| Author | Message | | Guest | | Posted: Tue Oct 29, 2002 10:25 am Post subject: "Operation Cyanide"/ Intentional Israeli USS Liber |
| Subj: "Operation Cyanide" and the Intentional Israeli USS Liberty Attack
Date: 10/28/02 11:47:23 PM Pacific Standard Time
In a message dated 10/27/02 6:13:40 PM Pacific Standard Time, congressmanbillybob@earthlink.net writes:
Subj:Re: Robert Fisk of London Independent Newspaper
Date:10/27/02 6:13:40 PM Pacific Standard Time
From:congressmanbillybob@earthlink.net
There's not much use in debating with anyone who takes the Independent in the U.K. seriously as a source of news. That paper is a bird-cage liner which publishes the bigoted and dishonest screeds of Robert Fisk. And as a waste of time and newsprint, Fisk is right up there with Joe Conason in the US. Spend time around the Internet. Get some better, more accurate and more thorough sources of news. Then, when you have a clue, write to me again. Cheers, Billybob
Robert Fisk is one of the best (if not the best) print journalists covering the Middle East today (especially on the Palestinian v. Israeli conflict) because he doesn't tow the "Israel can do no wrong" party line that most US press/media takes... For a reality check, I suggest you read the following article by Mr. Fisk:
http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=285777
I also suggest that you access the message threads found at the top of the following Israel message board:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/index.php
If you indeed are a Congressman, how much AIPAC (pro-Israel) lobby money have you ever received? Just curious as you can see the AIPAC link at:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com
I suppose you are one of the Israeli apologists and/or truth distorters about the intentional and brutal Israeli attack on the USS Liberty (in which 34 American sailors were murdered by Israel with 171 more wounded)? For the truth on this act of treachery by Israel, access the following Web site:
http://www.ussliberty.org
A recently released BBC documentary ("Dead in the Water") aired this past summer about "Operation Cyanide".
If you are sincerely a patriotic American as you seem to claim, you should read the following and address it in that there are classified documents about "Operation Cyanide" that the US and Israeli governments still won't release some 35 years later. Why won't they?
Subj: Lyndon Johnson's treasonous USS Liberty cover-up for Israel in a larger context
Date: 7/7/02 2:21:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time
To: richard_neustadt@harvard.edu
Dear Professor Neustadt,
I have been reading your "Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents" book for a political science course that I have been taking with an excellent professor at UCLA. However, I noticed that you did not even mention the intentional and brutal Israeli attack on the USS Liberty (which resulted in the deliberate murder of 34 American sailors with 172 wounded) that occurred in 1967 during President Johnson's term. This was a major event as the USA almost launched a nuclear strike on Cairo (after learning that the USS Liberty had been attacked) according to a recently released BBC documentary (called "Dead in the Water") as you can access the following Web site for it at your convenience:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/dead_in_the_water.shtml
The same BBC documentary mentioned that there has been a 35 year cover-up beginning with the Johnson administration. As you had mentioned in your book that you were a consultant to the Johnson White House, I am emailing to inquire whether you have any additional information about the cover-up? The cover-up question now becomes even more significant with the latest issue of the Navy Times (via www.navytimes.com) containing an article (which is included below as well) conveying that the Kidd Navy Court of Inquiry was a sham and a fraud. Also, I came across the following Web link on the Internet and found it incredibly concerning how you left out any mention of the USS Liberty attack (and its association to the Johnson Presidency) out of your book:
http://www.jfkmontreal.com/lbj's_passionate_attachment.htm
Sincerely,
OCT. 28, 2002 (COL. 2)
A BIG DIFFERENCE
BY CHARLEY REESE
Iraq's Saddam Hussein doesn't have nuclear weapons, but President George Bush wants to use
force to disarm him (and actually to dethrone him). North Korea does have nuclear weapons, but
President Bush thinks we should use a diplomatic approach, without threats.
What's the difference?
North Korea has no oil; Iraq does. After a bloody war in North Korea, you would have
nothing but a poor, devastated country. After a much easier war in Iraq, you would be sitting
in charge of the second-largest known oil reserves in the world.
Saddam Hussein is cruel man, but he seems … to me, at least … a lot saner than Kim Jong Il.
Recalling the image of Kim in what looked like a 1970s leisure suit cavorting with former
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright makes me nervous to think of him with nuclear weapons.
Saddam looks like actor Walter Matthau; Kim John Il looks like a character out of an Austin
Powers movie.
Of course, another reason the president prefers diplomacy in dealing with North Korea,
despite its now-revealed lying and deception, is that this little country is one mean, tough
little dragon with very sharp teeth. A military officer friend of mine who has seen the U.S.
estimates of casualties in the event of a war with North Korea said the estimate for the first
few hours of combat is 72,000.
North Korea is the fourth-largest military power in the world. It has more than 1 million
men in its army, and another 4.7 million in reserve. It has 3,500 main battle tanks and 26
submarines. It has so much of its power perched on the Demilitarized Zone, just a few miles
from Seoul, South Korea, and 35,000 American troops, that there is no way we could fight a war
without losing thousands of men.
I know this sounds cynical, but as a character in a novel by Benjamin Disraeli once said,
the world isn't run the way most people imagine it is. As a former political speechwriter, I
can tell you that I quit paying attention to what politicians say a long time ago. You have to
watch what they do. You have to look beyond and behind their rhetoric for the real reasons for
their actions. They don't always lie outright, but they often neglect to tell you the whole
story.
President Bush withheld the information that North Korea had nuclear weapons for 12 days
while Congress was debating his war resolution for Iraq. It was certainly relevant knowledge
and might have changed some votes. That's no doubt why Bush kept the information secret. As a
result, whatever slim trust existed between Democrats and the president is now probably gone.
Oh, well, it's a good idea not to go to war with North Korea. I thought as much when Bush
included the country in his ``axis of evil.'' It just isn't worth the price. The United
States, France, Great Britain, Russia, China, Israel, India and Pakistan all have nuclear
weapons, so who cares if North Korea joins the club? Until the world gets serious about
eliminating nuclear weapons … and the superpowers are nowhere close to that … you can hardly
blame other countries for wanting them. But we all have to face the fact that if these nations
keep them and other nations get them, one day they will be used. That won't be the end of the
world, but it will be a most unpleasant situation.
When I was younger, I was more into warrior stuff, but now it seems that diplomatic
solutions make a lot more sense than I used to believe they did. I think ``older and wiser''
is just a greater appreciation of life. One hates to see it cut short because of political
quarrels among politicians.
(Write to Charley Reese at P.O. Box 2446, Orlando, FL 32802) | |  | | Guest | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
