| Author | Message | | Cowboy | | Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:00 am Post subject: |
| 
Friendly fire or non-hostile fire, a term originally adopted by the United States military, is fire from allied or friendly forces, as opposed to fire coming from enemy forces or enemy fire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire
Friendly fire refers to weapons fire mistakenly fired upon friendly units. The danger of friendly fire is greatly increased when the firing unit is outside of visible range of the target, such as field artillery or air support.
http://www.army-technology.com/glossary/friendly-fire.html
There is no single, official definition.
But "friendly" is "friendly", and not always the same as "allied".
| Quote: | The US was neutral.
Got it? |
Is 'neutral' hostile? Neutral is pretty friendly.
Israel already at that time had informed the US of its intention to take the Golan Heights.
Sounds pretty friendly to me. | |  | | Cowboy | | Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:15 am Post subject: |
| | Quote: | No official definition for friendly fire, also referred to as
fratricide or amicicide, exists. The lack of a precise, clearly defined
term has caused disagreement about what is or is not a friendly fire
casualty. ...
A universally accepted definition for friendly fire does not
exist. |
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1992/WBG.htm | | | | DanielDives | | Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:18 am Post subject: |
| The term FF is used when alligned or allied forces shoot up one another, accidentally.
The US was not involved in this war nor did it's naval vessel the USS Liberty participate in waging this war.
But terminology is of the least concern here. The main question still stands firm:
Why do you refuse to honor the request of the USS Liberty survivors? | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:24 am Post subject: |
| You're really showing your true colors and loyalty today hb.
Only in your dual loyalty world is "(visciously anti-Israel)" the same as pro-American, pro-Navy, pro-veteran. It's a shame the IDF participants are ordered to silence and the State of Israel has said that they will not participate in any Congressional investigation. Some "accident", huh?
| harrietbuster wrote: | | What part of the fact that the officers all testified that the logs, then photographed for inclusion into the record) at the inquiry were true...do you not understand? |
By your "accurate "bs" that "the officers all testified that the logs, then photographed for inclusion into the record) at the inquiry were true...do you not understand?" Where is Jim Ennes' testimony on the NCOI?, he didn't testify. Where is his written testimony that he submitted, it's not there either. Where is Painter's testimony that he testified to the life boats being machined gunned? It's not there either. In 40 years, the Liberty crew has never been been caught in a deception, a lie, a retraction or proven anything they have claimed to be false.
Israel, Cristol, the US Govt, the Navy have all made "corrections or omissions of truth" regarding the attack in multiple ways. And you two defenders of Israel are the worst cases of all.
So who is really lying? They are willing to testify and have been for 40 years but the above parties do not wish that to occur.
| Capt. Ward Boston, JAG, Vhief Counsel, US Naval Court of Inquiry for the USS Liberty. wrote: | | "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 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 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. In addition, the testimony of Lt. Lloyd 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 including in the original transcript, is now missing. Let the survivors testify. Let me testify. Let former intelligence officers testify that they received real-time Hebrew translations of Israeli commanders instructing their pilots to sink “the American ship.”" -Ward Boston, Chief Counsel to the Navy's Court of Inquiry into the attack on the U.S. Navy intelligence ship Liberty. in an interview for the San Diego Union. |
I don't believe that this man would perjure himself and is willing to testify but they won't and investigation based on his crucial involvement in the NCOI. And before you state his age as a problem, (his recorded interviews show no age problems), the apologists have no problem accepting Robert McNamara's comments to stand who is in his nineties cringes and shakes at the mention of the USS Liberty and whose memory of it has no recollection of that day. This was called "sheer supposition" when Boston said it and the new evidence and new people stepping forward confirming what Boston said again shows the lies of the apologists. Cristol is still on record and has never proven his claims..well judge this for yourself.
| Jim Ennes wrote: | "We learned later that the official deck logs for the day of the attack were also changed. I (Jim Ennes) was Officer of the Deck for the morning watch, from 0800 to 1200. During that period the ship was directly overflown on six or eight occasions, once less than 200 feet directly overhead. Before I left the bridge I completed and signed a log entry for my watch. Yet years later when I reviewed copies of that log I discovered that it had been rewritten and signed by the commanding officer with no reference to the very close surveillance we had experienced during my watch.
Navy Regulations require that the Officer of the Deck personally sign the logs for his watch. Why were these logs changed without my permission?
We know now from Captain Ward Boston, the legal counsel for the Court of Inquiry, that he and the President of the Court (and presumably the other members) actually believed that the attack was deliberate, even though they signed an official report claiming to have found that it was accidental.
| Quote: | My deck logs were changed, apparently to support the fraudulent findings of the Court. A statement I made for the Court describing my morning watch also vanished from the record, no doubt to support the Court's fraudulent findings.
Below are the deck logs for that period. Notice, for instance, that the logs for June 8 give a complete list of deaths and injuries, all information that could not possibly have been known on June 8. The commanding officer, who signed the logs, was incapacitated and could not possibly have signed or prepared these logs on that date or for several days afterward. So they are in fact a reconstruction, prepared long after the fact. The logs for June 8 do not represent accurately the events of June 8." | |
| Quote: | | "The haughty Cristol persisted with his bogus argument, at the signing, that there has been “seven investigations” that have exonerated Israel. (In his book, he claimed thirteen! Go figure.) He even claimed that the House Appropriation Committee has a “classified report” on the Liberty “locked up in its safe.” However, Terrance O’Keefe’s excellent investigatory article in the “WRMEA,” (12/03), directly contradicted Cristol’s unsupported opinion and labeled it, “pure fantasy.” O’Keefe underscored how Cristol had also alleged that five of 13 supposed investigations had been conducted by the Congress. In fact, the Congressional Research Service, according to O’Keefe, revealed that “Congress has never investigated the attack" |
| Cowboy wrote: | | "You say the Navy lied." |
The NCOI stated in their Finding of Fact
| Quote: | 1. Available evidence combines to indicate the attack on LIBERTY on 8 June was in fact a case of mistaken identity
6. There are no available indications that the attack was intended against a U. S. Ship..
48. LIBERTY apparently experienced a phenomenon identified as electronic jamming of her voice radio (of US Naval frequencies known to Israel, not mentioned - JD) just prior to and during air attacks. This jamming was described as a steady carrier without modulation. |
Based on what evidence in the NCOI? Automatic acceptance of the word of the attackers? The subject was NEVER even discussed by the crew or an opinion asked?, just assumed. There is no evidence to conclude this in the NCOI on any level to make that conclusion. Who is lying?
| Quote: | 2. "The calm conditions and slow ship speed may well have made the American Flag difficult to identify."
18. Hull markings were clean and freshly painted - ensign was flying from foremast halyard.
28. Flat, calm conditions and the slow five knot patrol speed of LIBERTY in forenoon when she was being looked over initially may well have produced insufficient wind for steaming colors enough to be seen by pilots. |
Based on what? What fact? What evidence?
How can this be determined if the "Weather Logs" (mentioned by McG, pg.31,124 in testimony) excluded from exhibit list ,pg. 104-5) were not submitted as evidence. The logs indicate that prior to the attack going into a western wind at 8 knots and a 5-12 knot wind and guts is more than ample to keep a flag furled in such a condition. Please show me the proof that such "calm conditions" existed if the weather logs say differently, the crew states that flag was flying briskly many times yet this unsubstantiated Finding of Fact is allowed" Who is fabricating?
| Quote: | 19. In five of six attacks, from various angles, two or more jet aircraft at a time conducted strafing, rocket and incendiary attacks.
20. Twenty minutes following air attack, MTB's closed ship to a position 2000 yards on starboard quarter...At this time ship had been making turns for FLANK speed for 9 minutes (Estimated SOA 15-17 knots). Holiday ensign was flying from the starboard yardarm for at least five minutes before torpedo attack was launched. |
A minimum of 4 pilots to 8+ pilots under two waves of a 74 minute attack by different aircraft (excellent eyesight, a renowned air force), 3 MTB Captains, numerous crewmen, watchers, lookouts presumably with binoculars could not see the freshly painted 8 feet tall hull registration on a clear sunny day driving into the wind, nor the "7 x 13 "Holiday flag " blowing before the torpedo attack? Who is lying here yet a wounded , bleeding, severely injured Capt. McConagle speculates correctly that the MTB's were Israelis at 2000 yards through binoculars while under attack.
So who is lying? , a simple Congressional investigation long need for you 40 years.
As to you hb and Cowboy, your obstructionism, obfuscations, apologia just confirm you to be the lying kike rat bastards Liberty apologists you really are, have been and always will be. Disloyal lying American "dual" neocon agents for Israel. | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:17 pm Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | The term FF is used when alligned or allied forces shoot up one another, accidentally. |
No official definition for friendly fire, also referred to as
fratricide or amicicide, exists. The lack of a precise, clearly defined
term has caused disagreement about what is or is not a friendly fire
casualty. ...
A universally accepted definition for friendly fire does not
exist.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1992/WBG.htm
| Quote: | | The US was not involved in this war nor did it's naval vessel the USS Liberty participate in waging this war. |
Is that supposed to make an accident impossible?
| Quote: | But terminology is of the least concern here. The main question still stands firm:
Why do you refuse to honor the request of the USS Liberty survivors? |
Why conduct another investigation when you insist on ignoring the crewmembers' sworn testimony unless it says what you obviously so desperately need it to say? | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:25 pm Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | Where is Jim Ennes' testimony on the NCOI?, he didn't testify. |
But many did.
And their sworn testimony refutes Ennes' unsworn statements.
ANd you believe that the crewmembers lied under oath.
| Quote: | | I don't believe that this man would perjure himself and is willing to testify ... |
Yet you are unwilling to make the same statement about the crewmembers who were actually witnesses and who testified under oath.
Very revealing.
| Quote: | | Based on what evidence in the NCOI? |
All of it. Particularly the evidence and sworn testimony that you deny and are electively blind to.
You pretend that 'should have known' is the same as 'knew', in complete denial of the fact of so many friendly fire incidents on ships that were marked and flying flags. Sorry, al Jeffie, but your opinion which is discredited bu so many events in the real world just doesn't cut it. | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:47 pm Post subject: |
| Where is Jim Ennes' testimony on the NCOI?, he didn't testify.
| Quote: | But many did.
And their sworn testimony refutes Ennes' unsworn statements.
ANd you believe that the crewmembers lied under oath. |
You ignore, avoid and divert. Where's his written statement submitted to the COI?, it is no where in the record. Where's Painter's testimony of the MTB's m-gunning the life rafts? Why was it not included? You say the crew never lied so who is lying here? Who is deceiving? Who is altering the record?
Only 14 Liberty crewmen testified out of a crew od 294 over a period of less 3 days in a COI initiated quickly only 36 hours after the attack and concluded six day later when the Court Reporter flew back on the morning of the 16th with the records. The USS Stark, USS Cole, USS Pueblo, USS Greeneville, USS Nimitz all took weeks and months and all had Congressional Investigations.
14 Crew members out of a 294 man ship is 4.76 of the crew. You say "many were questioned" but one thing is sure. "Many questions were not asked, many questions remained", so who is lying?
I found 5 references in the COI of "RECORDS NOT AVAILABLE"
The ship's weather log was available and mentioned yet was not submitted into evidence.
3 crew spoke as ship and deck officers on events.
-An injured, tired McGonagle spoke only for a total of six hours in 2 sessions. No more.
4 crewmen spoke of damage, fire control, engineering and ship repairs.
1 on medical conditions, treatments, etc.
5 crewman spoke on communications, sigint, radio messaging, etc.
1 crewman spoke on gunnery, ship defense and events.
No crewman was aver asked about Israeli intentions or events or any contradiction to a pre-determined "ACCIDENT" canard the that Finding of Fact was never proven legally or materially by any evidence.
60 members were denied permission t speak at the COI as a "pre-determination" was already in place. And you think this is justice. The State of Israel took one month for their NCOI issued in July '67 to state their canards usuin the predetermined conclusions of the Liberty COI.
34 of course will never speak again. I know you two patriotic proud veterans are so proud. Be sure to wear your flag pins.
You and hb, typical lying rat bastard traitors of the first order. | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
