Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Israel rules Pollard not prisoner of Zion
Science Daily ^ | January 16, 2006

Posted on 01/16/2006 8:10:56 PM PST by Howlin

Edited on 01/16/2006 8:30:39 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-283 next last
To: ozoneliar

Just because someone does not put Israeli interests ahead of American interests, it doesn't mean that they support islamists and it is insulting an inappropriate to suggest that. Don't accusse people of being terror sympathizers just because you cannot justiy the things Israel has done to damage US intersts. I've been on countless threads taking muslims to task and I'll take them to task when I see them. I think we are being way too soft on Iran and Pakistan.

By the way. Muslims hated the USSR also, so following your logic that means anyone who criticizes the USSR is a islamist terror sympathizer.


101 posted on 01/16/2006 10:54:51 PM PST by Johnnyboy2000 (Give it all up tommorrow to live in world without crime, and go back tothe circuit riding motocross)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Johnnyboy2000
"...and keep the tens of billions of dollars worth of defense aid we send them every year."

So many people haven't seen the following, yet.

President Bush Calls for New Palestinian Leadership
The Rose Garden
June 24, 2002
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020624-3.html
"The United States, the international donor community and the World Bank stand ready to work with Palestinians on a major project of economic reform and development. The United States, the EU, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund are willing to oversee reforms in Palestinian finances, encouraging transparency and independent auditing."

Quartet Joint Statement
Summary
July 16, 2002: Text of a joint statement issued by the "Quartet" (United Nations, Russian Federation, the United States and the European Union) following their meeting in New York
[Document behind the link.]
http://europa-eu-un.org/articles/sk/article_1489_sk.htm
"The new international Task Force on Reform, which is comprised of representatives of the U.S., EU, UN Secretary General, Russia, Japan, Norway, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, and which works under the auspices of the Quartet, will strive to develop and implement a comprehensive action plan for reform."

It's also revealing that you have a problem with money or loans to Israel, though Israel repays with interest by doing defense work for cowardly, backstabbing Europe (taking out Iraq's nuclear plant and the current begging of Israel to take out Iran's many facilities).

It doesn't surprise me, though, that so many national socialist Romanesque nations and sanguinary councils (neo-Nazis of both contemporary and Ancient stripes) want to pick on a country of only 6 million or so. ...shows what they're made of.
102 posted on 01/16/2006 11:07:54 PM PST by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Johnnyboy2000
I see you put loyalty to Israel ahead of loyalty to the US.
Not without divine intervention.

LBJ may have been a lousy President, but he doesn't have to withdraw from the area because the Israelis said so.
LBJ did not have to make the promise, but he did.
Thus Israel had no reason to believe that there were American ships in the area.

The fact is the Liberty was flying a huge US flag yet low-flying Israeli aircraft attacked it.
Fog of War. No American ships were supposed to be in the area.

Even when ships are known to be in an area, they can be misidentified. For instance, during the British capmaign to sink the Bismark, British bombers flying at only 100 knots attacked their own cruiser. The Swordfish were supposed to follow the HMS Sheffield, which was trailing hte Bismarck and attack the 40,000 ton battle ship. Instead, they attacked their own 8,000 ton cruiser!

How many times have our military forces bombed the wrong taget?

"What aid did Israel get from the US from 1948 until 1968?"
How about a country.

Huh? The US did nothing for Israel for those 20 years. In fact, one could argue that we wanted to see Israel destroyed. Although the US recognized Israel in 1948, we immediately enforced arms sanctions on Israel and the Arabs. The problem was that we already armed the Arabs either directly, or thorugh the british, who gave lend-lease equipment to the Egyptians and Transjordanians.
The ARabs had American tanks and fighter. Israel had virtually nothing but small arms.

103 posted on 01/16/2006 11:25:41 PM PST by rmlew (Sedition and Treason are both crimes, not free speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

"Not without divine intervention."

Okay. So I am justified in my belief that you are not all tha concerned with US national security.

"How many times have our military forces bombed the wrong taget?"

What do you mean "our"? Are you talking about Israel?



104 posted on 01/16/2006 11:37:34 PM PST by Johnnyboy2000 (Give it all up tommorrow to live in world without crime, and go back tothe circuit riding motocross)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Johnnyboy2000
"Not without divine intervention." Okay. So I am justified in my belief that you are not all tha concerned with US national security.
You have read it improperly. I am an American first and formest, until and unless there is divine intervention.
If the Messiah comes in my lifetime, all bets are off.

"How many times have our military forces bombed the wrong taget?"

What do you mean "our"? Are you talking about Israel?

No, I meant the US.

105 posted on 01/16/2006 11:52:03 PM PST by rmlew (Sedition and Treason are both crimes, not free speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

My bad. I was kind of just giving you a hard time. No offense meant.


106 posted on 01/16/2006 11:55:31 PM PST by Johnnyboy2000 (Give it all up tommorrow to live in world without crime, and go back tothe circuit riding motocross)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
Your argument in defense of Israel, and the facts garnered to bolster it, are praiseworthy and impressive, but I couldn't help but feel trapped when reading it. How much longer are we supposed to put up with this? Are we supposed to patiently listen to these arguments for another fifty years?

What if Truman had not recognized Israel, as many advised him to do? Would it have been wise for Truman to establish diplomatic relations with the State of Israel, thereby legitimizing it, if he had known that fifty years later Israel would still be struggling to survive, struggling to exist?

The State of Israel with its four or five million inhabitants has occupied an inordinate amount of the world's attention for a very long time. It's tiring. Exhausting really. The present military engagements of this nation are directly linked to the founding of the State of Israel, and the subsequent geopolitical circumlocutions of that event, all the strenuous exclamations to the contrary by Israel's defenders notwithstanding.

This thing has got to end. The Israelis have got to find a way to make peace with their neighbors. Or else they've got to go out of business, admitting a valiant, but failed, attempt at justifiable irredentism. The world, and the US, cannot afford another fifty years Middle East turmoil.

107 posted on 01/17/2006 12:07:51 AM PST by beckett (Amor Fati)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
Even moderate Muslims believe in universal sharia

Sharia and sharia alike, my friend

108 posted on 01/17/2006 12:12:23 AM PST by drlevy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: beckett

Were Israel gone, you think the Moose madness would stop? No way. Along with the 47 years or so of Israel's existence, has developed about a half century of global petropolitics.


109 posted on 01/17/2006 12:15:53 AM PST by drlevy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: poinq
"If Israel did not exist than neither would the need for Israel exist. They pick fights and hold very hard lines. They are not good neighbors and they have sowed the hatred against them. . .Having Israel as an ally is like having a little brother that goes around kicking people. You have to defend him from bigger people."

That looks something that Ahmadinejad or a member of Hamas would say. You shouldn't sympathize with terrorist enemies of the USA. Europe needs Israel more than Israel needs old Europe.

New Iran missiles can reach London
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1227123/posts

Israel Successfully Tests Missile Defense (Arrow)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1532846/posts

Israel Shoots Down Incoming Missile in Test of Arrow System
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1532897/posts

And surprise, surprise,...

ARROW 2 THEATRE BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENCE SYSTEM, ISRAEL" (Army-Technology.com)
"The Arrow 2 theatre ballistic missile defence system has been developed by the MLM Division of Israel Aircraft Industries and is in operation with the Israeli Defence Forces." Israel started anti-ballistic missile defense research and development in 1986.

Europe's looking at a lack of oil in the near future, too.
110 posted on 01/17/2006 12:16:33 AM PST by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: beckett

Very well said. You articulated what I was feeling in a less abrasive way than myself. I just seem to piss people off.


111 posted on 01/17/2006 12:21:50 AM PST by Johnnyboy2000 (Give it all up tommorrow to live in world without crime, and go back tothe circuit riding motocross)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: familyop

Israel can not stop Iran. Only America, Britain, Austrailia, the EU, Russia, and/or China can stop them. I am not crazy enough to think all of these countries will help with Iran, I am simply suggesting they are the only nations with the means to disarm Iran. Israel would not stand a chance against Iran. It is almost ridiculous that people are suggesting that it is even Israel's responsibility to take on a country that dwarfs it in population, size, and resources. This is the world's problem, which means it is America's and its allies to solve.


112 posted on 01/17/2006 12:28:51 AM PST by Johnnyboy2000 (Give it all up tommorrow to live in world without crime, and go back tothe circuit riding motocross)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: beckett
"The State of Israel with its four or five million inhabitants has occupied an inordinate amount of the world's attention for a very long time. It's tiring. Exhausting really."

That makes the prophecy about that obsession by so many busy-body nations all the more interesting.

"This thing has got to end. The Israelis have got to find a way to make peace with their neighbors."

That kind of illogical, immoral equivalence between Israelis and the terrorist "neighbors" on our US list (Hamas, Hezbollah,...) is always surprising.

"Or else they've got to go out of business, admitting a valiant, but failed, attempt at justifiable irredentism."

Wow. That's a slippery way of saying that Israel shouldn't exist. My advice to you is to try to begin to see the lack of credibility in comments by the likes of Ahmadinejad.
113 posted on 01/17/2006 12:31:26 AM PST by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: beckett
I quote:

"The State of Israel with its four or five million inhabitants has occupied an inordinate amount of the world's attention for a very long time. It's tiring. Exhausting really. The present military engagements of this nation are directly linked to the founding of the State of Israel, and the subsequent geopolitical circumlocutions of that event, all the strenuous exclamations to the contrary by Israel's defenders notwithstanding. This thing has got to end. The Israelis have got to find a way to make peace with their neighbors. Or else they've got to go out of business"

Such impassioned fervor! I hear the ghosts of many a glorious Nuremberg Rally past rattling to life, shaking off the dust, and sounding the old clarion call to action!...

"Or else they've got to go out of business"

And there ya are...Israel going "out of business" today would resemble something like that.

I'm sure such a repeat of history would bring forth from you an appropriate "cluck, cluck," followed by a soothing "How much longer are were we supposed to put up with this? Are Were we supposed to patiently listen to these arguments for another fifty years?"

The older I get, the less I'm surprised. Disgust has made up the loss.

114 posted on 01/17/2006 1:25:18 AM PST by A Jovial Cad ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -General Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: A Jovial Cad

Oh no, I'm sure the Mooses would hold off a decent time for the US to airlift them all out to, say, New Jersey. Then they would happily proceed to trash and poop all over a land as prized by Christians as by Jews. They've already just about chased all the Christians out of Jesus' birthplace.


115 posted on 01/17/2006 1:29:00 AM PST by drlevy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: poinq

When has an Israeli strapped a bomb to himself? Because I am not aware of it ever happening.


116 posted on 01/17/2006 2:01:02 AM PST by nickcarraway (I'm Only Alive, Because a Judge Hasn't Ruled I Should Die...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Johnnyboy2000

Keep your eye on the big picture JohnnyClown. Iran wants to get into your pants. Pollard and Israel are a sideshow. Iran is the main act


117 posted on 01/17/2006 2:08:18 AM PST by dennisw ("What one man can do another can do" - The Edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
"Iran is the main act."

That's very true. I can't help but wonder if some of Iran's friends (nations) are going to have enough insanity to get into the act, and how. The vanities and paranoia of national socialism have been known to make unfriendly, expansionist leaders really nuts, and there's a lot of propaganda effort, especially overseas, to keep the focus on Israel and America.
118 posted on 01/17/2006 2:18:09 AM PST by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: beckett; rmlew; familyop; sheik yerbouty; veronica; SJackson
Your argument in defense of Israel, and the facts garnered to bolster it, are praiseworthy and impressive, but I couldn't help but feel trapped when reading it. How much longer are we supposed to put up with this? Are we supposed to patiently listen to these arguments for another fifty years?

What if Truman had not recognized Israel, as many advised him to do? Would it have been wise for Truman to establish diplomatic relations with the State of Israel, thereby legitimizing it, if he had known that fifty years later Israel would still be struggling to survive, struggling to exist?

The State of Israel with its four or five million inhabitants has occupied an inordinate amount of the world's attention for a very long time. It's tiring. Exhausting really. The present military engagements of this nation are directly linked to the founding of the State of Israel, and the subsequent geopolitical circumlocutions of that event, all the strenuous exclamations to the contrary by Israel's defenders notwithstanding.

This thing has got to end. The Israelis have got to find a way to make peace with their neighbors. Or else they've got to go out of business, admitting a valiant, but failed, attempt at justifiable irredentism. The world, and the US, cannot afford another fifty years Middle East turmoil.

LOL. I thought you had your shit together. You seem to be in a panic.
If only it were all so easy.
If only Iran could nuke Israel tomorrow so there would be no more Jew problem for you. What a pain in the ass these pesky Jews are!

But the world doesn't work like that. The next Muslim meal after Israel is Europe. That's your people. What are you going to do about that? Muslim birthrates will conquer Europe. China-Iran-Venezuela are scheming together. They are very hungry. Russia is very hungry too and schemes with them. They want control of world energy supplies. And we import 50% or more of our oil, gas energy requirements. Israel didn't invent the Iranian nuclear menace. The United States and Europe's energy cravings did. Israel didn't invent the new Moorish invasion of Europe. Blame your fellow Catholics and Christians for that. Israel has been strong against Islam and Europe very weak.

119 posted on 01/17/2006 2:25:34 AM PST by dennisw ("What one man can do another can do" - The Edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: familyop

Ever see the movie "The Edge"? Once a Kodiak bear tastes human blood that's what he wants to hunt, kill and eat again and again and again. A man killing machine.

IOW the Muslim world is back in Jihad mode after snoozing for a few centuries. It will not be content with obliterating Israel. China will help Iran. They hate the white man's West and will do their best to destroy it economically, demographically and more. China wants to grab Taiwan. Why do you think?


120 posted on 01/17/2006 2:33:54 AM PST by dennisw ("What one man can do another can do" - The Edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
"China wants to grab Taiwan. Why do you think?"

...my opinions:

China's leaders want to take Taiwan in order to perpetuate an illusion to the rest of the Chinese people that they can generally beat the USA. That move might be preceded or accompanied with an ugly market maneuver (big sell of US company stocks and wave of account transfers away from the USA). And China wants to begin taking ownership of Pacific ocean routes for further expansion. That's also why China is working so hard on building its new PLA Navy. China is likely to move if we and/or Israel get into it with Iran very hastily without much support/agreement from EU countries that would otherwise be Iran's prime targets. That's why Iran is tossing out so much provocation at us now.

You might disagree with what follows (and that's alright), but IMO, we should help build Israel's anti-ballistic missile defense and other defenses without stopping until Iran moves on to wake the west side of the EU up. And there's more in the mix (Freepmail to you).
121 posted on 01/17/2006 3:11:02 AM PST by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
First of all, it was a mistaken identity during war.

Nonsense. Nobody believes this. Not you, not anybody.

122 posted on 01/17/2006 3:14:49 AM PST by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: familyop; Travis McGee; Jeff Head
China's leaders want to take Taiwan in order to perpetuate an illusion to the rest of the Chinese people that they can generally beat the USA. That move might be preceded or accompanied with an ugly market maneuver (big sell of US company stocks and wave of account transfers away from the USA). And China wants to begin taking ownership of Pacific ocean routes for further expansion. That's also why China is working so hard on building its new PLA Navy. China is likely to move if we and/or Israel get into it with Iran very hastily without much support/agreement from EU countries that would otherwise be Iran's prime targets. That's why Iran is tossing out so much provocation at us now.

All valid reasons. More valid than I could type out.
My Occam's razor reason is China wants more money, high tech and wealth. It can do it the quick way by subsuming Taiwan under Chinese Middle Kingdom ownership. Follow the money. China used to want Taiwan for communist ideological reasons. Now it wants Taiwan for the same reason Saddam Hussein wanted Kuwait's oil and invaded them. It's a bank robbery. An instant acquisition of wealth

Taiwan is a major hi tech engineering and manufacturing country. Same as Japan and Korea. That's why China wants to absorb them, by war if necessary

You might disagree with what follows (and that's alright), but IMO, we should help build Israel's anti-ballistic missile defense and other defenses without stopping until Iran moves on to wake the west side of the EU up. And there's more in the mix (Freepmail to you).

123 posted on 01/17/2006 4:19:51 AM PST by dennisw ("What one man can do another can do" - The Edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Good.


124 posted on 01/17/2006 4:28:43 AM PST by bmwcyle (As the left takes to the streets the too many lazy Freeper sleep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

"Pollard, a civilian U.S. Naval intelligence analyst pleaded guilty to espionage on June 4, 1986,"

actually, wasn't he only charged with mishandling 1 document, in order to avoid having any of the real issue (spying for israel) with him put in court?


125 posted on 01/17/2006 5:08:38 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Johnnyboy2000

Haven't they helped us give the chinese various types of our military tech?


126 posted on 01/17/2006 5:10:39 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Radix

"I do not know all the details concerning the Liberty back then, but I think that the Israeli's acted prudently based on what I know.
"

From an israeli viewpoint, bombing the Liberty might have been 'prudent.'

From a muslim viewpoint, the 9/11 attacks might have been prudent.'

From a russian viewpoint, trying to annex west berlin might have been prudent.

I can provide more examples of actions directly contrary to american interests where the aggressor might have found such action prudent.

what about an american viewpoint?


127 posted on 01/17/2006 5:17:01 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

what i read in the press at the time was that when this was brought up there was widespread and vehement objection from pretty much the entire intelligence community. i would not be surprised if tenet had threatened to resign, etc., just to avoid this happening. Not that I have any idea what tenet's values are but if clinton didn't do it, he had a pragamtic, not moral, reason.


128 posted on 01/17/2006 5:21:05 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ozoneliar

" but historically Israel has the best record of voting with the U.S.(in the U.N.) If any country is basically on the same page as the U.S., then it is Israel."

Whatever the role of israel in us foreign policy, using UN voting as a basis for any sort of judgement of israeli intentions is dubious, to use a mild term.


129 posted on 01/17/2006 5:25:08 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

You have the first post on this thread listing ways that israel has helped or accomodated the US, thanks.

Only three quick questions/clarifications -

1. it is not known for certain if the attack on the liberty was accidental. There is certainly circumstantial reason to doubt it, but we will probably never know.
2. re soviet intelligence FROM israel, it is said that israel gave raw data from pollard to the USSR which they then used to unravel parts of the us intel network in e europe. this is another 'we will never know for sure' item but it would explain the vehement US position on pollard after all these years.
3. multiple reports over the years of our military tech being traded to china by israel, to the point that they were excluded from a major project recently. It would be more offensive if the chinese weren't perfectly capable of stealing the tech by becoming a sub-contractor here in the US instead.


130 posted on 01/17/2006 5:31:10 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: beckett; dennisw
Good Lord. Did Stormfront have a purge or something?

Learn a little Middle East history. The Arabs went to war with Israel, not the other way around.

Nobody is interested in whether you, or anyone else wants Israeli to disappear. It's not gonna happen. :)

"Nobody does Israel any service by proclaiming its 'right to exist.' Israel's right to exist, like that of the United States, Saudi Arabia and 152 other states, is axiomatic and unreserved. Israel's legitimacy is not suspended in midair awaiting acknowledgement.... There is certainly no other state, big or small, young or old, that would consider mere recognition of its 'right to exist' a favor, or a negotiable concession.” Abba Eban on Israel's “Right to Exist".

131 posted on 01/17/2006 5:34:14 AM PST by veronica (....."send Congressman Murtha a message: that cowards cut and run, Marines never do.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: familyop; poinq

"That looks something that Ahmadinejad or a member of Hamas would say."

You obviously haven't been reading what the above parties have been saying, or you are trying to label this guy. I don't see this poster calling for the destruction of israel, as well as far more verbally offensive things I am not reposting here, etc.

I don't think that posting something that is not very supportive of israeli foreign policy deserves being compared to the parties mentioned here. Some folks seem to have a wall of 'no-debate/no-think' when it comes to rationally discussing the pro's and con's of israel foreign policy and how it affects the US.


132 posted on 01/17/2006 5:37:04 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123
That poster clearly stated views that echo what Hamas, the mad mullahs of Iran, and other Jewhaters say. If he's going to spew that venom here he will be challenged. Them's the breaks.
133 posted on 01/17/2006 5:41:46 AM PST by veronica (....."send Congressman Murtha a message: that cowards cut and run, Marines never do.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: poinq; familyop

"America should only defend democracies. (That means every Palestinian votes along with every Jew.) "

palestine is becoming a special case in the sense that a decent amount of the population is being indoctrinated/trained to view suicide attacks as a valid political method. I don't see how you can have any representative form of government under those conditions, nor do I see how not supporting israel against this monstrosity is an option. This IS barbarians at the gates, in a manner of speaking.


134 posted on 01/17/2006 5:42:41 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Hildy

Reading this thread is like watching the Golden Globes. Uninformed yahoos siding with terrorists who would just as soon slit their throats as look at them. Trying to ride the tiger. The Hollywood yahoos do it because they hate Bush. I can only guess the motives here.


135 posted on 01/17/2006 5:45:52 AM PST by veronica (....."send Congressman Murtha a message: that cowards cut and run, Marines never do.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: beckett

"This thing has got to end. The Israelis have got to find a way to make peace with their neighbors. Or else they've got to go out of business, admitting a valiant, but failed, attempt at justifiable irredentism. The world, and the US, cannot afford another fifty years Middle East turmoil.
"

this has gone beyond just supporting israel. The problem TODAY in the middle east is not israel, but radical islam and the oil-funded countries that support it. There is NO concession israel can make that will make this problem go away.


136 posted on 01/17/2006 5:46:12 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123; beckett; veronica
this has gone beyond just supporting israel. The problem TODAY in the middle east is not israel, but radical islam and the oil-funded countries that support it. There is NO concession israel can make that will make this problem go away.

You have to be real dumb not to see that. Keep the faith Becket. You have fallen for the cheapest trick in the book. That the lion won't eat you after it's eaten your more vulnerable companion 

Islam is voracious. Has a fast feral learning curve and is eating Europe one small bite at a time via demographics

137 posted on 01/17/2006 5:57:41 AM PST by dennisw ("What one man can do another can do" - The Edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

Unless executed, which would be alright by me, the traitor Pollard should remain in prison until he rots (perhaps longer).


138 posted on 01/17/2006 6:00:02 AM PST by reelfoot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123

http://www.ussliberty.org/report/report.htm

"Washington, June 10, 1967.

The Secretary of State presents his compliments to His Excellency the Ambassador of Israel and has the honor to refer to the Ambassador's Note of June 10, 1967 concerning the attack by Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats on the United States naval vessel U.S.S. Liberty,

. . .

In these circumstances, the later military attack by Israeli aircraft on the U.S.S. Liberty is quite literally incomprehensible. As a minimum, the attack must be condemned as an act of military recklessness reflecting wanton disregard for human life.

The subsequent attack by Israeli torpedo boats, substantially after the vessel was or should have been identified by Israeli military forces, manifests the same reckless disregard for human life. . . . The U.S.S. Liberty was peacefully engaged, posed no threat whatsoever to the torpedo boats, and obviously carried no armament affording it a combat capability. It could and should have been scrutinized visually at close range before torpedoes were fired.

. . . the Secretary of State wishes to make clear that 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."

There has been no statement in the last thirty-eight years by the United States government reversing or amending this formal position.

The Israeli Defense Forces Chief Military Prosecutor, immediately following the attack, filed formal charges recommending court martial proceedings against a number of Israeli military personnel.[36] The examining judge disagreed with United States position that the attack.

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").


139 posted on 01/17/2006 6:07:32 AM PST by rcocean (Copyright is theft and loved by Hollywood socialists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

If our treason laws had any teeth,Pollard would have been executed.Don't fret Johnathan,I suspect you will eventually be released to emmigrate to Israel.


140 posted on 01/17/2006 6:10:23 AM PST by Thombo2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rcocean

yeah i am not coming out and claiming something i cannot prove but it is my personal belief that the attack was deliberate.


141 posted on 01/17/2006 6:37:52 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123

I believe you are correct.


142 posted on 01/17/2006 8:16:44 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; WoofDog123; dennisw
The following couple letters lay out the issues in the case reasonably well. It's worth noting that while the contents are declassified, the Weinberger letter, which he now considers insignificant, on which Pollard was sentenced is still classified. None of us, excepting posters with access to classified information and a willingness to post in on the internet, knows what was in it. Including Pollard's lawyers. Personally, I think it's long past time to declassify the document and clear the situation up.

Pollard Has Been Punished Enough

March 8, 1994 - Theodore Olson, Esq. - The Wall St. Journal

It is plain than columnist Al Hunt and the anti-Pollard faction within the Clinton administration for whom he is giving voice do not like Jonathan Pollard (“President Clinton, Don’t Free the Traitor Pollard, February 24). But his rationale for opposing clemency is mostly misinformation and ignorance, and his conclusion implicitly concedes the shallowness of his convictions.

As Mr. Pollard’s attorney, I offer these counterbalancing facts:

First, the matter of motives and money. Mr. Hunt’s carefully chosen litany of phrases such as “big bucks,” “well-paid” and “well-heeled” produces a profoundly false impression. As Mr. Hunt knows, Mr. Pollard sought out the Israelis and volunteered to give, not sell, information to Israel about nuclear, chemical and biological weapons under construction by Iraq and others for use against Israel. Six months down the line, Pollard was persuaded to accept paltry sums - pocket change compared with what Washington journalists routinely receive for weekend television appearances. Intelligence services know that it is impossible to control idealists - and it is standard procedure to corrupt them with money. Mr. Pollard was wrong to acquiesce, but everyone who has studied the record objectively knows that he acted as he did because he could not stand the implications of silence in the face of another Holocaust, not for money.

Second, Mr. Hunt repeatedly uses the term “traitor.” That word describes one who commits treason, the only crime considered so egregious that is mentioned in our Constitution. It is defined by law as committing war against the U.S. or aiding its enemies. It is punishable by death. Mr. Pollard did not commit, nor was he charged with, treason. Even the government has admitted that is use of the word “treason” and “traitor” to describe Mr. Pollard was wrong and “regrettable.” The court that reviewed Mr. Pollard’s case, whose opinion Mr. Hunt quotes, said that the “traitor” could justifiably be called “rank hyperbole.”

Third, Mr. Hunt’s comparison of Mr. Pollard to the Aldrich Ames case is appalling. Mr. Ames allegedly aided the Soviet Union when they were implacable enemies of the U.S.: Mr. Pollard helped one of our closest allies. Mr. Ames is said to have betrayed American agents: Mr. Pollard told Israel about instruments of mass destruction against Jews. Mr. Ames purportedly took millions of dollars and was motivated by greed: Mr. Pollard gave defensive information to save a people that had been nearly exterminated 50 years ago. What can Mr. Hunt be thinking?

Fourth, Mr. Hunt has mischaracterized the court decision regarding the government’s violation of the Pollard plea bargain. Mr. Pollard’s appeal was rejected as untimely, not because it was lacking in merit. All three judges who considered the appeal expressed considerable skepticism concerning the government’s conduct. One of the three went so far as to call Mr. Pollard’s treatment “a fundamental miscarriage of justice.” The fact is that the government blatantly betrayed Mr. Pollard and its written contract with him. It made three promises, and broke them all. It agreed to represent to the sentencing judge that Mr. Pollard’s cooperation had been of “considerable value” to “enforcement of the espionage laws,” but did precisely the opposite, denigrating the value and motivation for that compensation - listing it among factors “compelling a substantial sentence.” It promised to limit its sentencing argumentation to the “facts and circumstances” of Mr. Pollard’s offense, but instead heaped savage vituperation on his motives on his motives, character and “arrogance.” Finally, it agreed not to seek a sentence of life in prison, but obtained exactly such a sentence by, among other things, demanding a sentence commensurate with the crime of treason.

Fifth, Mr. Hunt rejects as “bogus and irrelevant” the assertion that Mr. Pollard’s sentence was excessive. He could not be more wrong. Mr. Pollard has served more than eight years, mostly in solitary confinement in the nation’s harshest prison. No one who gave defense information to an ally has ever been punished so severely. The government did not even charge him with harming or having reason to know that his actions would harm the U.S. Once again, Mr. Hunt has outpaces Mr. Pollard’s prosecutors by pressing to maintain a level of punishment that the prosecutors promised not to seek.

Sixth, it is curious that Mr. Hunt thinks that the information Mr. Pollard gave away “was so sensitive that officials still insist they can’t provide specifics.” What officials? The Office of Naval Intelligence has said that much of Mr. Pollard’s information “was declassified during the Gulf War.” Mr. Pollard’s chief prosecutor has urged publicly that it all be declassified.

Finally, after all of Mr. Hunt’s rhetoric, his main grievance seems to be that Israel has failed to “come clean and acknowledge what a despicable act Pollard performed.” If it did so, he concludes, then “clemency [would] be in order.” This is an amazing conclusion because Mr. Pollard himself has admitted that what he did was wrong and has expressed great remorse for his actions. And two successive Israeli prime ministers have put in writing formal requests for mercy - not forgiveness - for the Pollard affair. The significance of these extraordinary official requests cannot have been lost on President Clinton - who, incidentally, may not be anxious to acknowledge publicly that the U.S. has spied on Israel. What more does Mr. Hunt want? Some sort of Chinese Communist public act of self-abasement?

There is more, but too little space to say it all. Defense Secretary-nominee Bobby Inman has publicly admitted that he cut off Israel from promised defensive information as retaliation for Israel’s destruction of Iraq’s nuclear reactors. (Maybe Mr. Hunt can tell us how many America soldiers would have died in the Persian Gulf had Israel not taken that action.) Mr. Pollard stepped into the breach and opened the spigot that Mr. Inman had closed. He had no right to do so, but voices as diverse as Cardinal Law, Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel, Benjamin Hooks, Father Drinan, Sen. Carol Mosely-Braun, Pat Robertson, dozens of Members of Congress, the city councils of New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, and two Israeli prime ministers have pleaded for an end to his punishment. Apparently many officials at State, Justice and the White House now agree.

The fundamental issue is when we can stop punishing a man who broke the law to expose a massive, malignant and malicious arms buildup so that a beleaguered people could defend themselves from weapons of terror and mass destruction. It might take some courage from President Clinton to do the right thing, but Mr. Pollard has been punished enough.

Theodore B. Olsen Esq.

Theodore B. Olson is the former lead attorney for Jonathan Pollard.

………………………………………………

The document below was written by a former Pollard attorney, Theodore Olsen, to counter a 1993 NJCRAC position paper on the Pollard case. The document is as relevant today as when it was originally written. Many of the old lies that it deals with are still being circulated today by the same Jewish sources.

Mr. Lawrence Rubin
Executive Vice Chairman – NJCRAC
National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council
443 Park Avenue South
New York New York 10016-7322

April 9, 1993

RE: Jonathan J. Pollard

Dear Mr. Rubin:

As you know, we represent Jonathan J. Pollard. We have received a copy of the Jerome Chanes NJCRAC memorandum of March 23, 1993 disseminated to NJCRAC and CJF member agencies entitled "The Pollard Case: Myths and Facts." The Chanes memorandum states that it is intended to "provide accurate information" about the "substantive issues" involved in the Pollard case. However, it contains many materially inaccurate and damaging statements concerning Mr. Pollard and his case. We therefore request that you circulate this letter as soon as possible to all of the member agencies that received the Chanes memorandum

The "Myths and Facts" memorandum states that there has been an "unfortunate pattern of misrepresentation" concerning the Pollard case. This regrettable and entirely gratuitous innuendo is apparently intended to accuse Mr. Pollard's supporters of misrepresentations. It is not true. Naturally, in any highly visible case such as this involving many people working to achieve a common objective, there may be misconceptions that develop. But the Pollard supporters have made every effort to supply scrupulously accurate information concerning his case. In fact, the NJCRAC memorandum contains more errors and misleading perceptions than anything we have seen. That is why it is so important for you to correct it by distributing this response.

2. Disproportionality of sentence

Mr. Pollard's sentence of life in prison is grossly disproportionate to punishments in comparable cases. Your wholly inaccurate and distorted rejection of this fact ignores both the facts and fundamental principles of our criminal justice system.

You assert that "comparisons between Pollard's sentence and sentences meted out to others . . . are inappropriate," and that such an analysis of the proportionality of Mr. Pollard's sentence is improper as a jurisprudential matter. That, of course, is nonsense It is a fundamental principle of justice and jurisprudence that the law should treat similarly situated individuals similarly and that punishments, insofar as possible, should be relatively equal and proportionate. The fact that Mr. Pollard's sentence is completely out of scale with those imposed for comparable offenses is a highly salient consideration in his efforts to seek a commutation of his sentence.

Moreover, the Supreme court of the United States has held as a matter of constitutional "principle that a criminal sentence must be proportional to the crime for which the defendant has been convicted-" Solem V. Helm, 463 U.S. 277, 290 (1983) (emphasis added) . The Court has struck down as unconstitutional punishments that are "significantly disproportionate to [the] crime," id. at 303, based on a comparison "with sentences imposed on other criminals" Id. At 292; see also Harmelin V. Michigan, 111 S. Ct. 2680, 2702-05 (1991) (Kennedy, J., concurring) (reiterating that the constitution forbids "extreme sentences that are 'grossly disproportionate' to the crime") - It is well recognized that disproportionality in sentencing when compared to others convicted of similar crimes is "fundamentally unfair," and accordingly, it "has also been a fundamental part of . . . the clemency philosophy." Kobil, The Quality of Mercy Strained: Wrestling the Pardoning Power from the King, 69 Tex. L. R. S69, 627 (1991).*

[*NOTE: For example: President Carter commuted the 20 year sentence of Watergate conspirator G. Gordon Liddy after 4 years and 3 months because Liddy had served much more time than the other Watergate participants. Id. The reason given by the White House Counsel was that "[it] was a clear case of unfair disparity." Id. (citations omitted).]

You also argue that Mr. Pollard's sentence was not disproportionate. But that is clearly incorrect. As thoroughly documented in Mr. Pollard's commutation application, his sentence was manifestly inconsistent with the punishment historically imposed for disclosing intelligence information to an ally of the United States. Indeed, the more than seven-year period that Mr. Pollard has already served is much closer to the typical sentence for comparable offenses. The only other life sentences imposed for espionage in the United States of which we are aware -- including each of the instances cited in your memorandum -- involved individuals who spied for the Soviet Union (or Eastern block countries that were under its control) during the Cold War. We believe that Mr. Pollard is the only person in the history of our Nation to receive a life sentence for giving information to an ally.

3. The Pertinence of the Fact that Mr. Pollard Spied for a Close Ally

Your memorandum asserts that it is irrelevant that Mr. Pollard provided intelligence information to Israel, one of the United States closest allies, as opposed to a country that is hostile to the United States. That assertion is legally incorrect and morally perplexing. While it may be a crime to disclose any classified information to anyone, both the law and society recognize the difference between efforts to harm the United States by giving information to its enemies and supplying data to an ally to help save the lives of victims of aggression.

You contend that "as a legal matter, the law on espionage does not distinguish between allies and enemies. . . ." But the law, including the Constitution of the United States most certainly does make such a distinction. The most serious espionage crime is treason, which, unlike Mr. Pollard's offense, is punishable by death, and is defined explicitly in the Constitution as consisting "only in levying war against [the United States), or in adhering to their Enemies [or] giving them Aid and Comfort." (emphasis added) . The statutes on espionage also recognize that providing information to an enemy is different in kind from and more reprehensible than supplying information to a country that is an ally of the United States, explicitly singling out the former for special treatment. Compare 18 U.S.C. 794(b) and 794(a); 18 U.S.C. 2382. The law distinguishes between those whose conduct occurred with reason to believe it may harm the United States. Mr. Pollard was not charged with that offense.

Moreover, the vastly harsher sentences imposed on individuals who have committed espionage against the United States an behalf of hostile nations demonstrate the obvious and fundamental principle that spying for an enemy is a far more egregious offense that deserves more severe punishment than providing intelligence data to an ally. As discussed above, life sentence have historically been reserved exclusively for individuals who have spied for countries that are hostile to the United States, while persons who, like Mr. Pollard, assisted allies have been subjected to far less severe punishments that more closely approximate the time that Mr. Pollard has already served in prison.

Your memorandum also misleadingly suggests that Mr. Pollard's reliance on the hostile nation/ally dichotomy is an attempt by him to excuse or justify his conduct. But that is not Mr. Pollard's point at all. Mr. Pollard acknowledges that he violated an important law of the United States. He pleaded guilty to that offense and agreed to cooperate fully with the government's investigation of his conduct. He has repeatedly expressed regret and remorse for his conduct and for any and all harm that his offense may have caused. Mr. Pollard is not arguing that his unlawful conduct in justified because he was motivated only by a desire to save lives.

But those who ask for an humanitarian commutation of Mr. Pollard's sentence to a severe punishment equivalent to the punishment already imposed are surely entitled to emphasize that Mr. Pollard's actions, admittedly wrong, was inspired by the desire to protect against violent aggression, to prevent a holocaust and to allow the people of Israel to defend themselves. This is a legitimate and important basis for the sentence commutation being sought from President Clinton.

4. Conditions of Incarceration

The fact that Mr. Pollard has been in solitary confinement for several years is not a "myth." And it is not a "myth" that Mr. Pollard has been incarcerated in the nation's harshest maximum security prison. Mr. Pollard did not ask to be placed in Marion prison -- where security measures are necessary to protect him from anti-Semitic prison gangs. Moreover, NJCRAC should understand that it is exceedingly difficult for Mr. Pollard to chronicle his specific, day-to-day prison experiences without exposing himself to repercussions. It should be obvious to anyone that solitary confinement in a prison containing the most violent and vicious criminals in the nation is not a circumstance that should be ignored or labeled as a "myth."

5. Parole

As a technical matter, Mr. Pollard was not sentenced to "life without possibility of parole," and parole may legally be considered in 1995. But your implication that the possibility of parole makes commutation unnecessary - is incorrect and misguided. The law enforcement and intelligence agency officials who will be given the opportunity to express themselves on the subject have indicated that they will oppose parole. Immediately following sentencing, the U.S. Attorney said that Mr. Pollard would "never see the light of day." Parole is a virtual impossibility under these circumstances. Your emphasis on the highly unlikely theoretical possibility of parole avoids addressing the circumstances and fairness of Mr. Pollard's incarceration. The fact is that he has been punished enough already.

6. The Government's Breach of the Plea Agreement

You agree in your memorandum that there are "legitimate questions" regarding the government's conduct at the time of sentencing in conjunction with its plea bargain.

However, you selectively omit a full discussion of the issue and the pertinence of it to Mr. Pollard's request for a commutation of his sentence.

The fact is that the government violated its plea bargain with Mr. Pollard in several fundamental respects. Nearly everyone who has examined the circumstances agrees with that conclusion. Indeed, this situation was severely questioned by the federal appellate court that reviewed Mr. Pollard's sentence. Despite the government's agreement in exchange for Mr. Pollard's plea of guilty to temper its rhetoric at the tide of sentencing, not to seek a life sentence, and to point out that Pollard's cooperation with the government had been valuable, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the government had engaged in "hard-nosed dealings," Pollard v. United States, 939 F.2d 10110, 1030, cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 322 (1992), and that the government's conduct was "problematic" and "troublesome." Id. at 1026. Dissenting Judge Stephen Williams concluded that the government violated material terms of Mr. Pollard's plea agreement, resulting in a "fundamental miscarriage of justice." Id. at 1032. And the government's forceful, bitter and antagonistic rhetoric produced the very life sentence it had agreed not to seek. Although the courts declined for technical reasons to set aside Mr. Pollard's sentence, there are no such constraints on the President's constitutional power to commute Mr. Pollard's sentence and thereby to redress the injustice of a sentence of life in prison despite the government's promise not to seek such a sentence.

NJCRAC's characterization of the facts is revealing. It says that Pollard's claim of a government breach of the plea bargain is "not entirely a myth". This is a very peculiar choice of words to describe an audacious, deliberate and manifest injustice.

7. The Secretary of Defense's Submission of a Memoranda During the Sentencing Process and Use of the Word "Treason"

Your brief discussion of the memoranda submitted by Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger during the sentencing proceedings and your astonishing efforts to rationalize Secretary Weinberger's use of the word "treason" to describe Mr. Pollard's conduct overlooks completely the improper nature and devastating impact that that submission had on Mr. Pollard's case.

The Secretary of Defense was not "obliged to submit a pre-sentencing memorandum." No law or custom requires it. It was an entirely gratuitous and intentionally forceful symbolic act by the nation's highest national security official.

The Secretary of Defense's memoranda did not relay objective facts about possible damage to national security caused by Mr. Pollard. Rather, the Secretary went to extraordinary and unprecedented lengths to volunteer extremely prejudicial and unjustified statements unjustified statements of opinion such as Pollard's "loyalty to Israel transcended his loyalty to the United States," and "the punishment imposed should reflect the perfidy of [his] actions (and) the magnitude of the treason committed," (emphasis added).

Judge Williams found that these statements amounted to a call for a life sentence in "all but name", and constituted a

"flagrant violation of the (plea) agreement's spirit . . . . [T]he repeated use of superlatives implied an appeal for the maximum (sentence). Weinberger's reference to treason took the point further. Whereas treason carries the death penalty, and involves aiding the nation's enemies, Pollard was charged with espionage, carrying a maximum of life imprisonment and encompassing aid even to friendly nations - here, Israel . . . Weinberger's subtext was that the heaviest possible sentence was the lightest that was just."

Mr. Pollard did not commit treason, was not accused of treason and did not plead guilty to treason, and even the Government has now acknowledged that use of that terminology was both unwarranted and "regrettable". In fact, Mr. Pollard pleaded guilty to one count of violating 1a U.S.C. S 794, the transmission of national security information to a foreign government. Mr. Pollard's conviction was not even based upon that portion of # 794 that is predicated on an intent or reason to believe that harm to the United States would result from his conduct.

The Chanes memorandum's explanation that Secretary Weinberger was not using the word "treason" in its "formal and legal sense", is nothing short of outrageous. The Secretary was one of the nation's top officials, filing a formal legal document in the name of the United States under the supervision of the United States Attorney in a formal and extremely serious legal proceeding in a proceeding in a case that he, himself, characterized as very important. The word "treason" was intentionally used, as evidenced by the simultaneous use of the term "traitorously" by the Assistant United States Attorney. The assertion that the Secretary and the Government did not know the meaning of the word "treason" in that context is absurd. It was intended to secure a life sentence for Jonathan Pollard and it worked.

We will not comment an the remainder of the memorandum or the NJCRAC process. Those are matters for NJCRAC and its CJF member agencies. However, we do expect that NJCRAC will feel obliged to disseminate only accurate information concerning the Pollard case in the future.

In sum, your March 23 memorandum does not "provide accurate information" about the Pollard case. Rather, it either inaccurately portrays or omits entirely facts that we believe are vitally important and that would be of great interest to the NJCRAC and CJF member agencies. Your memorandum does not even mention that the government of Israel has specifically requested the President to grant Mr. Pollard's request for commutation. Such omissions seriously call into question the objectivity of your "fact-finding" efforts.

Very truly yours,
signed
Theodore B. Olsen

143 posted on 01/17/2006 8:30:36 AM PST by SJackson (Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants to see us happy. B. Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123

USS Liberty (AGTR-5) was savagely attacked without warning or justification by air and naval forces of the state of Israel.[3]

Of a crew of 294 officers and men[4] (including three civilians)[5], the ship suffered thirty four (34) killed in action and one hundred seventy three (173) wounded in action.[6] The ship itself, a Forty Million ($40,000,000) Dollar state of the art signals intelligence (SIGINT) platform, was so badly damaged that it never sailed on an operational mission again and was sold in 1970 for $101,666.66 as scrap[7] .

Israel acknowledged the following facts without qualification:

a. USS Liberty was an American ship, hence a neutral vis-à-vis the June 1967 war between Israel and its Arab neighbors.[8]b. USS Liberty remained in international waters at all times on June 8, 1967[9] .c. The attacking Israeli forces never made a positive identification of the nationality of USS Liberty before unleashing deadly force in their attack on the ship.[10]
At approximately 0600 hours (all times local) on the morning of June 8, 1967 an Israeli maritime reconnaissance aircraft observer reported seeing "a US Navy cargo type ship," just outside the coverage of the Israeli coastal radar defense net, bearing the hull markings "GTR-5".[11] This report, made to Israeli naval HQ, was also forwarded immediately to the Israeli navy intelligence directorate.[12]

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]

The defenseless crew, initially unable to report their plight or summon assistance and with only themselves to rely upon, fought heroically to save themselves and their ship. In recognition of their effort in this single action, they were ultimately awarded collectively one Medal of Honor, two Navy Crosses, eleven Silver Stars, twenty Bronze Stars (with "V" device), nine Navy Commendation Medals, and two hundred and four Purple Hearts. In addition, the ship was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.


144 posted on 01/17/2006 8:31:54 AM PST by rcocean (Copyright is theft and loved by Hollywood socialists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123

USS Liberty (AGTR-5) was savagely attacked without warning or justification by air and naval forces of the state of Israel.[3]

Of a crew of 294 officers and men[4] (including three civilians)[5], the ship suffered thirty four (34) killed in action and one hundred seventy three (173) wounded in action.[6] The ship itself, a Forty Million ($40,000,000) Dollar state of the art signals intelligence (SIGINT) platform, was so badly damaged that it never sailed on an operational mission again and was sold in 1970 for $101,666.66 as scrap[7] .

Israel acknowledged the following facts without qualification:

a. USS Liberty was an American ship, hence a neutral vis-à-vis the June 1967 war between Israel and its Arab neighbors.[8]b. USS Liberty remained in international waters at all times on June 8, 1967[9] .c. The attacking Israeli forces never made a positive identification of the nationality of USS Liberty before unleashing deadly force in their attack on the ship.[10]
At approximately 0600 hours (all times local) on the morning of June 8, 1967 an Israeli maritime reconnaissance aircraft observer reported seeing "a US Navy cargo type ship," just outside the coverage of the Israeli coastal radar defense net, bearing the hull markings "GTR-5".[11] This report, made to Israeli naval HQ, was also forwarded immediately to the Israeli navy intelligence directorate.[12]

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]

The defenseless crew, initially unable to report their plight or summon assistance and with only themselves to rely upon, fought heroically to save themselves and their ship. In recognition of their effort in this single action, they were ultimately awarded collectively one Medal of Honor, two Navy Crosses, eleven Silver Stars, twenty Bronze Stars (with "V" device), nine Navy Commendation Medals, and two hundred and four Purple Hearts. In addition, the ship was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.


145 posted on 01/17/2006 8:31:54 AM PST by rcocean (Copyright is theft and loved by Hollywood socialists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: veronica

It's very disturbing.


146 posted on 01/17/2006 8:35:41 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Missing from post.1. Pattern of Misrepresentation

The "Myths and Facts" memorandum states that there has been an "unfortunate pattern of misrepresentation" concerning the Pollard case. This regrettable and entirely gratuitous innuendo is apparently intended to accuse Mr. Pollard's supporters of misrepresentations. It is not true. Naturally, in any highly visible case such as this involving many people working to achieve a common objective, there may be misconceptions that develop. But the Pollard supporters have made every effort to supply scrupulously accurate information concerning his case. In fact, the NJCRAC memorandum contains more errors and misleading perceptions than anything we have seen. That is why it is so important for you to correct it by distributing this response.

147 posted on 01/17/2006 8:35:47 AM PST by SJackson (Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants to see us happy. B. Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: DoNotDivide
If it weren't for Nixon, Communist China might have dried up on the vine and resembled North Korea today.

And then we'd all be speaking Russian.

148 posted on 01/17/2006 8:53:29 AM PST by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Johnnyboy2000

Johnnyboy 2000...maybe you have fallen one too many times on your little motocross bike to spout such B....S!!


149 posted on 01/17/2006 10:57:13 AM PST by Napoleon Solo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"Furthermore, it would stop jailers from tormenting and torturing him as they are doing now."

They made him watch the Alito hearings???

150 posted on 01/17/2006 11:00:01 AM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-283 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson