REVEALED: Israel’s IDF Used Passenger Airliners as Cover During Christmas Day Attack <MOD WARNING>

All things considered, the Liberty attack and more importantly the cover-up show the degree to which Israeli interests control the federal government and the mainstream media.

 

Every story ever written about Israel intentionally attacking the USS Liberty - as a false flag or from whatever mysterious reasons - starts with, or contains, a lie: the basic premise is that Israel attacked the ship of their friend and ally the US. But back then the US was not a friend and ally of Israel. The friendship and alliance came after the Six Day War. The emotionally loaded, tears-squeezing "friend and ally" stuff, designed to put Israel in the worst light possible, is of course both a lie and a logical fallacy. Please explain how can I, and why should I, believe anything written in a piece that starts with a lie and a logical fallacy.

 

It is absurd denialism - akin to denial that water is wet. It is one thing to disagree but another to go into mindless and often disingenuous denial when confronted with information that conflicts with deeply held religious belief (for some the believe in various "necessary illusions" is akin to religious belief).

This is the case with said poster. I was discussing some of the atrocities committed by the death squads in Guatemala during the Reagan/Bush administration. Death squads who we were supporting - and in fact training in terror at the "School of the America's". It was a nasty time. These death squads would drag children over barbed wire until the flesh hung from their bones in front of their parents.

This was all good with said poster because - and I quote "they are OUR bad guys". Obviously the posters brain could not handle the idea that we would be involved with such nastiness. He has lived all his life believing in the "necessary illusion" that our side is all good and the other is all bad. Typical black vs white, good vs evil, God vs devil paradigm. We are all good the other side is pure evil and that is that.

 

The full investigation into the Israeli attack was not carried out because Israel became an ally and friend with the US as stated by Mcnamara. It is irrelevant whether they were friend and ally before the attack.

http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/2117/1/U613349.pdf

 

The incident in question has been well documented. Whether or not Israel was an ally of US or not at the time has little bearing on the evidence and your claim that it does is fallacy.

That said - where do you get the idea that the US was not an ally of Israel in 1967 ?

 

Your source forgot to mention that the Liberty opened fire on the approaching Israeli torpedo boats before the attack.

However, my point was that there are good reasons to doubt the veracity of a story that contains a blatant lie.

 

Before which attack? The Liberty had just been bombed by Israeli planes and one of the torpedoes from those Israeli torpedo boats left a huge hole in the Liberty

 

While I'm reluctant to discuss other individuals, I have run into cases where no amount of evidence is enough to persuade people who exemplify the maxim: "None so blind as those who will not see."

Many people who sit comfortably at home view deadly international conflicts much as they would a sport.
Their "team" can do no wrong and must be supported regardless of their cheating or immorality. Once you see what modern ordinance can do to human tissue and how casually some people are willing to deploy that deadly ordinance, you begin to see that your "team" is not the embodiment of "Good" and why armed conflict should be the last resort.

Even though I am primarily loyal to the US, I am not afraid to condemn some of the inexcusable actions of its government.
If you truly care about either a friend or your country, you are doing either a disservice when you do not speak up when either is getting ready to screw up or do something it will later regret.

Decades before 9/11, I've spoken up concerning America's fatally flawed, "Israeli First" policy which has only worsened America's security, genuine best interest and worst of all, wasted countless lives.

Contrary to what America's pro Israel MSM has deluded gullible Americans into thinking, Israel's interests are not America's interests & Israel's enemies are not America's enemies.
Most Americans have been hoodwinked by pro Israel MSM into viewing Muslims as the "Evil" entity which Americans must sacrifice more blood & resources to fight.....for the "Good" Israel.

I was encouraged when Trump announced the withdrawal of US Troops from Syria but not surprised when Zionist US Policy makers orchestrated a quick reversal after installing US Troops in Israel to defend Israeli aggression.

The only way that the US can "win" the "War on Terror" (aka Islam/"Evil") is to stop fomenting terrorism & finally initiate an even handed Mid East Policy not seen for decades.

“Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can’t help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East.”– John Sheehan, Society of Jesus. (Jesuit priest)

 

Re:

You've just given everyone an excellent reason to dismiss anything written by Ahron Jay Cristol:

$10,000 Challenge
https://www.usslibertyveterans.org/10000challenge.html

"The Liberty Veterans Association offers a $10,000 reward to anyone who can establish the truth of A. Jay Cristol's claim:

"After ten official US investigations (including five congressional investigations), there was never any evidence that the attack was made with knowledge that the target was a US ship."

 

I completely agree. There is nothing more Patriotic than criticizing our Gov't - whether it is in relation to misguided foreign or domestic policy. People confuse support for the troops with support for the agenda of those who send our troops into harms way.

Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the Military Industrial Complex - was he "anti American" ? Apparently according to many of today's indoctrinated whelps. Our foreign policy is now conducted largely on the basis of the economic agenda of international financiers and national oligarchs - not on the basis of "freedom" and all the other platitudes bandied about as if they apply.

Still trying to wrap my head around how people think that arming and supporting Al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria somehow was in keeping with American values. Yeah. Israel was involved (not sure whether leading or following) in this endeavor as well (along with Saud, Qatar and various other nation states). How exactly was Assad some threat to US national security ? No one ever addresses that one either.

The more insane idea is that having extremist Islamist's (Al Qaeda/ISIS) take over Syria is a preferable alternative to either the US or Israel. It is no secret why El Saud would like nothing better. I would not be at all surprised if it was the US/Israel that either asked Russia to intervene or "green lighted" Russia intervention as the Jihadists were almost about to topple Assad.

Given that there is almost always an economic reason for US foreign policy these days I have looked some of the possibilities in the case of Syria. Syria rejected a pipeline sponsored by US/Israeli/Western interests in favor of Russia/Iran consortium. Occam's razor. The objective (same reason why we are still in Afghanistan - competing interests over building the energy corridor into the "new silk road" energy market of China/India) is then to destabilize the region so that the competing interest can not build an energy corridor.

That possibility aside - we need a war somewhere in order to justify the massive 1 Trillion dollar total military spend - to pad the pockets of the international financiers who own/run the Military Industrial Complex, the banks the Fed and so on.

 

US became an ally and friend of Israel after the war. It's a well known fact. Here's a source:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311886.2017.1299555

I know the prevalent narrative is that Israel received American help from inception, and couldn't have survived without it, but this narrative is false. The first country to recognize baby Israel was the USSR. The first weapons of the newly born IDF in 1948 were soviet made, smuggled from Czechoslovakia despite an American arms embargo for the Middle East.

The faulty premise in the anti-Israel story regarding the USS Liberty - that the US was at the time of the attack a friend and ally of Israel - is both a lie and a logical fallacy. In fact there are at least three logical fallacies packed together in that faulty premise:
1. Bandwagon - just because many people believe something (US being an ally of Israel at the time of the attack, in this particular case), that something is not necessarily true (how many people once believed Earth is flat?). Many of those who write about Liberty are probably too lazy, or too biased, to do their own research, believing the lie.
2. Appeal to emotion - manipulation of readers' emotions in order to win an argument
3. Loaded and leading sentence - a sentence that contains appeal to emotion and an unproven premise (when have you stopped beating your wife?)

Opinion pieces are usually full of logical fallacies of all kinds, that's why I avoid them like plague. Articles claiming to accurately describe historical events, or objectively report news, shouldn't contain even a hint of a logical fallacy, or unproven premises. All sides' arguments must be mentioned, even if not discussed thoroughly. The articles accusing Israel of deliberately attacking their friend and ally's ship don't withstand scrutiny and don't meet standards for ethical journalism. Choose any article you like, I'll analyze it for you.

Frankly, I don't understand how can someone accept anything written in an article as Gospel truth. I never do. While the writer might be an excellent journalist, and while he might sincerely believe he wrote the truth as objectively as possible, and while the article might contain only true facts, there's always more than one side to each story. I've yet to read an article that, while accurately reporting facts, didn't leave out some, or exaggerated the importance of others.

I'm not clutching for dear life to the concept of an always pure and righteous Israel, we're only humans, but so far the adherents of the "Israel deliberately attacked Liberty because false flag and stuff" theory failed to convince me.

 

Your inference that the US was not instrumental in the creation the State of Israel is 1) false and 2) more false. That the Soviets also agreed is irrelevant to this well known historical fact.

Moral of the Story ? The region was under British Control and the Brits did not want a Jewish state. The idea that the Soviets had some sway (greater than the US) over Britain is preposterous nonsense. The US was the Defacto Leader of the west and had huge influence with respect to Britain.

Without the US - Israel as we know it would likely not exist - FULL STOP.

The inferred premise that the US was some kind of enemy or at war with Israel such that the attack on the Liberty was justified is simply not true.

How you figure a quote claiming a "profound strengthening of relations happened in 1967" meant that prior to this the US was an enemy of Israel. The best you can get to is that the US was neutral (which does not justify attacking the liberty).


From your link:

How is the US not acting as an ally - or at least on the same side - as Israel ? while the Soviets were acting favorably towards Syria and Egypt (albeit pretty much neutral)

You are on some kind of revisionist History kick.

 

Thanks for your excellent observations and assessments.

Whenever Eisenhower's MIC warning is mentioned, the latin phrase "cui bono" comes to mind.
I've gotten cynical enough to believe that many of America's current confrontations in Cent. Asia & the M.E. are fueled by those who profit from them. Surprise!

The question remains, who benefits from US Troops currently occupying those hostile regions who would resent any foreign occupier inflicting collateral damage on their families, friends & neighbors.
Who gains from the recruitment of more terrorists that these costly US occupations engender?
The argument most frequently used for fighting "them" over "there" is so that "we" don't have to fight "them" here.
There is the presumption, then, that "they", already can't travel & that "they" think just like our arms makers say "they" think..

I spent 10 - 11 months walking & hitch hiking, alone throughout the Islamic Mid East (Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, etc) and based on that distant & limited experience, I do not think that "they" would bother themselves to leave their homes, shops, farms & decimated countries over to fight "us"

I also agree that US Troops are in harm's way due to pipeline competition/conflicts but feel the cost of the occupation outweighs the profit from the potential pipelines, competition etc.
There is, as you know, big money to be made in weapons sales, development, Private Security & last but far from least, Israeli lobby influence that strongly influences all US Foreign policy

 

I just found out recently during Trumps bankruptcy days he was bailed out by two interesting sources 1) Soros - and 2) the Rothschild consortium. The Rothschild consortium also funded his campaign.

The front man for the Rothschild interest that helped to bail Trump out was a man by the name of "Wilber Ross". Now Wilber is an interesting fellow who in August 2016, agreed to reimburse investors $11.8 million and pay a fine of $2.3 million to settle a Securities and Exchange Commission probe into the overcharging of fees by WL Ross & Co.

In the quid pro quo of "Quid Pro Quo" - Trump makes this guy commerce secretary. That is what you call filling the Admin with swamp creatures rather than doing any draining. Turns out Mr. Anti -Establishment - Carrot Top ... IS the the Establishment.

Ivanka dated the heir to the Rothschild fortune. Ivanka was not rich enough to marry but ... I digress.

Trump is a bought and paid for establishment insider who is filling the ranks with the swampiest of swamp creatures.

 

Before the torpedo attack.

I don't have the time, nor the will, to debate the USS Liberty incident. I only point out fallacies, faulty premises, and unethical (from a journalistic point of view) approach to the subject. A faulty premise will lead to a faulty conclusion even under normal circumstances - when rules of reasoning are rigorously applied - and will certainly lead to freakish conclusions when rules of reasoning are ignored.

The faulty premise of every anti-Israel article on the Liberty is that Israel attacked a ship of a friend and ally.

Please understand that I have no horse in the race. I don't care one way or the other. But I can't sit on the fence when lies, slander, and logical fallacies are used against my country to justify calling for its demise. The leftist narrative is so riddled with lies, courtesy of the Soviet Bear's efforts in the 60s to wrestle influence in the Muslim world from the West at the expense of Israel, that debunking all its foundational myths is a very complex and time consuming task.

 

There are so many gaps in your perspective on the history of the region, I don't know where to begin.

The US was not instrumental in the creation of the State of Israel. My country gained independence despite US policies, not because of them.

The recognition offered by Truman was de facto, holding no weight whatsoever from a legal point of view. The first country to recognize Israel de jure - legally binding, official recognition - was the USSR.

Truman's de facto recognition didn't stop the US from imposing an arms embargo on the Middle East, effectively denying the young state the possibility to defend itself against five Arab armies. Instrumental my sweet behind.

As I already mentioned, the Israeli army had to fight using old Soviet weapons smuggled from Czechoslovakia.

How did you reach the conclusion that the American de facto recognition of Israel had anything to do with Perfidious Albion retreating from Mandate Palestine? There's no connection whatsoever.

The British tried indeed to keep control of the area, even if only through proxy. They trained, armed and led the Jordanian army against Israel. They were forced to leave their former Mandate by force of arms, not by some US diplomatic maneuvers. They lost the war.

By the way, the legal basis for the existence of Israel had been laid down by the San Remo Treaty in 1920. Israel's legitimacy is anchored in international law, not dependent on recognition by one country or another. The US was not a party to the Treaty, just a neutral observer at the conference.

Not enough time. End of first episode. To be continued, hopefully.

 

The MTBs approached the Liberty in torpedo launch formation and as for the Liberty starting the shooting:

"Simultaneously from the firing from mounts 51 and 53, the MTBs commenced strafing the starboard side of the Liberty"

Page 20 http://www.thelibertyincident.com/docs/CourtOfInquiry.pdf

 

All old news, It's been resolved, but you have people who hate Jews and America, that will not let it go away.

And they have all kinds of new bullshit.

 

I hope I'm wrong, but my guess is you believe the official narrative regarding 911. If that is the case, you certainly do believe a piece that starts with a lie and a logical fallacy.

 

The Liberty Veterans website makes it clear that they oppose any form of anti Semitism & anti Americanism:


"Anti-Semitism and the Anti-American Apologists"
http://www.gtr5.com/
EXCERPT "The USS Liberty Memorial web site abhors the racist and extreme positions taken by antiSemitic, Holocaust denial, conspiracy theorist and other such groups which often seek to identify with us and to usurp our story as their own. We have no connection with and do not support or encourage support from any of these groups"CONTINUED

AND

No, this particular Israeli betrayal has not been resolved but you are in the unique position of being able to win $ 10,000- if you can prove that it has been resolved as you claim:

$10,000 Challenge

https://www.usslibertyveterans.org/10000challenge.html

"The Liberty Veterans Association offers a $10,000 reward to anyone who can establish the truth of A. Jay Cristol's claim:

"After ten official US investigations (including five congressional investigations), there was never any evidence that the attack was made with knowledge that the target was a US ship."

_ _ _ _ _ _

There, your entire tantrum has just been debunked.

 

RE:

Nonsense.

Without the US, Israel would never have come into existence:

"U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel: History & Overview"
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/history-and-overview-of-u-s-foreign-aid-to-israel
EXCERPT “It is my responsibility to see that our policy in Israel fits in with our policy throughout the world; second, it is my desire to help build in Palestine a strong, prosperous, free and independent democratic state. It must be large enough, free enough, and strong enough to make its people self-supporting and secure,” President Truman said in a speech October 28, 1948.

Truman's commitment was quickly tested after Israel's victory in its War of Independence when she applied to the U.S. for economic aid to help absorb immigrants. President Truman responded by approving a $135 million Export-Import Bank loan and the sale of surplus commodities to Israel. In those early years of Israel's statehood (also today), U.S. aid was seen as a means of promoting peace.

In 1951, Congress voted to help Israel cope with the economic burdens imposed by the influx of Jewish refugees from the displaced persons camps in Europe and from the ghettos of the Arab countries."CONTINUED


Your contention that it was OK for Israel to attack the USS Liberty is flawed on many counts.

1. To America's severe detriment, the ZOA & numerous other Zionist groups have made Israel America's most rapacious parasites prior to Truman's ill fated commitment.

2. The USS Liberty was in international waters.

3. Israel's War Crimes committed when it attacked the Liberty were numerous & in violation of all international law:
- Israel jammed all 5 emergency frequencies on the Liberty.
- Israel deployed & used unmarked aircraft.
- Israeli MTB strafed lowered life rafts & rescue personnel


The Israelis closely reconnoitered the ship for 5 - 9 hours before they began strafing relaxed crew members sun bathing on the deck.
Since that seems justified to you, it's no wonder that Israel is one of the most unpopular nations in the world.

“BBC Poll: Israel Among World's Least Popular Nations”
http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/bb...tions-1.525890

EXCERPT“The annual BBC World Service poll finds Germany most popular; only countries less popular than Israel are North Korea, Pakistan and Iran.”CONTINUED

 

You are wrong most of the time, so we can run with that.

 

There are contradictory accounts of the same incident. Does your document list all accounts, or only the anti-Israel version? If it does, it's worth reading. If it doesn't, let's leave it at that.

 

Did you not bother to go to the link?

 

Considering your track record, why would anyone bother.