Another victory for the ZOG: doctored documents "prove" Liberty attack to be an error

[Imran Siddiqui]

When conservatives, liberals, and radicals unite (including people who support Israel) on an issue, then it's pretty clear that the issue has merit.

Well most people can see that the whole thing is very, very fishy... and no 'official' answer has been satisfactory.

[Az]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
When conservatives, liberals, and radicals unite (including people who support Israel) on an issue, then it's pretty clear that the issue has merit.

It's the "300 million people can't be wrong" logic. lo and behold.

[Arrian]

On the other side of the incompetance argument, let me pose this question:

Why, if Israel deliberately attacked the Liberty, did they not sink it? Shocking incompetance!

-Arrian, devil's advocate for a day (no, Israel isn't the devil )

[Az]

OK, so let's summarize things now:

Pro Deliberate sinking arguments:
-----------------------------------------
-The attack lasted for 2 1/2 hours.
-They raised a big flag after the attack started.

Con Arguements:
---------------------
- No motive.
- Recordings by Israelis.
- Recordings by Americans.

[TCO]

My father who served in the Med and was familiar with the Isr. Navy and the Liberty beleived that the attack was deliberate. He was not a conspiracy theorist.

[Edan]

According to Six Days of War, the attack started at 1:57, making it an hour and 15 minutes, not two and a half hours.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Edan
According to Six Days of War, the attack started at 1:57, making it an hour and 15 minutes, not two and a half hours.

Even if we accept this time frame, don't you think that even this length of time stretches things quite a bit.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I had no idea that the Israeli military was so stupid and incompatent then.

Transparent horse****. You think they didn't know that after the attack, every US asset in the area wouldn't be recording everything for future analysis?

Yes, they're going to say "American Intel ship"

Az - pro motives: plenty. The Israelis had no reason to want anybody to listen in or potentially "interfere" even if it was a "neutral" country or an ally.

The time frame isn't that significant, because it was multiple passes by multiple air and sea craft. For every one of those individuals to misidentify a 10,000 ton floating antenna farm with an unmistakeably radical profile, huge flag, and big fat US number and name, the moon bounce antenna (only four of it's kind existed in the world, and they were undoutedly of great interest to all intel communities around the world), for a 2300 ton garbage scow that was disabled in port for months (something also undoubtedly known to Israeli intel, since they were keenly interested in all aspects of the Egyptians combat capabilities on an on-going basis), is simply absurd.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Transparent horse****.

Of course it is. However that is what Az seems to be implying by trumpeting this out as some sort of definative proof.

[TCO]

I don't think it is definitive. It does help the "accident case". I wish they woudn't bring in red herrings like the apology or compensation. (Which was NOT IMMEDIATE. was in 1987.)

[Panag]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Transparent horse****. You think they didn't know that after the attack, every US asset in the area wouldn't be recording everything for future analysis?

Yes, they're going to say "American Intel ship"

Az - pro motives: plenty. The Israelis had no reason to want anybody to listen in or potentially "interfere" even if it was a "neutral" country or an ally.

The time frame isn't that significant, because it was multiple passes by multiple air and sea craft. For every one of those individuals to misidentify a 10,000 ton floating antenna farm with an unmistakeably radical profile, huge flag, and big fat US number and name, the moon bounce antenna (only four of it's kind existed in the world, and they were undoutedly of great interest to all intel communities around the world), for a 2300 ton garbage scow that was disabled in port for months (something also undoubtedly known to Israeli intel, since they were keenly interested in all aspects of the Egyptians combat capabilities on an on-going basis), is simply absurd.

hi ,

héy , we had no money , times where a bit different in 67 then today , .......

and dont forget the area the liberty was in was been, getting shelling for days by some cruiser that used hit and run tactics , ......

and things are not what they seem to be in a war , .... people act differently , they put things in other perspectives and all , ......

have a nice day

[MichaeltheGreat]

The Egyptians didn't have cruisers - they had small coastal craft, and a few destroyers at most 1/5th the tonnage of the Liberty.


I agree things are different in war. It's just too bad your side can't admit you hosed the ship because you didn't want anyone listening in on communications.

It's not like the US is gonna ally with the PA and Hamas and Syria and help drive you into the Med.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
It's not like the US is gonna ally with the PA and Hamas and Syria and help drive you into the Med.

No, but it could seriously damage U.S. perceptions of Israel were they to make the admission. Most people who weren't born or old enough to witness the Liberty incident probably have no idea it even occured, or have vague ideas about it. An admission now that Israel deliberately attacked a U.S. ship would probably make a lot of people who are currently either pro-Israel or in the middle start shifting more against Israel.

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Transparent horse****. You think they didn't know that after the attack, every US asset in the area wouldn't be recording everything for future analysis?

Yes, they're going to say "American Intel ship"

Az - pro motives: plenty. The Israelis had no reason to want anybody to listen in or potentially "interfere" even if it was a "neutral" country or an ally.

Wait, so Israel attacked (but didn't sink) the American Intel ship (and risk antagonizing their major ally) in order to prevent the US from listening or interfering even though they knew that once they did so, it would cause the US to have "every US asset in the area" record "everything for future analysis"? Anyone else see the flaw in this argument?

And just what were they worried the US would be litening in or interfering with?

[Tuberski]

Do I think it was deliberate? Yes.

Do I care? No.

If an Israeli intelligence gathering vessel was operating off of the cost of our country while we were at war with a third, you can bet your ass I'd sink the bastard.

I'd also make restitution and lead everybody believe that it was an accident.

ACK!