USS Liberty

[HaShev]

Do you ever get tired of lying, Mormon Mike? Then again, you belong to a religion based on lies, so probably not.

These are the profiles of the USS Liberty vs the El-Quesir

View attachment 1116149

The Mistaken Identity Claim: USS Liberty vs El Quseir

www.gtr5.com

As you can see, the pictures of El Quseir were fairly large and relatively clear. The pictures show clearly that El Quseir had:

• two rows of portholes running along the sides of her hull,
• two tall and angled pole-masts (forward and aft),
• a small vertical pole-mast on top of middle superstructure,
• a small (two-level) superstructure,
• an angled stack behind the superstructure, and
• a vertical (90 degree) bow point. In all respects, El Quseir appeared like a classic "tramp steamer" -- a relatively common sight in the Mediterranean Sea region, before and during 1967.

Other than both ships having general hull lines of cargo-type ships, the two ships had little in common (as highlighted below). The USS Liberty had:

• no portholes in her hull,
• two tall and vertical pole-masts (forward and aft),
• a large tower-mast on top of forward superstructure,
• a large (four-level) superstructure,
• a vertical stack in the middle of the superstructure,
• an angled (78 degree) bow point,
• a very large radio antenna reflector dish aft the superstructure,
• a large radio antenna reflector dish at the forecastle level, and
• many other type radio antennas visible on her decks and masts.

Additionally, USS Liberty had her US Navy ID number "GTR5" painted in very large letters on both sides of her bow and stern. In all respects, USS Liberty appeared like a WW2-era Victory Ship converted to some type of communications ship, with US Navy markings. (Like "tramp steamers," civilian and military ships with Victory Ship type hulls were a relatively common sight in the Mediterranean Sea region before and during 1967.)



Again, if you have ever been involved in a military investigation, they tell you what the testimony will be before you say it. I remember one time an officer was caught doing something he wasn't supposed to be doing, and I kept documentation to cover my own ass. Not to go into too much detail, but the system bent over backwards to protect this officer's reputation. (He was kind of considered a golden boy.)

So given that the fix was in from the top on this one, I just don't take what is in the official record all that seriously.

I take what the survivors have testified to. And what whistleblowers have said after the fact.

The statement of Ward Boston, Jr., CAPT, USN JAG

18. ADMIRAL KIDD ALSO TOLD ME THAT HE HAD BEEN ORDERED TO "PUT THE LID" ON EVERYTHING HAVING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK ON USS LIBERTY. WE WERE NEVER TO SPEAK OF IT AND WE WERE TO CAUTION EVERYONE ELSE INVOLVED THAT THEY COULD NEVER SPEAK OF IT AGAIN.45

19. I HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT THE ACCURACY OF THAT STATEMENT AS I KNOW THAT THE COURT OF INQUIRY TRANSCRIPT THAT HAS BEEN RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC IS NOT THE SAME ONE THAT I CERTIFIED AND6 SENT OFF TO WASHINGTON.7

20. I KNOW THIS BECAUSE IT WAS NECESSARY, DUE TO THE EXIGENCIES OF TIME, TO HAND CORRECT8 AND INITIAL A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PAGES. I HAVE EXAMINED THE RELEASED VERSION OF THE TRAN9 SCRIPT AND I DID NOT SEE ANY PAGES THAT BORE MY HAND CORRECTIONS AND INITIALS. ALSO, THE ORIGI10 NAL DID NOT HAVE ANY DELIBERATELY BLANK PAGES, AS THE RELEASED VERSION DOES. FINALLY, THE TESTIMONY OF LT. 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 IN13 CLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL TRANSCRIPT, IS NOW MISSING AND HAS BEEN EXCISED.14 21. FOLLOWING THE CONCLUSION OF THE COURT OF INQUIRY, ADMIRAL KIDD AND I REMAINED IN15 CONTACT. THOUGH WE NEVER SPOKE OF THE ATTACK IN PUBLIC, WE DID DISCUSS IT BETWEEN OURSELVES,16 ON OCCASION. EVERY TIME WE DISCUSSED THE ATTACK, ADMIRAL KIDD WAS ADAMANT THAT IT WAS A DE

http://www.gtr5.com/Witnesses/boston.pdf

Why do you keep taking things out of context?

For those following along at home, the context of my statement was not that Hitler was anti-Semitic, but that GERMAN CULTURE was anti-Semitic. Hitler didn't have to convince the Germans to hate Jews, they already did. If 500-1500 years of Christian demonizing wasn't enough, there was the role Jewish revolutionaries played in the downfall of the Kaiser, or the role Jewish Bankers played in the Weimar Economic disaster.

All this talk using silhouettes of ships and what the unseen from the sky says on the sides of ships, not knowing distance view size perception, obstructed views, not keeping the tech and view in their day and age in mind, compared to the clarity of view we have today, is all pure ignorance talk. Haters find all kinds of silly arguments to fit their hate mongering narrative.
If the Chinese would have made these arguments they would have went to war with us, when the US accidentally shot down their plane a number of years back, I think in the Middle East near Iran or Iraq.

 

[JoeB131]

Axis Mikey strikes again

Your definition of "insane stuff" is comical. Your idea of "insane stuff" is any position you reject. It is hilarious that you would compare these supposedly "insane" positions with the truly nutty, obscene positions you have taken.

Naw, guy, if my positions were "obscene", you wouldn't have the constant whining about them

Uh, yeah, it is. Obviously, you don't know that most of the scientists who've studied the Shroud have concluded it is authentic. Heard of STURP? Google it. STURP was the team of scientists who examined the Shroud in 1978, and all of them concluded the image on the Shroud could not be manmade.

Don't care.

Here's how we know it's a fraud, besides the carbon dating and the image is that of a white European Dude and not a middle-eastern one.

FIrst, Pope Clement VII declared it was a fraud. (Yes, Clement was later declared an "anti-Pope" by later Popes, but he held authority at the time.

But here's an easy way to tell. Lay flat on your back on the floor. Now, without bending any muscles or making any effort, put your hands over your dick. Oh, wait, you don't like vulgar words. Okay, try to lay your hands over your genitals without bending your back or stretching your arms.

You won't be able to do it. Simply put, a dead body in a shroud wouldn't have laid that way.

We've been over this before, and you just keep repeating this distortion and ignoring evidence you can't explain. Again, one of the world's leading experts on hypnosis examined Sirhan for months and concluded he had been hypno-programmed, as I explain on my RFK website.

Yeah, that's some crazy talk right there.

here's a hint. Criminals will say anything to avoid responsibility and none of them ever did it.

I think you mean "massacre," but it was neither a slaughter nor a massacre--it was a battle that the Indians started. Are you ever going to address the evidence I present about the incident on my website? You're as unread on Wounded Knee as you are on Custer's Last Stand.

Yes, you seem to love people who shoot unarmed women and children, whether it be the Japanese at Nanjing, or the US Army at Wounded Knee or the Zionists in Gaza. Well, shit, it's not like they are "White and Delightsome" as your fake bible says.

And we saw in my thread on McCarthy that you know next to nothing about the man and his investigation. You just follow the standard liberal propaganda about him.

Actually, the man was a drunk who started beliveing his own bullshit.

Now, let's revisit some of the truly obscene, fringe statements you have made--I am quoting them verbatim from your replies:

Out of context, with no discussion of the point.

Hey, do you know who else blamed the Jews for overthrowing the Kaiser?

The ******* Kaiser. While Kaiser Wilhelm II denounced what the Nazis did, he blamed them (amongst others) for the 1918 revolution.

 

[JoeB131]

All this talk using silhouettes of ships and what the unseen from the sky says on the sides of ships, not knowing distance view size perception, obstructed views, not keeping the tech and view in their day and age in mind, compared to the clarity of view we have today, is all pure ignorance talk. Haters find all kinds of silly arguments to fit their hate mongering narrative.
If the Chinese would have made these arguments they would have went to war with us, when the US accidentally shot down their plane a number of years back, I think in the Middle East near Iran or Iraq.

Um, okay, let's look at that. I assume you are talking about the 2001 incident when a Chinese fighter collided with a US Spy plane that was in Chinese airspace.

There was no claim of mistaken identity there. The Chinese knew it was a US Plane; the Americans knew it was a Chinese plane. The dispute was whether or not the plane was in Chinese airspace.

So the end of the day, the Chinese let our damaged plane land on their territory, and released it and it's crew. That all sounds... pretty reasonable.

Nowhere near what the Zionists claimed, they mistook a clearly marked US Surveillance ship for an Egyptian Horse carrier half its size.

 

[HaShev]

Um, okay, let's look at that. I assume you are talking about the 2001 incident when a Chinese fighter collided with a US Spy plane that was in Chinese airspace.

There was no claim of mistaken identity there. The Chinese knew it was a US Plane; the Americans knew it was a Chinese plane. The dispute was whether or not the plane was in Chinese airspace.

So the end of the day, the Chinese let our damaged plane land on their territory, and released it and it's crew. That all sounds... pretty reasonable.

Nowhere near what the Zionists claimed, they mistook a clearly marked US Surveillance ship for an Egyptian Horse carrier half its size.

No we shot down a Chinese plane while dealing with Iran I think.

 

[JoeB131]

No we shot down a Chinese plane while dealing with Iran I think.

You think? You mean you don't know?

you might be thinking of the downing of Iran Air 655, which was shot down by USS Vincennes.

But that was a case where the Vincennes was under active attack by Iranian gunboats and the radar mistook an airliner for a F-14 fighter.

Nothing to do with China.

 

[HaShev]

You think? You mean you don't know?

you might be thinking of the downing of Iran Air 655, which was shot down by USS Vincennes.

But that was a case where the Vincennes was under active attack by Iranian gunboats and the radar mistook an airliner for a F-14 fighter.

Nothing to do with China.

No when I said " I think', as in being during problems with Iran. You know my memory is accurate, it was definitely a Chinese plane, that's something you don't forget otherwise I would have mentioned the blur.

 

[JoeB131]

No when I said " I think', as in being during problems with Iran. You know my memory is accurate, it was definitely a Chinese plane, that's something you don't forget otherwise I would have mentioned the blur.

Well, let me know when you know what you are talking about.

 

[HaShev]

Well, let me know when you know what you are talking about.

SEE the news that is hidden from you makes you uninformed, then you blame others for your ignorance
THAT THEY CREATED.
But that is your choice, you choose your media bias, you choose to be lied to and played, you choose to view with blinders on and search engines that whitewash info and news even as far as changing events and their dates.

 

[JoeB131]

SEE the news that is hidden from you makes you uninformed, then you blame others for your ignorance
THAT THEY CREATED.
But that is your choice, you choose your media bias, you choose to be lied to and played, you choose to view with blinders on and search engines that whitewash info and news even as far as changing events and their dates.

Guy, you were the one who claimed that a Chinese plan was shot down over Iran.

You should be able to provide a link to such an incident happening.

I suspect you are conflating other incidents that were in the news, but you don't remember the details clearly.

None of this, of course, has to do with the fact that the Israelis attacked a US flagged ship in 1967, in three separate waves, killing or injuring dozens of US sailors.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

My goddness!

What have those conniving Jews with their money-grubbing ways and hooked noses done to you NOW, Joe?


You poor guy, being plagued by Jews like you are.

 

[PeterPilot]

No when I said " I think', as in being during problems with Iran. You know my memory is accurate, it was definitely a Chinese plane, that's something you don't forget otherwise I would have mentioned the blur.

Maybe you're thinking about the Chinese Embassy that Clinton's administration & NATO "accidentally" bombed when it was destroying Serbia?

 

[JoeB131]

My goddness!

What have those conniving Jews with their money-grubbing ways and hooked noses done to you NOW, Joe?


You poor guy, being plagued by Jews like you are.

Duly noted you couldn't answer my point.

Kind of like how IM2 screams racism every time someone disputes his nonsense.

 

[HaShev]

Guy, you were the one who claimed that a Chinese plan was shot down over Iran.

You should be able to provide a link to such an incident happening.

I suspect you are conflating other incidents that were in the news, but you don't remember the details clearly.

None of this, of course, has to do with the fact that the Israelis attacked a US flagged ship in 1967, in three separate waves, killing or injuring dozens of US sailors.

It didn't happen recently, not everything has a link and never said it was over Iran I said I think I remember it being around Iran with issues we had with them years back, like,one of those times they harassed our sailors, kidnapping them?
It was definitely China and if this place had better archiving it would be in the post archives discussion years ago.
Your response proves my point.

 

[HaShev]

Maybe you're thinking about the Chinese Embassy that Clinton's administration & NATO "accidentally" bombed when it was destroying Serbia?

No it was a friendly fire incident taking down a China plane.

 

[JoeB131]

It didn't happen recently, not everything has a link and never said it was over Iran I said I think I remember it being around Iran with issues we had with them years back, like,one of those times they harassed our sailors, kidnapping them?
It was definitely China and if this place had better archiving it would be in the post archives discussion years ago.
Your response proves my point.

If it happened, you'd have no problem finding it on Google or Wiki.

 

[HaShev]

If it happened, you'd have no problem finding it on Google or Wiki.

Not true, I couldn't find my uncle's friendly fire sunk Sub attack that killed the entire crew either. Another of those lack of communication incidents.

 

[JoeB131]

Not true, I couldn't find my uncle's friendly fire sunk Sub attack that killed the entire crew either. Another of those lack of communication incidents.

Well, that's kind of vague.

I'm sure it didn't involve a clearly marked ship in international waters in broad daylight.

 

[HaShev]

Well, that's kind of vague.

I'm sure it didn't involve a clearly marked ship in international waters in broad daylight.

In waters they weren't supposed to be and warned by Israel not to be. CAN YOU SHOW US A LINK TO THE VIEW FROM ABOVE THAT THE PLANE HAD, THE EXACT VISIBILITY "y-o-u" are claiming existed?

 

[JoeB131]

In waters they weren't supposed to be and warned by Israel not to be. CAN YOU SHOW US A LINK TO THE VIEW FROM ABOVE THAT THE PLANE HAD, THE EXACT VISIBILITY "y-o-u" are claiming existed?

Oh, I see, the Jews now own international waters?

According to crew members, the planes flew close enough to where they could see the pilots.

But, shit, let's leave the planes aside for the moment. The third attack was by boats on the water.

They knew what they were doing, and it was murder. If our government hadn't sold out to the Zionist Lobby, we'd see justice.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Oh, I see, the Jews now own international waters?

Yes, you ARE talking about Jews every time you use the term Zionist, subhuman.