Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rrufff who wrote (19505)	7/20/2003 5:15:18 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21614

I never expected that "Dr Senior Lab Rat" would change his mind because he does not have one. But I really hoped that people like LL would understand re: " to keep the United States from learning that Israel was planning to attack Syria as part of its strategy during the war." people still believe it to be most probable cause in spite of the NSA documents stating that Israel informed US of israel's intentions well in advance

To: rrufff who wrote (19505)	7/20/2003 7:00:01 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Maybe you better reread that info. It cuts YOU pretty deeply. Message 19127264

To: rrufff who wrote (19505)	7/21/2003 2:57:24 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21614

apparently not read by the moron known as the "senior lab researcher" I beg to differ. The senior lab researcher has read the story, and even alluded to it in an earlier post to LPOS. You probably never noticed that. That's ok, I don't expect you to be observant. The article is very, very persuasive....NSA has released a partial transcript that Miami Judge Cristol, LPOS, and you find as overwhelming evidence....it's soooooooo overwhelming that NSA [who has the entire transcript] has this to say..... Weadon [NSA spokesman] said: "The agency takes no official position on what happened to the Liberty.".....talk about a clear and firm position! There are some other folks that also seem to think that it was no accident....Secretary of State Dean Rusk and former JCS Chairman Admiral Thomas Moorer ussliberty.org Of course, you could claim that a Secretary of State and a Chairman of the JCS wouldn't have the access [or brains] that you and LPOS have. I could certainly expect LPOS to jump in and say something along the lines of .....It's possible that the only information [evidence] that the Secretary of State and the Chairman of the JCS saw was what they read in anti-semetic media. That's one illustration of why I'm a Senior Scientist and you're a "rrufff". jttmab

To: rrufff who wrote (19505)	7/21/2003 4:05:19 AM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 21614

Here's a list of undisputed facts from the Libery crew. You might take note of the statements on Judge Cristal. You can also note the LPOS has indicated on multiple occasions the crew of the Liberty is "sincere". The following sixteen facts, prepared and presented by an experienced prosecuting attorney, are undisputed: 1. At all times on June 8, 1967, during the fourth day of the Arab-Israeli "Six Day War," USS Liberty, a neutral ship, remained in international waters. 2. USS Liberty carried no offensive armament and only four .50 cal. machine guns as a defense against boarders. 3. On the morning of June 8, 1967 USS Liberty was over flown by Israeli reconnaissance aircraft, and POSITIVELY identified by an Israeli pilot not just as a U.S. Navy ship, but as USS Liberty specifically. 4. The Hague Convention on Naval Warfare prohibits attacks on neutral ships on the high seas. 5. The government of Israel stated that they ordered ships and aircraft to the location of USS Liberty because they had received reports that IDF forces on the shore were being shelled from the sea. 6. The Israeli motor torpedo boats (MTBs) claimed to have detected USS Liberty on their radar initially at a distance of approximately 28 miles. The maximum range of the MTB radar units was just 16 miles. 7. The MTBs calculated the speed of USS Liberty initially at 30 knots and then a few minutes later at 28 knots. The maximum speed of USS Liberty was 20 knots, and the ship was at that time barely making way at five knots. 8. The Israeli aircraft, which should have been looking for a ship with offensive armament with sufficient range to bombard the shore 15 miles away and traveling at high speed, instead found a converted cargo ship, with no offensive armament, and moving at approximately five knots. 9. USS Liberty presented no obvious offensive threat, nor was she attempting to flee the scene. Indeed, US sailors were sunbathing on the deck. 10. Prior to the start of the attack (1358 local time), USS Liberty - still in international waters - was never positively identified as a hostile ship. 11. Rather than wait for the MTBs to arrive and positively ID the ship, the aircraft launched an attack on USS Liberty. 12. The pilots of the attacking aircraft claimed that they were unable to see the 5' by 8' red, white, and blue US flag flying approximately 100 feet above the bridge of the ship, yet one of the pilots stated that he saw a .50 cal machine gun, painted gray, on the deck. 13. The Israelis claim that the aircraft finally saw a U.S. flag on Liberty at approximately 1422 and they called off the attack. 14. At 1436, the MTBs launched a torpedo attack on USS Liberty, launching five torpedoes, one of which hit USS Liberty amidships, killing 25 men. 15. The MTBs continued to circle USS Liberty, firing on the ship until at least 1510, when they claim that they saw Liberty's US flag for the first time. 16. The Israeli attack was broken off almost immediately following an unencrypted broadcast by USS Saratoga that she had launched aircraft to come to the aid of Liberty. The Israeli government has never explained why it was necessary to attack an unthreatening ship on the high seas without waiting a few more minutes until their surface ships arrived to positively identify it. This was a gross violation of the laws of war. There is simply no rational explanation for the attack having been anything other than planned and deliberate. Reference was made to Mr. Cristol's website www.libertyincident.com. When visiting this site, please keep in mind that while Mr. Cristol traveled to Israel 15 times to interview IDF personnel, he had only brief conversations with a few USS Liberty survivors. He has claimed to have interviewed quite a few individuals who dispute that they were ever interviewed by Cristol. The facts alleged on Cristol's website are often contradictory. One of the individuals who disputes ever having been interviewed by Cristol about the attack on USS Liberty, is Captain Ward Boston, the JAG officer for the court of inquiry. He has recently broken his silence on this subject. In a recent published interview, Captain Boston contradicted Cristol's claims of comments attributed to Admiral Isaac Kidd and stated that Kidd has opined to him that he thought that Cristol was "an Israeli agent." Also bear in mind Cristol's somewhat misleading biography, which suggests that he was a combat pilot during the Korean war (he wasn't). ussliberty.org

To: rrufff who wrote (19505)	7/21/2003 4:09:46 AM
From: jttmab	Respond to of 21614

Once again from the people that LPOS says are sincere. NSA Releases 1967 helicopter intercept transcripts Haaretz claims they prove the attack was an accident They prove no such thing The NSA intercepts prove only that the helicopter pilots were not aware of the ship's identity until they arrived. Intercept of the attack itself, not released and said not to exist but which has been seen by senior NSA sources we have identified, show that in fact they did know they were attacking an American ship. The plain truth is that, despite the arguments sent by spokesmen for Israel, most people who look carefully at this attack agree that it was deliberate. Moreover, the top minds in the American intelligence community agree that solid evidence is overwhelming that it was deliberate! Supporters.txt lists some of those names. One really must look carefully when such leading lights as Dean Rusk, Marshall Carter, Richard Helms, Lou Tordella, Tom Moorer, Rufus Taylor, William Odom, Bobby Ray Inman, John Morrison, George Ball, Clark Clifford, Lucius Battle, William Odom, Merlin Staring and others including even LBJs own press secretary George Christian all say almost with one voice that it was deliberate and that the evidence says so. Four former NSA directors agree that deliberateness of the attack was not a debatable issue; it was agreed fact. None of these men are the sort to adopt wild or irresponsible positions. We survivors say the attack was deliberate because what we saw argues that it was: Prolonged, low-level pre-attack reconnaissance in which the recon pilots were heard telling their HQ that we were American; an extended close air attack with large colors flying throughout; selective jamming of the very frequencies we needed to call for help; torpedo boats that examined the ship and flag from 50 feet away and CONTINUED to fire from close range for another 40 minutes; machinegunning of our liferafts in the water. Then they lied about everything and claimed that they recognized us as American even while the torpedoes were in the water and never fired again. Nonsense. They claim falsely that the boats called in the air attack because they miscalculated our speed from 32 miles away when in fact their maximum radar range was 16 miles and that they judged our speed at 30 knots when we were moving five knots. Nonsense. They claim we flew no flag. Nonsense. If it was a mistake, at least they could tell the truth. If they didn't know we were American, why did they jam American radio frequencies? Yet the evidence goes far beyond those things; it is virtually absolute. Recently I called Oliver Kirby, a former NSA Ops boss who was called back to NSA in 1967 to look into the circumstances of the attack. He has never before discussed this with anyone outside the confines of the NSA complex, but the first words out of his mouth were, "I can tell you for an absolute certainty that they knew they were attacking an American ship." How did he know? He saw transcripts of Israeli communications during the attack. There was a Navy EC121 overhead (reported recently by Jim Bamford) and an Air Force C130 a few miles away. Both were recording communications. The Navy intake was merely recorded; the Air Force product was sent securely in real time via the CRITICOMM system to Air Force intelligence centers worldwide where it was seen by hundreds of people. Now many of those people are coming forward to describe what they saw. These are the same intercepts that were seen by Oliver Kirby and other top analysts and officials at the National Security Agency. These transcripts are the reason so many top intelligence officials are certain that this attack was no accident. NSA now denies there were airplanes overhead during the attack or that the attack was intercepted or recorded. Those denials are contradicted by very credible people who were there, including the navigator of the EC121 who is talking to us. NSA can deny that such intercepts exist because shortly after the attack all such evidence of a deliberate attack was ordered destroyed. But fortunately for the historical record a great many people saw those things before they went into the burn bag, and many of those people are now speaking out. People are just learning that the Court of Inquiry was falsified. The Court's own legal counsel, Captain Ward Boston, now says publicly in Navy Times and elsewhere that the court actually believed that the attack was deliberate but reported otherwise falsely because it was so ordered by Washington. Why would Israel bite the American hand? We may never know. As Dean Rusk once said, it must have been ordered by someone fairly high up to be able to coordinate all the different forces involved. Richard Helms and Admiral Moorer have supposed that it was done to delay American knowledge of the pending Golan invasion. General Morrison agrees that it could have been to assure that we didn't learn of the executing of POWs then underway at El Arish. We may never know the real reason, but anyone who wonders about this should look carefully at the circumstances before allowing the improbability of such an attack to weigh against the very solid evidence that the attack was deliberate. A recent article in Naval Institute Proceedings discusses these things in some depth. You will find this at in the June 2003 issue of Naval Institute Proceedings at usni.org. This conservative and trusted publication, known as the voice of the US Navy officer corps, does not bite carelessly on weak positions. ussliberty.org