| Author | Message | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:59 am Post subject: A brilliant commentary on the USS Liberty |
| Well said. Worthy of its own thread and a reminder..... Kudos AT
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 3:20 am
Okay, I know everyone here understands fully why Cowboy can't address any of the facts or discuss any of the evidence relating to the deliberate attack by Israel on the USS Liberty or the subsequent cover-up by the US government. I know we all understand why he has gone into broken record mode and is spamming his question, which has been answered several times by patient folks. Every regular here knows why he has to ignore the answers he's been given. For him to even touch on the issues would simply serve to highlight the obvious, the attack was deliberate, that's what the facts say, that's what the crew says, that's why there had to be a cover-up at all. Simple stuff and Cowboy knows it.
But for the newcomers who are wondering, "Why does he ask that question over and over, what's his point?", here's where he's trying to go.
1. Israel deliberately attacks and tries to sink the USS Liberty. Please see http://ussliberty.com for a good starting point for your own investigation, and have a look at the documentary from the BBC, "Dead in the Water", link available at the top of this page.
2. After the attack the crew were told in no uncertain terms they were not to discuss the deliberate attack with anyone, not even families. They were threatened with serious consequences, including jail time should they speak openly. As an example, from crewman "Larry" Weaver, "I told Admirial [sic] Kidd (without his 3 stars) what I saw. Finally puts his stars back on and he said, "Very well Richard, now I'm an Admiral again." Then in a stern voice he said, "IF YOU EVER TELL ANYONE -- family, friends or anyone else -- what you have just told me, you will be put in Prison and we will lose the key.""
3. The kangaroo investigation that followed was careful to limit the scope of the inquiry to fit the desired outcome, key testimony was excluded, key witnesses prevented from testifying - including the acting Captain who took charge on the Liberty after Captain McGonagle was incapacitated - see "Dead in the Water" for confirmation.
4. Now here's the key element of Cowboy's attempt at deception, because the crew had been threatened, because they had been told not to speak of the facts, because the inquiry was a complete whitewash and omitted the key evidence, the whole truth did not emerge at the time. The cover-up worked, the men were silenced. Cowboy imagines this amounts to a confirmation the attack was an accident because they crew never said otherwise, because the crew was prevented from saying otherwise. So because they didn't reveal all the facts, they either 'lied', as he puts it, or, as he cynically suggests in order to support his own attempt at a whitewash, they actually did tell the whole story. If they told the whole story at the time, it follows the attack was accidental. If they didn't then they 'lied' under oath. See how that works? See what a snake he is?
5. Now then, to answer his endlessly repeated question requires a person to either say, "No they didn't lie" - therefore they told the whole truth at the time and therefore the attack was accidental and so they must be lying now after the facts, or, "Yes, they did lie", therefore you've just assaulted the crew's integrity and therefore what's to say they aren't lying now when they say the attack was deliberate? Either way, by this reckoning, they end up liars and either way you have just called them liars, either at the time or after the event. All the while our 'patriot' Cowboy sticks with the crew (with the same altruistic intent as a vampire sticking to its prey) - or should I say, paints them into their testimony regardless of what they have said subsequently. This is so cynical it might even make a lawyer blush in shame. And this is the whole body of Cowboy's defence of criminals, back-stabbers and traitors. Of course he can't rely on the facts so word games, legal doublespeak and deceitful ploys, albeit clever ones, are his tools of the trade. His trade is, betrayal.
So to answer his question - NO THE CREW DID NOT LIE. THEY WERE NOT GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO TELL THE TRUTH. However, despite the threats made against them, now they have left the service and are no longer under military jurisdiction, now they are no longer subject to the orders from the chain of command, the crew is free to tell the whole story. And the story they tell and the evidence they are now permitted to reveal and the evidence that has since come to light from other sources including official records and the views of now retired senior ranking military and political figures points to the cast iron conclusion - THE ATTACK WAS MOST CERTAINLY DELIBERATE.
By the way, Cowboy knows the attack was deliberate. He may be one of the most deceitful and traitorous people alive but he's not stupid and he can read. His own oath lies with Israel, that much is plain, and unlike the crew of the Liberty who stood their posts and took the hail of bullets and bombs that fell upon them, delivered by an enemy posing as a friend, he has no problem betraying the country he claims to be a citizen of, betraying the servicemen he claims to be a staunch supporter of in any other instance. A war crime in Iraq, Cowboy will tell you it never happened - because it suits his agenda. But the crew of the Liberty who do not tell you to believe them, they simply ask you to support their calls for a full and open hearing - their day in court with the shackles removed and the truth brought to light - Cowboy won't support these guys, these Americans, because it threatens his agenda.
His agenda is self-evident. Israel first, Israel second, but America only when America is useful. In times past creatures like Cowboy would be hanged by the neck until dead and then buried in an unmarked grave. This was thought a fitting punishment for quislings and traitors and I can't say I disagree. But ever since men of stature so low as to rival Cowboy's have attained high office, betrayal of the nation and its people has become the norm. People like Cowboy are promoted rather than disposed of, medals are pinned to their chests. Look at McCain, for instance, offspring of a traitor who participated directly in the Liberty cover-up. McCain who went on to personally betray American servicemen left behind in Vietnam. Will he be the next president? How can that be? These are your contemporary American 'heroes' and look around to see the world that has been made in their image. It is because of these vermin the crew of the Liberty will not have the opportunity to set truth over deceit in an open hearing. It falls then on every American who believes in the principles upon which they claim their nation was founded to fight these men who have no honour or regard for their country and remove them from office. Only then will the truth of the USS Liberty be allowed to enter into the American conscience and only then will an ongoing threat to America come into the brighter light. On that day, all things that are obvious to the few will become obvious to the many and the world will be changed for the better.
Until then, we cannot hang this Cowboy, all we can do is pity him and reject him as the miserable wretch he is. He will continue spamming, trying to trap the unwary, mislead the inquisitive, undermine the crew. I suspect the aim is to keep things out of the light until the last crew members have passed away, then the final history can be written up without unhelpful interventions by truth. Hopefully the crew will set world records for longevity, fingers crossed. The story of the USS Liberty is hugely important, and be sure of this - it's far too important to allow it to be hijacked by those who would use it to press their hatred of Jews. This is not about Jews, go and read the front page of the Liberty Veterans web site for their own views on anyone that uses their misfortune to push hateful agendas. In fact the Liberty vets don't even call for sanctions against the nation that deliberately assaulted them, they simply call for a chance to tell the whole story. But of course that story would lead to very big questions concerning Israel and its status as an American ally should the truth ever be widely revealed. Even so, in pressing your support for these crew members, do not fall into the same trap infested by the Cowboy's of this world. For every one of you that brings hatred of Jews to the table, the court date requested by the crew members gets pushed that little bit further away, into a disappearing distance. Don't do such a disservice to these men. In pressing this case, follow the crews' wishes, abide by their motivation and if you can't do that, take a back seat, don't get involved at all. When the truth comes out Americans will make their own judgements and that will be enough. Will any of us live to see the day? I think not, but the fight that is made today will allow future generations to put things to right. And that's a worthy fight.
Remember the Liberty. | |  | | snowqueen | | Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 6:01 pm Post subject: |
| | Very good. It should be kept up top or made a sticky. | | | | Tipper | | Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 6:15 pm Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | Very good. It should be kept up top or made a sticky. |
its excellent...but not enough to shut cowpollards spam down...
he has no shame at all......and is a very very sick person indeed....
the authorities are going to have to step in and use drastic measures....
because cowpollard is no longer in control of himself.....
a taser would probably stop him for awhile....but I don't know for
how long.... | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 6:33 pm Post subject: |
| The fact is, Cowboy references indisputable facts related to the event, and sworn testimony of USS Libert crewmembers.
Others here either want to avoid their sworn testimony, say that the crewmembers may have lied under oath, or outright say that the crewmembers lied under oath.
WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY PEOPLE FEAR DISCUSSION OF THE SWORN TESTIMONY OF THE USS LIBERTY CREWMEMBERS?
WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE INSIST ON CLAIMING THAT US NAVY VETERANS CANNOT HAVE LIED WHEN THEY CALL OTHER US NAVY VETERANS LIARS?
WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE ARE UNWILLING TO FACE INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THEIR OWN CLAIMS, AND FACTS RELATED TO THE INCIDENT AND CREWMEMBERS' SWORN TESTIMONY?
WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE ADHERE TO A CLAIM "NO THE CREW DID NOT LIE. THEY WERE NOT GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO TELL THE TRUTH"... WHEN THERE IS DOCUMENTATION OF SWORN TESTIMONY THAT THE CREWMEMBERS HAVE HAVE NOT DENIED OR EVER CLAIMED IS FALSE?
WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE ADHERE TO A CLAIM "NO THE CREW DID NOT LIE. THEY WERE NOT GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO TELL THE TRUTH"... WHEN THERE WERE IMMEDIATE ORDERS TO ALLOW CREW INTERVIEWS, AND CREWMEMBERS DID, IN FACT, PROVIDE SUCH INTERVIEWS? AND WHEN, IN FACT, ISRAELIS HAVE BEEN QUESTIONED BY AMERICANS ABOUT THE INCIDENT?
WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE DEMAND THAT ISRAEL IS HIDING SOMETHING BY NOT PROVIDING ISRAELIS FOR TESTIMONY, WHEN THE US PRACTICE IS TO NOT PROVIDE AMERICAN MILITARY TO FOREIGN QUESTIONING IN SIMILAR INCIDENTS?
WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE FALSELY MAKE THIS AN ISSUE OF WHAT THEY ALLEGE TO BE 'PATRIOTISM' OR 'LOYALTY', AND NOT AN ISSUE OF FACTS AND TRUTH?
WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE INSIST ON INVESTIGATION AFTER INVESTIGATION UNTIL AN INVESTIGATION WILL SAY WHAT THEY OBVIOUSLY HAVE A NEED FOR ONE TO SAY?
It clearly appears that the facts in evidence and the crewmembers' sworn testimony must desperately be avoided here. | | | | Tipper | | Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 7:20 pm Post subject: |
| 
I own a taser gun....may I use it in here? | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:07 pm Post subject: |
| | Cowboy wrote: | WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE INSIST ON INVESTIGATION AFTER INVESTIGATION UNTIL AN INVESTIGATION WILL SAY WHAT THEY OBVIOUSLY HAVE A NEED FOR ONE TO SAY?
It clearly appears that the facts in evidence and the crewmembers' sworn testimony must desperately be avoided here.] |
-WHY IS IT THAT SO MANY HERE INSIST ON INVESTIGATION AFTER INVESTIGATION UNTIL AN INVESTIGATION WILL SAY WHAT THEY OBVIOUSLY HAVE A NEED FOR ONE TO SAY?
What "investigation after investigation"? This is apologist mythology. A lie.
Ahron Jay Cristol, self proclaimed and discredited "USS Liberty expert" posted in his 'apologist handbook" that
Ahron Jay Cristol
| Ahron Jat Cristol, author of the and accused of being an "agent for Israel wrote: | | "After ten official US investigations(including five congressional investigations) , there was never any evidence that the attack was made with knowledge that the target was a US ship. There is substantial evidence the attack was a tragic mistake caused by blunders of both the US and Israel. Eight US presidents, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush (41), Clinton, and Bush (43), have each accepted the conclusion that the attack was a tragic case of mistaken identity." |
The Liberty Veterans Association's response:
The Liberty Veterans Association has long offered a $10,000 reward to anyone who can show that these statements are true. See www.ussliberty.org/challenge.htm. No one has ever applied for the reward. ['The challenge has been offered since March 1, 2004, with no takers'] There has never been a Congressional investigation. We are unaware that any American president has accepted the position that the attack was a tragic accident. The only American government investigation of any kind was the U.S.Navy Court of Inquiry in 1967. That inquiry examined only the performance of the crew and the adequacy of communications and avoided entirely the question of whether the attack was deliberate, accepting "at face value" the Israeli claim that the attack was an accident. That inquiry has been dismissed by its own legal counsel, legal counsel to the convening authority and numerous other key figures as fraudulent. Yet Mr. Cristol persists in his false reports. Unfortunately, the big lie has been repeated so often that it is widely repeated even by Members of Congress as if it were established fact. Moreover, we have a letter from the Librarian of Congress verifying that there has never been such an investigation which is reproduced below.
Source: http://www.ussliberty.org/thebiglie.htm
| Quote: | James Gotcher replies to Jay Cristol
Naval Institute Proceedings
August 2005
Liberty Victims Did Not Die in Vain
(See A. Wells, p88, March 2005; A. Cristol, p 28, April 2005; R. Russell, p14-16, May 2005 Proceedings
James R. Gotcher -- The letter by A. Jay Cristol is an attempt to perpetuate discredited myths. Captain Cristol objects to Mr. Wells's characterization of former Secretary of State Dean Rusk's position and suggests that Secretary Rusk in fact held contrary views. In his formal diplomatic note to the Israeli government (6/10/67), Secretary Rusk characterized the attack as follows:
"In these circumstances, the later military attack by Israeli aircraft on the USS Liberty is quite literally incomprehensible. As a minimum, the attack must be condemned as an act of military recklessness reflecting wanton disregard for human life. The subsequent attack by Israeli motor torpedo boats, substantially after the vessel was or should have been identified by Israeli military forces, manifests the same reckless disregard for human life."
Cristol's suggestion that Secretary Rusk held different views is belied by Secretary Rusk's own words not long before his death:
"But I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous." -- Rusks memoirs: As I Saw It, p.388.
Similarly, Captain Cristol suggests that the Central Intelligence Agency concluded that the attack was a mistake. Commenting on the final CIA report that followed the interim report quoted by Captain Cristol, former director of Central Intelligence Richard Helms wrote in his memoir, A Look Over My Shoulder:
"I had no role in the board of inquiry that followed, or the board's finding that there could be no doubt that the Israelis knew exactly what they were doing in attacking the Liberty. I have yet to understand why it was felt necessary to attack this ship or who ordered the attack."
Finally, Captain Cristol suggests that readers visit his web site for further information. On that website, he alleges: "After ten official US investigations (including five congressional investigations), there was never any evidence that the attack was made with knowledge that the target was a U.S. warship."
The allegation is false. There is conclusive evidence that Congress has never investigated the Israeli attack on the Liberty. ( http://www.usslibertyinquiry.com/arguments/American/israelidefenses/investigations/investigations.html ) Captain Cristol should offer proof if he intends to continue his campaign on behalf of Israel.
Source: http://ussliberty.org/gotcheraug05.htm |
| Quote: | An Open Letter to Ahron Jay Cristol
fromJames Ronald Gotcher
Dear Mr. Cristol,
It has now been [more than a year] since I invited you to debate the validity of your claim of official Congressional investigations. You have not come forward, nor has your surrogate, Mr. Weeks.
A short time ago, I visited your web site and saw that it still proclaims the lie that:
Quote:
"After ten official US investigations (including five congressional investigations), there was never any evidence that the attack was made with knowledge that the target was a US ship."
This is a lie. You know it. I know it. And anyone who has investigated this issue knows it. Why do you persist in asserting it?"
Source: http://ussliberty.org/gotcheraug05.htm
|
Besides how can any "investigation after investigation" as you claim EXCLUDE the American participants? There has never been a Liberty surviving crewman who has ever testified to anything concerning the Liberty attack in any public accounting excepting the 14 "permitted" sailors who were allowed to testify in a rush to predetermined Naval Court of Inquiry over a two day period. The COI was conducted in 10 days and convened only 36 hours after the attack according to the public COI. The USS Cole Court of Inquiry lasted over a year and included a Congressional investigation. Same for the USS Jacksonville submarine sinking the Japanese boat lasted nearly two months. Even the initial Israeli investigation of the USS Liberty attack took a month. Every crew member of the USS Cole and 43 members of the USS Jacksonville where less loss of life occurred than the USS Liberty.
| Quote: | "Reading reports of Cristol's whitewash of the devastating attack, which killed 34 American crewmen and wounded 172 others, was the last straw for Captain Ward Boston, senior legal counsel for the Navy's Court of Inquiry. Commander-in-Chief Naval Forces Europe, Boston and the late Rear Admiral Isaac "Ike" Kidd were given just one week by Admiral John McCain (father of Sen. John McCain) to investigate the attack and gather testimony from survivors still on board the crippled ship. Captain Boston asked each witness to tell his story for a court stenographer.
"There is no question in my mind that those goddamned bastards tried to kill everyone on board," Boston told the Washington Report. "I was the counsel. I put witnesses on. I talked to kids never exposed to combat who'd seen their friend's head blown off. Kids who were crying as they told me what they'd gone through. Those boys who had their heads blown away were not out fighting [the Israelis]. They were sunbathing. They weren't even given a chance to get to their machine guns."
Boston also watched the bodies of the dead carried out of the hold, and saw boys throw up as they retrieved body parts and mopped up after the shelling and torpedo attack. He recalled seeing the shot-up U.S. flags that had clearly marked the ship as an American vessel. Boston flatly dismisses the claims of Cristol and Israel that Israeli fighter pilots mistook the electronically advanced spy ship, complete with an 18-foot-wide satellite dish, a microwave dish, and antennae, for the El Quseir, a 1920s-era Egyptian horse transport ship.
The Navy captain heard survivors' testimonies that the Israelis even shot up the Liberty's lifeboats after they were lowered into the waters to save the crew. That testimony was excised from the official record at some point after it left Boston's hands. (The tattered rafts now are proudly displayed in an Israeli museum.) Boston recalls shaking hands with Liberty skipper Commander William McGonagle, who had a big hole in his leg. "He thanked me later for that handshake," Boston recalled, "because it made some shrapnel pop out of his hand."
"Those boys who had their heads blown away weren't even given a chance to get to their machine guns."
When Boston suggested going to Tel Aviv to have the Israelis tell their side of the story, he was told, "You can't do it. Come on home and present the evidence you have."
Armed with a gun to protect the evidence, which he had attached to himself with handcuffs, Admiral Kidd, along with Captain Boston took the records to London. As the week allotted for gathering testimony came to an end, the team gathered 20 people to type up the report, which ended up being three inches thick. After all the evidence painstakingly collected was turned over to the U.S. Embassy there, the report may have been altered. "I made lots of corrections which are no longer in the report," Captain Boston told the Washington Report. "There are even pages missing."
A U.S. Embassy official in London told Kidd that he and his men must keep quiet. Ten days after the attack, the Navy's Court of Inquiry, despite all the evidence to the contrary, somehow exonerated Israel and ruled the attack was a case of mistaken identity. Following the Court proceedings in London, Admiral Kidd returned to Washington, DC and called Boston, with whom he was very close. "We have to be quiet," he said. "We can't talk to the media."
"LBJ [President Lyndon B. Johnson] had ordered us to put the lid on it. Don't talk about it," Boston told the Washington Report. "And after 35 years of active duty, when I get an order, even from a yellow-bellied superior, I follow those orders. All this time I've kept quiet until this [explicative deleted, Cristol] book came out."
After years of obeying those orders, Captain Boston broke his silence on June 26, 2002, when he told Marine Corps Times reporter Bryant Jordan the attack was deliberate (see "Israel Attack on USS Liberty •No Accident' Says Helms" published in the Navy Times July 2, 2002).
Boston said he just had to speak out after reading Cristol's claim that Kidd, in interviews conducted in the early 1990s, had said Israel's attack was not intentional. The captain told the Washington Report that he finds it hard to believe Cristol's version of interviews with the now deceased Admiral Kidd, a man Boston greatly admired."Admiral Kidd called me two hours after an interview with Cristol," Boston related, "and said, •I think Cristol's an Israeli agent.'"
According to Boston, both he and Admiral Kidd always believed that, despite the Court's official conclusion, the Israelis knew the ship was American. "I have strong patriotic feelings," he explained. "I believe the CIA slogan, •the truth will out,' and hate the Israeli Mossad's motto: •Win By Deception.'"
"Madder Than Hell"
"Cristol now says I recanted my interview with the Navy Times. That makes me madder than hell," Boston said. "I have not recanted one thing. If anything, now I'm going to speak out louder than before and tell people what Admiral Kidd told me. He and I were very close. He said, •those sons of bitches knew what they were doing when they killed innocent sunbathing kids. They tried to sink that ship.'" Cristol may now be kicking himself for waxing so eloquently about Boston's qualifications and skills, and calling him a "man of integrity" on pg. 149 of his book.
Liberty survivor James Ennes, author of the groundbreaking book Assault on the Liberty, also had numerous conversations with Admiral Kidd over the years. Kidd never characterized the attack as an accident. In fact, Ennes says Kidd told him many times, "You are on the right track, Jim. Just keep on probing. Keep on doing what you're doing."
When asked why he thought the U.S. government has covered up the attack for 36 years, Captain Boston replied: "Iraq, Vietnam, the Liberty—it's the same old story. When people are in power they don't want to upset people who may help them get reelected. Maybe people didn't want the world to see that Israelis were slaughtering Egyptian prisoners of war. Maybe Johnson was afraid of upsetting potential voters."
As a captain and staff legal officer in London, retired Admiral Merlin Staring reviewed the Court of Inquiry's report in 1967. Before he could finish, however, the report was taken away. Based on what he read, however, Staring, who later became the Navy's top JAG officer, has said the evidence did not support the "accidental" attack contention.
Last year Richard Helms, CIA director at the time of the attack, agreed that "it was no accident." Helms also told Marine Corps Times correspondent Jordan on May 29, 2002, "I've done all I can. I don't want to spend the rest of my life in court testifying about the incident."
Helms' book, A Look Over My Shoulder, written in collaboration with William Hood, describes the Liberty attack as "one of the most disturbing incidents in the six days [war]…Israeli authorities subsequently apologized for the accident, but few in Washington could believe that the ship had not been identified as an American naval vessel."
Admiral Rufus Taylor, Helms' deputy, told his boss, "To me, the picture thus far presents the distinct possibility that the Israelis knew that Liberty might be their target and attacked anyway..."
A fine article by David Walsh was released in the Naval Institute Proceedings on June 3, 2003, (available on the USNI Web site at <http://www.usni.org>). Walsh's well-documented article notes that even Clark Clifford, chairman of President Johnson's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and a great supporter of Israel, called Israeli claims that the attack was accidental "unbelievable." Clifford told the president, "Something had gone terribly wrong and then it had been covered up. I never felt the Israelis had made adequate restitution or explanation for their…unprovoked actions."
U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Walsh's article adds, had said there was "every reason to believe that the USS Liberty was identified, or at least her nationality determined one hour before the attack." Finally, Walsh notes, former NSA and CIA director Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, based on his talks with NSA seniors at the time,"flatly rejected" the Cristol/Israel thesis.
Former Chief of Naval Operations and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Thomas Moorer has been on the record for some time as saying the attack on the Liberty was deliberate. Among those agreeing with him are then-NSA Director Marshall Carter, Carter's deputy, Louis Tordella, NSA "Liberty Incident" analyst Walter Deeley, and Hayden Peake, professor of intelligence history at the Joint Military Intelligence College and a retired CIA officer.
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence John Stenbit told an audience at a conference on "Transforming National Security and Protecting the Homeland," held April 15 to 17 in Vienna, VA, that the Israelis had warned the U.S. to move the USS Liberty or they would sink it. His comments appeared in the Israeli daily Jerusalem Post and elicited a letter to the editor in the online section of the magazine. Both the letter and the article have mysteriously vanished from the Web site.
In addition to the many Americans noted above, Israelis and even Russians are adding to the public record on the attack. Nikolay Cherkashin, who has spent years investigating the Liberty tragedy, quoted a recently published Russian translation of Joseph Daichman's History of the Mossad, which states that it was perfectly clear to Israelis that the Liberty was an American ship and that the attack was committed to deprive the U.S. "of its eyes and ears."
Daichman also argues that Israel had every right to attack the American ship. If the Liberty had reported that Israeli troops had moved from the Egyptian borders to the Syrian front, the Soviets, if they were eavesdropping on the U.S., could have warned the Arabs. Eliminating any eyes and ears, Israel was able to attack Syria and capture the Golan Heights.
Daichman also speculates that Israel may have tried to sink the ship and blame Egypt, and thus provoke a lethal U.S. response. That theory is the theme of the documentary "Dead in the Water," nominated for Best Documentary at the Vancouver Film Festival, and the new Operation Cyanide book by Peter Hounam.
Despite overwhelming new testimony, however, Cristol's version of the attack on the Liberty is gaining notoriety. Michael Oren's Six Days of War won an award for best history book at the Los Angeles Times Festival of Books. According to Ennes, Oren's chapter on the treacherous attack echoes Cristol's version, which Ennes describes as "pure Israeli spin and truth distortion."
That's not surprising, of course, since in his book's acknowledgements Oren thanks the Shalem Center, where he is a senior fellow and "under whose auspices this book was researched and written." The center describes its senior fellows program as "promoting the research and writing of agenda-shaping work." Its journal, Azure, with editorial offices in Jerusalem and Washington, DC, "champions…a strong, free and Jewish State of Israel for the future of the Jewish people."
"Cristol, though discredited at every turn, continues to hawk his book," Ennes says, "arguing endlessly that the attack was a tragic accident and that we who say otherwise are simply either anti-Semites or blinded by blood and what he calls the 'fog of war.' Cristol will be promoting his book in August and speaking at a large veterans' forum in Pigeon Forge, TN," Ennes told the Washington Report. He added, "Knowing the views of most veterans who know about the Liberty, I cannot imagine that Cristol will be well received."
"Will the Liberty remain a sort of 'Flying Dutchman,' sailing forever around her poor men's souls?" Walsh concludes his Liberty article by asking. Until a congressional investigation gives survivors the opportunity to tell their stories before they die, and Americans can examine top-secret reports still shrouded in secrecy, the Liberty's ghost will not rest."
http://www.wrmea.com/archives/july_aug2003/0307042.html |
Who is lying Cowboy? The Liberty crew or you? | | | | snowqueen | | Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject: |
| | Cowboy obviously doesn't care about the crew of the USS Liberty. | | | | Anglo Thug | | Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:43 pm Post subject: |
| | snowqueen wrote: | | Cowboy obviously doesn't care about the crew of the USS Liberty. |
Sure he does, but only to the extent they may damage his client's reputation by revealing the truth.
_________________
Please sign the petition to prosecute War Criminal Tony Blair | | | | DanielDives | | Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:47 am Post subject: |
| | Lest we forget! | | | | DanielDives | | Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2008 6:44 am Post subject: |
| Still no rebuttal?
Still no $10K cashed?
Still not straightened out Ennes?
So many things left to do.... | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
