Biden: U.S. won't play favorites between Israelis, Palestinians

[CMike]

You are posting only opinions, I am posting the facts.

 

[Marc39]

and lord fucking knows that such "official" reports are NEVER influenced by political affiliation..




and always truthful too!

Basically you are calling the US Navy, the Joint Chiefs, The CIA, and, the NSA liars and that they lied under oath.

However, since the people on your side, including yourself, display hatred toward america I am not surprised of the attitude.

yes, I'm saying that people in those positions have historically bent their testimony around international relations. Hell, are you fucking stupid enough to not know that this very thing happened THIS WEEK regarding our relationship with Turkey?


but, hey...


"It was not the responsibility of the court to rule on the culpability of the attackers, and no evidence was heard from the attacking nation"

The Joint Chief of Staff's Report contains findings of fact related only to communication system failures associated with the Liberty attack. It was not concerned with matters of culpability, nor does it contain statements thereof.

as expressed by Senator Bourke B. Hickenlooper: "From what I have read I can't tolerate for 1 minute that this [attack] was an accident." Also, there was concern about obtaining more information about the attack, as expressed by the committee's chairman: "We asked for [the attack investigation report] about 2 weeks ago and have not received it yet from Secretary Rusk."

The House Armed Services Committee Investigation report is entitled, "Review of Department of Defense Worldwide Communications". It was not an investigation focused on the Liberty attack; although, the committee's report contains a section that describes communications flow involved with the Liberty incident.

The NSA History Report is, as its name connotes, a historical report that cited the U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry record, various military and government messages and memorandum, and personal interviews for its content. The report ends with a section entitled, "Unanswered Questions", and provides no conclusion regarding culpability.

Critics—including an active group of survivors from the ship—assert that U.S. congressional investigations and other U.S. investigations were not actually investigations into the attack; but, rather, reports using evidence only from the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, or investigations unrelated to culpability that involved issues such as communications. In their view, the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry is the only actual investigation on the incident to date. They claim it was hastily conducted, in only 10 days, even though the court’s president, Rear Admiral Isaac Kidd, said that it would take 6 months to conduct properly. The inquiry's terms of reference were limited to whether any shortcomings on the part of the Liberty's crew had contributed to the injuries and deaths that resulted from the attack.[37] According to the Navy Court of Inquiry's record of proceedings, four days were spent hearing testimony: two days for 14 survivors of the attack and several U.S. Navy expert witnesses, and two partial days for two expert U.S. Navy witnesses. No testimony was heard from Israeli personnel involved.

The National Archives in College Park, Md., includes in its files on casualties from the Liberty copies of the original telegrams the Navy sent out to family members. The telegrams called the attack accidental. The telegrams were sent out June 9, the day before the Navy court of inquiry convened.





In the historical report, it was acknowledged that IDF naval headquarters knew at least three hours before the attack that the ship was "an electromagnetic audio-surveillance ship of the U.S. Navy" but concluded that this information had simply "gotten lost, never passed along to the ground controllers who directed the air attack nor to the crews of the three Israeli torpedo boats."
.

Dean Rusk, US Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote:
“ 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.[41]

in which he claimed that Admiral Kidd had told him that the government ordered Kidd to falsely report that the attack was a mistake, and that he and Kidd both believed the attack was deliberate. On the issue Boston wrote, in part:
“ The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. Each evening, after hearing testimony all day, we often spoke our private thoughts concerning what we had seen and heard. I recall Admiral Kidd repeatedly referring to the Israeli forces responsible for the attack as 'murderous bastards.' It was our shared belief, based on the documentary evidence and testimony we received first hand, that the Israeli attack was planned and deliberate, and could not possibly have been an accident.



but hey... as long as the "official" conclusion benefits israel, right buddy?

Go back to sleep, stoner.

 

[P F Tinmore]

We should note that the facts reported by those who were attacked are different than the official story.

and lord fucking knows that such "official" reports are NEVER influenced by political affiliation..




and always truthful too!

Basically you are calling the US Navy, the Joint Chiefs, The CIA, the US Senate, and, the NSA liars and that they lied under oath.

However, since the people on your side, including yourself, display hatred toward america I am not surprised of the attitude.

So you believe the 9/11 whitewash commission report?

 

[Shogun]

You are posting only opinions, I am posting the facts.

No, you are posting "accepted conclusions" which are, in fact, official OPINIONS.


Nice to see that you have a firm grasp on what facts are though.

 

[Shogun]

Basically you are calling the US Navy, the Joint Chiefs, The CIA, and, the NSA liars and that they lied under oath.

However, since the people on your side, including yourself, display hatred toward america I am not surprised of the attitude.

yes, I'm saying that people in those positions have historically bent their testimony around international relations. Hell, are you fucking stupid enough to not know that this very thing happened THIS WEEK regarding our relationship with Turkey?


but, hey...


"It was not the responsibility of the court to rule on the culpability of the attackers, and no evidence was heard from the attacking nation"

The Joint Chief of Staff's Report contains findings of fact related only to communication system failures associated with the Liberty attack. It was not concerned with matters of culpability, nor does it contain statements thereof.

as expressed by Senator Bourke B. Hickenlooper: "From what I have read I can't tolerate for 1 minute that this [attack] was an accident." Also, there was concern about obtaining more information about the attack, as expressed by the committee's chairman: "We asked for [the attack investigation report] about 2 weeks ago and have not received it yet from Secretary Rusk."

The House Armed Services Committee Investigation report is entitled, "Review of Department of Defense Worldwide Communications". It was not an investigation focused on the Liberty attack; although, the committee's report contains a section that describes communications flow involved with the Liberty incident.

The NSA History Report is, as its name connotes, a historical report that cited the U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry record, various military and government messages and memorandum, and personal interviews for its content. The report ends with a section entitled, "Unanswered Questions", and provides no conclusion regarding culpability.

Critics—including an active group of survivors from the ship—assert that U.S. congressional investigations and other U.S. investigations were not actually investigations into the attack; but, rather, reports using evidence only from the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, or investigations unrelated to culpability that involved issues such as communications. In their view, the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry is the only actual investigation on the incident to date. They claim it was hastily conducted, in only 10 days, even though the court’s president, Rear Admiral Isaac Kidd, said that it would take 6 months to conduct properly. The inquiry's terms of reference were limited to whether any shortcomings on the part of the Liberty's crew had contributed to the injuries and deaths that resulted from the attack.[37] According to the Navy Court of Inquiry's record of proceedings, four days were spent hearing testimony: two days for 14 survivors of the attack and several U.S. Navy expert witnesses, and two partial days for two expert U.S. Navy witnesses. No testimony was heard from Israeli personnel involved.

The National Archives in College Park, Md., includes in its files on casualties from the Liberty copies of the original telegrams the Navy sent out to family members. The telegrams called the attack accidental. The telegrams were sent out June 9, the day before the Navy court of inquiry convened.





In the historical report, it was acknowledged that IDF naval headquarters knew at least three hours before the attack that the ship was "an electromagnetic audio-surveillance ship of the U.S. Navy" but concluded that this information had simply "gotten lost, never passed along to the ground controllers who directed the air attack nor to the crews of the three Israeli torpedo boats."
.

Dean Rusk, US Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote:
“ 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.[41]

in which he claimed that Admiral Kidd had told him that the government ordered Kidd to falsely report that the attack was a mistake, and that he and Kidd both believed the attack was deliberate. On the issue Boston wrote, in part:
“ The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. Each evening, after hearing testimony all day, we often spoke our private thoughts concerning what we had seen and heard. I recall Admiral Kidd repeatedly referring to the Israeli forces responsible for the attack as 'murderous bastards.' It was our shared belief, based on the documentary evidence and testimony we received first hand, that the Israeli attack was planned and deliberate, and could not possibly have been an accident.



but hey... as long as the "official" conclusion benefits israel, right buddy?

Go back to sleep, stoner.

fuck you, jew.

 

[Marc39]

yes, I'm saying that people in those positions have historically bent their testimony around international relations. Hell, are you fucking stupid enough to not know that this very thing happened THIS WEEK regarding our relationship with Turkey?


but, hey...


"It was not the responsibility of the court to rule on the culpability of the attackers, and no evidence was heard from the attacking nation"

The Joint Chief of Staff's Report contains findings of fact related only to communication system failures associated with the Liberty attack. It was not concerned with matters of culpability, nor does it contain statements thereof.

as expressed by Senator Bourke B. Hickenlooper: "From what I have read I can't tolerate for 1 minute that this [attack] was an accident." Also, there was concern about obtaining more information about the attack, as expressed by the committee's chairman: "We asked for [the attack investigation report] about 2 weeks ago and have not received it yet from Secretary Rusk."

The House Armed Services Committee Investigation report is entitled, "Review of Department of Defense Worldwide Communications". It was not an investigation focused on the Liberty attack; although, the committee's report contains a section that describes communications flow involved with the Liberty incident.

The NSA History Report is, as its name connotes, a historical report that cited the U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry record, various military and government messages and memorandum, and personal interviews for its content. The report ends with a section entitled, "Unanswered Questions", and provides no conclusion regarding culpability.

Critics—including an active group of survivors from the ship—assert that U.S. congressional investigations and other U.S. investigations were not actually investigations into the attack; but, rather, reports using evidence only from the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, or investigations unrelated to culpability that involved issues such as communications. In their view, the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry is the only actual investigation on the incident to date. They claim it was hastily conducted, in only 10 days, even though the court’s president, Rear Admiral Isaac Kidd, said that it would take 6 months to conduct properly. The inquiry's terms of reference were limited to whether any shortcomings on the part of the Liberty's crew had contributed to the injuries and deaths that resulted from the attack.[37] According to the Navy Court of Inquiry's record of proceedings, four days were spent hearing testimony: two days for 14 survivors of the attack and several U.S. Navy expert witnesses, and two partial days for two expert U.S. Navy witnesses. No testimony was heard from Israeli personnel involved.

The National Archives in College Park, Md., includes in its files on casualties from the Liberty copies of the original telegrams the Navy sent out to family members. The telegrams called the attack accidental. The telegrams were sent out June 9, the day before the Navy court of inquiry convened.





In the historical report, it was acknowledged that IDF naval headquarters knew at least three hours before the attack that the ship was "an electromagnetic audio-surveillance ship of the U.S. Navy" but concluded that this information had simply "gotten lost, never passed along to the ground controllers who directed the air attack nor to the crews of the three Israeli torpedo boats."
.

Dean Rusk, US Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote:
“ 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.[41]

in which he claimed that Admiral Kidd had told him that the government ordered Kidd to falsely report that the attack was a mistake, and that he and Kidd both believed the attack was deliberate. On the issue Boston wrote, in part:
“ The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. Each evening, after hearing testimony all day, we often spoke our private thoughts concerning what we had seen and heard. I recall Admiral Kidd repeatedly referring to the Israeli forces responsible for the attack as 'murderous bastards.' It was our shared belief, based on the documentary evidence and testimony we received first hand, that the Israeli attack was planned and deliberate, and could not possibly have been an accident.



but hey... as long as the "official" conclusion benefits israel, right buddy?

Go back to sleep, stoner.

fuck you, jew.

Go back to sleep, stoner. Jew owns you.

 

[CMike]

You are posting only opinions, I am posting the facts.

No, you are posting "accepted conclusions" which are, in fact, official OPINIONS.


Nice to see that you have a firm grasp on what facts are though.

Nope. They are based on sworn testimony and documentation. They are from five different parts of the US government, the Navy, NSA, Joint Chiefs, CIA, and the Senate.

Plus I provided the actual transcripts of the Israeli pilots as retrieved from a US spy plane.

 

[Shogun]

Go back to sleep, stoner.

fuck you, jew.

Go back to sleep, stoner. Jew owns you.

nice grammar, jew. Clearly, Engrish is your first language.

and, again, you own a cement mixer. Big difference.

 

[Shogun]

You are posting only opinions, I am posting the facts.

No, you are posting "accepted conclusions" which are, in fact, official OPINIONS.


Nice to see that you have a firm grasp on what facts are though.

Nope. They are based on sworn testimony and documentation. They are from five different parts of the US government, the Navy, NSA, Joint Chiefs, CIA, and the Senate.

Plus I provided the actual transcripts of the Israeli pilots as retrieved from a US spy plane.

Sworn testimony is WHAT? say it with me... OPINIONS. and, i've retorted with what mentioned reports actually stated in regards to the culpability is israel. Feel free to wrap your comprehension within a star of david if you need to. After all, those transcripts were notoriously edited. SHOCKER.

 

[CMike]

Prove that they were "notoriously" edited.

The transcipts make it clear that the Israelis thought it was an egyptian ship.

Since the ship was off the egyptian coast at at time of an active war, it's easy to see how they would make a mistake.

Have you heard of friendly fire? America has accidently attacked allies and even itself numerous times during war.

 

[Shogun]

Arieh O'Sullivan, the Post reporter who made the newspaper's transcript, said the Israeli Air Force tapes he listened to contained blank spaces. He said he assumed those blank spaces occurred while Israeli pilots were conducting their strafing runs and had nothing to communicate.

'But sir, it's an American ship!'

Forslund, Gotcher and Block are not alone in claiming to have read transcripts of the attack that they said left no doubt the Israelis knew they were attempting to sink a U.S. Navy ship.

enjoy, motherfucker.


Forslund's recollections are supported by those of two other Air Force intelligence specialists, working in widely separate locations, who say they also saw the transcripts of the attacking Israeli pilots' communications.

One is James Gotcher, now an attorney in California, who was then serving with the Air Force Security Service's 6924th Security Squadron, an adjunct of the NSA, at Son Tra, Vietnam.

"It was clear that the Israeli aircraft were being vectored directly at USS Liberty," Gotcher recalled in an e-mail. "Later, around the time Liberty got off a distress call, the controllers seemed to panic and urged the aircraft to 'complete the job' and get out of there."



The transcripts Block remembered seeing "were teletypes, way beyond Top Secret. Some of the pilots did not want to attack," Block said. "The pilots said, 'This is an American ship. Do you still want us to attack?'

"And ground control came back and said, 'Yes, follow orders.'"



Block, now a child protection caseworker in Florida, observed that "the fact that the Israeli pilots clearly identified the ship as American and asked for further instructions from ground control appears to be a missing part of that Jerusalem Post article."


"They said, 'We've got him in the zero,'" Kirby recalled, "whatever that meant -- I guess the sights or something. And then one of them said, 'Can you see the flag?' They said 'Yes, it's U.S, it's U.S.' They said it several times, so there wasn't any doubt in anybody's mind that they knew it."

Kirby, now 86 and retired in Texas, said the transcripts were "something that's bothered me all my life. I'm willing to swear on a stack of Bibles that we knew they knew."


New revelations in attack on American spy ship - chicagotribune.com

 

[CMike]

Arieh O'Sullivan, the Post reporter who made the newspaper's transcript, said the Israeli Air Force tapes he listened to contained blank spaces. He said he assumed those blank spaces occurred while Israeli pilots were conducting their strafing runs and had nothing to communicate.

'But sir, it's an American ship!'

Forslund, Gotcher and Block are not alone in claiming to have read transcripts of the attack that they said left no doubt the Israelis knew they were attempting to sink a U.S. Navy ship.

enjoy, motherfucker.


Forslund's recollections are supported by those of two other Air Force intelligence specialists, working in widely separate locations, who say they also saw the transcripts of the attacking Israeli pilots' communications.

One is James Gotcher, now an attorney in California, who was then serving with the Air Force Security Service's 6924th Security Squadron, an adjunct of the NSA, at Son Tra, Vietnam.

"It was clear that the Israeli aircraft were being vectored directly at USS Liberty," Gotcher recalled in an e-mail. "Later, around the time Liberty got off a distress call, the controllers seemed to panic and urged the aircraft to 'complete the job' and get out of there."



The transcripts Block remembered seeing "were teletypes, way beyond Top Secret. Some of the pilots did not want to attack," Block said. "The pilots said, 'This is an American ship. Do you still want us to attack?'

"And ground control came back and said, 'Yes, follow orders.'"



Block, now a child protection caseworker in Florida, observed that "the fact that the Israeli pilots clearly identified the ship as American and asked for further instructions from ground control appears to be a missing part of that Jerusalem Post article."


"They said, 'We've got him in the zero,'" Kirby recalled, "whatever that meant -- I guess the sights or something. And then one of them said, 'Can you see the flag?' They said 'Yes, it's U.S, it's U.S.' They said it several times, so there wasn't any doubt in anybody's mind that they knew it."

Kirby, now 86 and retired in Texas, said the transcripts were "something that's bothered me all my life. I'm willing to swear on a stack of Bibles that we knew they knew."


New revelations in attack on American spy ship - chicagotribune.com

I don't care what he remembered. It's utterly irreleveant what some idiots think. All the US government investigations ruled it was an accident.

I just posted the declassified transcript.

P.S. You are a douchebag.

 

[CMike]

This is the actual delassified transpcript as received from a US spy plane.

http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/liberty.pdf

The Israelis first think it was an Egyptian warship, then they thought it was an Egyptian cargo ship.

After the ship is attacked, Israel still think it's egyptian and sends in rescue helicopters and finally realizes it's american.

The ship was off the egyptian coast at a time of active war.

America has fired on it's allies and itself by mistake too.

 

[GHook93]

Who would have thought there would be another Democrat gay scandal in the same month!

 

[CMike]

No, you are posting "accepted conclusions" which are, in fact, official OPINIONS.


Nice to see that you have a firm grasp on what facts are though.

Nope. They are based on sworn testimony and documentation. They are from five different parts of the US government, the Navy, NSA, Joint Chiefs, CIA, and the Senate.

Plus I provided the actual transcripts of the Israeli pilots as retrieved from a US spy plane.

Sworn testimony is WHAT? say it with me... OPINIONS. and, i've retorted with what mentioned reports actually stated in regards to the culpability is israel. Feel free to wrap your comprehension within a star of david if you need to. After all, those transcripts were notoriously edited. SHOCKER.

Sworn testimony of the people who are actually relevant, then some douce bags quoted in some article that have nothing to do with the incident.

 

[Marc39]

Arieh O'Sullivan, the Post reporter who made the newspaper's transcript, said the Israeli Air Force tapes he listened to contained blank spaces. He said he assumed those blank spaces occurred while Israeli pilots were conducting their strafing runs and had nothing to communicate.

'But sir, it's an American ship!'

Forslund, Gotcher and Block are not alone in claiming to have read transcripts of the attack that they said left no doubt the Israelis knew they were attempting to sink a U.S. Navy ship.

enjoy, motherfucker.


Forslund's recollections are supported by those of two other Air Force intelligence specialists, working in widely separate locations, who say they also saw the transcripts of the attacking Israeli pilots' communications.

One is James Gotcher, now an attorney in California, who was then serving with the Air Force Security Service's 6924th Security Squadron, an adjunct of the NSA, at Son Tra, Vietnam.

"It was clear that the Israeli aircraft were being vectored directly at USS Liberty," Gotcher recalled in an e-mail. "Later, around the time Liberty got off a distress call, the controllers seemed to panic and urged the aircraft to 'complete the job' and get out of there."



The transcripts Block remembered seeing "were teletypes, way beyond Top Secret. Some of the pilots did not want to attack," Block said. "The pilots said, 'This is an American ship. Do you still want us to attack?'

"And ground control came back and said, 'Yes, follow orders.'"



Block, now a child protection caseworker in Florida, observed that "the fact that the Israeli pilots clearly identified the ship as American and asked for further instructions from ground control appears to be a missing part of that Jerusalem Post article."


"They said, 'We've got him in the zero,'" Kirby recalled, "whatever that meant -- I guess the sights or something. And then one of them said, 'Can you see the flag?' They said 'Yes, it's U.S, it's U.S.' They said it several times, so there wasn't any doubt in anybody's mind that they knew it."

Kirby, now 86 and retired in Texas, said the transcripts were "something that's bothered me all my life. I'm willing to swear on a stack of Bibles that we knew they knew."


New revelations in attack on American spy ship - chicagotribune.com

Go back to sleep, stoner. Nobody cares about your drug-induced hallucinations.

 

[CMike]

Why should the US play favorites?

The arabs celebrated the Sept 11, 2001 attack.

Reactions to the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fox News reported that in Ein el-Hilweh, Lebanon's largest Palestinian refugee camp, revelers fired weapons in the air, with similar celebratory gunfire heard at the Rashidiyeh camp near the southern city of Tyre as well.[23]

Reports and images of Palestinians from East Jerusalem, Nablus, and Lebanon taking to the streets in celebration, were broadcast around the world.[23] with many newspapers, magazines, Web sites and wire services running photographs.[26][27]

In an attempt to quash further reporting, Ahmed Abdel Rahman, Arafat's Cabinet secretary, said the Palestinian Authority could not "guarantee the life" of an Associated Press (AP) cameraman if footage he filmed of post-9/11 celebrations in Nablus was broadcast. Rahman's statement prompted a formal protest from the AP bureau chief, Dan Perry.[28][27

 

[CMike]

Arabs Celebrate Massacre of Americans at The World Trade Center

Arabs mobs in Egypt, Lebanon the PA areas and the United States celebrated the massacre of Americans working in the World Trade Center by planes driven into it on September 11, 01 by suicide pilots. Several arabs were arrested who were rejoicing while watching the bombing from the statue of Liberty. Fred Siegel, in his column in the New York Post Sept 14, 01 writes how Egyptians, Palestinians and other Arabs from Patterson, New Jersey, celebrated as they received word of the murderous attacks in New York and Washington. An excellent article about the celebrations after the World Trade massacre was written by Daniel Pipes and is called A Middle East Party Arafat has succeeded in suppressing reports of this party in the media. The following item appeared in Israel National News 9/13/01

Yasser Arafat's Tanzim kidnapped the cameraman who filmed a report for AP
showing Palestinians in Ramallah celebrating the attacks against the United
States. The report includes footage of Palestinian police firing their
assault rifles in the air in celebration as hundreds cheer. The cameraman
was released this morning, but not before the Associated Press protested to
the Palestinian Authority about threats against the cameraman in the event
the footage was screened. Ahmed Abdel Rahman, Arafat's Cabinet secretary,
said the Palestinian Authority "cannot guarantee the life" of the cameraman
if the footage is broadcast.
Dr. Aaron Lerner asked AP Bureau Chief Dan Perry today whether his office
would release the video of joyous Palestinians celebrating the attack on
the World Trade Center. Perry answered, "We are acting to assure the
safety of our staff. The safety of our staff is paramount. At this point
we believe there to be a serious threat to our staff if the video is
released and we have protested this to the PA."

 

[CMike]

That's why the US should play favorites.

 

[Kalam]

Meh.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS89vNH-eeY&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS89vNH-eeY[/ame]