This just in

The Question wrote:

You talk about the Pallies and the Lebanese having brought Israel's aggression on themselves, well... Israel were the terrorists in the beginning. They brought terrorism on themselves.

Exactly, so I think we are in agreement on the relative morality of either side. Israel is the side that identifies closest with us, so I support them over their opponents. And it's why I don't support a cease-fire, let them fight it out fully and get it over with. And let the better side win. (If Hamas/Hezbollah wants it more, we'll find out, won't we?)

-Ogami
 
Ogami said:
The Question wrote:

You talk about the Pallies and the Lebanese having brought Israel's aggression on themselves, well... Israel were the terrorists in the beginning. They brought terrorism on themselves.

Exactly, so I think we are in agreement on the relative morality of either side. Israel is the side that identifies closest with us, so I support them over their opponents.

Events like the Liberty assault, the Lavon Affair, the King David Hotel bombing, and Mossad involvement pre-9/11 convince me that they don't identify with us, they merely lie to and use us, with the complicity of our own politicians and without the consent of the American people.

And it's why I don't support a cease-fire, let them fight it out fully and get it over with. And let the better side win. (If Hamas/Hezbollah wants it more, we'll find out, won't we?)

If you really were that equanimical about it, I'd agree. But it still looks to me like you're defending terrorists over terrorists, which to my mind is nonsensical at best and hypocritical at worst.
 
The Question wrote:

If you really were that equanimical about it, I'd agree. But it still looks to me like you're defending terrorists over terrorists, which to my mind is nonsensical at best and hypocritical at worst.

It's nonsensical to get choosy over our country's allies because they don't meet arbitrary and hypothetical standards. The notion that all of America's allies must be perfect died with President Carter. It's thanks to him raising his nose to the Shah of Iran that we have that theocracy today. (And incidentally, this Hezbollah war today was paid for by that same country that Carter alienated.)

I've got historical fact on my side, you've got theory. Care to see how one stacks up against the other?

-Ogami
 
Ogami said:
The Question wrote:

If you really were that equanimical about it, I'd agree. But it still looks to me like you're defending terrorists over terrorists, which to my mind is nonsensical at best and hypocritical at worst.

It's nonsensical to get choosy over our country's allies because they don't meet arbitrary and hypothetical standards. The notion that all of America's allies must be perfect died with President Carter.

I don't expect our allies to be perfect. I expect them to be worth more than they cost us, and Israel flatly isn't.

It's thanks to him raising his nose to the Shah of Iran that we have that theocracy today. (And incidentally, this Hezbollah war today was paid for by that same country that Carter alienated.)

And?

I've got historical fact on my side, you've got theory.

Unless you're saying that the King David Hotel bombing, the Liberty assault, the Lavon Affair, 9/11 and Israel's current military actions are all merely theoretical, you've might want to rephrase that to reflect reality.

Care to see how one stacks up against the other?

Put down the bong and step away from the keyboard, and we'll talk about it.
 
I am familiar with the Liberty mistake. Given your cherry-picked list of 'perfidy', I still trust Israel more than I trust Hezbollah/Hamas. (Or is that faint praise?)
 
Ogami said:
I am familiar with the Liberty mistake.

When you call it 'the Liberty 'mistake'', are you claiming it was a case of mistaken identity, or merely that the Israeli government was mistaken in assuming ALL Americans would be gullible enough to believe it was an accident?

Given your cherry-picked list of 'perfidy', I still trust Israel more than I trust Hezbollah/Hamas. (Or is that faint praise?)

Cherry-picked or not, that perfidy exists -- and is aside from the brutality they've been inflicting on the Palestinians for God knows how long. Those incidents were attacks on their "allies." Arab terrorists have done the same, and worse, but at least they had the decency to attack us to our faces rather than stab us in the back.
 
Tell me how similar these two ships look to you: (here's a clue: One is a SIGINT ship, and the other is a horse carrier. For transporting horses.)

Ship 1:

elquseir.gif


Ship 2:

lg0014.jpg
 
What's that, you say? You'd like to see more photos? Well, okay.

lg0044.jpg
Pre-attack reconnaisance aircraft, which Israel claims was not there.

lg0060.jpg
Life-rafts which have been hit with napalm.

lg0085.jpg
More napalm damage, signals bag and signals bridge.

sliberty.jpg
Another view of the ship Israel claims their pilots could not distinguish from a horse carrier.

lg0048.jpg
"Horses."

cmh.jpg
The Congressional Medal of Honor presented to Capt. McGonagle -- at the Navy Yard, rather than by the President.
 
The Question asked:

When you call it 'the Liberty 'mistake'', are you claiming it was a case of mistaken identity, or merely that the Israeli government was mistaken in assuming ALL Americans would be gullible enough to believe it was an accident?

I am familiar with the case, that does not mean I buy into the nutty conspiracy theory that it was a deliberate attack by Israel upon the United States. (I guess you'll tell me that a strafing by an American fighter jet in Afghanistan was a deliberate and pre-meditated attack against Canadian soldiers as well.)

-Ogami
 
Ogami said:
The Question asked:

When you call it 'the Liberty 'mistake'', are you claiming it was a case of mistaken identity, or merely that the Israeli government was mistaken in assuming ALL Americans would be gullible enough to believe it was an accident?

I am familiar with the case, that does not mean I buy into the nutty conspiracy theory that it was a deliberate attack by Israel upon the United States.

"nutty conspiracy theory"?! Dude, the glaringly obvious visual difference between the ship they attacked and the ship they claim they thought they were attacking is right in front of you! Jesus Listerine-gargling Christ, man! :shock:
 
Maybe you can read text better than you can identify the difference between a beat-up old Egyptian horse hauler and a $40 million intelligence vessel.

Read the War Crimes Report filed on behalf of the Liberty's survivors.
 
The Question wrote:

Jesus Listerine-gargling Christ, man!

I assume you are a fighter pilot and can thus speak with authority on identifying targets in the middle of a war. Otherwise, you'd just be blowing smoke out of your ass over this, hmmm?
 
Betrayal Behind Israeli Attack On USS Liberty

By Admiral Thomas Moorer

Houston Chronicle

1-14-4


After State Department officials and historians assembled in Washington, D.C., last week to discuss the 1967 war in the Middle East, I am compelled to speak out about one of U.S. history's most shocking cover-ups.

On June 8, 1967, Israel attacked our proud naval ship -- the USS Liberty -- killing 34 American servicemen and wounding 172. Those men were then betrayed and left to die by our own government.

U.S. military rescue aircraft were recalled, not once, but twice, through direct intervention by the Johnson administration. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara's cancellation of the Navy's attempt to rescue the Liberty, which I personally confirmed from the commanders of the aircraft carriers America and Saratoga, was the most disgraceful act I witnessed in my entire military career.

To add insult to injury, Congress, to this day, has failed to hold formal hearings on Israel's attack on this American ship. No official investigation of Israel's attack has ever permitted the testimony of the surviving crew members.

A 1967 investigation by the Navy, upon which all other reports are based, has now been fully discredited as a cover-up by its senior attorney. Capt. Ward Boston, in a sworn affidavit, recently revealed that the court was ordered by the White House to cover up the incident and find that Israel's attack was "a case of mistaken identity."

Some distinguished colleagues and I formed an independent commission to investigate the attack on the USS Liberty. After an exhaustive review of previous reports, naval and other military records, including eyewitness testimony from survivors, we recently presented our findings on Capitol Hill. They include:

· Israeli reconnaissance aircraft closely studied the Liberty during an eight-hour period prior to the attack, one flying within 200 feet of the ship. Weather reports confirm the day was clear with unlimited visibility. The Liberty was a clearly marked American ship in international waters, flying an American flag and carrying large U.S. Navy hull letters and numbers on its bow.

Despite claims by Israeli intelligence that they confused the Liberty with a small Egyptian transport, the Liberty was conspicuously different from any vessel in the Egyptian navy. It was the most sophisticated intelligence ship in the world in 1967. With its massive radio antennae, including a large satellite dish, it looked like a large lobster and was one of the most easily identifiable ships afloat.

· Israel attempted to prevent the Liberty's radio operators from sending a call for help by jamming American emergency radio channels.

· Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned lifeboats at close range that had been lowered to rescue the most seriously wounded.

As a result, our commission concluded that:

· There is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew.

· In attacking the USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder against U.S. servicemen and an act of war against the United States

· The White House knowingly covered up the facts of this attack from the American people.

· The truth continues to be concealed to the present day in what can only be termed a national disgrace.

What was Israel's motive in launching this attack? Congress must address this question with full cooperation from the National Security Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency and the military intelligence services.

The men of the USS Liberty represented the United States. They were attacked for two hours, causing 70 percent of American casualties, and the eventual loss of our best intelligence ship.

These sailors and Marines were entitled to our best defense. We gave them no defense.

Did our government put Israel's interests ahead of our own? If so, why? Does our government continue to subordinate American interests to Israeli interests? These are important questions that should be investigated by an independent, fully empowered commission of the American government.

The American people deserve to know the truth about this attack. We must finally shed some light on one of the blackest pages in American naval history. It is a duty we owe not only to the brave men of the USS Liberty, but to every man and woman who is asked to wear the uniform of the United States.


Moorer was chairman of the joint chiefs of staff from 1970 to 1974. He is joined in the independent commission of inquiry by Gen. Ray Davis (recently deceased); Rear Adm. Merlin Staring; former Judge Advocate General of the Navy and Ambassador James Akins.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3617724,00.html

U.S. Says 1967 Attack Act of Negligence

GUARDIAN (London) Tuesday January 13, 2004 2:31 AM By BARRY SCHWEID AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Reviewing documents covering 36 years, amid a lack of consensus, a State Department official concluded Monday that Israel's attack on the U.S. spy ship Liberty during the 1967 Six Day War was an act of Israeli negligence.

The United States also was negligent, the official maintained, for failing to notify Israel that the electronic intelligence-gathering ship was cruising international waters off the Egyptian coast and for failing to withdraw the Liberty from the war zone.

A daylong conference that studied fresh documents as well as the established record failed to produce a consensus for any of three views voiced most often: Israel intentionally attacked what it knew to be a ship of the U.S. Navy, the attack was accidental, or the attack resulted from faulty judgment.

Thirty-four Americans were killed in the June 8, 1967, attack, and more than 170 were wounded.

Israel long has maintained that the attack was a case of mistaken identity, an explanation the Johnson administration did not challenge formally. Israel said its forces thought the Liberty was an Egyptian horse carrier, apologized to the United States and paid almost $13 million in compensation, some to victims or their families.

Since the United States did not intercept the order to attack the ship with cannon fire and napalm, precise facts of the attack remain elusive, the State Department official said Monday, speaking on condition of anonymity.

He called the Israeli attack and the U.S. actions a classic example of Murphy's law: "If anything can go wrong, it will."

David Hatch, a technical director at the National Security Agency, said, "The good news is that information long sought by researchers is now out, and the bad news is that it does not settle it."

The occasion for the State Department conference was the release of historical documents about the 1967 war in which Israel defeated the combined forces of Egypt, Syria, Jordan and other Arab countries in six days.

Charles Smith, a professor at the University of Arizona, said in his presentation that Israel should have known the Liberty was an American ship.

"If they didn't know, they didn't try hard enough to find out," he said.

James Bamford, an investigative journalist who has written about the incident, demanded further investigation "instead of people getting up here and giving their opinions."

"There were cover-ups," Bamford said, citing a signed affidavit by retired Navy Capt. Ward Boston, who was a leader of a military investigation into the incident.

Boston said in the affidavit in October that then-President Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara had told those heading the Navy's inquiry to "conclude that the attack was a case of `mistaken identity' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary."

Boston, 80, who did not attend Monday's conference, said the Navy investigators were given only one week but still were able to amass "a vast amount of evidence, including heartbreaking testimony from young survivors."

Accusing Israel of a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and kill its crew, Boston said in a legal declaration in Coronado, Calif., that he was certain the Israel pilots knew the Liberty, which clearly displayed American flags and had markings in English instead of Arabic, was a U.S. Navy ship.

Additionally, Boston said, "Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned three lifeboats that that had been launched in an attempt by the crew to save the most seriously wounded - a war crime."

Jay Cristol, a U.S. bankruptcy court judge who has written about the incident, cited the finding of the Navy's inquiry as proof the attack was a mistake. "There was no indication they had any knowledge they were attacking a U.S. ship," Cristol told the conference.

If the attack were deliberate, its motivation remains uncertain.

Adm. Thomas Moorer, a former chief of naval operations and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote in a memorandum on June 8, 1997, the 30th anniversary of the attack, that Israel deliberately attacked to hide its intentions in the war.

"I am confident that Israel knew the Liberty could intercept radio messages from all parties and potential parties to the ongoing war, then in its fourth day, and that Israel was preparing to seize the Golan Heights from Syria despite President Johnson's known opposition to such a move," Moorer wrote.

"I believe (then-Israeli Defense Minister) Moshe Dayan concluded that he could prevent Washington from becoming aware of what Israel was up to by destroying the primary source of acquiring that information, the USS Liberty." Israel took the strategic Syrian territory and still holds it 37 years later.
 
The article is not in question, I'm sure you can post 50 trillion of them.

You posted to me: "Jesus Listerine-gargling Christ, man!"

You and I can disagree on this, since neither of us are fighter pilots, especially one operating in the middle of a bombing mission along the Egyptian coast like this Israeli pilot. You can choose to believe he was operating under orders to kill the Americans, I don't believe that is the case. That's it, really.

-Ogami
 
Same for you Mentalist. Unless you're that Israeli fighter pilot, we can't know what was going through his head. And our government obviously doesn't feel Israel was deliberately attacking American forces, so the matter is closed. (Except, naturally, in nutty conspiracy circles)
 
Ogami said:
Same for you Mentalist. Unless you're that Israeli fighter pilot, we can't know what was going through his head. And our government obviously doesn't feel Israel was deliberately attacking American forces, so the matter is closed. (Except, naturally, in nutty conspiracy circles)

I don't have a problem with you, you seem like a nice enough guy but seriously, I can't get on your wavelength of thinking whatsoever.

The evidence is overwhelming. Wake up to reality. The goverment says it's ok so case closed?

Jeez.
 
Mentalist wrote:

The evidence is overwhelming. Wake up to reality. The goverment says it's ok so case closed?

Because the U.S. government doesn't consider a warcrime to have been committed, the U.S. government doesn't consider an Act of War to have been committed, either. The Israelis have paid compensation to the sailors' families, the matter is closed.

I would point you to the similar case when a U.S. fighter jet shot a jet airliner out of the sky over the Persian Gulf. He misidentified its radar profile as a fighter jet, pretty stupid right? Yet it wasn't an act of war against Iran, it was a mistake. The U.S. government paid reparations to the victims' families, case closed.

So when I dismiss the "Liberty mistake", I do so with a command of the facts. Speculation about motive, of course, lies in the realm of the tinfoil hat crowd. No offense intended to any of you in that crowd, of course. ;)
 
Back
Top