Hezbollah TV Claims 2 Israeli Soldiers Captured

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 13 2006 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Souljah,

I see I hit a nerve with you.
You seem to be a little baffled regarding what act of war means. Granted violating airspace IS an act of war, much like jaywalking is illegal (jaywalking IS illegal you know).

Now for more substance. Since Israel's withdraw from Lebanon and redeployment along the internationally recognized border with Lebanon Hezbullah terrorists have attacked Israel numerously, kidnapped soldiers in crossed the border fired on Israeli towns and killed civilians after crossing the border to Israel - all unprovoked. Hizbullah has attacked Israel since 2000 over 40 times within this time period.

Hizbullah has no justification to attack Israel after Israel's withdraw yet they do so because Hizbullah regards all of Israel as occupied territory and not only the West Bank.

Hizbullah has trained, aided and infiltrated to Gaza and West Bank to conduct terrorist activities there too. Hizbullah agents were apprehended by Israeli troops in the West bank and Gaza.

All the above are act of war that far surpass Lebanese airspace violations. How can you talk about airspace violations while Hamas attacks israeli outposts in blatant violation of international war?

Hezbullah is an armed militia that is considered illegal by the UN and there has been a UN resolution passed that requires that Hezbullah disarm. Hizbullah is in violation of the UN resolution. Lebanon does not need to suffer because of the maniacal Islamic ambitions of Hamas and Iran.
The Lebanese government needs to get take responsibility over their country and deploy soldiers along its border with Israel like all countries are expected. They cannot allow Hizbullah to do as they wish like some kind of maniacal warlord.

With this said Israel needs to make Lebanon wake up. Why does Lebanon need to allow Hizbullah to attack Israel from its southern border and bring about a war?
Israel has no choice but to react to provocation otherwise there will be no end to provocation. Maybe with devastating attacks on Lebanese infrastructures will the Lebanese people and government realize that Hezbullah are bringing them tremendous trouble.




posted on Jul, 13 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Souljah,

You seem to have a problem with Israel shooting into densly populated area. Granted - Then why do the palestinians fire missles into cities, villages and towns? How do you expect Israel to deal with missle launchings from densely populated areas? How do you expect Israel to deal with militants who hide out in densely populated areas? Why do you think that militants hide in densly populated areas? same reason why they fire on Israeli troops from ambulances, fire from mosques, hospitals, schools, from behind children and from residential areas. They know that Israel is less likely to return fire to densely populated areas and that is why they do it. Well, at times Israeli patience wears thin and then you have collateral damage. The collateral damage is not Israel's fault though it is the militants fault. DO NOT expect Israel to lay back and do nothing.
Regarding the link you posted. I did some research a few years back on that site and found it to be grossly inaccurate. here are examples:
7 March 2005
Mohammed Hamed Jalaytah, 9,
of Jericho, West Bank,
killed when a hand grenade exploded as he was playing in a field near the West Bank town of Jericho.

OK how is this Israel's fault????

on March 30th 2003 Muhammad Tafish aged 16 was killed twice!?!?!?!

The above are few discrepancies I uncovered from a recursive review as an example.
I also noted that the list included Palestinians engaged in armed attacks on settlements.

Therefore the data is highly inaccurate. Another interesting thing to note is that much less Israeli kids were killed since the defensive barrier was erected.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Israel dropped flyers into Hezbollah strongholds yesterday and gave the (not so evil) inhabitants hours to get out, as they were going to shell these terrorist strongholds, when’s the last time a suicide bomber walked onto a bus and give all the none military the chance and time to walk off the buss? When was the last time hamas or Hezbollah told the people of Israel they were going to launch a rocket into Israel? So the next time some of you people think about the rules of engagement and what defines a terrorist as opposed to a nation protecting its people, think about the small finer points of the conflict.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by WarGame
Israel dropped flyers into Hezbollah strongholds yesterday and gave the (not so evil) inhabitants hours to get out,


Its a shame they didn't drop those flyers several weeks ago on the beach when they killed that family, and then again a week later when they killed those innocent civilians when they missed a car full of terrorists and instead killed a few kids and pregnant woman. This all probably wouldn't be happening right now.

The only reason they are even dropping the flyers is because they don't want to look bad. Otherwise if no one was complaining you don't really believe they would be warning anyone do you?



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi

OK how is this Israel's fault????



It isn't, it's the United Nations fault. They should never have steal the land from the Palestinians and give it to the Jews. It just doesn't make sense to claim back soil on which your ancestors used to live. It neither would make sense if the old imperial powers would claim back parts of the US.

We neither would accept it if we were driven from our lands, nor does Palestine. They should have been given the opportunity to move to Palestine, but not to creat an independent state.

How it used to be:


And, what changed:



Don't be hypocritical, not any other country would accept it.

[edit on 14-7-2006 by Mdv2]



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 06:12 AM
link   
Wargame.

The reason for the difference between the two is obvious. Israel seeks to minimize civilian casualties even at the risk of letting the terrorists escape while the Palestinians /Arabs /Hizbullah /Muslims seek to maximize civilian casualties.
This is the prime difference between the two groups and it defines why there is a perceived double standard. You cannot relate to these two groups equally.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 06:32 AM
link   
Mdv2,
In the innaccurate pretext you displayed of course noone would accept it. Problem is reality has it differently. The UNs Partition plan planned to make a Jewish state on the land that had a Jewish majority. OF course this was rejected by the Arabs since they cannot tolerate anything that is not Arab. The Arabs sought to masacre the Jews. As a result of this intolerance a war broke out initiated by the arabs (6 arab states against the puny Israeli existance) and the arabs, fighting for their lives managed to reinfornce all of Israel proper. Had the Arabs not initiated the war Israel would have looked like this:


wikipedia image

But Arabs like Arabs need to warmonger.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi

In the innaccurate pretext you displayed of course noone would accept it.


It's not inaccurate at all, this is how the situation used to be and how the situation currently is. The image you stated, represents the UN Partition Plan, while the image I stated represents the situation of Jewish settlements during the pre-Jewish-state situation. Please elaborate what's so inaccurate about that.



Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
The UNs Partition plan planned to make a Jewish state on the land that had a Jewish majority. OF course this was rejected by the Arabs since they cannot tolerate anything that is not Arab. The Arabs sought to massacre the Jews. As a result of this intolerance a war broke out initiated by the Arabs (6 Arab states against the puny Israeli existence) and the Arabs, fighting for their lives managed to reinforce all of Israel proper. Had the Arabs not initiated the war Israel would have looked like this:


First of all, the involved parties that actually fought on one side in the six-days war were Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq against Israel (backed up by the mighty US), which brings me to the ''accident'' with the USS Liberty, which almost resulted in an for Israel prosperous involvement of the US military. But Arabs like Arabs need to warmonger.


Of course the proposal was rejected by the Arab states, as I mentioned before, the US would neither accept a Jewish state on their land. If something like that would have been proposed the US would have come with the following: You're free to live in harmony on US soil, but creating an independent state is nonnegotiable (nor does Spain except ETA to create an independent state on Spanish soil. Arabs are warmongers? You generalize all Arabs. Furthermore, you might want to carefully review the current acts of war Israel commits. Destroying an entire country rather than remain negotiating, which civilized countries are ought to do.







posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Im sorry but I need to laugh here.
While his description might be lacking, your description is laughable and surely pitiful.

As it is, even to this day they made claims that they are trying to help the Palestinians while behind their backs and the backs of the international community they were sticking the knife in and twisting it slowly. The Palestinians were being screwed over and by the time they realized what was being done it was too late. The guests who came to visit never left.



A strict policy of what in today's terms would be described as racial discrimination was maintained by the Zionist Organization in this rapid advance towards the "national home". Only Jewish labour could service Jewish farms and settlements. The eventual outcome of this trend was a major outbreak of violence with unprecedented loss of life in 1929, which was investigated by the Shaw Commission. Another commission headed by Sir John Hope Simpson followed to investigate questions of immigration and land transfers. Certain observations of the Hope Simpson Commission are of interest, particularly on labour and employment policies.

The Commission went into great detail in its report, dividing Palestine into areas according to cultivability, and estimating total cultivable land at about 6.5 million dunums of which about a sixth was in Jewish hands. 73/

The report described in some detail the employment policies of the Zionist agencies quoting some of their provisions:

"The effect of the Jewish colonization in Palestine on the existing population is very intimately affected by the conditions on which the various Jewish bodies hold, sell and lease their land.

"The Constitution of the Jewish Agency: Land Holding and Employment Clauses ...

"(d) Land is to be acquired as Jewish property and ... the same shall be held as the inalienable property of the Jewish people.

"(e) The Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labour ... it shall be deemed to be a matter of principle that Jewish labour shall be employed ..."

"Keren Kayemet draft lease: Employment of Jewish labour only

"... The lessee undertakes to execute all works connected with the cultivation of the holding only with Jewish labour. Failure to comply with this duty by the employment of non-Jewish labour shall render the lessee liable to the payment of compensation ..."

"The lease also provides that the holding shall never be held by any but a Jew ..."

"Keren ha-Yesod agreements: Employment of labour

The following provisions are included:

'Article 7 - The settler hereby undertakes that ... if and whenever he may be obliged to hire help, he will hire Jewish workmen only.'
"In the similar agreement for the Emek colonies, there is a provision as follows:
'Article 11 - The settler undertakes ... not to hire any outside labour except Jewish labourers.'" 74/

Commenting on the Zionist attitude towards the Palestinians, the report noted the Zionist policy of allaying Arab suspicions:

"Zionist policy in regard to Arabs in their colonies. The above-quoted provisions sufficiently illustrate the Zionist policy with regard to the Arabs in their colonies. Attempts are constantly being made to establish the advantage which Jewish settlement has brought to the Arab. The most lofty sentiments are ventilated at public meetings and in Zionist propaganda. At the time of the Zionist Congress in 1931 a resolution was passed which 'solemnly declared the desire of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people, to develop the homeland common to both into a prosperous community which would ensure the growth of the peoples'. This resolution is frequently quoted in proof of the excellent sentiments which zionism cherishes towards the people of Palestine. The provisions quoted above, which are included in legal documents binding on every settler in a Zionist colony, are not compatible with the sentiments publicly expressed." 75/

At the same time, the Commission, rejecting Zionist arguments in support of their discriminatory policies, considered that they violated the Mandate:

"Policy contrary to article 6 of Mandate ... The principle of the persistent and deliberate boycott of Arab labour in the Zionist colonies is not only contrary to the provisions of that article of the Mandate, but it is in addition a constant and increasing source of danger to the country." 76/

The report noted in the strongest terms the effect on indigenous Palestinians of Zionist policies.

"The effect of the Zionist colonization policy on the Arab. Actually the result of the purchase of land in Palestine by the Jewish National Fund has been that land has been extraterritorialized. It ceases to be land from which the Arab can gain any advantage either now or at any time in the future. Not only can he never hope to lease or to cultivate it, but, by the stringent provisions of the lease of the Jewish National Fund, he is deprived for ever from employment on that land. Nor can anyone help him by purchasing the land and restoring it to common use. The land is in mortmain and inalienable. It is for this reason that Arabs discount the professions of friendship and goodwill on the part of the Zionists in view of the policy which the Zionist Organization deliberately adopted."
75/
"Land available for settlement. It has emerged quite definitely that there is at the present time and with the present methods of Arab cultivation no margin of land available for agricultural settlement by new immigrants with the exception of such undeveloped land as the various Jewish agencies hold in reserve." 77/

These developments in Palestine at the end of the 1920s - the 1929 Palestinian revolt and the reports of the Shaw and Hope Simpson Commissions - heightened awareness of the dangerous situation in Palestine as the Zionist drive towards a Jewish State met increasing Palestinian opposition. While reinforcing its military strength in Palestine, Great Britain issued a new statement of policy, called the Passfield White Paper of October 1930, in an effort to control the pressures that were building.* While criticizing both Jewish leaders for exerting pressure to obtain official compliance with Zionist wishes in matters of immigration and land transfers, and Palestinians for demanding self-determination which "... would render it impossible;... to carry out, in the fullest sense, the double undertaking", 78/ the 1930 policy, attempted to introduce an important change in emphasis from the Churchill paper which gave first priority to establishing the Jewish State. The Passfield paper commented:

Source

Even to this day the situation still stands as the same! They still have no self-government, almost 80 years later they are still under the foot of another government.



The revolt of 1929

The "Churchill Memorandum" reaffirmed the "national home" policy, and Palestinian resentment again broke out into violence in August 1929, sparked by a dispute over the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem. The clashes between Palestinians and Jews left 220 dead and 520 injured on both sides, and British reinforcements, including aircraft, naval vessels and armoured cars, had to be called in from outside Palestine before the situation was brought under control.

A special Commission, headed by Sir Walter Shaw, a retired Chief Justice of the Straits Settlements, investigated this outbreak. The Shaw Commission observed:

"In less than 10 years three serious attacks have been made by Arabs on Jews. For 80 years before the first of these attacks there is no recorded instance of any similar incidents. It is obvious then that the relations between the two races during the past decade must have differed in some material respect from those which previously obtained. Of this we found ample evidence. The reports of the Military Court and of the local Commission which, in 1920 and in 1921 respectively, enquired into the disturbances of those years, drew attention to the change in the attitude of the Arab population towards the Jews in Palestine. This was borne out by the evidence tendered during our inquiry when representatives of all parties told us that before the War the Jews and Arabs lived side by side if not in amity, at least with tolerance, a quality which to-day is almost unknown in Palestine".
87/

The Commission's findings on the causes of the violence:

"... If there was in Palestine in August last a widespread feeling of resentment amongst the Arabs at the failure of His Majesty's Government to grant them some measure of self-government, it is at least probable that this resentment would show itself against the Jews, whose presence in Palestine would be regarded by the Arabs as the obstacle to the fulfilment of their aspirations".
"That such a feeling existed among the leaders of the Arabs and the official and educated classes there can be no question ...


"... The Arab people of Palestine are today united in their demand for representative government. This unity of purpose may weaken but it is liable to be revived in full force by any large issues which involve racial interests. It is our belief that a feeling of resentment among the Arab people of Palestine consequent upon their disappointment at the continued failure to obtain any measure of self-government ... was a contributory cause to the recent outbreak and is a factor which cannot be ignored in the consideration of the steps to be taken to avoid such outbreaks in the future". 88/

The Shaw Commission's report was a major factor in the issue of the Passfield White Paper towards redressing these grievances, but it proved abortive, and the people of Palestine were soon to resort to violence again.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 08:02 AM
link   
My previous post was for JudahM.


Now what were you saying about Arabs not tolerating anything not Arab? I didn't hear you loud enough. People who live in glass houses should at least open their windows before they throw their stones. You just stuck a foot in your mouth. I see nothing about Arabs discriminating or trying to take advantage of Jews..only jews getting over and discriminating against arabs since day one of this so called Zionist movement. They seemed and still seem to this day to be treacherous and wiley. Stop trying to rewrite history..its in black and white on the very same site you used for your map. Next thing you will try to say is the Palestinians never existed before 1948!



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Pieman,


As it is, even to this day they made claims that they are trying to help the Palestinians while behind their backs and the backs of the international community they were sticking the knife in and twisting it slowly. The Palestinians were being screwed over and by the time they realized what was being done it was too late. The guests who came to visit never left.


You look at history in the wrong light. It is not like the Arabs were laying back and trying to diplomatically and civilly build a Palestinian state. They were first and foremost, at the time, interested in a pan-arab block. No Jewish state no matter how small could have been tolerated by the Arabs. Arab pride did not allow such a thing that those puny decrepid Jews build a home land on what was perceived Arab land. Even though Jerusalem was mostly Jewish since the early 1800s and probably earlier, in the eyes of the Arabs Jerusalem was Arab.
The Arabs stabbed themselves in the back with their warmongering nature. Arab pride is pride by the sword and those who live by the sword die by the sword.
You see it know as a small example. Hizbullah attacks Israel without justification and now its open season on Hezbullah.
What do you expect following 6 years of over 40 attacks, kidnappings, bombings and support of terrorist organization?



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
You look at history in the wrong light. It is not like the Arabs were laying back and trying to diplomatically and civilly build a Palestinian state.


I look at history in the wrong light? Why would you say that? Bcause Im not seeing it your way or the way of the founding fathers of Israel wanted people to see it? If you read the document it clearly explains how pressure was placed on certain people and the Palestinians were edged out. These were a people coming from under the rule of not only the ottoman empire but the British Empire following as well. Along comes the european jews with plenty of money and big words. What kind of a chance have they EVER had to civilly and diplomatically build a Palestinian state when they were being mislead into thinking the zionists were working alongside them to build a state along with them? Its right there...They had one set of rules laid out for the jewish colonists and said something completely different to appease the arabs. Which I believe to this day still holds true.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mdv2

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi

In the innaccurate pretext you displayed of course noone would accept it.


It's not inaccurate at all, this is how the situation used to be and how the situation currently is. The image you stated, represents the UN Partition Plan, while the image I stated represents the situation of Jewish settlements during the pre-Jewish-state situation. Please elaborate what's so inaccurate about that.


If you look at both maps you will see that the UN planned to make Israel on Jewish lands and an additional Arab state on Arab lands. I thought that would be obvious from both maps.



Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
The UNs Partition plan planned to make a Jewish state on the land that had a Jewish majority. OF course this was rejected by the Arabs since they cannot tolerate anything that is not Arab. The Arabs sought to massacre the Jews. As a result of this intolerance a war broke out initiated by the Arabs (6 Arab states against the puny Israeli existence) and the Arabs, fighting for their lives managed to reinforce all of Israel proper. Had the Arabs not initiated the war Israel would have looked like this:


First of all, the involved parties that actually fought on one side in the six-days war were Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq against Israel (backed up by the mighty US), which brings me to the ''accident'' with the USS Liberty, which almost resulted in an for Israel prosperous involvement of the US military. But Arabs like Arabs need to warmonger.

You have a serious flaw in your knowledge of history. The war of 1947 was the Israeli independance war. Israel with its minute army fought off 6 armies and expanded its borders up to the 1947 armistice lines which was larger than the UN partition plan. This did not end the hostilities. The arab israeli conflict did not start in 1967 during the 6 day war. It started way before Israel was established.
The six day war Israel was on its own - No US assistance, aid or military support was given. Israel just decimated its enemy after the recurring arab aggressions which like today brought Israel to loose its patience.

The US liberty was there not to assist Israel but as a surveillance ship on the war. Its bombing was a tragic mistake.


Of course the proposal was rejected by the Arab states, as I mentioned before, the US would neither accept a Jewish state on their land. If something like that would have been proposed the US would have come with the following: You're free to live in harmony on US soil, but creating an independent state is nonnegotiable (nor does Spain except ETA to create an independent state on Spanish soil. Arabs are warmongers? You generalize all Arabs. Furthermore, you might want to carefully review the current acts of war Israel commits. Destroying an entire country rather than remain negotiating, which civilized countries are ought to do.


Live in harmony???? with the Arabs???? do you read histrory? the riots of 1929? the riots in the 1930s???? are you kidding? there was no harmony!
Under your mentality there should be no Palestine on Israeli land as well! what other country dismantles settlements to accomodate the enemy like Israel did?

Israel's 'acts of war' as you put it are responses to Arab aggressions. Lets make it simple:
No Arab aggressions - no Israeli responses.
Israel withdraw from gaza and dismantled settlements. There is no more occupation in Gaza but the Palestinians did not build their lands and use it to nurture their people needs. They used the 'freedom' they were given to attack Israel and kill Jews. WARMONGERING!!!!! I guess they cannot help it.

Regarding your plee for negotiating with Hizbullah. What will that give Israel? should Israel give in to blackmail? If they do where will it end? Hizbullah considers all Israel as occupied. If Israel gives in there will be no end to the attacks, the kidnapping and the blackmail. As a result Israel needs to pound Hizbullah into Hell and let Lebanon build itself and live without a militia force that looks after the interests of Syria and Iran. Israel poses no threat to Lebanon - Hizbullah, Syria and Iran is the threat to Lebanon.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Pieman,

Have you heard of Haj amin al husseini read up on him and you will learn that the Arabs were fighting the Jews from the moment the concept of a Jewish nation was conceived. The Jews did not fool anyone - it was there in the open the Jews wanted to build a Jewish homeland and live in peace with the Arabs. But it was the Arabs that had no wish for a Jewish land on any part of "Muslim" lands.
Stop the victimization game. The Palestinians were a victim of their Arab brethern who declared war on Israel and subsequently got their butts kicked.

I do not know where you are from but I noted a misunderstanding amongst many people regarding the demography of Israel and Palesitnians.

Israel consists of almost 7million people of which approximately 1.5 million are Israeli Arabs. Those Arabs are Israeli citizens with full civilian rights. They can vote, go where they please just like the Jews. I work with Israeli Arabs and we live in relative harmony.
Then there are Palestinian Arabs who live in the west bank and gaza who are not Israeli citizens. They are Palestinian citizens who live under palestinian rule. Israel is at war with them now 6 years (since the 2nd intifadeh).
Israel does not need to let the Palesitnians vote for Israeli parliment much like the US does not allow mexicans to vote for the US president.
Israel does not need to allow them to come visit Tel-Aviv without the proper papers much like mexicans cannot visit New YOrk without a visa.
They are two different countries. The Arabs make an effort into making it seem like Arabs in Israel do not have rights and infuse confusion to serve their cause.
Israeli Arabs have full citizen rights just like Afro-american american.

Just needed to clear that up.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 08:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
The US liberty was there not to assist Israel but as a surveillance ship on the war. Its bombing was a tragic mistake.


Tragic mistake? How disgusting is that? 3 Israeli Fighter Jets, 3 Israeli Torpedo boats, jamming equipment, Firing upon life rafts?Bombs, Machine guns. A tragic mistake? Im glad you can so easily brush it aside as a mistake. False flag ops..the only mistake the IAF made was leaving survivors..They wanted people to think it was the Egyptians. This much is very clear.


Throughout the remainder of the day prior to the attack, Israeli reconnaissance aircraft regularly flew out to USS Liberty’s position and orbited the ship before returning to their bases in Israel. A total of no fewer than eight (8) such flights were made.[13]

At approximately 1050 hours, the naval observer from the early morning reconnaissance flight arrived at Israeli air force HQ and sat down with the air-naval liaison officer there. The two officers consulted Janes’ Fighting Ships and learned that the ship reported earlier in the day was USS Liberty, a United States Navy technical research ship.[14]

From 0900 hours on June 8, 1967, until the time of the attack five hours later, USS Liberty maintained a speed of approximately five knots and a generally westerly-northwesterly course.[15]

At 1400 hours, while approximately 17 miles off the Gaza coast, USS Liberty’s crew observed three surface radar contacts closing with their position at high speed. A few moments later, the bridge radar crew observed high speed aircraft passing over the surface returns on the same heading.[16]

Within a few short moments, and without any warning, Israeli fighter aircraft launched a rocket attack on USS Liberty. The aircraft made repeated firing passes, attacking USS Liberty with rockets and their internal cannons. After the first flight of fighter aircraft had exhausted their ordnance, subsequent flights of Israeli fighter aircraft continued to prosecute the attack with rockets, cannon fire, and napalm. [17]

During the air attack, USS Liberty’s crew had difficulty contacting Sixth Fleet to request assistance due to intense communications jamming[18]

The initial targets on the ship were the command bridge, communications antennas, and the four .50 caliber machine guns, placed on the ship to repel boarders.[19]

After the Israeli fighter aircraft completed their attacks, three Israeli torpedo boats arrived and began a surface attack about 35 minutes after the start of the air attack. The torpedo boats launched a total of five torpedoes, one of which struck the side of USS Liberty, opposite the ship’s research spaces. [20] Twenty-six Americans in addition to the eight who had been killed in the earlier air attacks, were killed as a result of this explosion.

Following their torpedo attack, the torpedo boats moved up and down the length of the ship (both the port and starboard sides), continuing their attack, raking the ship with cannon and machine gun fire.[21] In Malta, crewmen were later assigned the task of counting all of the holes in the ship that were the size of a man’s hand or larger. They found a total of 861 such holes, in addition to "thousands" of .50 caliber machine gun holes.

Survivors report that the torpedo boat crews swept the decks of USS Liberty with continuous machine gun fire, targeting communications equipment and any crewmembers who ventured above decks.[22]

Damage control firefighters, who had already risked their lives merely by appearing on deck, had to abandon their efforts because their fire hoses had been shredded by machine gun fire.[23]

Survivors also report that the torpedo boat crews fired on the inflated life boats launched by the crew after the captain gave the order "prepare to abandon ship."[24] This order had to be rescinded because the crew was unable to stand on the main deck without being fired upon and the life rafts were destroyed as they were launched.[25]

www.ussliberty.org...


If it was a mistake..it was a mistake that only US Servicemen paid for with their lives. No Israeli was ever brought to justice.


As a result of this blanket absolution, no one in the Israeli government or military has received so much as a reprimand for their involvement in the attack,[38] much less the punishment demanded by the United States ("the United States Government expects the Government of Israel also to take the disciplinary measures which international law requires in the event of wrongful conduct by the military personnel of a State").

Within 24 hours of the attack, the United States Navy convened a formal Court of Inquiry into that attack – a standard investigative procedure reserved for such serious events or circumstances. This procedure was unusual in only one respect – the President and members appointed to the Court of Inquiry by the Commander in Chief, U.S. Naval Forces, Europe (CINCUSNAVEUR), headquartered in London, were directed orally by the appointing authority to conduct and complete their investigative proceedings within one week – a most unusual requirement in light of the nature and magnitude of the events they were ordered to investigate.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Pieman,

Your theories regarding the USS liberty fail at a few points.
1-Israel demolished the Egyptian airforce on the first day of the war and that was common knowledge. Egypt did not have a single fighter. The attack on USS liberty happened 2 days later.
2-The Israelis after learning of their blunder assisted the US, their survivors and informed the US embassy in Tel-Aviv of the incident.
3- Israel paid $13 Million to the US for damages and casualties.

With that sadi Israel could not have slammed the USS liberty and expected anyone to think it was the egyptians.

I'd call it gross neglegence.

source



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
Pieman,

Have you heard of Haj amin al husseini read up on him and you will learn that the Arabs were fighting the Jews from the moment the concept of a Jewish nation was conceived

You put up a wikipedia site link written about an arab thats been written by shalomjerusalem.com? LOL! That would be like me going to a website about Golda Meir at nazis-r-us.com

EVERY SINGLE REFERENCE at the Bottom of that page points to a nonexistent reference page! Please don't try to pass this off as factual. This is obviously propaganda and an attempt to smear and re-write history. Thats just totally unacceptable. The couple of links that worked all lead to Jewish named author sites with Notices on them that read

"The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article is disputed.

Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page."

I notice a lot of sites looking as though they were arab or Palestinian with palestine names in the web address, but were definitly anti-palestinian. Seems like a lot of Israelis were smart enough to beat the Palistinians to the internet and rank up high in the search engines. Black Hat SEO , gotta love it.




. The Jews did not fool anyone -


It seems like they are trying like hell to do so though. Had me fooled for a long time. Thank God for the internet!



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Although not the full text is available but you can see that it was nearly taken word for work on Britannica

Another site is Yahoos encyclopedia see it here

Or just do an internet search. Choose a neutral source of you choiice and enter his name.

I won't argue this point any more. Common knowledge is common knowledge.

[edit on 14/7/06 by JudahMaccabbi]

mod edit: removed quote of entire previous post

[edit on 14-7-2006 by sanctum]



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
Pieman,

Your theories regarding the USS liberty fail at a few points.
1-Israel demolished the Egyptian airforce on the first day of the war and that was common knowledge. Egypt did not have a single fighter. The attack on USS liberty happened 2 days later.
2-The Israelis after learning of their blunder assisted the US, their survivors and informed the US embassy in Tel-Aviv of the incident.
3- Israel paid $13 Million to the US for damages and casualties.

With that sadi Israel could not have slammed the USS liberty and expected anyone to think it was the egyptians.

I'd call it gross neglegence.

source


Judah
Its not a theory my friend. Its factual. If you question it, then you should go to the site and email the 2 guys who run that site.
Jim Ennes and Joe Meadors, both survivors that were onboard the ship. I believe them before I believe CAMERA.

13million? That Israel got from the USA in aid? LOL now you really have me rolling on the floor. You are joking right? Israel gets 15Mil a day in US Aid Judah..so you guys even got to keep 2Mil out of the deal..not bad for a days worth of work!
That Wikepedia article is rife with CAMERA edits and citations. More BS.



posted on Jul, 14 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   
regarding USS liberty and the 13million Israel paid again you are lacking in historical knowledge. Israel began receiving military aid only in 1973 - 6 years later. I am sorry I have a weakness for correcting errors especially when it deals with Israel and the Jews.

Do you still believe that it was a flase flag operation attempt in light of the fact I brought forward?





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join