

Prohibiting Palestinians from travelling along roads without providing alternative routes, the never-ending delays at roadblocks, the many hours required to travel short distances, the humiliation, the destruction of homes, the incessant searches, the need to aim weapons at innocent women and children - all these actions turn the Israeli Defence Force into an immoral occupying force, and in these I refuse to participate . . .
In addition to the great harm we are causing daily to Palestinians, we damage ourselves as a society. Our society is based on moral precepts in Judaism, which states that "loved is a person created in God's image". Instead, we are raising a generation of violent young people immune to pain and human suffering, a generation who don't see in the Palestinian a human being, only part of a mass to be avoided and feared. We are raising a generation that stops pregnant women, old people and children from getting to hospital.
http://www.couragetorefuse.org/MoreArticles/English/HaimWeissEng_1.htm

---

Quote:

---

By Assaf Oron:
The Israeli government, in its policies of Occupation, has turned the Territories into a greenhouse for growing terror!!!" We have sown the seeds, grown them, nurtured them - and then our blood is spilled, and the centrist-right-wing politicians reap the benefits. Indeed, terror is the right-wing politician's best friend.
. . .In the meanwhile, I refuse to be a terrorist in my tribe's name. Because that's what it is: not a "war against terror", as our propaganda machine tries to sell. This is a war OF terror, a war in which, in return for Palestinian guerrilla and terror, we employ the IDF in two types of terror. The more visible one are the violent acts of killing and destruction, those which some people still try to explain away as 'surgical acts of defense.' The worse type of terror is the silent one, which has continued unabated since 1967 and through the entire Oslo process. It is the terror of Occupation, of humiliation on a personal and collective basis, of deprivation and legalized robbery, of alternating exploitation and starvation. This is the mass of the iceberg, the terror that is itself a long-term greenhouse for counter-terror. And I simply refuse to be a terrorist and criminal, even if the entire tribe denounces me.
http://www.couragetorefuse.org/MoreArticles/English/AssafOronEng_1.htm

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I think I've played this game enough. I've answered your questions, even your trick question about motive...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
According to the Wikipedia article, The most loss of life/damage occured from the Israeli torpedo boats. The same ones which were fired upon by the USS Liberty. Not to say that what occured before was not bad, just not as bad.

---

Quote:

---

Yet despite these things a few Americans seem to accept the preposterous claim that the attack was a mistake and that firing stopped with the torpedo explosion. One can accept and understand this attitude from an Israeli, as he would have a natural tendency to believe his country's version of events and to disbelieve contrary versions -- especially since he has no personal experience to draw upon. But how can an American disbelieve the virtually identical eyewitness reports of scores of surviving fellow Americans and accept instead the undocumented claims of the foreign power that tried to kill them? That is very difficult to understand or to accept.
http://www.ussliberty.com/ennes.htm

---

Quote:

---

The only time said jamming let up was during missle targeting runs by the attacking planes, presumably as to not hose their own targeting equipment via signal bleedover.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Attacking ones allies happens too often

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_the_French_Fleet_at_Mers-e
l-Kebir

1297 French sailors were killed and about 350 were wounded.

The British Admiral Somerville was less enthusiastic about the action saying that it was “the biggest political blunder of modern times and will rouse the whole world against us…we all feel thoroughly ashamed…”

---

A slightly different circumstance I think. The Royal Navy wanted to prevent those ships from falling into enemy hands, the French weren't willing to scuttle them themselves so.

Do you think perhaps it would have been better to let them join the German Navy?

---

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
]


But the thing is they didn't join the German navy,
and when the Germans tried to force the issue they scuttled them theirselves at that point. I also disagree with Finn's assertion that they were an extention of Germany... there was a government in exile formed in Britain.

Would you feel differently if it had been British sailors dying intentionally at the hand of an " allie "... or Americans ?

There is a theory with the Liberty incident that the Israelis eliminated the Liberty to prevent the Liberty from passing intell to the Egypt....

Accepting that theory, would you rather had Egypt aware of Israeli movements in the area ?



" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12

Quote:

---

Frem, thanks. I did not know this. Do you have a link, by any chance? I'd like to read more.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Now I have put forth three possible motives for a deliberate attack on the USS Liberty by the IDF from the Wikipedia article. I have stated why I do not think these were legitimate reasons and backed up my position with items in the article. You're up.

---

Quote:

---

. . .In June of 1967, while serving as a Captain in the Judge Advocate General Corps, Department of the Navy, I was assigned as senior legal counsel for the Navy’s Court of Inquiry into the brutal attack on USS Liberty, which had occurred on June 8th.

The late Admiral Isaac C. Kidd, president of the Court, and I were given only one week to gather evidence for the Navy’s official investigation into the attack, despite the fact that we both had estimated that a proper Court of Inquiry into an attack of this magnitude would take at least six months to conduct. . . .

The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. Each evening, after hearing testimony all day, we often spoke our private thoughts concerning what we had seen and heard. I recall Admiral Kidd repeatedly referring to the Israeli forces responsible for the attack as “murderous bastards.” It was our shared belief, based on the documentary evidence and testimony we received first hand, that the Israeli attack was planned and deliberate, and could not possibly have been an accident. . . .

I know from personal conversations I had with Admiral Kidd that President Lyndon Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara ordered him to conclude that the attack was a case of “mistaken identity” despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Admiral Kidd told me, after returning from Washington, D.C. that he had been ordered to sit down with two civilians from either the White House or the Defense Department, and rewrite portions of the court’s findings.

Admiral Kidd also told me that he had been ordered to “put the lid” on everything having to do with the attack on USS Liberty. We were never to speak of it and we were to caution everyone else involved that they could never speak of it again.

I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of that statement as I know that the Court of Inquiry transcript that has been released to the public is not the same one that I certified and sent off to Washington.

I know this because it was necessary, due to the exigencies of time, to hand correct and initial a substantial number of pages. I have examined the released version of the transcript and I did not see any pages that bore my hand corrections and initials. Also, the original did not have any deliberately blank pages, as the released version does. Finally, the testimony of Lt. Painter concerning the deliberate machine gunning of the life rafts by the Israeli torpedo boat crews, which I distinctly recall being given at the Court of Inquiry and included in the original transcript, is now missing and has been excised.

Following the conclusion of the Court of Inquiry, Admiral Kidd and I remained in contact. Though we never spoke of the attack in public, we did discuss it between ourselves, on occasion. Every time we discussed the attack, Admiral Kidd was adamant that it was a deliberate, planned attack on an American ship.
http://www.ussliberty.com/bostondeclaration.pdf

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I've said my piece on it, far as that goes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
But the thing is they didn't join the German navy, and when the Germans tried to force the issue they scuttled them theirselves at that point. I also disagree with Finn's assertion that they were an extention of Germany... there was a government in exile formed in Britain.

---

Quote:

---

Would you feel differently if it had been British sailors dying intentionally at the hand of an " allie "... or Americans ?

---

Quote:

---

Accepting that theory, would you rather had Egypt aware of Israeli movements in the area ?

---