USS Liberty Challenge/Reward

wrote in message . com...
(Issac Goldberg) wrote in message . com...
(Mike Weeks) wrote:

Idiot;

Weeks does what he does best, he resorts to childish
name calling.

What Mike does best is finding the facts and presenting
his conclusions based on the facts; e.g. you are an idiot.

Another poster whose arguments are so weak that
he feels the need to resort to childish name calling.

He acknowledges that Congress has never conducted an
investigation devoted solely to the Liberty affair.

What makes "Congress" more qualified to run an investigation than
the CIA?

Ah, it's the old 'move the goalposts' ploy. When
confronted with the fact Congress did not conduct
a thorough investigation of the Liberty affair,
some people denigrate Congress.

Can Congress get more data?

A Congressional investigation can ask the CIA
to testify on all of the data that has been
collected.

Does Congress have deeper understanding of Israel?

A non sequitur with regard to the question of
whether the attack on the Liberty was intentional
or not.

Does Congress have better exprerts in
navies-at-war issues than the US NAvy?

Congress can request the testimony of the US Navy's
finest experts, who are then obligated to give
truthful answers, or face jail terms.

In other words, why should Congresss investigate the Liberty
incidence after the CIA concluded that the Israeli explanation
is reasonable.

Believe it or not, the CIA is not always right.

Also, the CIA is subject to political pressure which
may cause them to change their correct conclusions to
something else. Kind of like when Vice President
Cheney made his visits to CIA HQ at Langley, and the
CIA then started to find reasons to invade Iraq.

The President can replace anyone at the CIA,
including the director, whenever he wants. But the
President cannot replace members of Congress,
since only the voters choose members of Congress.
Therefore, Congress should investigate because
they do not serve at the pleasure of the President.

(See http://libertyincident.com/cia.htm
@The Central Intelligence Agency completed an Intelligence
@Memorandum titled The Attack on the USS Liberty on 13 Jun
@1967. It was declassified on 31 Aug 1977. On page 4, in
@paragraph 5, the report concludes that the Liberty could
@easily be mistaken for the Egyptian transport El Quesir.)

Common sense refutes this.

The El Quesir was not outfitted with a large
and uniquely identifying antenna dish.

The first target attacked by the Israeli pilots
was Liberty's communications, and the large and
uniquely identifying antenna dish was quickly
put out of action.

If the El Quesir by some miracle had been
converted to an intelligence vessel with a
large and uniquely identifying antenna dish,
it would have been targeted and destroyed on
the first day of the war.

It sounds like there may have been some
political pressure put on the CIA to
produce the results that LBJ wanted.

wrote in message . com...

[snip]

(Issac Goldberg) wrote in message . com...
The main point, which Hillel does his best to avoid is:

Congress never conducted an investigation solely concerning
the USS Liberty affair, and Cristol's web page does not refute
that.

Congress never conducted an investigation of *MOST* affairs. Congress
usually investigates only if there is a high profile case or there
are indications that the executive branch lied; e.g. Joseph McCarthy
communists' hunt, Iran-Contra affair, Watergate.

Congress has thoroughly investigated every disaster involving
the US Navy EXCEPT for the USS Liberty.

[snip]

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

[snip]

Congress never conducted an investigation solely concerning
the USS Liberty affair, and Cristol's web page does not refute
that.

LOL: Well it does appear this poster believes only what's available on the net
counts for anything and there's nothing else; what a strange world it must be.

Note: Weeks does not refute my statement. He can't.

He just muddies the waters with another of his typically
inane arguments.

Nowhere on Cristol's web page is there any evidence that
Congress conducted a thorough investigation of the
Liberty attack, nor is there any evidence of a
Congressional report which exonerates Israel.

Cristol's web page does link to the following
Congressional events:

1) An investigation of DOD communication failures, and

2) Hearings into the 1967 Foreign Aid Bill.

To say that Congress conducted a thorough investigation
of the attack on the Liberty based on the two events
cited by Cristol is a complete fabrication.

Since the two above Congressional events did not
concentrate on the question to whether the attack
on the Liberty was intentional, it is not
surprising that they "found no evidence that
the Israeli attack was intentional." One could
have just as easily said that Congress "found
no evidence that the Israeli attack was an
accident," since the attack itself was never
thoroughly investigated by Congress.

Let's see; still too lazy to actually read a book? If not, try "The Liberty
Incident",

Cristol's book incorrectly implies that Congress
conducted a thorough investigation of the Liberty
affair and exonerated Israel. However, since
there was no thorough investigation by Congress,
then there was no report stating that the attack
was an accident. To imply so is the kind of
dishonest truth bending that Bush used to
convince the American people to support the
invasion of Iraq. Bush implied that Saddam
was directly responsible for 9/11, without
actually saying it. Bush was so successful in his
deceit that a majority of the American people,
at the time of the last invasion of Iraq,
believed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
[Bush poll numbers continue to hit new lows,
now that his lies and half-truths have become
public knowledge.]

Q: If there had been a thorough Congressional
investigation of the attack on the Liberty which
produced a report exonerating the Israelis, then
why didn't Cristol include a link to that report?

A: There was no such report or investigation.

(Issac Goldberg) wrote in message om...
wrote in message . com...

What Mike does best is finding the facts and presenting
his conclusions based on the facts; e.g. you are an idiot.

Another poster whose arguments are so weak that
he feels the need to resort to childish name calling.

He acknowledges that Congress has never conducted an
investigation devoted solely to the Liberty affair.

What makes "Congress" more qualified to run an investigation than
the CIA?

Ah, it's the old 'move the goalposts' ploy. When
confronted with the fact Congress did not conduct
a thorough investigation of the Liberty affair,
some people denigrate Congress.

So what?
To make an investigation you need the power of subpoena and
people who can ask the right questions. a Navy court of inquiry
has those powers, and it is the standard tool for the US Navy to
find the facts.

Do you think that Congress should double check every Navy inquiry,
or just the Liberty? If just the Liberty then please explain what
the Navy's court did wrong and how Congress may be able to fix.

IMO the Navy's court of inquiry has a better record of finding the
facts than Congress. If you reject this claim then please give
examples of Navy courtof inquiry making mistake, and Congress fixing
them.

Can Congress get more data?

A Congressional investigation can ask the CIA
to testify on all of the data that has been
collected.

A Navy court of inquiry can subpoena the CIA just like Congress can.
And since the Navy is better than Congress in keeping secrets, the
CIA will probably be more willing to coopertae.

Does Congress have deeper understanding of Israel?

A non sequitur with regard to the question of
whether the attack on the Liberty was intentional
or not.

You claim that Congress investigation will be "better."
I claim that for better investigation you should either have
the ability to collect more data, or the ability to understand
the data better. Do you reject my claim, yes or no?
And if yes then what is your counter-claim?

Does Congress have better exprerts in
navies-at-war issues than the US Navy?

Congress can request the testimony of the US Navy's
finest experts, who are then obligated to give
truthful answers, or face jail terms.

You assume that in short time Congressmen can become better experts
than people who spent years in sea commanding ships. I don't know
what is the base of your assumption, but I can tell you that you
can force people to tell you what they know, but knoweldge and
understanding is very different thing. E.g. a clueless person
like you who has access to all the data and still has no clue.

In other words, why should Congresss investigate the Liberty
incidence after the CIA concluded that the Israeli explanation
is reasonable.

Believe it or not, the CIA is not always right.

Believe it or not, Congress is not always right.
Believe it or not, Joseph McCarthy "investigations" did not catch
a single Russian spy.

Again, do you want to Congress to double-check everything that the
CIA say, or just the Liberty? And if just the Liberty then please
explain why the CIA can't be trusted in that case.

Make a case why the executive branch can't be trusted or shut up.

Also, the CIA is subject to political pressure which
may cause them to change their correct conclusions to
something else. Kind of like when Vice President
Cheney made his visits to CIA HQ at Langley, and the
CIA then started to find reasons to invade Iraq.

You make two baseless assumptions:
1) The Johnson adminstration put pressure on the CIA to lie
about Liberty.
2) Under eight different administrations, over 37 years, nobody in
the CIA discovered that their conclusions were baseless.

Again, make a case why the CIA can't be trusted in it Liberty
conclusions, or shut up.

The President can replace anyone at the CIA,
including the director, whenever he wants.

Yes.
You can make a case that Johnson had enough power to force the CIA
to lie about Liberty, but you still have to supply a motive. You
also have to explain how such a cover-up, invloving so many people,
can remian secret for 37 years.

But the
President cannot replace members of Congress,
since only the voters choose members of Congress.
Therefore, Congress should investigate because
they do not serve at the pleasure of the President.

I see.
We should get rid off Grand Juries, Court of Inquiries, and all that
jazz, and let just Congress investigate because only Congress can
be trusted.
(See http://libertyincident.com/cia.htm
@The Central Intelligence Agency completed an Intelligence
@Memorandum titled The Attack on the USS Liberty on 13 Jun
@1967. It was declassified on 31 Aug 1977. On page 4, in
@paragraph 5, the report concludes that the Liberty could
@easily be mistaken for the Egyptian transport El Quesir.)

Common sense refutes this.

The El Quesir was not outfitted with a large
and uniquely identifying antenna dish.

The first target attacked by the Israeli pilots
was Liberty's communications, and the large and
uniquely identifying antenna dish was quickly
put out of action.

If the El Quesir by some miracle had been
converted to an intelligence vessel with a
large and uniquely identifying antenna dish,
it would have been targeted and destroyed on
the first day of the war.

It sounds like there may have been some
political pressure put on the CIA to
produce the results that LBJ wanted.

(Steve Richter) wrote in message . com...
wrote in message . com...

What makes "Congress" more qualified to run an investigation than
the CIA? Can Congress get more data? Does Congress have deeper
understanding of Israel? Does Congress have better exprerts in
navies-at-war issues than the US NAvy?

1st, Congress has the legal authority to place witnesses under oath.

Other branches of government also have the right to place witnesses
under oath. E.g. a Grand jury and a Court of Inquiry.

2nd, as an equal branch of government to the executive, can demand
full access to all information known by the GOUS.

Having information, and using the information, are two different issues.
IMO Rear Admiral Isaac Kidd, and his court, had a better understanding
of navy operations in war zone than Congress does. If you diagree
then please explain why.

Thirdly, and most
important, the US Congress owns Israel from the perspective that it
authorizes the billions of $$ each year that the US gives to Israel to
conduct its brutal occupation of the palestinian territories. The
Congress could, if it wanted, force Israel to release what it knows.

Do you really believe that Israel could keep such a secret, involving
so many people for 37 years?

Anyway, treating a client state like **** is not always the best
course of action. See France before the 6-Days-War for example.
You may end up saving $3 billion per year on Israel, and spending
$50 billion extra to save pro-US regimes in Iraq,
Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

To this day, Israel refuses to release crucial facts of the attack on
the American ship.

And the source of your information is...?
How do you know what deals Israel made with the US?
Do you want Congress also to publish other information that the
US promised to keep secret? (E.g. the condition to US inspections
is Dimona was that the US would keep the information secret.
Should the US ignore its promise just because it will serve
better your political agenda?)

This is one item amoung many where Israel's explanations do not answer
legitimate questions about the attack. What did the Israeli coastal
radar net see when its operators looked at the Liberty?

What "Israel coastal radar net" in 1967?!
Where did you get that idea?
Don't you know that in 1967 the Israeli "navy" was a collection
of WWII quality small ships?
Israel had a couple of old naval radars, near its bigget navy
bases (Haifa and Ashdod), but it did not have a radar that could
look over the horizon.

The public has been told how the Israeli Naval command forgot it knew
of the American spy ship Liberty the morning of 8 June, hours before
it ordered the attack.

What an *IGNORANT* like you can't get is simple navy fighting facts.
If you want to sink a ship using 1967 airplanes then you used
half iron bombs, just like the US did in Midway. If you want to
sink a ship, and cover your ass, then you use submarines, not
torpedo boats that display your flag.

If Israel tried to sink a US ship, knowing that it was a US ship,
then this is a case of gross incompetence. The "cover-up" before
the attack was pretty bad. You claim that the same people who
did everything wrong before the attack have done everything
right in the cover-up. I wonder if you really believe in
your high quality bull****.

So yes, Hillel, a congressional investigation is long overdue and
worthwhile to the American public.

So write to your Congressman and ask of an investigation.
You may find one as stupid as you are, even though it is
not that easy.

#Congress never conducted an investigation of *MOST* affairs. Congress
# usually investigates only if there is a high profile case or there
# are indications that the executive branch lied; e.g. Joseph McCarthy
# communists' hunt, Iran-Contra affair, Watergate.

(Issac Goldberg) wrote in message . com...
Congress has thoroughly investigated every disaster involving
the US Navy EXCEPT for the USS Liberty.

Really?!
Would you like to compare the The USS Stark Incident
(see http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id344.htm), with
37 American seamen dead, to the Liberty?

Can you please tell us what special investgation Congress did about
the Stark and not about the Liberty? Come on, you made a claim now
prove it.

BTW my impression is that Congress usually accepts the Navy's Court
of inquiry conclusions; e.g. USS Greeneville. If you have some
counter examples, where Congress rejected the Navy's Court
of inquiry conclusions, then please post them.

(Mike Weeks) wrote in message ...
From: (Theodore Herzl)
Date: 6/29/2004 17:26 Pacific Daylight Time

It seems rather reasonable
to investigate anew the events surrounding the USS Liberty attack in
public investigation that settles this once and for all.

The challenge for the conspiracy loons

Weeks knows all, sees all. Since he is omniscient, anyone
who disagrees with him is a 'conspiracy loon.' QED

running around on the net is to actually
produce anything which can be considered credible.

So, according to Weeks:

1) the crew members of the USS Liberty are not credible,

2) Captain Boston is not credible,

3) Secretary of State Rusk is not credible,

4) CIA director Helms is not credible,

and the list goes on and on. Weeks is always right,
everybody else is always wrong.

Instead what we continue to
see is simply hot stale air.

All of the hot stale air is being produced
by Weeks. This is demonstrated by his
repeated need to resort to name calling.
If he had a valid argument, there would
be no need to engage in name calling.

Oh, BTW clueless, what's available to be investigated is indeed public,

A nice tautology. It's the material which is not public which
should be investigated. Why, after 37 years, is so much
information about the attack on the Liberty still classified
by the US and Israeli governments?

and the
last really solid piece of material came out of the NSA in July 2003 and State
Dept. in Jan. 2004, and once again as in the other examples, it doesn't support
the claims of the conspiracy loons.

We'll just have to take Weeks word for it, since he doesn't tell
use exactly what the 'really solid' material is. This is natural
for Weeks, since he sees all, knows all. Weeks is omniscient,
and he does not need to provide any evidence. Weeks just knows.

Besides, all we hear from the nuts ...

Anyone who disagrees with Weeks is a nut.

Remaining nonsense snipped.

It is Weeks' arguments that are nonsense. He is so extreme
in his opposition to an honest investigation that one must
ask why? If the attack was truly an accident, an honest
independent investigation would confirm what Weeks says.
But he opposes a new investigation with every ounce of
energy he possesses. Why?

(Issac Goldberg) wrote in message . com...
A nice tautology. It's the material which is not public which
should be investigated.

Here you go wrong.
*All* material, no matter if it is public record or not,
should be investigated. But, before you demand to see
the secret records, I'd suggest you to read the public records
first. Only then you will have some clue what questions to ask.

Why, after 37 years, is so much
information about the attack on the Liberty still classified
by the US and Israeli governments?

Why don't you ask LVA. I am sure that they know what the
mission of the Liberty was. May be one of the old guys will
be willing to risk jail time just to prove your conspiracy
theory...

ojunk (Mike Weeks) wrote:

[snip]

Narrator: Did Johnson order a cover up?

[then-CIA director] Helms: No, that I'm aware of.

Any other answer by Helms would have resulted in
his immediate termination from government service.

After Helms finished his government service, he
was free to speak his mind, and his true feelings
were that there was a cover-up.

wrote in message . com...
(Issac Goldberg) wrote in message . com...

[snip]

Why, after 37 years, is so much
information about the attack on the Liberty still classified
by the US and Israeli governments?

Why don't you ask LVA.

Are they in charge of both American and Israeli classification
of secret documents?

I am sure that they know what the
mission of the Liberty was.

Are you omniscient? How can you be 'sure' what LVA knows?

Why would the entire crew be told the details of a top
secret mission, instead of only those with a 'need-to-know?'

And if you know so much, would you like to tell us the
details of Operation Cyanide?