Abraham's Children in the Genome Era: Major Jewish Diaspora Populations Comprise Distinct Genetic Clusters with Shared Middle Eastern Ancestry

Conrad why do you continue to link to the same lame and bias article that I have debunked?

1. Abraham is a fictional character. There is no evidence that any such person existed. King David is a fictional character. There is no evidence that any such person ever existed.

2. The term "disporia" is exclusively used by European Jews and no one else. They are the people who are desperate to deny their ancestral roots and true home.

Your link is debunked and irrelevant. Rejected as evidence. Period.

go on debunk them!
Don't just say so!
Your assertions ain't no Debunk!
They are just Assertions,nothing more!
Like I say,doesn't matter what the Revisionists come up with,all they have is Assertions,nothing else!
Really doesn't matter what they think!
It's irrelevant!

Only "irrelevant to you."

But fact is fact and is never irrelevant. So keep laughing. Truth is and always will be truth.

Sure - Here is what I have found about the USS Liberty....It was
not much of a puzzle though since it all appears in a Wiki article.
Tons of research and testimony though. A tragic incident.

I reposted it in the other thread - from the Wiki article:

The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy torpedo boats, on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War.[2] The combined air and sea attack killed 34 crew members (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and one civilian), wounded 170 crew members, and severely damaged the ship.[3] At the time, the ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nmi (29.3 mi; 47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish.[1][4]

Both the Israeli and U.S. governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the identity of the USS Liberty,[5] though others have rejected these conclusions and maintain that the attack was deliberate.[6]

Events leading to the attack

During the Six-Day War between Israel and several Arab nations, the United States of America maintained a neutral country status.[8] Several days before the war began, the USS Liberty was ordered to proceed to the eastern Mediterranean area to perform a signal intelligence collection mission in international waters near the north coast of Sinai, Egypt.[9] After the war erupted, due to concerns about her safety as she approached her patrol area, several messages were sent to Liberty to increase her allowable closest point of approach (CPA) to Egypt's and Israel's coasts from 12.5 nmi (14.4 mi; 23.2 km) and 6.5 nmi (7.5 mi; 12.0 km), respectively, to 20 nmi (23 mi; 37 km) and 15 nmi (17 mi; 28 km), and then later to 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) for both countries.[10] Unfortunately, due to ineffective message handling and routing, the CPA change messages were not received until after the attack.[10]

According to Israeli sources, at the start of the war on June 5, General Yitzhak Rabin (then IDF Chief of Staff) informed Commander Ernest Carl Castle, the American Naval Attaché in Tel Aviv, that Israel would defend its coast with every means at its disposal, including sinking unidentified ships. Also, he asked the U.S. to keep its ships away from Israel's shore or at least inform Israel of their exact position.[11][12] The United States did not provide Israel any information about Liberty's mission or location.

American sources said that no inquiry about ships in the area was made until after the Liberty attack ended. In a message sent from U.S. Secretary of State Dean Rusk to U.S. Ambassador Walworth Barbour, in Tel Aviv, Israel, Rusk asked for "urgent confirmation" of Israel's claim. Barbour responded: "No request for info on U.S. ships operating off Sinai was made until after Liberty incident." Further, Barbour stated: "Had Israelis made such an inquiry it would have been forwarded immediately to the chief of naval operations and other high naval commands and repeated to dept [Department of State]."[13]

With the outbreak of war, Captain William L. McGonagle of the Liberty immediately asked Vice Admiral William I. Martin at the U.S. 6th Fleet headquarters to send a destroyer to accompany the Liberty and serve as its armed escort and as an auxiliary communications center. The following day, June 6, Admiral Martin replied: “Liberty is a clearly marked United States ship in international waters, not a participant in the conflict and not a reasonable subject for attack by any nation. Request denied.”[14] He promised, however, that in the unlikely event of an inadvertent attack, jet fighters from the Sixth Fleet could be overhead in ten minutes.

Meanwhile, at the United Nations, and in response to Arab complaints that the U.S. and British were supporting Israel in the conflict, United States Ambassador Arthur Goldberg announced that the U.S. forces were hundreds of miles from the conflict.[10] At the time the statement was made, this was the case, since the Liberty was just entering the Mediterranean Sea[15] but would ultimately steam to within a few miles of the Sinai Peninsula.

On the night of June 7 Washington time, early morning on June 8, 01:10Z or 3:10 AM local time, the Pentagon issued an order to 6th Fleet headquarters to tell the Liberty to come no closer than 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) to Israel, Syria, or the Sinai coast (Oren, p. 263).[16] (pages 5 and Exhibit N, page 58).

According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[17] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[18] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time and it also faulted a shortage of qualified radio men as a contributing factor to the failure to send the withdrawal message to Liberty in time.[17] (p. 111 ff)

I asked you to analyse the video on The Uss Liberty Thread not consult Wikileaks.

I saw the videos but most are very biased

Yeah. See the Wikipedia article on the USS Liberty to put it into context.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

The Israeli military called the attack a "tragic mistake" and then-President Lyndon Johnson agreed it was nothing more.

And President Johnson was not exactly an ardent supporter of Israel
but he knew what was right.

If you read more about it rather than relying on anti-Israel
propaganda alone you will see that there were missed orders,
confusion about where the Liberty was from their own command
and similar issues on the Israeli side.

It is obvious to anyone that Israel never had any interest in
sinking a US vessel and killing its crew. It's hogwash. Although
the pain and suffering is real enough. Like any friendly fire
accident it is devastating. But we have moved on.

Hey - it's your dead horse - flog it as much as you like.

Me? I have had close ties to the USN matter of fact.
I'm a proud American. I just have an unbiased view of Israel.

Hey I just thought I answered this...must not have taken it.
OK here goes again..

It's obvious!!

The Israelis clearly had a burning desire to kill as many of
their closest allies and friends that they could!!

This was calculated to force the US to always support and defend
Israel. There is no possibility that it could have been a tragic
accident.

Anybody can see how it is to the Israeli's advantage to kill
American sailors. That's why there have been so many follow-up
attacks by Israel on US troops!!



Unless you believe that Wikipedia crap.

Except the Palestinians govern themselves in the West Bank and
Gaza and all they have to do to live in peace is to stop committing
terrorist acts and work on building a better tomorrow for their
kids. They should accept Israel as a Jewish state and lay down their
arms and make peace and allow themselves to prosper.

They may never get Jerusalem or be allowed to mount an army but so what? Peace and prosperity and a future for their kids would be worth it. Jordan, Syria and Egypt could help by also kicking in some territory and resources.

The problem is Palestinians do not accept Israel as a Jewish state and Palestinians continue to kill innocent people in despicable
terrorist attacks rather than making peace.

The regime Israel has imposed on the Palestinians is not the most murderous in the world, and certainly not in history (a recent exception being the war in Gaza). The most striking element is not the level of violence Israel employs against the Palestinians, but the level of control it exercises.

If there were terrorist in say, Ireland, that wanted to blow up and kill innocent people, say your children or family, what would you do? Have a picnic with them? Palestinians receive worse treatment from Hamas. If the Palestinians really want peace, they will have to live along side Israel, which they wont. Muslims want world domination not peace and that means one thing, they want you dead. Think about it.

If there were terrorist in say, Ireland, that wanted to blow up and kill innocent people, say your children or family, what would you do? Have a picnic with them? Palestinians receive worse treatment from Hamas. If the Palestinians really want peace, they will have to live along side Israel, which they wont. Muslims want world domination not peace and that means one thing, they want you dead. Think about it.