Declassified Israeli cables add evidence USS Liberty no accident

[CXC3000]

More evidence that our 'ally' is nothing more than a vile murderous enemy...

----------

A Special Report by the Chicago Tribune details declassified cables, from the Israeli State Archive, which add further evidence that Israel knew it was attacking an American ship as it attacked the USS Liberty

The cables obtained by the Tribune, and translated from Hebrew to English, are were published in a 2007 special report. They detail exchanges between the Israeli ambassador in Washington and the Israeli foreign minister in Tel Aviv. Five days after the attack, Israeli Ambassador Avraham Harman worried that the deliberate nature of the attack had been uncovered, and cabled Foreign Minister Abba Eban that a source, code-named "Hamlet," had told him that the Americans had:

"clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."


As the diplomatic uproar over the attack played out, Harman cabled three days later that:

"the Americans probably have findings showing that our pilots indeed knew that the ship was American."

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/w...article/414951

----------



-------

[Tripinn]

It's been almost 2 days since someone has made a thread about this. To not support a country of millions based on the actions of a few dozens is pretty petty IMO.

How can you have "Clear proof" and "probably" in back to back quotes referring to the same thing.

I will go on continuing my support for Israel versus it's defense against the barbaric Palestinians. But I'll agree, they probably aren't the greatest people in the world, I mean how great of a people would we be if Mexico and Canada (every bordering country) tried invading the USA every 20 years or so.

[metco]

It's been almost 2 days since someone has made a thread about this. To not support a country of millions based on the actions of a few dozens is pretty petty IMO.

How can you have "Clear proof" and "probably" in back to back quotes referring to the same thing.

I will go on continuing my support for Israel versus it's defense against the barbaric Palestinians. But I'll agree, they probably aren't the greatest people in the world, I mean how great of a people would we be if Mexico and Canada (every bordering country) tried invading the USA every 20 years or so.

Reading comprehension? In the first quote the Israeli ambassador said the Americans "have" clear proof that we knew what we were doing. In the second quote the Americans "probably" have clear proof that we knew what we were doing. In both quotes we admit that we knew what we were doing. The modifier applies to how certain it is that the Americans know it.

[Oncebitten]

"clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."

Well that's interesting CXC! In your dozens of previous posts about this, you've explained that Israel attacked the USS Liberty on purpose!

Now your saying it's been uncovered that there is proof that at a "certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship..."

But Israel attacked the ship on purpose!

But the pilot didn't discover the identity of the ship until a "certain stage"?

But it was on purpose.

But the indentity wasn't known until a "certain stage".

But it was on purpose.

But they didn't know who's ship it was at first.

Right.....


Negged. Idiot.

[metco]

"clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."

Well that's interesting CXC! In your dozens of previous posts about this, you've explained that Israel attacked the USS Liberty on purpose!

Now your saying it's been uncovered that there is proof that at a "certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship..."

But Israel attacked the ship on purpose!

But the pilot didn't discover the identity of the ship until a "certain stage"?

But it was on purpose.

But the indentity wasn't known until a "certain stage".

But it was on purpose.

But they didn't know who's ship it was at first.

Right.....


Negged. Idiot.

are u some kind of retard? The Israeli cable doesn't say "until" a certain stage. You added that. It says "clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."

"continued the attack anyway..." Why did you leave that part out?

[Oncebitten]

are u some kind of retard? The Israeli cable doesn't say "until" a certain stage. You added that. It says "clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."

"continued the attack anyway..." Why did you leave that part out?

How could the attack have been on purpose if they didn't know the identity of the ship from the very beginning you f**king retard?

Post count: 2. Already red.

Lol...

[CXC3000]

How could the attack have been on purpose if they didn't know the identity of the ship from the very beginning you f**king retard?

Post count: 2. Already red.

Lol...

Just for you :

Dean Rusk, U.S. 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."

-----

You still going to defend your Israeli terrorist brethren ?

[foreverSNAFU]

LOL at JIDF trying to spin this as the actions of a "few". (Looking at you, Tripinn.)

[Oncebitten]

Just for you :

Dean Rusk, U.S. Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote:



-----

You still going to defend your Israeli terrorist brethren ?

So answer my question. Was the attack on purpose or not?

[metco]

How could the attack have been on purpose if they didn't know the identity of the ship from the very beginning you f**king retard?

Post count: 2. Already red.

Lol...

Did you fall on your head as a child?

"our pilots indeed knew that the ship was American."

"the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."

"Steve Forslundan, an intelligence analyst for the 544th Air Reconnaissance Technical Wing at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha, said that the Israeli military:

""made specific reference to the efforts to direct the jets to the target which was identified as American numerous times by the ground controller. Upon arrival, the aircraft specifically identified the target and mentioned the American flag she was flying. There were frequent operational transmissions from the pilots to the ground base describing the strafing runs. The ground control began asking about the status of the target and whether it was sinking. They stressed that the target must be sunk and leave no trace.""

"Air Force Capt. Richard Block, who was commanding an intelligence wing of more than 100 analysts and cryptologists monitoring Middle Eastern communications on the island of Crete, told the Tribune:

"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.'"

PARTIAL List of public figures who say Israel must have know ship was American

Secretary of State Dean Rusk,
Undersecretary of State George Ball,
CIA Director Richard Helms,
NSA Director Lt. Gen. William Odom, USA (Ret.),
Adm. Bobby Ray Inman, USN (Ret.),
NSA deputy directors Oliver Kirby
Maj. Gen. John Morrison, USAF (Ret.);
Ambassador Dwight Porter, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon

[NumeroOnce]

"clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."

Well that's interesting CXC! In your dozens of previous posts about this, you've explained that Israel attacked the USS Liberty on purpose!

Now your saying it's been uncovered that there is proof that at a "certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship..."

But Israel attacked the ship on purpose!

But the pilot didn't discover the identity of the ship until a "certain stage"?

But it was on purpose.

But the indentity wasn't known until a "certain stage".

But it was on purpose.

But they didn't know who's ship it was at first.

Right.....


Negged. Idiot.

Lol at people that follow the official story to a tee... it has been uncovered that at some point in time, the Israeli's definitely knew who they were attacking. This doesn't imply that they didn't know who they were attacking before they began the assault, just that they can only prove their knowledge at some point in time. Either way, lol at the idea that it would be excusable that they only who they were attacking for half the attack, and not the full attack from the beginning.

And when it's the actions of "a few," I'd point out that the "few" was a military organization, which implies political/government involvement.

Sorry, Israel is a part of the Middle East and hardly any better than the brainwashed Muslims that surround them. "When fighting monsters, it is imperative that one doesn't become one," or something along those lines.

[Tekkendo]

LOL at JIDF trying to spin this as the actions of a "few". (Looking at you, Tripinn.)

Why would the Israeli government, the Israeli military and the Israeli nation want to attack the country that is most supportive of them? Does that even make sense?


But of course, logic, facts and truth don't matter to CT loonies as they just freely make up their own shiete as they go along. So whatever.. Don't really care.

[metco]

LOL at JIDF trying to spin this as the actions of a "few". (Looking at you, Tripinn.)

what is JIDF?

[NumeroOnce]

Why would the Israeli government, the Israeli military and the Israeli nation want to attack the country that is most supportive of them? Does that even make sense?


But of course, logic, facts and truth don't matter to CT loonies as they just freely make up their own shiete as they go along. So whatever.. Don't really care.

Lol... "If America was attacked by Israel, it would be all over CNN and not CTardNewsNet lololol...." except when the media is controlled by those with ties to and sympathy towards Israel. I'd still say Chicago Tribune, which is linked in the article, is relatively trustworthy by mainstream standards, no? How come it's events like these when people choose not to believe in the media? Just because others have said the same thing long before it comes out?

To answer your question, its a classic case of attacking a superpower who is likely to retaliate strongly against any threat, then shifting the blame to the group they really want to hurt. Is that too complex for people to wrap their heads around? The only problem is, they were unable to sink the boat and finish the job.

What we have here is Israel attacking America with almost certain knowledge of their target sometime during the attack, yet people refuse to blame them for anything. Pathetic.

[CXC3000]

So answer my question. Was the attack on purpose or not?

What do you call it when someone attacks something, knowing what it is, and refuses to stop ?

[metco]

Why would the Israeli government, the Israeli military and the Israeli nation want to attack the country that is most supportive of them? Does that even make sense?


But of course, logic, facts and truth don't matter to CT loonies as they just freely make up their own shiete as they go along. So whatever.. Don't really care.

The same reason Israel planted a bomb in the US embassy in the L:avon Affair. To blame it on Muslims and accomplish a foreign policy goal. Google Lavon Affair wikipedia.

The Lavon Affair refers to a failed Israeli covert operation, code named Operation Susannah, conducted in Egypt in the Summer of 1954. As part of the false flag operation,[1] a group of Egyptian Jews were recruited by Israeli military intelligence to plant bombs inside Egyptian, American and British-owned civilian targets, cinemas, libraries and American educational centers. The bombs were timed to detonate several hours after closing time. The attacks were to be blamed on the Muslim Brotherhood, Egyptian Communists, "unspecified malcontents" or "local nationalists" with the aim of creating a climate of sufficient violence and instability to induce the British government to retain its occupying troops in Egypt's Suez Canal zone.

In this case the sinking of the Liberty was to be blamed on Egypt, so the US would attack Cairo in the middle of the Six Day War which \was taking place at the time. Can't post links this is Fox News:

"(Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admral Thomas) Moorer's panel suggested several possible reasons Israel might have wanted to attack a U.S. ship. Among them: Israel intended to sink the ship and blame Egypt because it might have brought the United States into the 1967 war."

Killing Americans to get them all riled up against Muslims is a standard Israeli M.O.

[ZioBot]

What size shall i get you CXC?

[CXC3000]

What size shall i get you CXC?

Got this in a large ? :

[Tekkendo]

The same reason Israel planted a bomb in the US embassy in the L:avon Affair. To blame it on Muslims and accomplish a foreign policy goal. Google Lavon Affair wikipedia.




In this case the sinking of the Liberty was to be blamed on Egypt, so the US would attack Cairo in the middle of the Six Day War which \was taking place at the time. Can't post links this is Fox News:



Killing Americans to get them all riled up against Muslims is a standard Israeli M.O.

That kind of gig is too risky that it is not worth the risk. One mess up and you fuk your country permanently. The gain is not worth the risk. No sane leadership would permit that kind of operation. It is suicidal, b/c it is not a one off thing. Once you did it, the risk of it being discovered and destroy your country stays there forever.


It is good for Hollywood. But it doesn't fly IRL.

[Tekkendo]

Lol... "If America was attacked by Israel, it would be all over CNN and not CTardNewsNet lololol...." except when the media is controlled by those with ties to and sympathy towards Israel. I'd still say Chicago Tribune, which is linked in the article, is relatively trustworthy by mainstream standards, no? How come it's events like these when people choose not to believe in the media? Just because others have said the same thing long before it comes out?

To answer your question, its a classic case of attacking a superpower who is likely to retaliate strongly against any threat, then shifting the blame to the group they really want to hurt. Is that too complex for people to wrap their heads around? The only problem is, they were unable to sink the boat and finish the job.

What we have here is Israel attacking America with almost certain knowledge of their target sometime during the attack, yet people refuse to blame them for anything. Pathetic.

1. It is illogical.

2. The Israeli leadership apologized and paid compensation fully.

3. There has been no other incident of this nature since.

4. Shiete like this is not uncommon in war. Friendly fire has always been a present danger on the battlefield. We have hit our own troops in just about every war.

5. Case closed.

[ZioBot]

Got this in a large ? :

that doesn't show the strength of the Israeli-American bond so its not relevant to my t-shirt discussion.

[NumeroOnce]

1. It is illogical.

Or a high level of deception meant to gain military support which you are unable to comprehend.

2. The Israeli leadership apologized and paid compensation fully.

Yeah, because despite their hours-long attack, they failed to sink the ship and were eventually caught red-handed.

3. There has been no other incident of this nature since.

I'm not so sure of that... the incident with the embassies the above poster mentioned, they more than likely they had a hand in 9/11, etc...

4. Shiete like this is not uncommon in war. Friendly fire has always been a present danger on the battlefield. We have hit our own troops in just about every war.

And a reliable source reports that they knew they were attacking the US at least by sometime during the attack, yet continued anyways. This isn't a case of "friendly fire," if anything it should be called a "friendly hour long assualt," although it was nothing near friendly.

5. Case closed.

[metco]

1. It is illogical.

2. The Israeli leadership apologized and paid compensation fully.

3. There has been no other incident of this nature since.

4. Shiete like this is not uncommon in war. Friendly fire has always been a present danger on the battlefield. We have hit our own troops in just about every war.

5. Case closed.

Israel still sticks to this day to the official lie that it was an "accident." All foreign aid to Israel should be cut off until they officially acknowledge that it was not. These cables and the radio transmissions are the irrefutable, bulletproof evidence.

[Dave22reborn]

Got this in a large ? :

If that were true, then they wouldn't have given back the Gaza Strip, and the palestinians in the Gaza Strip wouldn't be suffering from obesity.

[Tripinn]

Or a high level of deception meant to gain military support which you are unable to comprehend.



Yeah, because despite their hours-long attack, they failed to sink the ship and were eventually caught red-handed.



I'm not so sure of that... the incident with the embassies the above poster mentioned, they more than likely they had a hand in 9/11, etc...



And a reliable source reports that they knew they were attacking the US at least by sometime during the attack, yet continued anyways. This isn't a case of "friendly fire," if anything it should be called a "friendly hour long assualt," although it was nothing near friendly.

This is a clear example of "What if's" turning into more "What if's" off those previous "What if's" to facts? Makes since.

[NumeroOnce]

This is a clear example of "What if's" turning into more "What if's" off those previous "What if's" to facts? Makes since.

Didn't use any what ifs in that statement at all. It's really quite simple: Israeli bombed a distinctive American ship for hours, and then said oops.

And people like to make excuses for them for some reason, even our own government.

The anger is mixed with incredulity: that Israel would attack an important ally, then attribute the attack to a case of mistaken identity by Israeli pilots who had confused the U.S. Navy's most distinctive ship with an Egyptian horse-cavalry transport that was half its size and had a dissimilar profile. And they're also incredulous that, for years, their own government would reject their calls for a thorough investigation.

Their anger has been stoked by the declassification of government documents and the recollections of former military personnel, including some quoted in this article for the first time, which strengthen doubts about the U.S. National Security Agency's position that it never intercepted the communications of the attacking Israeli pilots -- communications, according to those who remember seeing them, that showed the Israelis knew they were attacking an American naval vessel.

The documents also suggest that the U.S. government, anxious to spare Israel's reputation and preserve its alliance with the U.S., closed the case with what even some of its participants now say was a hasty and seriously flawed investigation.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-li...ry.html#page=1

How can you deny this, I'm interested to hear your reasoning. You just believe Israel when they said "Oops, it was an accident?" And that's a reputable source.

[metco]

This is a clear example of "What if's" turning into more "What if's" off those previous "What if's" to facts? Makes since.

What? There is nothing what if about it. Israel'sm own communications show they knew it was an American ship before, during and after the attack. 34 US sailors were brutally murdered and hundreds wounded. I recommend you watch the new documentary with the interviews of the Liberty survivors called The Day Israel Attacked America. They are unanimous. You also have a list of top generals and political figures who say it was 100% a deliberate attack intended to sink the ship. Including Secretay of State Dean Rusk, NSA Director Bobby Ray Inman, CIA Director Richard Helms.

The attack went on for 2 hours with strafing runs, napalm bombs, rockets, then tor**** boats came on the scene and tor****ed the ship. This was after 9 hours of aerail recon in the morning. The plan was to blame it on Egypt and drag the US into the Six Day War on the Israeli side.

Please google The Day Israel Attacked America.

[darknessmanX]

1. It is illogical.

2. The Israeli leadership apologized and paid compensation fully.

3. There has been no other incident of this nature since.

4. Shiete like this is not uncommon in war. Friendly fire has always been a present danger on the battlefield. We have hit our own troops in just about every war.

5. Case closed.

have you ever said the words "nine eleven"?

[GuardianBrah]

have you ever said the words "nine eleven"?

Of course they knew. Imo this was a false flag operation to blame the attack on isreal's enemies, its just the idf fubared the operation.

[Oncebitten]

Imo this was a false flag operation to blame the attack on isreal's enemies,

So the Israeli's decided to use a type of jet that only Israel flew (in the middle east)? And ones that were fully adorned with Israeli markings? And they were on the radio the entire time during the attack speaking Hebrew?

That was their plan to make everyone think the Arabs did it? Really?

Have you really thought that through all the way?