Whatever happened to the Golan Heights?

Fuck, we have unemployement, racism, classism, all happening here...why do Zionists and Islamists continue to use American IMC sites to push their agenda. Go home, we have our own problems to contend with here.

Nothing would please me better than for Israel and the U.S. to go their separate ways. As is this is not the case. Annually, as a U.S. citizen a portion of your taxes go to support Israel. It's hard to get one definitive answer on how much of U.S. taxpayer cash is given to each year to Israel but it ranges from a low of 3.2 Billion to well over 5 Billion. In addition, we pay tribute to Egypt for having made peace with Israel. This is another 2.1 Billion a year.

In other words, when an Israeli settler or Israeli Homicide Force points, aims and fires at a Palestinian civilian, he does so on your dime.

Aside, from forced remittances to Israel, I'm deeply offended by injustice both domestically and internationally, more so when we fund this international injustice questions unasked.

If there is some progress on the dubious peace plan, you will see more energy devoted to domestic issues. Actually, if you step back and look at the IMC newswire articles, it really is only a minority of posts (one fourth or less?) that deal with the illegal Israeli occupaton of the W.Bank and Gaza.

West Bank occupation by Israel is not illegal, because Israel won the territories in a defensive war of 1967. According to International Law, the territories are not illegaly occupied, but disputed, subject to negotiation for peace. Israel gave back Sinai to Egypt for peace, true peace that exists to this day. If Palestinians would sincerely desire peace with Israel, they would most likely get most of the territories back, but only if they will live peacefully alongside with Israel and end their eternal dream of destroying it.

Thanks for watching! Sean and Bill send their best wishes.

The Golan Heights was about 1% of Syria. It is high over Israel, and year after year after year after year was used by terrorists to hurl bombs at Israelis. That's a fact. Now, another FACT is that Israel appealed for U.N. intervention, asking for U.N. troops to be put there to prevent terrorists living in Syria from using the Golan Heights to wage attacks on Israel. The move was rejected. So, finally, after many years, Israel won the Golan Heights in war. It's part of Israel now. Syria still has over 99% of itself left. Check a map of the entire region.

Further discussion about it is a waste of time.

It's amazing how much land Israel has taken in it's "defensive wars". They have violated numerous UN resolutions in acquiring land and that too is illegal. Things stolen in wars including land are illegal. We give Israel billions each year more than any other country in the world for what? Think what the billions could do at home or for the sick and starving of the world.

Sorry, I'm much too stupid to understand your post.

How many times do we have to go over this?

Fact: The West Bank was originally part of Egypt. That makes the people living there Egyptians.

Fact: The Gaza Strip was originally part of Jordan. Which makes the people living there Jordanians.

Fact: The PLO/PLA/PA was kicked out of Jordan for trying to take over the country. Where did they send them? The Gaza Strip.

Fact: Syria used the Golan Heights to shell (that means drop bombs without people attached) down on Israeli people. That also makes people living there originally Syrians.

Fact: Jordan, Egypt, Syria, and Baghdad were all involved in the 1967 War...which Israel won.

Fact: The West Bank, The Sinai Peninsula, The Gaza Strip, and the Golan Heights. The lands were offered back in exchange for peace (except the West Bank).

Fact: The Egyptians were given the Sinai back for peace. The Israeli's kept the West Bank due to the strategic nature in which it was used to attack Israel. Keeping the lands was a security measure.

Fact: Jordan didn't want Gaza back. It had found the perfect place to dump all the "Palestinians" who had been making so much trouble.

One last Fact....When Jordan was created, it was called "Trans-Jordan Palestine." I guess that makes Jordan the first country of the Palestinians.

Kinda makes you wonder why Jordan didn't want Gaza back? Hmmmmm....

In May 1967, Egypt and Syria took a number of steps which led Israel to believe that an Arab attack was imminent. On May 16, Nasser ordered a withdrawal of the United Nations Emergency Forces (UNEF) stationed on the Egyptian-Israeli border, thus removing the international buffer between Egypt and Israel which had existed since 1957. On May 22, Egypt announced a blockade of all goods bound to and from Israel through the Straits of Tiran. Israel had held since 1957 that another Egyptian blockade of the Tiran Straits would justify Israeli military action to maintain free access to the port of Eilat. Syria increased border clashes with Israel along the Golan Heights and mobilized its troops.

The U.S. feared a major Arab-Israeli and superpower confrontation and asked Israel to delay military action pending a diplomatic resolution of the crisis. On May 23, U.S. President Lyndon Johnson publicly reaffirmed that the Gulf of Aqaba was an international waterway and declared that a blockade of Israeli shipping was illegal. In accordance with U.S. wishes, the Israeli cabinet voted five days later to withhold military action.

The U.S., however, gained little support in the international community for its idea of a maritime force that would compel Egypt to open the waterway and it abandoned its diplomatic efforts in this regard. On May 30, President Nasser and King Hussein signed a mutual defense pact, followed on June 4 by a defense pact between Cairo and Baghdad. Also that week, Arab states began mobilizing their troops. Against this backdrop, Nasser and other Egyptian leaders intensified their anti-Israel rhetoric and repeatedly called for a war of total destruction against Israel.

Arab mobilization compelled Israel to mobilize its troops, 80 percent of which were reserve civilians. Israel feared slow economic strangulation because long-term mobilization of such a majority of the society meant that the Israeli economy and polity would be brought to a virtual standstill. Militarily, Israeli leaders feared the consequences of absorbing an Arab first strike against its civilian population, many of whom lived only miles from Arab-controlled territory. Incendiary Arab rhetoric threatening Israel's annihilation terrified Israeli society and contributed to the pressures to go to war.

Against this background, Israel launched a pre-emptive strike against Egypt on June 5, 1967 and captured the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza Strip. Despite an Israeli appeal to Jordan to stay out of the conflict, Jordan attacked Israel and lost control of the West Bank and the eastern sector of Jerusalem. Israel went on to capture the Golan Heights from Syria. The war ended on June 10.

Following the war, Israel reunified the city of Jerusalem which had been divided since 1948. The government signaled to the Arab world its readiness to discuss the future of the rest of the areas it acquired during the war. Israel pressed for direct, face-to-face negotiations while the Arabs sought negotiations through third-party intermediaries. Secondly, the Arabs demanded that Israel immediately withdraw unilaterally from all the territories it gained before beginning any type of negotiations. Israel indicated a willingness to withdraw from some land but only in exchange for full peace treaties with the Arab states. A few months later, meeting in Khartoum, Sudan, in September 1967, the Arab states declared that their formal position was "no peace, no recognition and no negotiation" with Israel.

On November 22, 1967, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242 as a framework for Arab-Israeli negotiations. The drafters of the resolution envisioned direct Arab-Israeli negotiations leading toward Arab-Israeli peace based on the principle that Israel would withdraw from areas acquired during the war.

The resolution called for the . . .Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; Termination of all claims of states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.

Arab-Israeli differences continued to prove insurmountable. The Arab states insisted that Resolution 242 called for a complete Israeli withdrawal from all the areas captured in 1967. The United States and Israel disagreed, stating that the resolution called for withdrawal from territories but did not define the scope of the withdrawal.

In the wake of this deadlock, Israel found itself with a million Palestinian Arabs under its control and began administering the territories in what has become known as the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Israel hoped that its authority over the Palestinians in these areas would be short-lived. Since Israel did not annex or incorporate the West Bank and Gaza into Israel proper, it could not apply the civil, democratic laws that govern Israeli civilian life to the residents of the territories.

In the years following the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, the Arab states and Israel continued to disagree about how to begin peace negotiations. The Arabs insisted that Israel first withdraw from all the territory it had captured during the 1967 war as a precondition for discussions leading to peace. The Israelis argued that since their security had been threatened by Arab aggression, they would not withdraw from any territory except in return for full peace agreements negotiated directly with the Arab states.

In order to weaken Israel militarily into accepting Arab terms, from 1969-1970, Egypt launched a war of attrition along the Egyptian-Israeli border aimed at slowly eroding Israeli strength through repeated artillery barrages. Israel retaliated with raids into Egyptian territory. A cease-fire was reached in August 1970.

Meanwhile, in 1969, Yasir Arafat, head of the Palestinian terrorist group Fatah, was elected chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), an umbrella for a broad array of Palestinian commando groups. Factions of the PLO initiated airline hijackings and other sensational acts of violence around the world. In September 1972, for example, Palestinian terrorists murdered 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics Games. Both Jordan and Lebanon allowed PLO groups to use their territory as a springboard for guerrilla attacks against Israeli civilians within both Israel and the 1967 territories. Israel retaliated against both countries for attacks launched from Jordanian and Lebanese territory. Subsequently, Jordanian-Palestinian tensions escalated and fighting erupted leading to the deaths of many Palestinians at the hands of Jordanian troops.

Thanks for watching! Bill will be sending you an autographed "The Factor" windbreaker. Enjoy!

It’s nice to know that the only thing you have to retort with is pathetic rhetoric.

By your substantial lack of anything even remotely representing a discernable view, you have only strengthened my point.

BTW…Can I get a polo shirt instead of the windbreaker?

MYTH
"Arab governments were prepared to accept Israel after the Suez War."
FACT
Israel consistently expressed a desire to negotiate with its neighbors. In an address to the UN General Assembly on October 10, 1960, Foreign Minister Golda Meir challenged Arab leaders to meet with Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion to negotiate a peace settlement. Nasser answered on October 15, saying that Israel was trying to deceive the world, and reiterating that his country would never recognize the Jewish State.1
The Arabs were equally adamant in their refusal to negotiate a separate settlement for the refugees. As Nasser told the United Arab Republic National Assembly March 26, 1964:
Israel and the imperialism around us, which confront us, are two separate things. There have been attempts to separate them, in order to break up the problems and present them in an imaginary light as if the problem of Israel is the problem of the refugees, by the solution of which the problem of Palestine will also be solved and no residue of the problem will remain. The danger of Israel lies in the very existence of Israel as it is in the present and in what she represents.2
Meanwhile, Syria used the Golan Heights, which tower 3,000 feet above the Galilee, to shell Israeli farms and villages. Syria's attacks grew more frequent in 1965 and 1966, while Nasser's rhetoric became increasingly bellicose: "We shall not enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand," he said on March 8, 1965. "We shall enter it with its soil saturated in blood."3

Again, a few months later, Nasser expressed the Arabs' aspiration: "...the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel."4
MYTH
"Israel's military strike in 1967 was unprovoked."
FACT
A combination of bellicose Arab rhetoric, threatening behavior and, ultimately, an act of war left Israel no choice but preemptive action. To do this successfully, Israel needed the element of surprise. Had it waited for an Arab invasion, Israel would have been at a potentially catastrophic disadvantage.
While Nasser continued to make speeches threatening war, Arab terrorist attacks grew more frequent. In 1965, 35 raids were conducted against Israel. In 1966, the number increased to 41. In just the first four months of 1967, 37 attacks were launched.5
Meanwhile, Syria's attacks on Israeli kibbutzim from the Golan Heights provoked a retaliatory strike on April 7, 1967, during which Israeli planes shot down six Syrian MiGs. Shortly thereafter, the Soviet Union — which had been providing military and economic aid to both Syria and Egypt — gave Damascus information alleging a massive Israeli military buildup in preparation for an attack. Despite Israeli denials, Syria decided to invoke its defense treaty with Egypt.
On May 15, Israel's Independence Day, Egyptian troops began moving into the Sinai and massing near the Israeli border. By May 18, Syrian troops were prepared for battle along the Golan Heights.
Nasser ordered the UN Emergency Force, stationed in the Sinai since 1956, to withdraw on May 16. Without bringing the matter to the attention of the General Assembly, as his predecessor had promised, Secretary-General U Thant complied with the demand. After the withdrawal of the UNEF, the Voice of the Arabs proclaimed (May 18, 1967):
As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel. We shall exercise patience no more. We shall not complain any more to the UN about Israel. The sole method we shall apply against Israel is total war, which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence.6
An enthusiastic echo was heard May 20 from Syrian Defense Minister Hafez Assad:
Our forces are now entirely ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. The Syrian army, with its finger on the trigger, is united....I, as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation.7
On May 22, Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran to all Israeli shipping and all ships bound for Eilat. This blockade cut off Israel's only supply route with Asia and stopped the flow of oil from its main supplier, Iran. The following day, President Johnson expressed the belief that the blockade was illegal and unsuccessfully tried to organize an international flotilla to test it.
Nasser was fully aware of the pressure he was exerting to force Israel's hand. The day after the blockade was set up, he said defiantly: "The Jews threaten to make war. I reply: Welcome! We are ready for war."8
Nasser challenged Israel to fight almost daily. "Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight," he said on May 27.9 The following day, he added: "We will not accept any...coexistence with Israel...Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel....The war with Israel is in effect since 1948."10
King Hussein of Jordan signed a defense pact with Egypt on May 30. Nasser then announced:
The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations.11
President Abdur Rahman Aref of Iraq joined in the war of words: "The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear -- to wipe Israel off the map."12 On June 4, Iraq joined the military alliance with Egypt, Jordan and Syria.
The Arab rhetoric was matched by the mobilization of Arab forces. Approximately 250,000 troops (nearly half in Sinai), more than 2,000 tanks and 700 aircraft ringed Israel.13
By this time, Israeli forces had been on alert for three weeks. The country could not remain fully mobilized indefinitely, nor could it allow its sea lane through the Gulf of Aqaba to be interdicted. Israel's best option was to strike first.On June 5, the order was given to attack Egypt.

Israel Before the 1967 War

MYTH
"Nasser had the right to close the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping."
FACT
In 1956, the United States gave Israel assurances that it recognized the Jewish State's right of access to the Straits of Tiran. In 1957, at the UN, 17 maritime powers declared that Israel had a right to transit the Strait. Moreover, the blockade violated the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, which was adopted by the UN Conference on the Law of the Sea on April 27, 1958.14
The closure of the Strait of Tiran was the casus belli in 1967. Israel's attack was a reaction to this Egyptian first strike. President Johnson acknowledged as much after the war (June 19, 1967):
If a single act of folly was more responsible for this explosion than any other it was the arbitrary and dangerous announced decision that the Strait of Tiran would be closed. The right of innocent maritime passage must be preserved for all nations.15
MYTH
"The United States helped Israel defeat the Arabs in six days."
FACT
The United States tried to prevent the war through negotiations, but it could not persuade Nasser or the other Arab states to cease their belligerent statements and actions. Still, right before the war, Johnson warned: "Israel will not be alone unless it decides to go alone."16 Then, when the war began, the State Department announced: "Our position is neutral in thought, word and deed."17
Moreover, while the Arabs were falsely accusing the United States of airlifting supplies to Israel, Johnson imposed an arms embargo on the region (France, Israel's other main arms supplier, also embargoed arms to Israel).
By contrast, the Soviets were supplying massive amounts of arms to the Arabs. Simultaneously, the armies of Kuwait, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Iraq were contributing troops and arms to the Egyptian, Syrian and Jordanian fronts.18


MYTH
"Israel attacked Jordan to capture Jerusalem."
FACT
Prime Minister Levi Eshkol sent a message to King Hussein saying Israel would not attack Jordan unless he initiated hostilities. When Jordanian radar picked up a cluster of planes flying from Egypt to Israel, and the Egyptians convinced Hussein the planes were theirs, he then ordered the shelling of West Jerusalem. It turned out the planes were Israel's, and were returning from destroying the Egyptian air force on the ground. Meanwhile, Syrian and Iraqi troops attacked Israel's northern frontier.
Had Jordan not attacked, the status of Jerusalem would not have changed during the course of the war. Once the city came under fire, however, Israel needed to defend it, and, in doing so, took the opportunity to unify its capital once and for all.

MYTH
"Israel did not have to shoot first."
FACT
After just six days of fighting, Israeli forces broke through the enemy lines and were in a position to march on Cairo, Damascus and Amman. A ceasefire was invoked on June 10. The victory came at a very high cost. In storming the Golan Heights, Israel suffered 115 dead — roughly the number of Americans killed during Operation Desert Storm. Altogether, Israel lost twice as many men — 777 dead and 2,586 wounded — in proportion to her total population as the U.S. lost in eight years of fighting in Vietnam.19 Also, despite the incredible success of the air campaign, the Israeli Air Force lost 46 of its 200 fighters.20 Had Israel waited for the Arabs to strike first, as it did in 1973, and not taken preemptive action, the cost would certainly have been much higher and victory could not have been assured.
MYTH
"Israel viewed the territories it captured as conquered lands that were now part of Israel and had no intention of negotiating over their return."
FACT
By the end of the war, Israel had captured enough territory to more than triple the size of the area it controlled, from 8,000 to 26,000 square miles. The victory enabled Israel to unify Jerusalem. Israeli forces had also captured the Sinai, the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
Israel's leaders fully expected to negotiate a peace agreement with their neighbors that would involve some territorial compromise. Almost immediately after the war, Israel's leaders expressed their willingness to negotiate a return of at least some of the territories. Israel subsequently returned all of the Sinai to Egypt, territory claimed by Jordan was returned to the Hashemite Kingdom, and nearly all of the Gaza Strip and more than 40 percent of the West Bank was given to the Palestinians to establish the Palestinian Authority.
To date, approximately 93 percent of the territories won in the defensive war have been given by Israel to its Arab neighbors as a result of negotiations. This demonstrates Israel's willingness to trade land for peace.

Cease-Fire lines after the Six-Day War
MYTH
"Israel expelled peaceful Arab villagers from the West Bank and prevented them from returning after the war."
FACT
After Jordan launched its attack on June 5, approximately 325,000 Palestinians living in the West Bank fled.21 These were Jordanian citizens who moved from one part of what they considered their country to another, primarily to avoid being caught in the cross fire of a war.
A Palestinian refugee who was an administrator in a UNRWA camp in Jericho said Arab politicians had spread rumors in the camp. "They said all the young people would be killed. People heard on the radio that this is not the end, only the beginning, so they think maybe it will be a long war and they want to be in Jordan."22
Some Palestinians who left preferred to live in an Arab state rather than under Israeli military rule. Members of various PLO factions fled to avoid capture by the Israelis. Nils-Göran Gussing, the person appointed by the UN Secretary-General to investigate the situation, found that many Arabs also feared they would no longer be able to receive money from family members working abroad.23
Israeli forces ordered a handful of Palestinians to move for "strategic and security reasons." In some cases, they were allowed to return in a few days, in others Israel offered to help them resettle elsewhere.24
Israel now ruled more than three-quarters of a million Palestinians — most of whom were hostile to the government. Nevertheless, more than 9,000 Palestinian families were reunited in 1967. Ultimately, more than 60,000 Palestinians were allowed to return.25
MYTH
"Israel imposed unreasonable restrictions on the Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem."
FACT
After the 1967 war, Israel chose not to annex the West Bank or Gaza Strip and instituted a military administration instead. This was necessary as an interim step until negotiations could resolve the future of the territories. This was by no means an ideal situation for the inhabitants, but the Israeli authorities tried to minimize the impact on the population. Don Peretz, a frequent writer on the situation of Arabs in Israel and a sharp critic of the Israeli government, visited the West Bank shortly after the Israeli troops had taken over. He found they were trying to restore normal life and prevent any incidents that might encourage the Arabs to leave their homes.26
Except for the requirement that school texts in the territories be purged of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic language, the authorities tried not to interfere with the inhabitants. They did provide economic assistance; for example, Palestinians in the Gaza Strip were moved from camps to new homes. This stimulated protests from Egypt, which had done nothing for the refugees when it controlled the area.
Arabs were given freedom of movement. They were allowed to travel to and from Jordan. In 1972, elections were held in the West Bank. Women and non-landowners, unable to participate under Jordanian rule, were now permitted to vote.
East Jerusalem Arabs were given the option of retaining Jordanian citizenship or acquiring Israeli citizenship. They were recognized as residents of united Jerusalem and given the right to vote and run for the city council. Also, Islamic holy places were put in the care of a Muslim Council. Despite the Temple Mount's significance in Jewish history, Jews were barred from conducting prayers there.
After the Six-Day War ended, President Johnson announced his view of what was required next to end the conflict:
“Certainly, troops must be withdrawn; but there must also be recognized rights of national life, progress in solving the refugee problem, freedom of innocent maritime passage, limitation of the arms race and respect for political independence and territorial integrity.”27

MYTH
"During the 1967 War, Israel deliberately attacked the USS Liberty."
FACT
The Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was a grievous error, largely attributable to the fact that it occurred in the midst of the confusion of a full-scale war in 1967. Ten official United States investigations and three official Israeli inquiries have all conclusively established the attack was a tragic mistake.
On June 8, 1967, the fourth day of the Six-Day War, the Israeli high command received reports that Israeli troops in El Arish were being fired upon from the sea, presumably by an Egyptian vessel, as they had a day before. The United States had announced that it had no naval forces within hundreds of miles of the battle front on the floor of the United Nations a few days earlier; however, the USS Liberty, an American intelligence ship assigned to monitor the fighting, arrived in the area, 14 miles off the Sinai coast, as a result of a series of United States communication failures, whereby messages directing the ship not to approach within 100 miles were not received by the Liberty. The Israelis mistakenly thought this was the ship doing the shelling and war planes and torpedo boats attacked, killing 34 members of the Liberty's crew and wounding 171.
Numerous mistakes were made by both the United States and Israel. For example, the Liberty was first reported — incorrectly, as it turned out — to be cruising at 30 knots (it was later recalculated to be 28 knots). Under Israeli (and U.S.) naval doctrine at the time, a ship proceeding at that speed was presumed to be a warship. The sea was calm and the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry found that the Liberty's flag was very likely drooped and not discernible; moreover, members of the crew, including the Captain, Commander William McGonagle, testified that the flag was knocked down after the first or second assault.
According to Israeli Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin's memoirs, there were standing orders to attack any unidentified vessel near the shore.28 The day fighting began, Israel had asked that American ships be removed from its coast or that it be notified of the precise location of U.S. vessels.29 The Sixth Fleet was moved because President Johnson feared being drawn into a confrontation with the Soviet Union. He also ordered that no aircraft be sent near Sinai.
A CIA report on the incident issued June 13, 1967, also found that an overzealous pilot could mistake the Liberty for an Egyptian ship, the El Quseir. After the air raid, Israeli torpedo boats identified the Liberty as an Egyptian naval vessel. When the Liberty began shooting at the Israelis, they responded with the torpedo attack, which killed 28 of the sailors.
Initially, the Israelis were terrified that they had attacked a Soviet ship and might have provoked the Soviets to join the fighting.30 Once the Israelis were sure what had happened, they reported the incident to the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv and offered to provide a helicopter for the Americans to fly out to the ship and any help they required to evacuate the injured and salvage the ship. The offer was accepted and a U.S. naval attaché was flown to the Liberty.
Many of the survivors of the Liberty remain bitter, and are convinced the attack was deliberate as they make clear on their web site. In 1991, columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak trumpeted their discovery of an American who said he had been in the Israeli war room when the decision was made to knowingly attack the American ship.31 In fact, that individual, Seth Mintz, wrote a letter to the Washington Post on November 9, 1991, in which he said he was misquoted by Evans and Novak and that the attack, was, in fact, a "case of mistaken identity." Moreover, the man who Mintz originally said had been with him, a Gen. Benni Matti, does not exist.
Also, contrary to claims that an Israeli pilot identified the ship as American on a radio tape, no one has ever produced this tape. In fact, the only tape in existence is the official Israeli Air Force tape, which clearly established that no such identification of the ship was made by the Israeli pilots prior to the attack. It also indicates that once the pilots became concerned about the identity of the ship, by virtue of reading its hull number, they terminated the attack. The tapes do not contain any statement suggesting the pilots saw a U.S. flag before the attack.32
None of Israel's accusers can explain why Israel would deliberately attack an American ship at a time when the United States was Israel's only friend and supporter in the world. Confusion in a long line of communications, which occurred in a tense atmosphere on both the American and Israeli sides (five messages from the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the ship to remain at least 25 miles — the last four said 100 miles — off the Egyptian coast arrived after the attack was over) is a more probable explanation.
Accidents caused by “friendly fire” are common in wartime. In 1988, the U.S. Navy mistakenly downed an Iranian passenger plane, killing 290 civilians. During the Gulf War, 35 of the 148 Americans who died in battle were killed by “friendly fire.” In April 1994, two U.S. Black Hawk helicopters with large U.S. flags painted on each side were shot down by U.S. Air Force F-15s on a clear day in the “no fly” zone of Iraq, killing 26 people. In April 2002, an American F-16 dropped a bomb that killed four Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan. In fact, the day before the Liberty was attacked, Israeli pilots accidentally bombed one of their own armored columns.33
Retired Admiral, Shlomo Erell, who was Chief of the Navy in Israel in June 1967, told the Associated Press (June 5, 1977): “No one would ever have dreamt that an American ship would be there. Even the United States didn't know where its ship was. We were advised by the proper authorities that there was no American ship within 100 miles.”
Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara told Congress on July 26, 1967: “It was the conclusion of the investigatory body, headed by an admiral of the Navy in whom we have great confidence, that the attack was not intentional.”
In 1987, McNamara repeated his belief that the attack was a mistake, telling a caller on the “Larry King Show” that he had seen nothing in the 20 years since to change his mind that there had been no “coverup.”34
Israel apologized for the tragedy and paid nearly $13 million in humanitarian reparations to the United States and to the families of the victims in amounts established by the U.S. State Department. The matter was officially closed between the two governments by an exchange of diplomatic notes on December 17, 1987.
Notes
1Encyclopedia Americana Annual 1961, (NY: Americana Corporation, 1961), p. 387.
2Yehoshafat Harkabi, Arab Attitudes To Israel, (Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House, 1972), p. 27.
3Howard Sachar, A History of Israel: From the Rise of Zionism to Our Time, (NY: Alfred A. Knopf, 1979), p. 616.
4Samuel Katz, Battleground-Fact and Fantasy in Palestine, (NY: Bantam Books, 1985), pp. 10-11, 185.
5Netanel Lorch, One Long War, (Jerusalem: Keter, 1976), p. 110.
6Isi Leibler, The Case For Israel, (Australia: The Globe Press, 1972), p. 60.
7Ibid.
8Abba Eban, Abba Eban, (NY: Random House, 1977 p. 330.
9Leibler, p. 60.
10Leibler, p. 18.
11Leibler, p. 60.
12Leibler, p. 18.
13Chaim Herzog, The Arab-Israeli Wars, (NY: Random House, 1982), p. 149.
14United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, (Geneva: UN Publications 1958), pp. 132-134.
15Yehuda Lukacs, Documents on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 1967-1983, (NY: Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp. 17-18; Eban, p. 358
16Lyndon B. Johnson, The Vantage Point: Perspectives of the Presidency 1963-1969, (NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971), p. 293.
17AP, (June 5, 1967).
18Sachar, p. 629.
19Katz, p. 3.
20Jerusalem Post, (April 23, 1999).
21Encyclopedia Americana Annual 1968, p. 366.
22George Gruen, "The Refugees of Arab-Israeli Conflict," (NY: American Jewish Committee, March 1969), p. 5.
23Gruen, p. 5.
24Gruen, p. 4.
25Encyclopedia Americana Annual 1968, p. 366.
26Don Peretz, "Israel's New Dilemma," Middle East Journal, (Winter 1968), pp. 45-46.
27Lyndon B. Johnson, Public Papers of the President, (DC: GPO 1968), p. 683.
28For the most comprehensive analysis, see A. Jay Cristol,The Liberty Incident. Washington, D.C.: Brassey's Inc., 2002;Yitzhak Rabin, The Rabin Memoirs, (CA: University of California Press, 1996), pp. 108-109.
29Rabin, p. 110.
30Dan Kurzman, Soldier of Peace: The Life of Yitzhak Rabin, (NY: HarperCollins, 1998), pp. 224-227; Rabin, p. 108-109.
31Washington Post, (November 6, 1991).
32Hirsh Goodman, “Messrs. Errors and No Facts,” Jerusalem Report, (November 21, 1991).
33Hirsh Goodman and Ze'ev Schiff, “The Attack on the Liberty,” Atlantic Monthly, (September 1984).
34“The Larry King Show” (radio), (February 5, 1987).

Would you like an autographed "The O'Reilly Factor" windbreaker?

Wow! I get a free windbreaker just for quoting the Constitution and Magna Carta! What a country!

Also, I did not realize these two documents were so "right wing" or that the idea of a state existing only by force of arms is more acceptable to the indymedia establishment.

Would you like an autographed "The O'Reilly Factor" windbreaker, too? We like to reward our most loyal sheep.

Thanks for watching! Rupert will be calling you to thank you personally. We like to reward our most loyal sheep.

Actually, just the polo shirt would be fine. I've never been much for windbreakers.

If it's possible, I would like a Fox News mousepad if you have one.

May I kiss you?

There is no point to look for justice in the Middle East conflict. Too many emotions beliefs and historical misconceptions are clouding the issue beyond any ability to decide who is right and who is wrong. Any observer who feel that only one side is wrong is either stupid, Ignorant or just playing in cheap propaganda. Both sides have done many things that they should not have done.

The issue that will affect the lives of the 10,000,000 Palestinians and Israeli who live in what is now “Israel + the occupied territories” is how to find a solution to this problem. A solution that will allow Palestinians – some of them refugees – to live normally and not be under occupation; a solution that would allow Israelis – some of them were refugees until they came to their homeland – to live normally and not be in daily danger of terrorism.

So this is the first question: Are you for justice or for a solution?

Justice exists on both sides and wrong exist on both sides. However, Solution is nowhere to be found. Solution can be based on fostering understanding in both sides, understanding that a compromise is must: No one side will get all that is believed to be “theirs” in this conflict. No one side will have to loose everything – but each side will have to give up some of what is very dear to them and some of what maybe rightfully theirs. On both sides of this conflict there are strong feeling and ample evidence that this or that stone or peace of land is “ours” – the question is should the Israelis and Palestinians continue to fight over these stones forever or until one side will completely disappear?

Neither the Palestinians people nor the Jewish/Hebrew people are going to just evaporate. Solutions that call for transfer of population: Either Ethnically cleanse the Jewish people away from Israel or transfer the Palestinians to the Jordan are just harmful wishful thinking that just fuel the conflict. The same goes for the constant demonization of both sides – portraying Palestine as all terror state or Israel as all occupation state is not going to help (unless of course the intent is propaganda)

So the bottom-line: I believe that justice is what we leave to our kids and this should guide what we do to resolve the conflict. Any person or organization that calls itself “peace activist” and is only focusing on showing how poor and weak is un side and how evil is the other side is IMHO fostering hate and not solutions. I very much doubt if Gahndy and MLK would approve of the hate against Israel ISM us spreading within Palestinians and in the world. It is very sad to see figures like Starhawk take part in what is a cheap propaganda campaign instead of working to foster peace and understanding between Arabs and Jews. The people of this region have suffer greatly from outside intervention in the form of colonization and the organization calls itself “International Solidarity Movement” is just one more link in the chain of foreigners who think they know better what the natives should be doing. If you come to help the least you can do is listen to both sides and help both sides listen to each other. Burning Israeli flags, hiding terrorists in your office, assisting Hammas operatives that hide in the nativity church to evade the law and spreading lies about Israel is not the way to peace.

It is impossible to negotiate with islamic extremists who believe it's god's will to rid earth -- and especially the middle east -- of infidels. Hamas have sworn to keep attacking no matter what. They consider every jew in that part of earth to be an "occupier." They don't recognize actual laws of any country or land. They want to kill Israel, one jew at a time. They refuse to even negotiate with Arafat and representitives from Jordan and Egypt about peace, let alone Jews.

That's the #1 roadblock to all this. Well, that, and the fact that it's insane to give control of a new state to Arafat, or anyone hand-picked by Arafat. The Palestinians need to find some moderate non islamic-extremist leaders who have nothing to do with the PLO, PA, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. If that's possible.