ojunk (Mike Weeks) wrote:
(Issac Goldberg) wrote:
(Mike Weeks) wrote:

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/boston.html

Thanks for the link, Weeks.

In the future, I will state that Johnson and
McNamara gave the order for the cover-up to Admiral
Kidd, who then informed Boston.

Thanks for the heads up.

You're most welcome. Pleased that your problem has as last been overcome.
Really a shame it took so long for it to happen and that you were unable, or
unwilling, to do it on your own.

It's really a shame that you play a game of "I'm so smart
because I know that you made a minor mistake but I'm not
going to tell you what that mistake is." If you had been
forthcoming initially, a lot of bandwidth could have been
saved. But apparently that is your style, obfuscation rather
than clarity.

As to the content of Boston's statement, I'll take the
word of a Navy Captain over you, Weeks, a non-entity
who refuses to reveal his background.

Oh, this is truly heart-warming to read, especially since it comes from whoever
the heck you are.

Changing the subject again? You prove my point that you
refuse to reveal any information about your background.

BTW, the "word" you wish to accept w/o question comes with a
small condition, that of admitting to violating UCMJ article 135, section (e):

"(e) The members, counsel, the reporter, and interpreters of courts of inquiry
shall take an oath to faithfully perform their duties."

But don't let that "small" detail bother you.

Members of the Armed Forces are trained to follow
orders without question. And if the orders originated
directly from the President of the United States,
there would be few in the service, if any, who would
not obey those orders, even if they were clearly illegal.

[LBJ's previous illegal acts included the theft of the
1948 Senate election in Texas, where he secured his
victory by using ballot box stuffing. 200 people
who allegedly voted for Johnson from precinct 13 in
Jim Wells County amazingly voted in alphabetical order,
and furthermore, they all had the exact same handwriting
when they allegedly signed in at the polling place.
Johnson's final winning margin was 87 votes out of a
million votes cast. See volume 2 of Caro's
LBJ biography, "Means of Ascent."]

Everything Boston says ties in with the charges by the
Liberty crew that the Navy Court of Inquiry was a sham.

The Navy Court of Inquiry carefully avoided looking
into the question of whether the attack was
intentional or an accident, so you are able to say
both that "they found no evidence that the attack
was an accident," and that "they found no evidence
that the attack was intentional."

[snip]

A Navy Captain is more credible than a non-entity
like you any day.

Agreed.

Thanks for your endorsement of Captain Boston.

That's why you have no credibility but Captain A. Jay Cristol does ...

Cristol lost whatever credibility he had because he
continues to imply that Congress thoroughly investigated
the Liberty affair and exonerated Israel as a result.
That never happened. If Congress never investigated
whether the attack was intentional or not, then they had
no evidence one way or another on which to base a
conclusion. It would be just as accurate to say, "Congress
found no evidence that the attack was an accident," as
saying "Congress found no evidence that the attack was
intentional." Both statements are technically correct, but
both are misleading, since the major point of controversy,
whether the attack was intentional or not, WAS NEVER
INVESTIGATED BY CONGRESS. Cristol, by continuing to imply
otherwise, is being dishonest.

For example, Cristol cites the Hearings on the Foreign
Aid Assistance Act of 1967 as evidence that the attack
on the Liberty was investigated by Congress. But
Senators present at those hearings openly questioned
the Administration's explanation of events and
complained about not having enough information to
make an informed conclusion regarding the attack on
the Liberty.

The only other Congressional investigation cited by
Cristol on his web page, by the House Armed Services
Committee, did not investigate the details of the
Israeli attack on the USS Liberty, because that committee
was charged to investigate shortcomings in DOD's
communications. To imply, as Cristol does, that the
Armed Services investigation thoroughly looked into
the Israeli attack on the Liberty and concluded that
it was an accident is pure dishonesty.

[Why Cristol would put examples of Congressional
investigations which clearly do not support his
conclusion, when better examples exist, is totally
illogical.]

President Bush used the same kind of deception to
build support for his invasion of Iraq. He repeatedly
implied that Saddam had been responsible for the 9/11
attacks, and at the start of the recent conquest of
Iraq, a majority of the American people believed it.