On June 8, 1967, Israeli forces knowingly attacked an American intelligence ship off the coast of Egypt. Thirty-four Americans were killed.
Here is a new YouTube video that captures the spirit of the attack.
The Johnson administration responded by rushing to coverup the facts.
James Bamford, author of Body of Secrets, has unearthed massive evidence proving that the Israelis had definitely identified the ship as American before they sought to destroy it.
The fact that many of the files and tapes relating to the attack on the USS Liberty are still kept under wraps illustrates how truth has scant chance in DC – if some major interest group is profiting from official lies.
Here’s a link I did to a longer blog on this subject last June 8.
It is naive to think that the Obama team would give a damn about getting the truth out about last week’s Israeli attack on the humanitarian relief ship, considering how the U.S. government has vigilantly covered up the IDF killing of 34 American sailors.
Well, Jim, one thing we now know is that all of the Mossad cloak-and-dagger stuff is now over! Hurrah! Israel can now just kill whomever it wants wherever it wants in the full light of day.
And if you don’t cheer for them, you’re a bigoted anti-Semite.
I suspect that Israel could shoot down two 747’s, sink an American warship transiting the Suez Canal, and imprison the US diplomatic staff and a good many Americans would salute their ‘right of defense’.
Your characterization of the “humanitarian relief ship” already belies your lack of objectivity. Mr. Bovard, I have always admired your ability to marshall facts and draw logical conclusions in the six books of yours that I have read. So let’s do so, shall we? (1) The Hamas “government” wants to destroy Israel–it has stated so on numerous occasions. (2) Toward that end, it has relentlessly fired rockets at civilian targets within Israel. (3) As a legitimate tactic of self defense, Israel (as well as Egypt) imposed a blockade on Gaza to try to limit the weapons that are shipped in. (4) Israel allows in humanitarian aid. (5) Despite tag lines like “humanitarian relief ship”, attempting to break a blockade is an act of war. (6) Video evidence shows that Israeli soldiers acted in self defense.
Israel’s objective is to exist. The Arabs’ objective is to destroy it. Choosing the good guys ain’t that hard here.
Mr. Bovard, I was always a little puzzled regarding your association with The American Conservative magazine, whose principles seem so distant from your own. Sadly, I think I now see the ground you share with Mr. Buchanan.
Are those the best Talking Points you can find?
That list has been debunked by articles in Haaretz and many other liberal publications.
Adam, with your core assumption – “Israel’s objective is to exist. The Arabs’ objective is to destroy it. Choosing the good guys ain’t that hard here.” — regardless of how many civilians the Israelis killed, they would always be the good guys.
It is unwise to irrevocably label any government as good guys.
Mr. Bovard, I note your objection to my core assumption. So let me try to be more precise. The Israeli PEOPLE wish to be left alone. The Hamas GOVERNMENT, as well as a significant number of individual Arabs, wishes to destroy Israel.
When an law abiding individual wants to be left alone and a government wants to wield its coercive powers against him, you and I both side with the individual. There is a legitimate comparison here.
Aside from this general backdrop, I would ask what should Israel have done in the face of a supposed aid ship trying to break a blockade despite the fact that humanitarian aid is routinely allowed in to Gaza anyway? What were soldiers supposed to do when brutally attacked?
Appreciate your insight.
If the Israeli people wish to be left alone, why has the Israeli government & the settlers acted aggressively in seizing so much land in the West Bank?
The notion that the soldiers were attacked without provocation strikes me as very unlikely. The Israeli government continues to suppress much of the video/audio/etc. data from the confrontation.
I never give the benefit of the doubt to a government that suppresses evidence.
uh….so much land? How many square miles would that be? You mean the territory seized as a result of an Arab effort to destroy Israel? You mean land that is critical to the protection of the citizenry when surrounded by people committed to your destruction?
A constant state of siege is, unfortunately, not consistent with an ideally sized government.
Best to give the benefit of the doubt to the Arabs, who have demonstrated their peaceful intentions so nicely over time. Well done.
If the Israeli people want to be left alone, here’s a good start: forgo all foreign aid that pours into the Tel Aviv coffers. Oh, and no more loan guarantees that never get paid back….
Adam, you seem to begin by assuming that everything the Israeli government does is justified and that practically all the Arabs deserve to die – or at least to lose their land.
Those assumptions don’t leave a lot of room for fruitful discussion.
Jim, I only assume that Israel has the right to exist and that the government has the obligation to defend itself against external aggression. I grant that all Arabs have the same right. Do you disagree with either assumption?
You, on the other hand, comment that Arabs have the right not to “lose their land”. Here we might have the basis of disagreement. I do not believe in the right of a tribal people who had no fixed borders dividing Arab land prior to those drawn by the British to overrun the tiny sliver of land that was set aside for a Jewish state by international agreement. So let me ask you: what do you assume? Do you acknowledge Israel’s right to exist? What about to defend itself? After I understand your position on these most basic points, perhaps there can be “fruitful discussion”.
So are you saying that Israel is only entitled to the land specified in an agreement between governments prior to the first Arab-Israeli war?
Why don’t you answer my questions first? Does Israel have the right to self defense? If we truly agree on that very fundamental point, perhaps we can move forward.
I don’t give “rights to exist” to governments. Governments are governments, and as such, they tend to be aggressive and dishonest.
Jim, I am surprised at the vast number of erroneous myths that “Adam” has chosen to swallow. That Palestinians had not property borders before the Israeli incursions is absurd, and the growing apartheid wall is continuing to separate them from their farms and sources of water — of which they have been owners for generations. In San Diego, there is a former Anglican bishop from Palestine. He has shown me pictures of the American “smart bomb” that blew up his church. Pieces of unexploded ones crashed through his “terrorist” altar. Apparently Adam is unaware of the dozens of apartheid laws that prevent Palestinians from earning a living and participating in society — and I mean dozens of laws. With all of the dozens of checkpoints to which Palestinians are subjected to in a mere 3-mile walk to work, it takes hours to go to a job and hours to return. Women die at these checkpoints giving birth, while scrubbed Israeli soldiers laugh. The Israelis even drove a tank into a Palestinian hospital, and then they denied it. Unfortunately the Italians had film footage. It’s odd how Adam wants to excuse invading Israeli soldiers attacking an aid ship illegally in international waters, and they he resents the defense of people picking up bolts and screws and (horrors!) pipes against the advanced Israeli weaponry supplied by the Evil Empire. Perhaps Adam and his ilk should discover why average everyday Palestinians are being forced into a corner by the relentless aggression of the Israeli theft state.
Here’s a video about a neonatal nurse’s trip to a hospital in Palestine, and what she saw the American-supplied Israelis do (This is Not Your War):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r65aH9axIY8
Here’s another about the apartheid wall (Wall of Shame) that is robbing them of their family farms with American backing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1NZGI02WkI
Stop swallowing the talking points, and allow your gag reflex to operate freely, Adam. You might make more sense when your mouth isn’t quite so full.
Jim (I pray this is not Bovard), nowhere do I say anything about a government’s right to exist, do I? I said Israel, the state and its people. Governments are formed to serve its citizens. True libertarians are not simple minded anarchists who believe in no government. We believe in governments with limited and proscribed functions, most fundamental among them to defend its citizens.
If you cannot agree that Israel has a right to exist and that its government has an obligation to defend its citizens against external aggression, then I finally agree with you on something: no fruitful discussion with you is possible.
note: Jim is Jim Bovard through this thread – my WordPress blog software is a bit erratic.
Adam, if I insisted that you first admit that the Lebanese, Egyptian, Jordanian, Syrian, and Iranian governments have a right to exist before continuing discussion – would that make any sense?
To begin by assuming that one specific state has a right to exist – a right presumptively superior to anyone surrounding it, or happening to occupy territory desired by that state – is to destroy objectivity – to assume that one nation is morally superior to others.
I find it interesting that Adam resorts to the pre-medieval conception that legal fictions have more “rights” than actual, living breathing people. One of the great achievements of medieval philosophy was to destroy the extreme realism of Plato and his Neo-platonist followers (many of whom were in the Catholic Church through the 13th century) — who believed that concepts had more “existence” than actual beings. Adam’s regression to this phase of thought puts him with some sordid company. When will the Catherine Wheel be rolled out?
PS: Here’s a wonderful web site from a typical American Jewess who decided to visit Palestine. Like most Americans, she had swallowed the propaganda about Palestine and Israel. When she visited there, she was appalled at the reality of it, and now her mission in life is to inform other Jews about the lies they’ve been told. Enjoy Anna in the Middle East:
http://www.annainthemiddleeast.com/
I remember finding this out in 1978 or so. My friend Deborah made her one-year visit to Israel and came back to Detroit where I lived. She told me: “Larry, they treat Palestinians worse than bigoted American officials treated Blacks during the Jim Crow era. It’s like a giant slave reservation governed by theocrats.” And if you dare speak about it, you become (presto chango) an anti-Semite! Remember what happened to Vanessa Redgrave, when she decided to make a movie about it. How dare she!
Jim, once again, I am not talking about governments, I am talking about people. While you may not want to face it, a lot of Arab people and institutions do not want a new government in Israel, they want no Israel. The PEOPLE have a right to form a government, which has an obligation to defend the people. As I stated earlier, I believe that all Arabs have a right to life and liberty and self defense. For those unfortunates living in Gaza, their government is a far greater impediment to their individual rights than that of Israel.
And, once again, if someone wants to rob and kill me and rape my wife, and I want that person not to, is it objectionable to you to place my desires above his, or does that destroy objectivity?
If you are indeed Bovard, I’ve enjoyed the 6 books of yours I have. I still refer to Fair Trade Fraud all the time. Also enjoyed seeing you debate some union hack here some years back.
I am, however, disturbed at seeing you and Noam Chomsky side by side on this issue.
Many Jews who travel to Palestine for the first time are shocked at the treatment of the Palestinians at the hands of the socialist Israeli theocracy. A typical example is Anna, an American Jewess who traveled to Israel. After seeing what really is happening there, she made it her mission in life to tell other Jews about what the Israelis state is all about. Here’s a wonderful link to Anna in the Middle East:
http://www.annainthemiddleeast.com/
I remember when I first heard about this in 1978, it was under similar circumstances. My friend Deborah had made the “year living in Israel trip” as so many American Jews do. When she returned, she told me how embarrassed she was. She told me: “Larry, they treat Palestinians worse than Blacks were treated in the Jim Crow era.” And of course that must now mean she’s a self-hating Jew! And remember, Vanessa Redgrave became an anti-Semite (presto-chango!) the moment she completed her film exposing the reality of Palestine. Oy ve!
Sorry about the double post.
Adam, individuals have a right to defend themselves and their families. This is without regard to race, creed, religion….
The Middle East is a mess in part because of rascaly French and British politicians carving out nations arbitrarily after the First World War.
I vigorously criticized the PLO & Arafat for corruption & much worse abuses in my Israeli chapter in Terrorism & Tyranny. I don’t see virtue as residing on one side or another.
No group of people has a right to murder or rob any other group of people. It doesn’t matter if they have a political sanction for such action.
Your opening assumption Arabs per se aim to destroy Israel would justify unlimited preemptive Israeli attacks. This would not serve either the Israelis or their neighbors.
Have you publicly criticized anything that Israel did in the last decade? Was there any point where Ariel Sharon or other Israeli leaders or commanders went “too far” according to your standard?
Adam may be interested to know that the Likudniks want to strangle Palestine in its crib. And they’ve been doing it in spades. What does this imply for non-involved Israelis in general? Is what’s good for the Goosnik good for the Gandernik?
Jim,
Have I criticized specific actions of the Israeli government? Absolutely. Have I criticized their objective, which I see as self defense but you apparently do not? Not at all. Israel has few choices, so I do tend to give them more leeway when they screw up.
I can’t tell, but I think that above you disagree with my opening assumption that many, not all, Arabs and their governments want to destroy Israel. If you disagree, tell me what you think their objective is. If you think that it is true, then once again, I ask, what is Israel supposed to do? When it cedes land and that land is used to launch rocket attacks against its civilians, what should it do? When its soldiers are kidnapped, what should it do? When suicide bombers strike, what should it do? When a hostile flotilla takes military action by trying to break its blockade, imposed for self defense, what should it do?
Lawrence, if I continue to ignore you, will you go away?
Unless Israelis have some God-given right to starve Palestinians, I don’t see how this blockade is justified.
You meant to say Israelis and Egyptians, right?
OK, now we’re getting somewhere. The point is that the blockade itself is, in your view, unjustified. The purpose of the blockade is to protect Israelis, and not to impoverish Palestinians. Despite the copious media reports that Israelis inspect and then allow humanitarian aid in, you apparently believe otherwise. What should Israel do to keep rockets from raining down on their hospitals, schools and neighborhoods? What would you want done if rockets were falling in your neighborhood? I can’t figure out a better alternative than the blockade.
Adam: I wish I could ignore you, but it is people like you who pick my pocket through taxation and thereby force me to pay for the mass-murder, starvation, and economic warfare inflicted by our government and its proxy criminal gang in Israel. Likewise, I am likely to suffer the blowback consequences of behavior that you support — while the politicians who do this for you hide behind their security screens. Similarly, my freedoms are being reduced because of the spin-off and hyper-growth of government that is the natural result of perpetual war-making, taxation, and surveillance — all of which are the natural product of your world outlook. I WISH I could ignore you. By the way, you ignore me as so many Americans ignore the Palestinians and others on whom they inflict death and destruction. That’s why they remain — well — ignorant.
Sen. Schumer spoke accurately when he recently declared that the purpose of the blockade was to “economically strangle” Gazans.
And he is gung-ho for such strangulation….
I asked you your view of the blockade, and you quoted a foolish politician instead. I asked you what you would suggest to deter rocket attacks, and you still fail to respond. AND to top things off, you misrepresent the foolish comments of that foolish politician.
I’m done here, Mr. Bovard. And disappointed not in your conclusions, but in your inability to satisfactorily justify them.
Schmer makes and represents US policy. His words capture the intent of the policy.
To talk as if the blockade had some lofty goal is hokum.
I should have tracked this quote down earlier: “Dov Weisglass, an adviser to Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister [said when it was first imposed]: ‘The idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger'”
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/05/31/israel/index.html
And if Palestinian babies die because of the blockade – its their own fault, since Israel did not approve of how their parents voted.
Adam B., the blockade is unjustified. The right to self-defense does not give carte blanche to dump moral principles. It does not convey the right to starve the innocent, even if you “can’t figure out a better alternative”.
In reviewing the debate over “existence rights”, one has to at least enjoy the conflation of “Israel’s Right To Exist” with the demonstrated Israeli Right to Kill American Sailors and Get Away With It because our own Government felt their own enlisted men and their expensive hardware essentially expendable.
alpowolf, when someone is raping your 14 year old, do you consider it immoral to use a little force? Your premise that using the blockade is immoral–so Israel should sacrifice its civilian population? If Hamas chose to cease its attacks on Israel, I agree that its citizens would be better off. But Hamas is the cause–Israel is responding.
I look forward to seeing the latest twisted logic from the collection of misfits on here. Lawrence, come back and tell me what I believe again! That was my favorite.
And if any serious person, our host included, wants to actually answer my questions and suggest a reasonable course of action for the country under siege, I look forward to reading it. somehow, I do not expect any such response.
Adam, you are spurring me to do more blogs and writing on th is topic….
In January 2009, I wrote a blog entitled, “Why Not Kill All Gazans?”
http://jimbovard.com/blog/2009/01/06/why-not-kill-all-gazans/
I suppose if the Israelis feel justified in killing all Gazans, they are also automatically justified in killing anyone who tries to feed Gazans.
Here’s a few paragraphs from that 2009 blog entry: Reading the justifications that Israeli supporters are offering for the IDF assault, I don’t see any rationale being offered that would not justify killing everyone in Gaza.
If a single rocket is fired from Gaza territory, does that mean that everyone living in that area has automatically forfeited their life? The New York Times notes today that Israeli supporters believe that “the issue of proportionality… is a false construct because comparing death tolls offers no help in measuring justice and legitimacy.”
And we are obliged to accept whatever exonerations are offered by the IDF and their apologists.
Adam, of course it is moral to use force to stop a rape. What would not be moral would be to burn the rapist’s apartment building to the ground, killing everyone inside innocent or guilty. I am responsible for the consequences of whatever force I use; the judge will be utterly unimpressed by any attempt to use cutesy euphemisms like “collateral damage”. As well he should be.
Even if Israel’s blockade worked–and do you have any evidence that it does?–it would not be justified.
Alopowof: Good point, but like most socialist apologists for the Israeli terror state, Adam cannot distinguish between justifiable and collective responses. He’s even in a dreamworld (or is it nightmare?) about who is the initiator of this conflict, so how can anyone make progress against resistance to simple facts?
Adam B. apparently reads only Likud propaganda to form his views on the topic of Gaza. How else could one view Israel’s treatment of Palestinians as anything other than collective punishment? Given the very few casualties the Palestinian “rockets” have caused, how else could one justify the Israeli response as proportional?
Adam B. writes:
“The purpose of the blockade is to protect Israelis, and not to impoverish Palestinians.”
I suppose he has not read the McClatchy article published last week:
“McClatchy obtained an Israeli government document that describes the blockade not as a security measure but as “economic warfare” against the Islamist group Hamas, which rules the Palestinian territory.”
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/09/95621/israeli-document-gaza-blockade.html
Perhaps Adam B. should also check out “The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine” by Ilan Pappe, an Israeli. Haaretz and Uri Avnery might also be good sources of information for Adam B. because he certainly has a problem distinguishing Likud talking points from reality.
Lawrence sums up my feelings well on his post above:
Comment on Sunday 13th June 2010 @ 1:30 pm
Any State or Institution that seeks to further its own hopes and dreams by obliterating the hopes and dreams of another people have forfeited the ability to utilize morality as its justifying force. We are reduced to the equation of the dog-eat-dog. It goes on forever or until one of the sides is over-run. Birthrates would seem to indicate that the Palestinians are not about to be over-run , quite the contrary. Expect deeper violence and expect it to be splashed liberally on this side of the Atlantic.
Good point.
The routine invocation of morality in the Middle East is a sign that people didn’t pay close enough attention to the last scam…
Someone, be constructive: What should Israel do? Aside from ad hominem attacks on me, aside from condemnation of what they have done, in the current circumstance (a neighbor committed to its destruction, constant attacks–feel free to tell me that I am wrong about these premises and why)–what should they do?
By the way, I’m sure you objective thinkers have all read Shelby Steele’s take today. Be proud of yourselves!
Mr. Bovard, you ask me if a single rocket being fired gives Israel carte blanche to kill all Gazans. The answer is no. But I do not believe that only one rocket has been fired, nor do I believe that all Gaza residents are being “killed” by Israeli action. Do you? Just say so. And answer my question.
Wow. “Adam B” is like Binny Netanyahu, Richard Perle and William Kristol, all rolled into one e-personality.
Selective memory, ignorance of inconvenient facts, and polite put-downs of those who refute him — yep, a regular Likudnik troika! Long live bigotry!
It’s so ironic when a defender of Eretz Israel sounds almost exactly like Joseph Goebbels.