| Author | Message | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 1:55 am Post subject: USS Liberty survivor assails former Navy lawyer's view |
| USS Liberty survivor assails former Navy lawyer's view
Jul. 22, 2007 12:00 AM LINK
Among the saddest aspects of the USS Liberty story is that it brings out of hiding a phalanx of die-hard Liberty opponents who exhaust themselves trying to disprove our eyewitness accounts and experiences.
I was a lieutenant on the bridge of USS Liberty for several hours up to and during the early minutes of the attack. Although wounded, I remained awake, alert and in touch with my men throughout. Among other things, it was obvious from the extended, prolonged, close attack on our clearly marked ship that this was no accident. Other evidence collected later confirmed that impression, as did intercepts of the attacking pilots who clearly knew they were attacking an American ship.
The facts are: The attack was preceded by hours of close reconnaissance by Israeli aircraft. We were fired upon for more than 75 minutes. The attack included 40 minutes of very close machine-gunning of firefighters and stretcher-bearers long after the attackers viewed our flag and clear markings in English from less than 50 feet away.
advertisement
U.S. Air Force intercept operators heard the pilots repeatedly identifying us as American during the attack. There was no doubt that the pilots knew they were killing Americans. This is widely known within the U.S. intelligence community, despite the heated denials of our attackers and their American supporters.
The attack ended only after the Israelis machine-gunned our life rafts in the water, a war crime that we have reported repeatedly to a disinterested government.
Contrary to A. Jay Cristol's false claim (in Viewpoints last week), numerous U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Joint Chiefs Chairman Tom Moorer, National Security Agency Director Gen. Marshall Carter, CIA Director Richard Helms and many other former senior officers from all of the U.S. intelligence agencies, have agreed that the attack was deliberate.
Cristol seeks to discredit our eyewitness accounts by maligning our motives and falsely claiming Arab financing and influence. Contrary to Cristol's false claims, the Liberty Veterans Association was organized by Master Chief Petty Officer Stan White and myself with no help from former congressmen or anyone else. Just paying the phone bills for this effort was a strain on both of our household budgets. We had no financial support and certainly no Arab money.
Cristol's little essay leans heavily on what he calls the "Navy Court of Inquiry" transcript. He neglects to mention that the court's own legal counsel swears that the transcript was illegally changed in Washington after it was signed. Key testimony, including my own as officer of the deck, was blocked from the record or removed. (See www.ussliberty.org/bostondeclaration.pdf.)
Cristol likens the attack to friendly fire. Rusk said of this case, "Accidents do not occur through repeated attacks by surface vessels and aircraft. ... (This attack) involved combined forces. The ship was flying an American flag. . . . I did not accept the Israeli explanation." (See www.ussliberty.org/supporters.htm for the full statement and others by senior U.S. officials who dispute Cristol.)
Cristol claims that several congressional investigations have concluded that the attack was an accident. False. (See www.ussliberty.org/thebiglie.htm.)
The librarian of Congress reported on July 26, 2006, that there has never been a congressional investigation. Liberty survivors offer $10,000 cash to anyone who can prove that there has been. Neither Cristol nor anyone else has applied for that award. (See www.ussliberty.org/challenge.htm.)
Cristol blames the Liberty Veterans Association for causing survivors distress. On the contrary, the association and its camaraderie have been our greatest comfort. Since the Cristol apologia last Sunday, I have heard from several angry shipmates who are still traumatized by the deaths of their shipmates. Now, many are having sleepless nights and other posttraumatic stress disorder effects renewed specifically by the denials and false statements in Cristol's article.
Cristol always seems perplexed that we crew members take the attack on our ship personally and can't understand why we won't accept that it might have been an accident. The explanation is simple. Cristol's Navy "career" was that of a weekend warrior reserve lawyer. He never served in combat or anywhere near combat. He has never been shot at. Those of us who suffered through an hourlong, well-coordinated, combined arms (air/ship) attack against our ship, seeing our shipmates killed and wounded, know the difference between an accident and a deliberate attack. Cristol obviously does not. To have our eyewitness accounts dismissed by someone who wasn't there and knows nothing about what happened only worsens the trauma we still experience.
The false accounts of our opponents illustrate once again why we survivors have sought for 40 years to have a full, complete, open investigation where we can testify under oath. Catch us in a lie and we go to jail. We are prepared to take that risk. Our opponents fear giving us that opportunity. Our story is true. Cristol's is not.
James Ennes, a retired Navy officer, is author of "Assault on the Liberty." | |  | | DanielDives | | Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:40 am Post subject: |
| Rent-A Troll, be sure to read this thrice before you reply!
The false accounts of our opponents illustrate once again why we survivors have sought for 40 years to have a full, complete, open investigation where we can testify under oath. Catch us in a lie and we go to jail. We are prepared to take that risk. Our opponents fear giving us that opportunity.
Your one of 'em. | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:10 am Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | Among the saddest aspects of the USS Liberty story is that it brings out of hiding a phalanx of die-hard Liberty opponents who exhaust themselves trying to disprove our eyewitness accounts and experiences. |
Such as the islamoleft here who claims that the Liberty crewmembers lied under oath at the US Navy Court of Inquiry?
That list who believe that they lied, of course, includes Daniel Dives and al Jeffie. | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:29 am Post subject: |
| | Spoken like the liar you are and have always been. Fucking AIPAC apologist scum. Tell us again how you don't support the LVA. Cowkike. | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 3:03 pm Post subject: |
| There were numerous investigations, including a US Navy Court of Inquiry, where members of the Liberty crew testified under oath.
Did Chief Radioman Smith lie under oath?
You believe that he lied.
Just like you believe Chief Thompson lied under oath.
What is the point of yet another investigation if you believe that the crew is willing to lie under oath? | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 6:55 pm Post subject: |
| What it is about is truth and facts.
THE NCOI is tainted and sworn as such by its first legal counsel. You oppose any and all investigations into settling the matter.
You say you support the crew's testimony yet the LAV which they are all a part of want an honest first time investigation.
You oppose the LVA, a Congressional investigations and the crew and families.
You oppose the truth and facts from coming forth as there can be only one version and your posts prove it. the heavily disputed official cover-up story and nothing more
Yoy are an Israeli fifth columnist, a hater of Navy veterans, a fool, a toady and lackey of AIPAC, a fraud, a troll and a liar. | | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:39 pm Post subject: |
| | cowgoebbels wrote: | There were numerous investigations, including a US Navy Court of Inquiry, where members of the Liberty crew testified under oath.
Did Chief Radioman Smith lie under oath?
You believe that he lied.
Just like you believe Chief Thompson lied under oath.
What is the point of yet another investigation if you believe that the crew is willing to lie under oath? |
- There was only ONE inquiry and that was the NCOI. So says the Dept of the Navy as relayed to Admiral Mervin Starling.
- A seaman ordered to lie by an Admiral will lie.
- The point is they [the Liberty crew] are no longer in the Navy, no longer subject to threats and blackmail, and for the first time they would be free to tell the truth the way it happened.
| | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:55 pm Post subject: |
| http://www.freewebs.com/gidusko/crimes/
Letter to the Secretary of the Army, April 20, 2006. Report of War Crimes submitted to the Secretary of the Army.....
[....]
When we thus wrote to the Secretary of the Navy, we had only recently learned of a 16 March 2005 admission by the Department of the Navy, in an official letter reply to a Congressional inquiry, that the only investigation that the United States Government had ever made into that attack was a Navy Court of Inquiry which was conducted - and concluded -- within ten days after the attack had occurred.
[....]
Merlin H. Staring
Rear Admiral, JAGC, USN (Ret.) | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
