Cover-Up Alleged in Probe of USS Liberty

[Seraphim]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031023/ap_on_go_ot/spy_ship_israel_4


By JENNIFER C. KERR, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - A former Navy attorney who helped lead the military investigation of the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty that killed 34 American servicemen says former President Lyndon Johnson and his defense secretary, Robert McNamara, ordered that the inquiry conclude the incident was an accident.


In a signed affidavit released at a Capitol Hill news conference, retired Capt. Ward Boston said Johnson and McNamara told those heading the Navy's inquiry to "conclude that the attack was a case of 'mistaken identity' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary."


Boston was senior legal counsel to the Navy's original 1967 review of the attack. He said in the sworn statement that he stayed silent for years because he's a military man, and "when orders come ... I follow them."


He said he felt compelled to "share the truth" following the publication of a recent book, "The Liberty Incident," which concluded the attack was unintentional.


The USS Liberty was an electronic intelligence-gathering ship that was cruising international waters off the Egyptian coast on June 8, 1967. Israeli planes and torpedo boats opened fire on the Liberty at what became known as the outbreak of the Israeli-Egyptian Six-Day War.


In addition to the 34 Americans killed, more than 170 were wounded.


Israel has long maintained that the attack was a case of mistaken identity, an explanation that the Johnson administration did not formally challenge. Israel claimed its forces thought the ship was an Egyptian vessel and apologized to the United States.


After the attack, a Navy court of inquiry concluded there was insufficient information to make a judgment about why Israel attacked the ship, stopping short of assigning blame or determining whether it was an accident.


It was "one of the classic all-American cover-ups," said Ret. Adm. Thomas Moorer, a former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman who spent a year investigating the attack as part of an independent panel he formed with other former military officials. The panel also included a former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, James Akins.


"Why would our government put Israel's interests ahead of our own?" Moorer asked from his wheelchair at the news conference. He was chief of naval operations at the time of the attack.


Moorer, who has long held that the attack was a deliberate act, wants Congress to investigate.


Israeli Embassy spokesman Mark Regev disputed any notion that Israel knowingly went after American sailors.


"I can say unequivocally that the Liberty tragedy was a terrible accident, that the Israeli pilots involved believed they were attacking an enemy ship," Regev said. "This was in the middle of a war. This is something that we are not proud of."


Calls to the Navy seeking comment were not immediately returned.


In Boston's statement, he does not say why Johnson would have ordered a cover-up. Attempts were made to reach Boston at his home in Coronado, Calif., but he did not return calls seeking comment.


Moorer's panel suggested several possible reasons Israel might have wanted to attack a U.S. ship. Among them: Israel intended to sink the ship and blame Egypt because it might have brought the United States into the 1967 war.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Has anyone here read the Liberty Incident I am trying to put together a reading list of NSA related books for the winter I wonder if its worth including.

[Seoulstriker]

Has anyone here read the Liberty Incident I am trying to put together a reading list of NSA related books for the winter I wonder if its worth including.

I have never heard of the USS liberty.

[Argyll]

Are you being serious Seoul?

[budanski]

The USS Liberty was an electronic intelligence-gathering ship that was cruising international waters off the Egyptian coast on June 8,
1967.

Gee Guess who Israel was at war with at the time.....cant imagine how a 'mistake' could have been remotely possible....

A tragic mistake...that happens sometimes in wars...USS Indianapolis for example..or leaving our ships bottled up in Pearl Harbor when many Naval intel types knew the Japs were about to attack us...and warned Washington of the attack..

Mistakes cost lives .....bad intel....bad judgement...bad luck...

Thats what I make of it.

[Seoulstriker]

Are you being serious Seoul?

yes, I am being serious.

i'm only 18 years old!

[IDFM203]

How is this news new here????.....there have been this cover up story ever since the incident, numerous books and websites have already been out for years now about this alleged cover-up.

It seems that out of all that’s going on or ever went on (every “cover up”), this pops up every some years along with the Kennedy assassination.

gee I can only wonder why all this attention :roll: ...oh well.......

[Argyll]

Ok seoul I get ya!!
Idf it's resurfaced becuase someone from the US Nacy Investigation team has said they were ordered to cover it up,or something like that,and this new revalation only surfaced in the past few days!

Stay safe

[IDFM203]

Ok seoul I get ya!!
Idf it's resurfaced becuase someone from the US Nacy Investigation team has said they were ordered to cover it up,or something like that,and this new revalation only surfaced in the past few days!

Stay safeNo I understand that, but he’s not the first to make that claim. You have to understand is that there is a lot of politics involved, now listen there were over ten different U.S. government and non government investigations over the years, and they all concluded either it was an accident or that they have no proof of anything.

Now this person brings nothing new to the table. Hes not the first to claim a cover-up.

No, what’s new is if he brought concrete proof that those Israeli pilots knew it was an American ship and that they deliberately targeted it. I have yet to have seen that proof. That would be new to me.

No this is old news but of course its going to blow up again big time as I can almost guarantee this thread turning into a flame war (as it usually does on other boards)

you stay safe as well mate :D

[XASA]

The Liberty incident was discussed here last summer.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2454&highlight=liberty

Sorry to say idfm203, it is still a touchy subject for the U.S. Unlike the Kennedy assassination "conspiracy," it's widely accepted and proven that facts concerning the attack were covered up. Why? Well, that's why it's still being debated. What isn't being argued is that the attack was brutal and unwarranted.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

I think the thing that sticks in the craw of the US navy men involved is that after the unmarked Israeli jets straffed and rocketed the Liberty a fleet of torpedo boats came along side and straffed her and then at 2:37pm in good visabilty put a 19 inch German made torpedo into her the only one of four to strke their target.
An US EC-121 ferret intercepted a lot of radio traffic from the incident but I am not sure if it was included in the investigation, its an interesting event and I am always keen to learn more about it.

[XASA]

I think the thing that sticks in the craw of the US navy men involved is that after the unmarked Israeli jets straffed and rocketed the Liberty a fleet of torpedo boats came along side and straffed her and then at 2:37pm in good visabilty put a 19 inch German made torpedo into her the only one of four to strke their target.
An US EC-121 ferret intercepted a lot of radio traffic from the incident but I am not sure if it was included in the investigation, its an interesting event and I am always keen to learn more about it.

Here's a good start: http://ussliberty.org/

[IDFM203]

The Liberty incident was discussed here last summer.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2454&highlight=liberty

Sorry to say idfm203, it is still a touchy subject for the U.S. Unlike the Kennedy assassination "conspiracy," it's widely accepted and proven that facts concerning the attack were covered up. Why? Well, that's why it's still being debated. What isn't being argued is that the attack was brutal and unwarranted.No I understand it’s a touchy subject, it’s just that there are much more touchier and worse ones out there but yet this gets the most attention…. (Its what I have come to expect)

Now everything about that incident is being argued. Even your assertion that the attack was brutal or unwarranted is a factual argument.

There is no concrete proof to anything.


The fact is that the liberty spyship, was in waters that was in middle of a war zone in middle of an all out war, one in which Israel was fighting for its survival……

Now except for the facts in bold, everything else in a theory that has not been proven, I believe out of the following three theories, one of them is what most probably happened (again all this is in absence of any clear and concrete proof)

The first one is that Israel thought it was an Egyptian ship and thus attacked it and then when the liberty fired back it still thought that it was an Egyptian ship firing and it continued to fire at what it thought was an Egyptian ship. But then it realised its mistake it immediately ceased fire and in fact sent over helicopters to medivac some of the wounded. That a plausible theory for the ship was not sunk, Israel did stop firing at it and out of 150 sailors on board, 34 died and while yes 34 is tragic, it wasn’t all of them as Israel could have done if it had a malice intent towards an American ship. In fact Israel has apologized for what it said was a mistake and has even paid compensation to the families of those that were killed.

The second theory is that the liberty spy ship was spying on Israel in midst of the war onto its Arab neighbours and as such Israel went after it by only targeting the communications part of the ship, which is exactly what happened. Lets not forget, that Israel did not sink that ship by any means. No it only took out that part of it. What’s also important to remember was that the U.S. was not an ally of Israel and as such it wasn’t clear as to what and who that spy ship was spying on.in fact, because of the arab oil and also because of the clear view at the time that in fact Israel wasn’t going to make it past this war, it can be argued that the U.S. was helping the Arabs out in a covert way in order to curry good favour from them after they win the war.

The third theory is that Israel out of malice (the anti Semites favourite theory) attacked the ship I guess simply because it could. Now what’s wrong with this is that a, if it was out of malice, Israel could have killed every one and sunk that ship. Another reason why this theory is not plausible, Israel was in the midst of an all out war for it survival, why the hell would it want to out of the blue attack a super powers ship and potentially invite it into the conflict to fight against it. It has enough on its plate already fighting 5 Arab countries, it doesn’t need to add a super power to that mix



Now I am all for a honest intellectual and civil conversation about the liberty spy ship incident, but it has been my experience that after a few posts people just start spewing ridicules notions and venem that just go on pure libel.
Shalom. :D

[IDFM203]

I think the thing that sticks in the craw of the US navy men involved is that after the unmarked Israeli jets straffed and rocketed the Liberty a fleet of torpedo boats came along side and straffed her and then at 2:37pm in good visabilty put a 19 inch German made torpedo into her the only one of four to strke their target.
An US EC-121 ferret intercepted a lot of radio traffic from the incident but I am not sure if it was included in the investigation, its an interesting event and I am always keen to learn more about it. What you just say is pure libel. No where does it mention that anywhere.

If Israel was into strafing Americans, it could have sunk that ship in a second or killed everyone on board. wow the lengths you will go to make it sound as vile and untruthful as you can only makes me sit there with utter bewilderment (and contempt)

As for intercepted radio transmissions, it was released a while back transmissions of the Israeli pilots who clearly think its an Egyptian ship.

[IDFM203]

I think the thing that sticks in the craw of the US navy men involved is that after the unmarked Israeli jets straffed and rocketed the Liberty a fleet of torpedo boats came along side and straffed her and then at 2:37pm in good visabilty put a 19 inch German made torpedo into her the only one of four to strke their target.
An US EC-121 ferret intercepted a lot of radio traffic from the incident but I am not sure if it was included in the investigation, its an interesting event and I am always keen to learn more about it.

Here's a good start: http://ussliberty.org/Nowhere in that site can they tell us where they knew what the Israelis were thinking. That site is by a few liberty sailors and a whole host of other political interests that just recount what they experienced. Nowhere in there can they say if the Israeli’s knew it was an American or an Egyptian ship its simply impossible for them to know that.

[XASA]

idfm203,

I have more respect for the men who were there, many of whom were wounded and/or awarded medals for valor including one CMH, and their sources than I do for your defense of your countrymen's actions that day. If you have facts to support your view, please share them with us. Otherwise, you might want to try and understand why this is a sore point with many Americans instead of immediately questioning the actions and strong emotions of the brave men who served on the Liberty more than 35 years ago.

[96B]

I remember reading about the accounts of some of the survivors and many claimed the American flag was flying the whole time and that the aircraft should have seen it. They also talked about when the gunboats arrived they intentionally strafed the life rafts first.

IMO Israel would never intentionally attack us unless they were totally provoked by some extreme means such as us firing on them first etc. It was very interesting how the fighter planes were called back from the aircraft carrier also. On the History Channel special about it they said that the ship was supposed to stay a certain distance away from the coast but they moved in closer for some reason. Although I definately am not a conspiracy theorist, I personally believe there is much to that story that the public does not know and the government is covering up.

[IDFM203]

idfm203,

I have more respect for the men who were there, many of whom were wounded and/or awarded medals for valor including one CMH, and their sources than I do for your defense of your countrymen's actions that day. If you have facts to support your view, please share them with us. Otherwise, you might want to try and understand why this is a sore point with many Americans instead of immediately questioning the actions and strong emotions of the brave men who served on the Liberty more than 35 years ago.I am not disrespecting them at all. All of us have our brave man who served our nations. I said there are three theories. I didn’t say I believed every one or that I conclusively belive one over the other.. At the same time I cant discount everyone as well.

This is a sore point for us Israelis as well. We love and respect the U.S. and it pains us when people attempt to falsify history by trying to piant Israel as going after the ship with a malice intent to kill Americans. I simply don’t buy that and I have not seen any proof of it as well. while you have respect for your brave sailors (as do I) I too have respect for my brave soldiers that were in the midst of an all out war aginst odds that is unimaginable and I simply don’t buy that in the midst of all that, Israel would maliciously attack an American ship seemingly because it could.

All I am saying is that when the liberty spyship survivors talk about the incident all they can say is from their perspective and that is an Israeli plane firing at it, what they cant do is say what the Israeli pilot’s thought he was firing on.

How did I disrespect these sailers?!?. I did not!!. Of course I have a right to ask questions of my own now don’t I?!? It doesn’t mean I am disrespecting them. Now of course if the second theory is correct then I do have a right to ask valid questions of my own and that there are some problems I too have. Again I am just stressing that we have no proof to any of them so I am not conclusively saying one is true over the other. (Well I am totally discounting the third one)

I mean you haven’t brought proof to anything as well have you???

Now I know this is a touchy subject and I will categorically state that if Israel attacked that ship with malice intent for no reason and it knew it was an American ship, I too would be having problems with Israel and there is no way I will defend Israel if that’s what happened. I don’t think that happened and no one has brought any concrete proof that it happened that way.

shalom

[Spine]

It seems the topic is only touchy to idfm203.

[IDFM203]

It seems the topic is only touchy to idfm203.no if you read carefully (which its clear you didnt) it is touchy to all thats involved.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

idfm203 nowhere in my post did I say it was a deliberate attack I simply quoted parts of the event, as for libel well really do not know about that, international law not being one of my strong points. The facts which are undeniable are that the USS Liberty had been straffed by jets and hit by a torpedo from an MTB in broad daylight. You should try reading James Bamford's Body Of Secrets a history of the NSA or go to http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/liberty.html

[StarvingStudent47]

I understand that the crew of the USS Liberty said that they were flying American colors clearly, so there is no possible way that the IAF planes could have mistaken them for an Egyptian warship. This is one of the main reasons people look for a conspiracy or cover-up.

However, it's worth noting that:

A USMC armored convoy in Iraq said that there was "no possible way" that an A-10 pilot could have mistaken them for Iraqis, because the USMC vehicles in question (I forget what they were called) look like bathtubs and are completely unlike anything the Iraqis use. That A-10 made repeated attack passes over an extended period of time, killing several Marines.

British armored units near the start of the war complained that they had some sort of infrared friend-or-foe device activated, yet they were still attacked by American air-to-ground units.

Afghan partiers at a wedding say that there is no possible way their wedding could have been mistaken for a training camp or troop movements, but the crew of an AC-130 thought otherwise. That attack went on for roughly two hours, I believe.

Canadian forces at a firing range in Afghanistan were absolutely baffled as to why American air units attacked them. But it happened.

The bottom-line? Friendly-fire always looks "impossibly dumb" in retrospect. But that doesn't mean that there's a deep, secret conspiracy going on. And from everything I've ever seen on the USS Liberty, I'm inclined to believe that it was just a very tragic friendly-fire incident.

A few other points:
*If it was a deliberate attack, don't you think the IAF would have SUNK the USS Liberty instead of calling it off halfway through and then making a panicked call to US authorities to try and offer any aid possible?
*If this was a friendly-fire incident between the Canadian air force and the American navy, do you think we'd still be talking about it 30 years later? Seriously. How many friendly-fire incidents were there in the Vietnam War (same time period) which we NEVER talk about anymore? Hundreds?

[NcDeuce]

I saw something about this incident some time ago, History Channel I suppose.

[IDFM203]

The clear facts are that the liberty spy ship was in waters in middle of a war zone in midst of an all out war.

whether it was a clear day or not, the fog of war comes quickly to mind............

As for books, while your recommending that one, I suggest you read this one by A. Jay Cristol who wrote book titled "the liberty incident"http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1574885367/ref=ase_theamericanisraeA/102-1234187-4558506?v=glance&s=books


Besides that book I will just post here something that’s taken from a lot of sources that corroborates the accident theory.........

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.1 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.2 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.3 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.4 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 official Israeli Air Force tape 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.5 Critics claimed the Israeli tape was doctored, but the National Security Agency of the United States released formerly top secret transcripts in July 2003 that confirmed the Israeli version.
A U.S. spy plane was sent to the area as soon as the NSA learned of the attack on the Liberty and recorded the conversations of two Israeli Air Force helicopter pilots, which took place between 2:30 and 3:37 p.m. on June 8. The orders radioed to the pilots by their supervisor at the Hatzor base instructing them to search for Egyptian survivors from the "Egyptian warship" that had just been bombed were also recorded by the NSA. "Pay attention. The ship is now identified as Egyptian," the pilots were informed. Nine minutes later, Hatzor told the pilots the ship was believed to be an Egyptian cargo ship. At 3:07, the pilots were first told the ship might not be Egyptian and were instructed to search for survivors and inform the base immediately the nationality of the first person they rescued. It was not until 3:12 that one of the pilots reported that he saw an American flag flying over the ship at which point he was instructed to verify if it was indeed a U.S. vessel.6
In October 2003, the first Israeli pilot to reach the ship broke his 36-year silence on the attack. Brig.-Gen. Yiftah Spector, a triple ace, who shot down 15 enemy aircraft and took part in the 1981 raid on the Iraqi nuclear reactor, said he had been told an Egyptian ship was off the Gaza coast. "This ship positively did not have any symbol or flag that I could see. What I was concerned with was that it was not one of ours. I looked for the symbol of our navy, which was a large white cross on its deck. This was not there, so it wasn't one of ours." The Jerusalem Post obtained a recording of Spector's radio transmission in which he said, "I can't identify it, but in any case it's a military ship."7
Spector's plane was not armed with bombs or, he said, he would have sunk the Liberty. Instead he fired 30mm armor piercing rounds that led the American survivors to believe they had been under rocket attack. His first pass ignited a fire, which caused the ship to billow black smoke that Spector thought was a ruse to conceal the ship. Spector acknowledged in the Post interview that he made a mistake, and said he admitted it when called to testify in an inquiry by a U.S. senator. "I'm sorry for the mistake," he said. "Years later my mates dropped flowers on the site where the ship was attacked."
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.8
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.”8
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. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/liberty.html

Now of course this article in the first post claims that it is a cover-up now whether the U.S. covered up anything or not is another discussion (I mean I too am curious as to what and why they are covering this up if indeed they are, though I suspect my curiosity might differ from some of yours) but this article brings up compelling arguments to show how Israel made a tragic mistake and that it was not any malice part of Israel to purposely with malice attack Americans.

[XASA]

idfm203 nowhere in my post did I say it was a deliberate attack I simply quoted parts of the event, as for libel well really do not know about that, international law not being one of my strong points. The facts which are undeniable are that the USS Liberty had been straffed by jets and hit by a torpedo from an MTB in broad daylight. You should try reading James Bamford's Body Of Secrets a history of the NSA or go to http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/liberty.html

Based on reading his other posts, it's clear idfm203 is a very patriotic Israeli and I don't blame him for defending his country's actions that fateful day; however, even the Israelis must realize that they occasionally make mistakes. It's rather obvious this is a sore point, still, with the Israeli government, too. No one is starting a "flame war" but history is clearly pointing out the actual events of that day. The news item that opened this thread and several other reports simply state that what happened does not jibe with Israel's claim of it being an accident.

I was assigned to the U.S. Army Security Agency (USASA), the Army branch of NSA, in Berlin at the time. The Navy branch, which was aboard the Liberty, was the Naval Security Group. I've worked with them later in my military career and I know the capability of the Liberty and the reasons why both sides would want her out of action, which Bamford clearly writes about in his history of the NSA.

idm203 support of his nation is commendable but sometimes it's best to let facts and not emotions carry a dialogue.

[IDFM203]

idfm203 nowhere in my post did I say it was a deliberate attack I simply quoted parts of the event, as for libel well really do not know about that, international law not being one of my strong points. The facts which are undeniable are that the USS Liberty had been straffed by jets and hit by a torpedo from an MTB in broad daylight. You should try reading James Bamford's Body Of Secrets a history of the NSA or go to http://www.nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/liberty.html

Based on reading his other posts, it's clear idfm203 is a very patriotic Israeli and I don't blame him for defending his country's actions that fateful day; however, even the Israelis must realize that they occasionally make mistakes. It's rather obvious this is a sore point, still, with the Israeli government, too. No one is starting a "flame war" but history is clearly pointing out the actual events of that day. The news item that opened this thread and several other reports simply state that what happened does not jibe with Israel's claim of it being an accident.

I was assigned to the U.S. Army Security Agency (USASA), the Army branch of NSA, in Berlin at the time. The Navy branch, which was aboard the Liberty, was the Naval Security Group. I've worked with them later in my military career and I know the capability of the Liberty and the reasons why both sides would want her out of action, which Bamford clearly writes about in his history of the NSA.

idm203 support of his nation is commendable but sometimes it's best to let facts and not emotions carry a dialogue.
yes I agree no need for a flame war so please dont take anything out of context and please read carefully what I write


Now I see what you have tried to do here and let me dispel that right now. While of course I am patriotic, don’t confuse that for a blindness.

Like I said in my previous post to you (did you read it???) if Israel maliciously attacked that spy ship simply because it could, I too would have a problem with that and I would not defend it.

You have not brought proof to anything here as well.

you know that same blind patriotic argument can be made to you as well.


as much as I am willing to ascertain a lot of theories, you are not even willing to listen to the second one. Now that is you being equally patriotic whereas in your mind its impossible that the ship was spying on Israel to its enemies in middle of a war for its survival. Again I am not saying that, but I am not blindly ruling that out either as you are doing.

You see that blind patriotic argument works both ways there.



Ok I want to ask you a question which pertaines to the second theory of which I want to stress I am not saying happened, I am just asking questions ??? What was that spy ship doing in those water’s which were in middle of a war zone in middle of an all out war??

Oh and why do you think Israel attacked that ship??

[Trident-za]

StarvingStudent47, you make several very good points.... I'm unsure as to why subsequent posters have ignored them....

[IDFM203]

I just want to stress that no one is saying that it was an accident and that Israel accidentally targeted that ship. No, what Israel said was that it made a tragic mistake in thinking that it was an Egyptian ship and that it thought it was targeting that.

[XASA]

Once again, I understand your position; however, I find it lacks credibility. You find the opinion of those different than yours as being also suspect. That's the only thing we agree on. I don't know why the Israeli's attacked the ship, that is something only they can attest to. Friendly fire? Perhaps. Mistaken for an Egyptian horse boat? Who knows? The point remains that the ship was attacked over an extended period of time, and today's report that started this thread said a cover-up was ordered by the U.S. government at the highest level. What was pointed out was that the attack was not one of the IDF's most glorious moments and a sad day in the history of the U.S. Navy. If you believe that your nation's forces were innocent of any wrong doing, fine, that's commendable. If I believe there was some other motive, which I do, there's nothing I can say to convince you of that, so why bother. I believe history and the facts will eventually come out. Then, perhaps, we can revisit this conversation. Until then,

Shalom

[IDFM203]

Once again, I understand your position; what position??. I haven’t staked out any one position. I have stated three differing positns and have brought down arguments and facts to back them up. Now the third one I brought down, I don’t believe it happened but I don’t rule anything out as impossible for nothing is (just like the second one is not impossible as well)


however, I find it lacks credibility. well you haven’t brought proof to anything to back up you claim of lack of credibility. All you have brought is that Israel shot that ship and that Americans died and that it is tragic and on that we both agree with. Now you have not brought any proof to show conclusively as to whom the Israelis thought they were shooting at.
As for my second theory, I too haven’t brought any proof hence its just a theory.

Now the third theory (and what I think you are saying} is also without any proof.


You find the opinion of those different than yours as being also suspect. no, when did I say that.

You see there are plenty of differing opinions, I suspect that you find some of my opinions and some of the other opinions suspect as well.

So You see that charge works both ways.


I don't know why the Israeli's attacked the ship, that is something only they can attest topoint exactly!! and no amount of testimony from the liberty crew can tell us what the Israeli knew or didn’t.


Friendly fire? defiantly plausible in the fog of an all out war.


Perhaps. Mistaken for an Egyptian horse boat? again defiantly plausible. Go read my post before where I explain this one in more detail.


Who knows? yeah who knows perhaps that ship was also spying on Israel to its enemies. I mean that’s a plausible theory as well. (Again I am not saying that just I am not discounting that as well).


The point remains that the ship was attacked over an extended period of time, and the fact is that Israel could have sunk that ship and killed everyone on boared and not just those 34 brave sailors but it didn’t and it in fact ceased fire and in fact offered to send a medivac helicopter (which it did)


and today's report that started this thread said a cover-up was ordered by the U.S. government at the highest level. well that’s debatable but to be honest I too am interested to know if there is a cover up and why??






What was pointed out was that the attack was not one of the IDF's most glorious moments and a sad day in the history of the U.S. Navy. I agree with that.





If you believe that your nation's forces were innocent of any wrong doing, fine, that's commendable. well if its not innocent that I too say its wrong and condemn it but right now there is no proof of that.

Oh and that same statement goes to you as well.



If I believe there was some other motive, ok so lets hear it…I am curios to hear what you believe (really!)



which I do, there's nothing I can say to convince you of that, so why bother. first of all that’s not true. If you bring proof to anything I will surly entertain it.

As for your theory well lay it out and then we will see.

Shalom. :D

[StarvingStudent47]

StarvingStudent47, you make several very good points.... I'm unsure as to why subsequent posters have ignored them....

Thanks, I'm glad somebody read them :) I just think that this whole thing is pretty straightforward.

Another "impossibly dumb in restrospect" incident: remember when US planes bombed the Chinese embassy during the Balkans War? Oops. That was pretty freakin' dumb. But I don't believe it was a secret conspiracy or anything. And from everything I've read, that's what I've taken away from the USS Liberty incident as well.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Well said StarvingStudent these things happen in war, I can remember the Chinese Consulate getting bombed and a Pentagon spokesman saying it was not meant to be there, I believe they were trying to hit a Yugoslav intel building that at that time did not exist anymore. I think the CIA were blamed for the flawed intel that they had sent to targeting, it was at least five years out of date. After reading the news reports on the web last night on the new Liberty information it would seem that many of the survivors and the relatives of the dead seamen and NSA men welcome the new information.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

friendly fire happens. Its unfortunate. I remeber in afghanistan the anger from the canadian familys that an ally can bomb friendly troops and get away without any sort of punishment. It happened even though the americans told they were training in the area. How did it happen? pilot error? who knows but it did and theres nothing nobody can do to fix it? So how does this relate to the uss liberty? It happened..not alot can be done to fix it now..conspiracy's or not . All we can do as humans is learn from past mistakes..and hopefully not make them again. If there was any sort of cover up im sure it would have been exposed by now.

[Royal]

I'm sorry, from what little I know about the incident, I agree with XASA - a point I noticed, as someone who's spend a fair part of his career at sea, these seem like contradictary statements;


the Liberty was first reported — incorrectly, as it turned out — to be cruising at 30 knots (it was later recalculated to be 28 knots).


Navy Court of Inquiry found that the Liberty's flag was very likely drooped and not discernible

[Argyll]

Friendly Fire,Fog of war,terrible accident...........whatever!
The surviving crew for years have tried to tell the truth,and they disgustingly were treated abhorrently by the USG at the time,all that matters here is that THEY who suffered the attack know the truth,and the truth always hurts.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

I managed to find some info on the top speed of the Liberty 17knts tops, this was her timed speed after she was fitted out for ELINT.

[alexjulian]

Americans cant seem to live without conspiracy theories.........no wander x files was such a massive programme

[Argyll]

Alex perhaps if you'd do some research on the Liberty incident,then you'd maybe find that your comments were completely crass...............again ignorance is bliss :bash:

[Deuterium]

Americans cant seem to live without conspiracy theories.........no wander x files was such a massive programme

Well if that ain't the pot calling the kettle black, ever heard of crop circles?

[martinexsquaddie]

yes but that keeps the loons busy.
ever heard of rendalsham Forest UFO visit or whatever. MOD tried to keep there investigation secret as they did'nt want to embarass the USAF.
as rabbit droppings and a lighthouse don't make a ufo but stagging on a 3am anythings possable :(

[IDFM203]

I'm sorry, from what little I know about the incident, I agree with XASA. did you read what I wrote???

Because if you did you will see that I brought down three theories which one of them is leaning to what XASA said.

Now if you agree with what he insinuated well as I said it is just a theory for he brought no proof to bear to back up that claim


a point I noticed, as someone who's spend a fair part of his career at sea, . while I most defiantly respect his service, the fact that he nor the sailors of the liberty could read the minds of the Israeli pilots or what the Israeli government was thinking, means he has no more extra bearing than someone who was not in the navy and besides he wasn’t there time as well.



these seem like contradictary statements;
[quote="idfm203" the Liberty was first reported — incorrectly, as it turned out — to be cruising at 30 knots (it was later recalculated to be 28 knots). quote

quote="idfm203"Navy Court of Inquiry found that the Liberty's flag was very likely drooped and not discernible quote

first of all, those two statements are from what I brought down that supports the first theory that it was an accident

Second of all I don’t see how this is any contradiction. Perhaps you can explain how you see it that way.

[IDFM203]

Friendly Fire,Fog of war,terrible accident...........whatever!
The surviving crew for years have tried to tell the truth,and they disgustingly were treated abhorrently by the USG at the time,all that matters here is that THEY who suffered the attack know the truth,and the truth always hurts. listen we all agreed that they suffered. And that they should know the truth. But all they saw were an Israeli plane attacking it, they were not in the pilots head to know what he thought he was attacking.

Secondly I suggest you go read everything I wrote but one point I want to repeat here.

If Israel was knowingly maliciously attacking that ship full of Americans in could have
Of sunk that ship or killed everyone on board and not just those 34 brave sailers as it could have, but the fact is that it ceased fire and in fact it called the ship to offer help and in fact did send over a medivac helicopter to treat the wounded. That’s not the actions of a nation that wants to maliciously harm a worlld super power as if it has nothing better to do (which as you know, it was in the midst of an all out war).


Now as for the “cover up” I saw no new information here. I mean that has been talked about and written about for years. Now if this guy says it’s a cover up (which is not new information) then he should present proof as to it as well as to what the U.S. is covering up heck I too am quite interested myself in knowing that.

Shalom.:D

[XASA]

So far as I know, the following are undisputed facts. Draw whatever conclusions you want.

1. At all times on June 8, 1967, during the fourth day of the
Arab-Israeli "Six Day War," USS Liberty, a neutral ship, remained in
international waters.

2. USS Liberty carried no offensive armament and only four .50 cal.
machine guns as a defense against boarders.

3. On the morning of June 8, 1967 USS Liberty was over flown by
Israeli reconnaissance aircraft, and POSITIVELY identified by an
Israeli pilot not just as a U.S. Navy ship, but as USS Liberty
specifically.

4. The Hague Convention on Naval Warfare prohibits attacks on
neutral ships on the high seas.

5. The government of Israel stated that they ordered ships and
aircraft to the location of USS Liberty because they had received
reports that IDF forces on the shore were being shelled from the sea.

6. The Israeli motor torpedo boats (MTBs) claimed to have detected
USS Liberty on their radar initially at a distance of approximately
28 miles. The maximum range of the MTB radar units was just 16 miles.

7. The MTBs calculated the speed of USS Liberty initially at 30
knots and then a few minutes later at 28 knots. The maximum speed of
USS Liberty was 20 knots, and the ship was at that time barely making
way at five knots.

8. The Israeli aircraft, which should have been looking for a ship
with offensive armament with sufficient range to bombard the shore 15
miles away and traveling at high speed, instead found a converted
cargo ship, with no offensive armament, and moving at approximately
five knots.

9. USS Liberty presented no obvious offensive threat, nor was she
attempting to flee the scene. Indeed, US sailors were sunbathing on
the deck.

10. Prior to the start of the attack (1358 local time), USS Liberty -
still in international waters - was never positively identified as a
hostile ship.

11. Rather than wait for the MTBs to arrive and positively ID the
ship, the aircraft launched an attack on USS Liberty.

12. The pilots of the attacking aircraft claimed that they were
unable to see the 5' by 8' red, white, and blue US flag flying
approximately 100 feet above the bridge of the ship, yet one of the
pilots stated that he saw a .50 cal machine gun, painted gray, on the
deck.

13. The Israelis claim that the aircraft finally saw a U.S. flag on
Liberty at approximately 1422 and they called off the attack.

14. At 1436, the MTBs launched a torpedo attack on USS Liberty,
launching five torpedoes, one of which hit USS Liberty amidships,
killing 25 men.

15. The MTBs continued to circle USS Liberty, firing on the ship
until at least 1510, when they claim that they saw Liberty's US flag
for the first time.

16. The Israeli attack was broken off almost immediately following
an unencrypted broadcast by USS Saratoga that she had launched
aircraft to come to the aid of Liberty.

This is not my conclusion but the conclusion of some of the Liberty crew members:

The Israeli government has never explained why it was necessary to
attack an unthreatening ship on the high seas without waiting a few
more minutes until their surface ships arrived to positively identify
it. This was a gross violation of the laws of war. There is simply no
rational explanation for the attack having been anything other than
planned and deliberate.

As I've said before, no one relishes a disagreement between friends; however, that doesn't mean a friend can piss in your face and tell you it's rain.

[IDFM203]

Well you brought down one view (which is not held by all, even amongst Americans and the government and non government investigations) and I will respond with the another (which is also not held by all). I guess it’s for all to draw whatever conclusions they want, though I suggest besides all my responses now, you read my last paragraph as to the more rational view of it.
I just want to say that please don’t take anything out of context, I am not callous here for I do view this as a tragic and regrettable mistake and that Israel should and did apologise to those brave sailors.


So far as I know, the following are undisputed facts. Draw whatever conclusions you want. no these are clearly disputed facts…whereas facts suggest other wise


1. At all times on June 8, 1967, during the fourth day of the
Arab-Israeli "Six Day War," USS Liberty, a neutral ship, remained in
international waters.
The U.S. liberty is a battle spy ship!!!

While in international waters, it was in waters in middle of a war zone in midst of an all out war.



2. USS Liberty carried no offensive armament and only four .50 cal.
machine guns as a defense against boarders. ok…



3. On the morning of June 8, 1967 USS Liberty was over flown by
Israeli reconnaissance aircraft, and POSITIVELY identified by an
Israeli pilot not just as a U.S. Navy ship, but as USS Liberty
specifically. how is that a fact….can you show me a link to prove that.

Secondly, even if that was true earlier, that doesn’t have any bearing on what the Israeli pilots thought they were seeing being that that it was in midst of a war and the fact that they thought there were no American ship’s in the battle theatre (as it was supposed to happen).



4. The Hague Convention on Naval Warfare prohibits attacks on
neutral ships on the high seas. while I understand that, a, it was an accident,

b that ship was a spy ship in waters that was in middle of a war zone in the midst of an all out war.



5. The government of Israel stated that they ordered ships and
aircraft to the location of USS Liberty because they had received
reports that IDF forces on the shore were being shelled from the sea. yes they thought it was an Egyptian ship

I reapeat.” 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.



6. The Israeli motor torpedo boats (MTBs) claimed to have detected
USS Liberty on their radar initially at a distance of approximately
28 miles. The maximum range of the MTB radar units was just 16 miles. .

No they claimed it was an Egyptian ship.

The explosions and smoke in El Arish had in fact been caused by an Egyptian ammunition dump that detonated. However, as the torpedo boats approached the area, their radar picked up a target to the west, moving away from El Arish. Presuming it to be an Egyptian warship, naval headquarters called for an air strike



7. The MTBs calculated the speed of USS Liberty initially at 30
knots and then a few minutes later at 28 knots. The maximum speed of
USS Liberty was 20 knots, and the ship was at that time barely making
way at five knots. . well those numbers are debatable.

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.

Whther the sea was calm or not doesn’t negate whther an accident could have happned or not.



8. The Israeli aircraft, which should have been looking for a ship
with offensive armament with sufficient range to bombard the shore 15
miles away and traveling at high speed, instead found a converted
cargo ship, with no offensive armament, and moving at approximately
five knots. . no that ship clearly looks like any other battle ship. Yes there are differing characteristics for this ship was a military spy ship, but in the fog of war mistakes clearly happen

But your converted cargo ship statement has no bearing as to the way that ship looked.




9. USS Liberty presented no obvious offensive threat, nor was she
attempting to flee the scene. Indeed, US sailors were sunbathing on
the deck. . well that’s clearly disputed. I mean there is a war going on and yet sailors are sunbathing…… come on!!!

Secondly the Israeli’s did report that the Egyptian ship did appear to be fleeing from al arish and that dump ammunition explosion.

Agin disputed facts in the in the midst (fog) of an all out war.



10. Prior to the start of the attack (1358 local time), USS Liberty -
still in international waters - was never positively identified as a
hostile ship. . well the Israeli’s (mistakenly) identified that ship as an Egyptian ship. (Or that’s what it thought it was)


11. Rather than wait for the MTBs to arrive and positively ID the
ship, the aircraft launched an attack on USS Liberty. . again in an all out war where there was supposed to be no American ships, a mistake of identification is most certainly possible.


12. The pilots of the attacking aircraft claimed that they were
unable to see the 5' by 8' red, white, and blue US flag flying
approximately 100 feet above the bridge of the ship, yet one of the
pilots stated that he saw a .50 cal machine gun, painted gray, on the
deck. . well there is big argument here but the fact is that the pilots said they didn’t see any flag!!!


13. The Israelis claim that the aircraft finally saw a U.S. flag on
Liberty at approximately 1422 and they called off the attack. . which they did.

Now I ask you if they were deliberately attacking this ship why would they then call off the attack and not just sink it as they could have if it was deliberate?????



14. At 1436, the MTBs launched a torpedo attack on USS Liberty,
launching five torpedoes, one of which hit USS Liberty amidships,
killing 25 men. .

fist of all the timing of all this is debatablle.

seconly, yes they thought an Egyptian ship was attacking them…..


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



15. The MTBs continued to circle USS Liberty, firing on the ship
until at least 1510, when they claim that they saw Liberty's US flag
for the first time. . well the fact is that they stopped once they knew it was an American ship.

Now I ask you if they were deliberately attacking this ship why would they then call off the attack and not just sink it as they could have if it was deliberate?????



16. The Israeli attack was broken off almost immediately following
an unencrypted broadcast by USS Saratoga that she had launched
aircraft to come to the aid of Liberty. . so first you say it was a long attack and now you say that they stopped because of the Americans were coming.

Well if it was a long attack and deliberate, Israel surly would have had enough time to sink it. More then enough time yet they didn’t and they stopped once they relised it was an American ship.!!!!



As I've said before, no one relishes a disagreement between friends; however, that doesn't mean a friend can piss in your face and tell you it's rain. yes I agree with that. Like I said before, if Israel maliciously attacked that ship full of Americans (if it knew they were Americans) simply because it could, well I too would have a problem with that and I too would not be defending the action’s of the idf on that day.
There simply has not been any proof to that and in fact most of it leads to a logical conclusion that it was no a malicious attack on Americans.


There is simply no
rational explanation for the attack having been anything other than
planned and deliberate. if it was deliberate as you say then there is simply no rational explanation to explain why the Israeli’s only killed 34 brave sailors and not the other 200+ and why it did not sink that ship as it could have

Also it doesn’t explain how the Israelis then sent a medivac to help treat the wounded.


Now as whether it was a cover up or not is debatable although I too have my questions??

Why would the U.S. cover it up and why would it want to if that sole aim was to help Israel??? Lets not forget that at the time of the attack, they were not allies with Israel and in fact it was an open secret that for years the state department gave secrets to the Arabs.
A fact also is that the U.S. sided with the Egyptians in the 1956 war against Israel

Another question I have is what was that spy ship doing in the theatre of battle in midst of an all out war???

Shalom. :D

[Argyll]

if it was deliberate as you say then there is simply no rational explanation to explain why the Israeli’s only killed 34 brave sailors and not the other 200+ and why it did not sink that ship as it could have


Well the cynics would say that was an easy answer...........the Saratoga's airwing were enroute.......!!!

The points XASA made are testaments from the crew of the Liberty,they all can't possibly be wrong.
All you've said is that nobody knew what was going through the Pilots minds,during a war,which at best is very confusing to say the least,whilst XASA has said these are statements made by the crew,you've used the it was all out war argument,one day the truth will come out,and it will not look good for either Government,but to dismiss the accounts of the survivors out of hand,and try to use the mind of the Pilot as an excuse is pretty thin.
Now Israel must've been able to call off the Gunboats if the planes suddenly realised their mistake,the pilots must have been in contact with somone in Israel,same as the Gunboats,yet according to testimony the Gunboats attacked after the aircraft.!I'm pretty sure that the timings XASA posted would be as accurate as could be ,and were probably taken from the ships log,all transmissions would also have been logged in the Comms room,and all these documents.along with the Israeli transcripts must be somewhere.?
I like you were not there so we can speculute as to what really happened ,the ones that were there have told their versions,but look what happened.Perhaps if you could post excerpts from the testament of the Pilots concerned,and also the Commanders of the Gunboats,then this should make things a little clearer?............Perhaps?

[alexjulian]

I think i recently saw a book on this incident and if i wasnt mistaken written by john simpson....a pompous **** of a journalist working 4 bbc

[Argyll]

Alex shut up!!
this is a serious post you moron,just like the rest of your posts they lack any credibility........all you've done here is prove you can read.!!!

[XASA]

idfm203, I think that you shouldn't mistake criticism of Israel as an attack. One has the feeling you are working in an Orwellian propaganda office dedicated to counter any statement you feel might be an aspersion on your version of events. This forum doesn't affect foreign policy nor will it ever be a factor in international events. We're really just a bunch of military afficianados looking to share information and photos; however, you act as if every post you disagree with is a State Department White Paper that has to be dismantled with point-by-point counter arguments.

As a long-time supporter of Israel, it's dialectical arguments like yours why many, including myself, find the Israeli position disheartening. So far as the Liberty is concerned, perhaps, one day soon, your leaders will decide to apologize to the crew and their families, pay damages and simply say, "Gee, we really made a bad mistake," instead of continuing with this charade of it was all the victims' fault. I've referred to books, documentaries and links that discuss this sad event in great detail. Since I'm not getting paid to write a position paper on the Liberty, I will let this thread be continued by you and perhaps others because, so far as I'm concerned, I've said what needed to be said on this issue. Till we meet again on another thread, good luck with your battle against terrorism...and lighten up dude!

[alexjulian]

mr argyll no need to get excited just saying i saw book on this subject recently (i think) and i was just imparting this with my fellow forum scribes

[Argyll]

No problems there Alex,it's just the way you put it,it's a very strong and emotive subject!

[IDFM203]

idfm203, I think that you shouldn't mistake criticism of Israel as an attack. no, valid criticism I am all for, but accusing Israel of deliberately attacking that ship without any proof is somewhat of an attack on Israel and its moral character.

Now if you show proof that Israel did as you say, then I too say its wrong. There has yet to have been any proof to that.

And the facts however don’t lead to that conclusion.




One has the feeling you are working in an Orwellian propaganda office dedicated to counter any statement you feel might be an aspersion on your version of events. so everything the Israelis or I say is propaganda? :roll: .

That same argument can be used for what you are saying as well.

Like you said this is a forum and we hash out differing opinions.

Now I brought down three theories that in the absence of any proof are the only realistic ones. Now on the third one I actually discount and I bring forth facts and sane intellectual arguments to back that up.



This forum doesn't affect foreign policy nor will it ever be a factor in international events. We're really just a bunch of military afficianados looking to share information and photos; however, you act as if every post you disagree with is a State Department White Paper that has to be dismantled with point-by-point counter arguments. I don’t want to start a flame war but I resent your condensation here and hypocrisy.

You have brought forth reams of information in here and to repond to my posts and yet when I do the same you throw this condesanding attitude at me

Listen we both are here on a forum to yes discuss military photos but also to discuss other events, I did not start this post but I have every right to respond here as do you.

You say Israel deliberately attacked that ship without offering any proof to that. That to me sounds like propaganda as well.


As a long-time supporter of Israel, it's dialectical arguments like yours why many, including myself, find the Israeli position disheartening. why because I say that most of the facts point to Israel not purposely attacking that ship.


what’s disheartening to us is that you seem to discount everything the Israeli’s or I say without even giving it much thought

That’s wrong

Please read carefully what I am saying.


So far as the Liberty is concerned, perhaps, one day soon, your leaders will decide to apologize to the crew and their families, fact: they did!!


pay damages fact: they did.



and simply say, "Gee, we really made a bad mistake," fact: they did!!!!


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


instead of continuing with this charade of it was all the victim's fault. that’s a factual lie!!

Israel said it was wrong and that it was a tragic mistake.
They did not blame the liberty crew at all.



I've referred to books, documentaries and links that discuss this sad event in great detail. Since I'm not getting paid to write a position paper on the Liberty, I will let this thread be continued by you and perhaps others because, so far as I'm concerned, I've said what needed to be said on this issue. yes I too, but I ask you to please not blindly discount anything Israel or I say as you have done.





Till we meet again on another thread, good luck with your battle against terrorism...and lighten up dude!vice versa!!!

Shalom :D

[IDFM203]

quoteif it was deliberate as you say then there is simply no rational explanation to explain why the Israeli’s only killed 34 brave sailors and not the other 200+ and why it did not sink that ship as it could have

Well the cynics would say that was an easy answer...........the Saratoga's airwing were enroute.......!!! no the cynics say the attack was a long attack. Now if Israel had set out to deliberately attacks that ship it could have destroyed it in the first or second wave.

Either way you cut it, Israel has ample time to destroy that ship before any American help would even be close.



The points XASA made are testaments from the crew of the Liberty,they all can't possibly be wrong. well the statements of the Israeli’s also all cant be wrong as well.

Again we are not arguing about the fact that Israel attacked that ship or not for it did, no what the argument is what the Israelis thought they were attacking and that the sailors cant bring anything to bear on that.



All you've said is that nobody knew what was going through the Pilots minds,during a war,which at best is very confusing to say the least, well first of all that statement is pretty straight forward.
Secondly whether who knew or not, the sailors cant say whether the pilots thought they were attacking. That’s pretty seneschal

thirdly yes things are confusing for it was an all out war. (That fog of war statement is valid whether you want to discount it or not)



whilst XASA has said these are statements made by the crew,you've used the it was all out war argument, mishaps do in fact happen in an all out war. I think that’s a pretty sensible argument indeed.

There has been no proof to prove that Israel deliberately attacked that ship.

Most facts points to other wise.


one day the truth will come out, yes and there is a possibility that the cynics of Israel might be surprised as well.



and it will not look good for either Government, well depending on what comes out, perhaps.


but to dismiss the accounts of the survivors out of hand, I haven’t dismissed them, I did in fact acknowledge that they saw an Israeli attack on them.

But you are seemingly dismissing the pilots view out of hand. (that is worng)



and try to use the mind of the Pilot as an excuse is pretty thin. please elaborate how you think that what the pilots thought was an Egyptian ship in the battle theatre in midst of an all out war, is pretty thin?


Now Israel must've been able to call off the Gunboats if the planes suddenly realised their mistake,the pilots must have been in contact with somone in Israel,same as the Gunboats,yet according to testimony the Gunboats attacked after the aircraft.! well first of all mistakes happen.

Second of all the gunboats were being attacked by that “Egyptian” ship and responded.

Yes if they knew it was an American ship they should have not fired but I don’t think they did for again if Israel was deliberately attacking that ship they could have destroyed it.


I'm pretty sure that the timings XASA posted would be as accurate as could be ,and were probably taken from the ships log,all transmissions would also have been logged in the Comms room,and all these documents.along with the Israeli transcripts must be somewhere.? yes there were transmissions…..

“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 official Israeli Air Force tape 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.5 Critics claimed the Israeli tape was doctored, but the National Security Agency of the United States released formerly top secret transcripts in July 2003 that confirmed the Israeli version.
A U.S. spy plane was sent to the area as soon as the NSA learned of the attack on the Liberty and recorded the conversations of two Israeli Air Force helicopter pilots, which took place between 2:30 and 3:37 p.m. on June 8. The orders radioed to the pilots by their supervisor at the Hatzor base instructing them to search for Egyptian survivors from the "Egyptian warship" that had just been bombed were also recorded by the NSA. "Pay attention. The ship is now identified as Egyptian," the pilots were informed. Nine minutes later, Hatzor told the pilots the ship was believed to be an Egyptian cargo ship. At 3:07, the pilots were first told the ship might not be Egyptian and were instructed to search for survivors and inform the base immediately the nationality of the first person they rescued. It was not until 3:12 that one of the pilots reported that he saw an American flag flying over the ship at which point he was instructed to verify if it was indeed a U.S. vessel.6”



I like you were not there so we can speculute as to what really happened , yes but the fact that the ship was not destroyed as Israel could have done is pretty compelling to me that it was not deliberate

But your right I was not there neither was most other people and especially all those people that claim Israel did it deliberately.

No, the only ones who were there were the liberty crew and the Israelis (pilots and torpedo boats) and they differ on what happened.

But the fact remains that the fact that the ship was not destroyed as Israel could have done and that is pretty compelling to me that it was not deliberate


Perhaps if you could post excerpts from the testament of the Pilots concerned, well I did above………….(and before in my initial postings but it is clear that you didn’t read it)




Oh and of course shalom and stay safe…. :D

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

On the subject of Israel's compensation to the US government and the victims it took two years for the survivors to obtain $20,000 and only after the men retained private counsel. The government asked Israel for $7,644,146 for the damage to the ship but did not receive any money until 1980, the amount they got was $6,000,000 without interest.
The first Israeli report after the attack said the USS Liberty had been identified as the Egyptian horse carrier El Quseir whose top speed according to Janes was 14knts.
Posssibly the only reason the Liberty stayed afloat after the sustained attack was her highly compartmentalized construction.

[IDFM203]

Wow you have a lot of interest in this case…………… :roll:
On the subject of Israel's compensation to the US government and the victims it took two years for the survivors to obtain $20,000 and only after the men retained private counsel. The government asked Israel for $7,644,146 for the damage to the ship but did not receive any money until 1980, the amount they got was $6,000,000 without interest. . yes Israel paid 6 million to the families and another 6 million later to the government of the U.S.

Now to be honest I would like to see a link for the two years..

Regardless though, Israel immediately apologized,

Now as for monetary compensation. Well as I am sure you know, governments have bureaucracies and not everything is overnight.
There were numerous investigations done by both Israel and the U.S. and those take time.

Its been a year since the Canadians were killed in Afghanistan by the U.S. did they get an apology or compensation right away?? Did they even get it at all???

There are many more such examples. These things take time.

Fact is that Israel apologized and paid compensation to the families.
If it was intentional it would never have done any such thing.




The first Israeli report after the attack said the USS Liberty had been identified as the Egyptian horse carrier El Quseir whose top speed according to Janes was 14knts. .that’s not true. It was reported as an unidentified ship.

Then when they thought it was an Egyptian one there was never any mention of that particular Egyptian ship.

Can you please show me where in those reports it says that?


Posssibly the only reason the Liberty stayed afloat after the sustained attack was her highly compartmentalized construction.that’s a very thin argument.
If Israel was attacking this ship deliberately it would have armed its planes with enough ammunition to do the job.

Israel could have defiantly sunk that ship if it wanted to.

shalom :D

[StarvingStudent47]

As a long-time supporter of Israel, it's dialectical arguments like yours why many, including myself, find the Israeli position disheartening. So far as the Liberty is concerned, perhaps, one day soon, your leaders will decide to apologize to the crew and their families, pay damages and simply say, "Gee, we really made a bad mistake," instead of continuing with this charade of it was all the victims' fault.

Israel ALREADY made a full apology for the incident and paid $13 million in reparations to the victim's families in amounts requested by the US State Department. (source) (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/liberty.html). To my knowledge, the Israeli government has NEVER claimed that the incident was the fault of the crew of the USS Liberty. They have ALWAYS called it a horrible mistake that happened in the middle of full-scale war.

Did the USA pay reparations to the Canadians we killed at that firing range in Afghanistan? I'm just curious; I don't know the answer.

[A$$MAN]

...Did the USA pay reparations to the Canadians we killed at that firing range in Afghanistan? I'm just curious; I don't know the answer.
I'm just curious; did the Israeli pilots who killed all those American saliors of the Liberty go to trial, as did the American aviators did in the Canadian case. I, also, don't know the answer.

[He219]

From a related article in the June 2003 U.S. Naval Institute Magazine 'Poceedings' (http://www.usni.org/proceedings/Articles03/PROwalsh06.htm):

http://www.usni.org/proceedings/Articles03/images03/1walsh06.jpg

What's that part in the article of honoring the attackers with a 'display' in an Israeli museum?

Anybody else think that the chopper pictured above looks like Airwolf? ;)

[GazB]

"The fact is that the liberty spyship, was in waters that was in middle of a war zone in middle of an all out war, one in which Israel was fighting for its survival…… "

The fact that the Liberty was a spy ship in a war zone is irrelevant. The Israelis have always claimed they thought it was an egyptian transport ship, so it was not seen as a direct threat.

"and thus attacked it and then when the liberty fired back it still thought that it was an Egyptian ship firing and it continued to fire at what it thought was an Egyptian ship."

The only weapons on board were two 50 cals... hardly a serious threat to a fighter.

", it wasn’t all of them as Israel could have done if it had a malice intent towards an American ship."

The attack had nothing to do with malice. It was a spy ship and it was detecting that the Israelis were intercepting Arab transmissions and altering them so that each arab group thought the other was doing better than it was with the intention to make them think their help was not needed on other fronts. The equipment used was supplied by the US on the condition that it would not be used in offense... which it clearly was. That is why the attack on the Liberty was necesary, and why subsequent enquiries have been inconclusive... the supply of NSA equipment and its use in combat, and even the secret agreement not to use it in attack but only in defence is all secret and could not be used in evidence... or even mentioned. As such there is no motivation for the Israelis to attack on purpose... therefore conclusions of it being an accident are inevidible... and wrong.

"In fact Israel has apologized for what it said was a mistake and has even paid compensation to the families of those that were killed. "

Of course it appologised... It could hardly tell the truth could it?

"What’s also important to remember was that the U.S. was not an ally of Israel and as such it wasn’t clear as to what and who th"

At this stage its friendship was covert... If there was no covert friendship at the time then why wouldn't the US retaliate?

"The third theory is that Israel out of malice (the anti Semites favourite theory) attacked the ship I guess simply because it could. "

Obviously BS.

"If Israel was into strafing Americans, it could have sunk that ship in a second or killed everyone on board."

It is actually rather hard to sink a ship with 30mm cannon fire and 68mm unguided rockets... If all 4 torpedos had hit they could have done the job, the one that did hit caused most of the fatalities.

"On the History Channel special about it "

I haven't seen that... the source of my info stated that the Israelis "identified" the Liberty correctly when the local carrier group dispatched fighters and the USS Littlerock to help.

"And from everything I've ever seen on the USS Liberty, I'm inclined to believe that it was just a very tragic friendly-fire incident. "

Spy ships rarely act like transport ships. They have tons of aerials and often remain in areas for long periods of time. The fact that the fighters sent to "sink" the transport used 30mm cannon fire and 68mm rockets is very suspicious too.

"The clear facts are that the liberty spy ship was in waters in middle of a war zone in midst of an all out war. "

In international waters near a war zone and was not obviously military.

"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. "

Hahahahahaha... Impressive... the USS Liberty has a top speed of about 16knts.

"including the Captain, Commander William McGonagle, testified that the flag was knocked down after the first or second assault."

Very interesting too... all the reports I have read claim that after missing with three of four torpedoes fired the FAC craft closed to within 800m to fire 40mm rounds point blank and while doing so saw the stars and stripes through the smoke... if it was blown down early on how did the Israelis actually identify it???

"When the Liberty began shooting at the Israelis, they responded with the torpedo attack, which killed 28 of the sailors. "

Yes, two 50 cal HMG are a deadly threat to FAC... FAC are sunk all the time by 50 cal rounds...

"Initially, the Israelis were terrified that they had attacked a Soviet ship and might have provoked the Soviets to join the fighting."

Is that why they opened fire... or did they wait and try to identify the target properly before opening fire?

"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. "

Actually when they realised help was imminent they offered a helo to help rescue those on the ship, but were told to Fk themselves by the (wounded) captain of the Liberty.

"Nine minutes later, Hatzor told the pilots the ship was believed to be an Egyptian cargo ship."

If identified initially as travelling at 28 knots I think the redesigation to cargo ship is bogus. How many cargo ships have you heard of that can do 28 knts?

"It was not until 3:12 that one of the pilots reported that he saw an American flag flying over the ship at which point he was instructed to verify if it was indeed a U.S. vessel."

Was it literally flying over the ship to land in the water... earlier you said it was blown down in the first or second attack...

"I can't identify it, but in any case it's a military ship."

It had two 50 cal guns... hat exactly identified it as a military ship??? The missile launchers that it didn't have, the gun turrets it didn't have?

"Instead he fired 30mm armor piercing rounds that led the American survivors to believe they had been under rocket attack. "

Yes, armour piercing 30mm cannon shells look like 68mm rockets... I confuse them all the time.

"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."

Contradicts: "What’s also important to remember was that the U.S. was not an ally of Israel and as such it wasn’t clear as to what and who th..."

"If Israel was knowingly maliciously attacking that ship full of Americans in could have "

It didn't want to kill Americans, but it didn't want a spy ship listening to what it was doing either... if the arab forces found out what it was doing then it would seriously effect the outcome of the war... if Israel lost it wouldn't matter whether the Liberty sailors died or not (to the Israelis of course...)

"2. USS Liberty carried no offensive armament and only four .50 cal.
machine guns as a defense against boarders. "

It was my understanding that there were only two.

"The U.S. liberty is a battle spy ship!!!"

An EP-3 is a "battle spy plane" yet had no weapons whatsoever.

"if it was deliberate as you say then there is simply no rational explanation to explain why the Israeli’s only killed 34 brave sailors and not the other 200+ and why it did not sink that ship as it could have"

They wanted it to go away, not kill it. If fighter aircraft really were after a ship bombarding the shore then at least bombs would be carried and much more likely anti ship missiles would have been used.
No amount of 30mm cannon fire will sink a decent sized ship.

"Also it doesn’t explain how the Israelis then sent a medivac to help treat the wounded. "

They didn't want dead Americans, they wanted Americans that weren't doing what they were doing... ie snooping.

"Why would the U.S. cover it up and why would it want to if that sole aim was to help Israel??? Lets not forget that at the time of the attack, they were not allies with Israel and in fact it was an open secret that for years the state department gave secrets to the Arabs."

Refer above to the quote you included about the US being Israels only ally in the world. The US covered it up because the equipment and tactics used were the same as the US was intending to use against the Soviets... the onyl thing the Israelis did wrong was violate the secret agreement not to use it in attack.

"Now if Israel had set out to deliberately attacks that ship it could have destroyed it in the first or second wave.

Either way you cut it, Israel has ample time to destroy that ship before any American help would even be close. "

The armament carried by the fighters suggests that there was no intention to sink the ship.

[Argyll]

He 219
A very very interesting post thank you for sharing!
This Judge is a complete and utter sphincter!!

[IDFM203]

"The fact is that the liberty spyship, was in waters that was in middle of a war zone in middle of an all out war, one in which Israel was fighting for its survival…… "

The fact that the Liberty was a spy ship in a war zone is irrelevant. The Israelis have always claimed they thought it was an egyptian transport ship, so it was not seen as a direct threat. .that’s factually false!!

They thought it was an Egyptian war ship.

You please show me a credible Israeli link where they claim that????

.

"and thus attacked it and then when the liberty fired back it still thought that it was an Egyptian ship firing and it continued to fire at what it thought was an Egyptian ship."

The only weapons on board were two 50 cals... hardly a serious threat to a fighter. .ahhh yes we know this now. But at the time the pilots did not know that and besides it was a war and that ship was thought to be an Egyptian one.



", it wasn’t all of them as Israel could have done if it had a malice intent towards an American ship."

The attack had nothing to do with malice. It was a spy ship and it was detecting that the Israelis were intercepting Arab transmissions and altering them so that each arab group thought the other was doing better than it was with the intention to make them think their help was not needed on other fronts. The equipment used was supplied by the US on the condition that it would not be used in offense... which it clearly was. That is why the attack on the Liberty was necesary, and why subsequent enquiries have been inconclusive... the supply of NSA equipment and its use in combat, and even the secret agreement not to use it in attack but only in defence is all secret and could not be used in evidence... or even mentioned. As such there is no motivation for the Israelis to attack on purpose... therefore conclusions of it being an accident are inevidible... and wrong. .well this is all thoery and is your (and a few others) theory.

Can you prove this one??? I don’t think so.

You just brought one theory amongst many that cant be proven,

Incidentally I spoke of this as my second theory if you go back to my first post.

Oh so now you are saying that the liberty spy ship was spying on Israel during an all out war?????



"In fact Israel has apologized for what it said was a mistake and has even paid compensation to the families of those that were killed. "

Of course it appologised... It could hardly tell the truth could it? . well there is no proof to anything so I guess we can go round and round with the apology. But the fact is that Israel paid reparations and in fact after that war the U.S. all of a sudden become overt allies whereas they should have remained like it was before the war (when they were not allies)if Israel deliberately attacked that ship.



"What’s also important to remember was that the U.S. was not an ally of Israel and as such it wasn’t clear as to what and who th"

At this stage its friendship was covert... If there was no covert friendship at the time then why wouldn't the US retaliate? . first of all I am curious of that my self but for differing reasons.

Second of all no, the friendship was overt perhaps for years but the allies status just came after the war. Israel had that victory and become powerful mostly from the help of the French. The U.S. only become Israel’s military supplier after the 1967 war.!!!!

.

"The third theory is that Israel out of malice (the anti Semites favourite theory) attacked the ship I guess simply because it could. "

Obviously BS. .at least you put forth that the U.S. was spying on Israel in the time of an all out war (albeit you put your spin on how it was doing it).

A lot of people simply say Israel did this simply because it could.


"If Israel was into strafing Americans, it could have sunk that ship in a second or killed everyone on board."

It is actually rather hard to sink a ship with 30mm cannon fire and 68mm unguided rockets... If all 4 torpedos had hit they could have done the job, the one that did hit caused most of the fatalities. . yes your right for that’s what it had on board.

The point is though that if Israel was doing this deliberate it would have armed its planes and torpedo boats with the requisite arms to do the job.


"On the History Channel special about it "

I haven't seen that... the source of my info stated that the Israelis "identified" the Liberty correctly when the local carrier group dispatched fighters and the USS Littlerock to help. . Israel identified that ship when they did and then they ceased fire. This whole notion that they stopped because of the impending U.S. responses is extremely thin for if this was deliberate Israel surly could have done it in the amount of time that they were attacking that ship.

.

"And from everything I've ever seen on the USS Liberty, I'm inclined to believe that it was just a very tragic friendly-fire incident. "

Spy ships rarely act like transport ships. They have tons of aerials and often remain in areas for long periods of time. The fact that the fighters sent to "sink" the transport used 30mm cannon fire and 68mm rockets is very suspicious too. . wow now that is spin at its purest.

No. Israel did not for a while identify that ship as some transport ship

They thought it was an Egyptian war ship.

And the torpados were already in the water with their regular mission.




"The clear facts are that the liberty spy ship was in waters in middle of a war zone in midst of an all out war. "

In international waters near a war zone and was not obviously military. .no it was in the battle theatre of which Israel had said to stay away 100 miles away (for precisely these mishaps)
-Exerpt from Israeli Attack on U.S. Ship Reveals Failure of C3 by James M. Ennes, Jr, the crypto specialist and Deck Officer of the USS Liberty, in Electronics Defense Mag. in 1981
"The United States made several serious, almost frantic attempts to move the ship. As the Liberty approached Gaza, the Joint Chiefs of Staff first sent a priority message ordering the ship to move 20 miles from the coast; the message was swamped by higher precedence traffic and was not processed until long after the crisis had ended. Hours later, a JCS duty officer phoned naval headquarters in London to relay an urgent JCS order to move the ship 100 miles from the coast; the telephone call was ignored, and Liberty's copy of the confirming message was misrouted to the Philipines before being returned to the Pentagon, where it was again misrouted, this time to Fort Meade in Maryland, where it was lost."
"Eventually, at least six critical messages were lost, delayed, or otherwise mishandled. Any one of those messages might have saved Liberty. None reached the ship."


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. "

Hahahahahaha... Impressive... the USS Liberty has a top speed of about 16knts.
Haaa that’s one of the mistakes. Yes we know now that it was not sailing at 28 knots but that is not what the pilots thought at first.




"including the Captain, Commander William McGonagle, testified that the flag was knocked down after the first or second assault."

Very interesting too... all the reports I have read claim that after missing with three of four torpedoes fired the FAC craft closed to within 800m to fire 40mm rounds point blank and while doing so saw the stars and stripes through the smoke... if it was blown down early on how did the Israelis actually identify it??? what does that mean all the reports YOU read (not to disrespect you but you make it sound like you have high access here or something)???
Well this is from one of the reports…
“The torpedo boats gave chase, but even at their maximum speed of 36 knots, they did not expect to overtake their target before it reached Egypt. Rahav therefore alerted the air force, and two Mirage III fighters were diverted from the Suez Canal, northeast to the sea. When they arrived, the vessel they saw was "gray with two guns in the forecastle, a mast and funnel." Making two passes at 3,000 feet, formation commander Capt. Spector (IDF records do not provide pilots' first names) reckoned that the ship was a "Z" or Hunt-class destroyer without the deck markings (a white cross on a red background) of the Israeli navy. Spector then spoke with air force commander Gen. Motti Hod, who asked him repeatedly whether he could see a flag. The answer was "Negative." Nor were there any distinguishing marks other than some "black letters" painted on the hull.”


"When the Liberty began shooting at the Israelis, they responded with the torpedo attack, which killed 28 of the sailors. "

Yes, two 50 cal HMG are a deadly threat to FAC... FAC are sunk all the time by 50 cal rounds... they thought it was an Egyptian ship firing at them

Very conceivable being that this was in middle of an all out war!!!! And the ship was in the battle theatre.


"Initially, the Israelis were terrified that they had attacked a Soviet ship and might have provoked the Soviets to join the fighting."

Is that why they opened fire... or did they wait and try to identify the target properly before opening fire? this was a war and they for the most part identified it as an Egyptian ship. Now some at headquarters thought that afterwards while other’s stayed with the Egyptian ship, but no one thought it was an American one.



"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. "

Actually when they realised help was imminent they offered a helo to help rescue those on the ship, but were told to Fk themselves by the (wounded) captain of the Liberty. well I never read that but I understand if that happened (the captin telling to f/k off), but the fact is that Israel offered and was accepted by the U.S. and it did send over a medivac.




"Nine minutes later, Hatzor told the pilots the ship was believed to be an Egyptian cargo ship."

If identified initially as travelling at 28 knots I think the redesigation to cargo ship is bogus. How many cargo ships have you heard of that can do 28 knts? well in the midst of the attack he didn’t have the luxury to do Monday morning quarterbacking as you are doing now. They first identified it as an Egyptian war ship and then later as a cargo ship. I can almost promise you that in the heat of the war and in this ensuing battle 9 minutes later the pilot wasn’t doing those 28 knots calculations and besides it was an “Egyptian” ship!!


Secondly that’s a f/k up now but that’s the whole point. It was a tragic mistake. It was an all out war and these mistakes happen. There were plenty of Israeli’s that were killed by other Israelis as well.

Friendly fire happens in all out wars. Misidentifications happens as well.


It was not until 3:12 that one of the pilots reported that he saw an American flag flying over the ship at which point he was instructed to verify if it was indeed a U.S. vessel."

Was it literally flying over the ship to land in the water... earlier you said it was blown down in the first or second attack... no the flag was replaced in middle by a bigger holiday one and after (it was shredded in the attack, which the pilots did not see) smoke had cleared then it was identified.


"I can't identify it, but in any case it's a military ship."

It had two 50 cal guns... hat exactly identified it as a military ship??? The missile launchers that it didn't have, the gun turrets it didn't have? battle spy ships look like military ones.

What am I saying, they are military ships……



"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."

Contradicts: "What’s also important to remember was that the U.S. was not an ally of Israel and as such it wasn’t clear as to what and who th..." no I didn’t contradict anything. If you go back and read what I wrote. I said there is no concrete proof to anything. Therefore I brought down three theories as to what happened and as such I have brought down facts or arguments to prove or disprove them

Now this article (which supports the fist theory) says friend. Yes the U.S. was a friend but it was no ally. (that’s not semantics but a rather big distinction)


"If Israel was knowingly maliciously attacking that ship full of Americans in could have "

It didn't want to kill Americans, but it didn't want a spy ship listening to what it was doing either... if the arab forces found out what it was doing then it would seriously effect the outcome of the war... if Israel lost it wouldn't matter whether the Liberty sailors died or not (to the Israelis of course...) this is for my second theory…

So you say that the liberty spy ship was spying on Israel and that if successful Israel would be destroyed… hmm very interesting indeed.

I mean your suggesting here that if the liberty spyship was successful and the Arabs found out (how?? Oh because the U.S. would tell them) then 3 and a half million Jews would die.

Interesting theory indeed…………


"2. USS Liberty carried no offensive armament and only four .50 cal.
machine guns as a defense against boarders. "

It was my understanding that there were only two. I mean no disrespect but your understanding???

No, reports indicate 4……


"The U.S. liberty is a battle spy ship!!!"

An EP-3 is a "battle spy plane" yet had no weapons whatsoever. yes we know this now but the pilots thought it was an Egyptian ship period!! This was an all out war and generally there was no “cargo” or commerce ships going on now.

No, the Israelis thought at first it was an Egyptian war ship.


"if it was deliberate as you say then there is simply no rational explanation to explain why the Israeli’s only killed 34 brave sailors and not the other 200+ and why it did not sink that ship as it could have"

They wanted it to go away, not kill it. If fighter aircraft really were after a ship bombarding the shore then at least bombs would be carried and much more likely anti ship missiles would have been used.
No amount of 30mm cannon fire will sink a decent sized ship. yes interesting here. So you actually are supporting my second theory which a lot of the members (as well as a lot of pople) here disagree with as well (I don’t mean the Jewish one’s) for a lot believe that the ship was strong and that’s why it wasn’t sunk (although like said before and like you say here, that’s a pretty weak argument)


"Also it doesn’t explain how the Israelis then sent a medivac to help treat the wounded. "

They didn't want dead Americans, they wanted Americans that weren't doing what they were doing... ie snooping. you have proof of that??
That’s your theory.

No Israel sent a medivac to help the wounded.


"Why would the U.S. cover it up and why would it want to if that sole aim was to help Israel??? Lets not forget that at the time of the attack, they were not allies with Israel and in fact it was an open secret that for years the state department gave secrets to the Arabs."

Refer above to the quote you included about the US being Israels only ally in the world. The US covered it up because the equipment and tactics used were the same as the US was intending to use against the Soviets... the onyl thing the Israelis did wrong was violate the secret agreement not to use it in attack. that’s such a weak argument.

In fact I would think based on what you wrote that they covered it up to hide that they were spying on Israel.


"Now if Israel had set out to deliberately attacks that ship it could have destroyed it in the first or second wave.

Either way you cut it, Israel has ample time to destroy that ship before any American help would even be close. "

The armament carried by the fighters suggests that there was no intention to sink the ship.wow we agree on this!!!!!!

Shalom. :D

[He219]

Read This (http://www.usni.org/proceedings/Articles03/PROwalsh06.htm):

But instead of punishing the attackers, Israel honors them in a museum. Told of the display, retired Air Force Major General John Morrison, NSA deputy director for operations at the time, commented, "I am offended by that." And retired Army Lieutenant General William Odom, NSA director from 1985 to 1988, and also unaware of the display, remarked, "I am astonished that Israel should put glory on the people who killed my SigInt-ers [signals intelligence personnel]."10 The Liberty's blood-stained flag is exhibited at the National Cryptologic Museum
Verification requested. Thanks!

p-)

[IDFM203]

I haven’t verified that.
Now these pilots fought bravely in that war (and in others) and (if) Israel was honouring them for that. No way in hell was it honouring them for their MISTAKE with the liberty.


Read THIS (http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/liberty1.html)for a more comprehensive investigation of what happened

[He219]

Thanks idfm203. I already read that (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/liberty.html) reference StarvingStudent gave earlier. The Naval Institute Report Jives with all the data given in the Jewish Virtual library. The tone of the two is clearly opposite. I wish the USNI would have stated which museum when making such a bold statement.

Have a great day!

[IDFM203]

Thanks idfm203. I already read that (http://www.operations.mod.uk/telic/images/ops/16bde_216drs_tn.jpg) reference StarvingStudent gave earlier. The Naval Institute Report Jives with all the data given in the Jewish Virtual library. The tone of the two is clearly opposite. I wish the USNI would have stated which museum when making such a bold statement.

Have a great day!
No my reference is not the same as what starving student gave.

It’s the same site but not the same reference at all (its much more comprehensive)


About the museum, I again refer you to what I said (my post above)before if in fact they are in a museum.

shalom :D

[He219]

:oops:

Didn't see the 'Case Closed' part. Thanks!

:D

[IDFM203]

No problem.


btw that link that you changed in your post above is to my link and not to starving students as you said you are referring to (if you can please change it [again] to his link so other members dont get confused here).

Shalom. :D

[GazB]

that’s factually false!!

They thought it was an Egyptian war ship.

You please show me a credible Israeli link where they claim that????

Sure, as soon as you can show me a Nazi link that proves the Holocaust happened.


ahhh yes we know this now. But at the time the pilots did not know that and besides it was a war and that ship was thought to be an Egyptian one.

So you are suggesting that the heavily armed Liberty opened fire first?
Excellent logic. Open fire and if they fire back then that is confirmation that they were hostile. Genius.


"Can you prove this one??? I don’t think so.
You just brought one theory amongst many that cant be proven,"

Makes sense to me. Certainly more sense than the "accident" theory. If the Isrealis were really called out to find and stop an enemy ship that was bombarding a coastal position they would hardly send aircraft armed with light unguided missiles and cannon.


Oh so now you are saying that the liberty spy ship was spying on Israel during an all out war?????

So what? If they were passing secrets to your enemies then that would be an act of war, but there is no evidence they did that.
The Russians had A-50 AWACS aircraft monitoring allied forces air actions during Desert Storm... no one tried to shoot them down.


yes your right for that’s what it had on board.

The point is though that if Israel was doing this deliberate it would have armed its planes and torpedo boats with the requisite arms to do the job.

The point is that if you send a plane out to attack a ship that is bombarding a coastal position then you have to assume that the target is probably armoured. 30mm cannon and 68mm rockets would do FA to an armoured ship with guns the calibre required for shore bombardment.

The armament choice makes more sense if you are going out to hassle a spyship and make it stop doing what it was doing and leave the area


at least you put forth that the U.S. was spying on Israel in the time of an all out war (albeit you put your spin on how it was doing it).

A lot of people simply say Israel did this simply because it could.


The Theory I mentioned logically explains the incident and the subsequent trials. If all the trials had shown that it was an accident then why were there so many trials?

"No. Israel did not for a while identify that ship as some transport ship
They thought it was an Egyptian war ship. "

Protecting a secret use of equipment I can understand. The ineptitude of sending cannon and light rocket armed fighters against a warship I can't understand. Israelis aren't morons. 30mm cannon fire and 68mm rockets wouldn't take out very many warships no matter how accurate they are. A ship capable of effective shore bombardment will be capable of taking out a couple of torpedo boats... it all sounds like a really bad joke, unless they knew what they were going out for (ie the aircraft). If they thought it was an enemy warship then at least a destroyer would be called for support, and bombs and Anti ship missiles would be loaded, not light rockets and unguided torpedos.

"what does that mean all the reports YOU read (not to disrespect you but you make it sound like you have high access here or something)??? "

I don't but a friend of mine does...

"they thought it was an Egyptian ship firing at them
Very conceivable being that this was in middle of an all out war!!!! And the ship was in the battle theatre."

The first torpedos were launched at 1.2km... at that range 50 cal rounds have no where near the effect of the FACs 40mm bofors guns.


They first identified it as an Egyptian war ship and then later as a cargo ship. I can almost promise you that in the heat of the war and in this ensuing battle 9 minutes later the pilot wasn’t doing those 28 knots calculations and besides it was an “Egyptian” ship!!


And when it was identified as an Egyptian cargo ship why did they engage it. I thought their mission was to find the Egyptian warship that was bombarding coastal positions? Wasn't that the priority target?


battle spy ships look like military ones.

What am I saying, they are military ships……

Bull****. A Battle spy ship then for the US was a civilian ship with a **** load of aerials on board. Currently... largely as a result of the Israeli attack and a few other incidents a US spyship is a nuclear attack sub or a modified destroyer.

"So you say that the liberty spy ship was spying on Israel and that if successful Israel would be destroyed… hmm very interesting indeed. "

No, if it was successful then there would be retribution from the US, but it is very unlikely they would go public... the whole reason it was secret in the first place is because they didn't want such things to be public.


yes we know this now but the pilots thought it was an Egyptian ship period!! This was an all out war and generally there was no “cargo” or commerce ships going on now.

No, the Israelis thought at first it was an Egyptian war ship.

They were supposed to be looking for a ship bombarding the coast, why waste ammo on this vessel... just note its position and go and find what they were sent to find... especially as they couldn't identify it properly. There is no reason why it couldn't have been a Soviet or even European vessel leaving the area... fog of war and all.

"for a lot believe that the ship was strong and that’s why it wasn’t sunk (although like said before and like you say here, that’s a pretty weak argument) "

Cargo ships (which is what Liberty was based on) consist of large open cargo areas and very small machinery areas at the extreme rear. Experience in the gulf shows that oil tankers are very difficult to sink even with anti ship missiles as there is little in them to burn... ie ammo or large amounts of fuel etc etc.

"you have proof of that??
That’s your theory. "

If they wanted dead Americans why didn't they use bombs or anti ship missiles?

"In fact I would think based on what you wrote that they covered it up to hide that they were spying on Israel. "

It is well known that Israel spies on the US and the US spies on Israel and its other allies too. Have you never heard of Echelon?




I said: The armament carried by the fighters suggests that there was no intention to sink the ship."
You said:
"wow we agree on this!!!!!!"

That just proves that the story of the fighters being sent to engage an egyptian vessel engaged in shore bombardment was bogus. It also suggests that they knew the vessel wasn't egyptian as they would have no qualms about sinking an egyptian vessel.

[He219]

He 219
A very very interesting post thank you for sharing!
This Judge is a complete and utter sphincter!!

Thanks, Argyll! :D

To be fair to both sides of the argument, read his rebuttal here (http://www.thelibertyincident.com/walsh-response.htm).

I'm partial to the Naval Institute's account.....

:D

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

idfm203 you asked me on a post to provide a link for the time it took Israel to pay compensation to survivors, their is no link that I am aware of on this subject but the document from which this information is quoted is titled United States Naval Proceedings (June 1978)
I hope this is of some use to you.

[IDFM203]

that’s factually false!!

They thought it was an Egyptian war ship.

You please show me a credible Israeli link where they claim that????

Sure, as soon as you can show me a Nazi link that proves the Holocaust happened. figures, you sound like a holocaust denier and as such you would defiantly have no qualms about making this theory up. :|
(What a stupid answer you gave :roll: )

ahhh yes we know this now. But at the time the pilots did not know that and besides it was a war and that ship was thought to be an Egyptian one.

So you are suggesting that the heavily armed Liberty opened fire first?
Excellent logic. Open fire and if they fire back then that is confirmation that they were hostile. Genius. no, have you read what I wrote???

The Israeli pilots opened fire first on an Egyptian “war ship” where there is no need for them to fire on anyone to give any excuse to be fired on for this was in middle of an all out war!!! But the torpedo boats were first attacked by the liberty when they came on the scene a bit later.


"Can you prove this one??? I don’t think so.
You just brought one theory amongst many that cant be proven,"

Makes sense to me. Certainly more sense than the "accident" theory. If the Isrealis were really called out to find and stop an enemy ship that was bombarding a coastal position they would hardly send aircraft armed with light unguided missiles and cannon. no it doesn’t prove that. All it proves is that Israel scrambled those planes without any initial planning for an attack. Meaning it wasn’t planned as any deliberate attack but rather a emergency call after the navy realised it couldn’t catch that ship with its torpedo boats and thus quickly scrambled those jets that were already in the air without the requisite armament to destroy the ship.

“Then, at 11:24, a terrific explosion rocked the shores of El-Arish. The blast was clearly heard by the men on the Liberty's bridge, who had been navigating according to the town's tallest minaret, and who also noted a thick pall of smoke wafting toward them. In El-Arish itself, Israeli forces were convinced they were being bombarded from the sea, and the IDF Southern Command reported sighting two unidentified vessels close offshore. Though the explosion probably resulted from an ammunition dump fire, that fact was unknown at the time, and both Egyptian and Israeli sources had reported shelling of the area by Egyptian warships the previous day. There was therefore good reason to conclude that the Egyptian navy had trained its guns on Sinai.21
Minutes after the explosion, the Liberty reached the eastern limit of its patrol and turned 238 degrees back in the direction of Port Said. Meanwhile, reports of a naval bombardment on El-Arish continued to reach IDF General Staff Headquarters in Tel Aviv. Rabin took them seriously, concerned that the shelling was a prelude to an amphibious landing that could outflank advancing Israeli troops. He reiterated the standing order to sink any unidentified ships in the war area, but also advised caution: Soviet vessels were reportedly operating nearby. Since no fighter planes were available, the navy was asked to intercede, with the assumption that air cover would be provided later. More than half an hour passed without any response from naval headquarters in Haifa. The General Staff finally issued a rebuke: "The coast is being shelled and you - the navy - have done nothing."22 Capt. Izzy Rahav, who had replaced Lunz in the operations room, needed no more prodding. He dispatched three torpedo boats of the 914th squadron, code-named "Pagoda," to find the enemy vessel responsible for the bombardment and destroy it. The time was 12:05 p.m.
At 1:41 p.m., Ensign Aharon Yifrah, combat information officer aboard the flagship of these torpedo boats, T-204, informed its captain, Cmdr. Moshe Oren,23 that an unidentified ship had been sighted northeast of El-Arish at a range of 22 miles. The ship was sailing toward Egypt at a speed, Yifrah estimated, of 30 knots.
Yifrah's assessment, twice recalculated and confirmed by him, was pivotal. It meant that the ship could not be the Liberty, whose maximum speed was 18 knots. Moreover, the Israelis had standing orders to fire on any unknown vessel in the area sailing at over 20 knots, a speed which, at that time, could only be attained by fighting ships. This information, when added to the ship's direction, indicated that the target was an enemy destroyer fleeing toward port after having shelled El-Arish.
The torpedo boats gave chase, but even at their maximum speed of 36 knots, they did not expect to overtake their target before it reached Egypt. Rahav therefore alerted the air force, and two Mirage III fighters were diverted from the Suez Canal, northeast to the sea. When they arrived, the vessel they saw was "gray with two guns in the forecastle, a mast and funnel." Making two passes at 3,000 feet, formation commander Capt. Spector (IDF records do not provide pilots' first names) reckoned that the ship was a "Z" or Hunt-class destroyer without the deck markings (a white cross on a red background) of the Israeli navy. Spector then spoke with air force commander Gen. Motti Hod, who asked him repeatedly whether he could see a flag. The answer was "Negative." Nor were there any distinguishing marks other than some "black letters" painted on the hull”.


Oh so now you are saying that the liberty spy ship was spying on Israel during an all out war?????

So what? If they were passing secrets to your enemies then that would be an act of war, but there is no evidence they did that. well first of all that’s what you were suggesting.

Second of all if they were passing secrets to Israel’s enemy in middle of an all out war, then that’s a bigger deal then your mere so what?? That potentially could cost the lives of 3 and half million Jews. That’s more then a so what (well maybe not to you but it sure is to me).

In fact I too am more interested now in knowing what the U.S. knows more then what Israel potentially knows……


yes your right for that’s what it had on board.

The point is though that if Israel was doing this deliberate it would have armed its planes and torpedo boats with the requisite arms to do the job.

The point is that if you send a plane out to attack a ship that is bombarding a coastal position then you have to assume that the target is probably armoured. 30mm cannon and 68mm rockets would do FA to an armoured ship with guns the calibre required for shore bombardment. ok so we both agree israel didn’t want to sink or kill any americans here

Now as for this mere strafing argument, all I can say is that was in middle of a war and these planes were flying missions all the time with these types of weapons.

Like I said above, these planes were scrambled from the air and were thus already not properly armed to sink a ship.


The armament choice makes more sense if you are going out to hassle a spyship and make it stop doing what it was doing and leave the area well the armament makes sense to be on those planes for a lot of other reasons as well. This was an all out war where these planes were flying missions all day. It wasn’t like in peace time and then Israel had all day to arm them with the requisite arms in order to do something deliberate.

Again these planes were scrambled from its normal missions to come to the scene.

Secondly, so again you contend that the ship was spying on Israel??

I mean how else do you explain that ship being in those waters?????



at least you put forth that the U.S. was spying on Israel in the time of an all out war (albeit you put your spin on how it was doing it).

A lot of people simply say Israel did this simply because it could.


The Theory I mentioned logically explains the incident and the subsequent trials. If all the trials had shown that it was an accident then why were there so many trials? you got to be kidding me. rofl That’s simply hilarious. rofl I mean you basing your proof that it wasn’t an accident because there were many different investigations on this JEWISH ship attacking an American one.

In May 1987, in the Gulf, the USS Stark was accidentally hit by Iraqi warplanes, killing 37 servicemen. I didn’t see many investigations to see if this wasn’t an accident or not gee I can only wonder as to why??

There are a few more worse horrible “mistakes” that have gotten less attention or investigations then this one Jewish mistake.

I can only wonder why :roll:


"No. Israel did not for a while identify that ship as some transport ship
They thought it was an Egyptian war ship. "

Protecting a secret use of equipment I can understand. ……let me understand this correctly. Israel is fighting an all out war for its survival, and then because of “alleged uses of secret equipment” it would potentially want to bring the U.S. into this war :roll: …I don’t think so!!.

You would figure that if that were true it would be better for the U.S. to find out then actually attack its ship which is a declaration of war.

Besides, even if they attack that ship, it is most plausible that wasn’t going to prevent the U.S. from knowing if Israel was using “secret equipment” or not for as we see, here you are after the ship was accidentally (you believe deliberate) attacked and yet you are talking about “secret equipment”.


"what does that mean all the reports YOU read (not to disrespect you but you make it sound like you have high access here or something)??? "

I don't but a friend of mine does... ……oh so you have your “friend sitting next to you ‘whispering” in “very privy” information into your ear now…..oookkkk :roll: …………….


"they thought it was an Egyptian ship firing at them
Very conceivable being that this was in middle of an all out war!!!! And the ship was in the battle theatre."

The first torpedos were launched at 1.2km... at that range 50 cal rounds have no where near the effect of the FACs 40mm bofors guns. …… no you don’t know where they were launched from. Reports indicate that the torpedoes got on scene and were fired upon. They returned fire. period!!
“Meanwhile, the Israeli torpedo boats came within range. The Liberty was shrouded in smoke, but even so, Oren could see that it could not be the destroyer that had supposedly shelled El-Arish. Rather, he believed, it was a slower-moving vessel that had either serviced that destroyer or evacuated enemy soldiers from the beach. At 6,000 meters, Oren's T-204 flagship paused and signaled "AA" - "identify yourself." Due to damaged equipment, McGonagle could only reply in kind, AA, with a hand-held Aldis lamp.28 Oren remembered receiving a similar response from the Egyptian destroyer Ibrahim al-Awwal, captured by the Israeli navy in the 1956 war, and was sure that he now faced an enemy ship. Consulting his naval intelligence manual, he concluded that the vessel in front of him - its deck line, midship bridge and smokestack - resembled the Egyptian freighter El-Quseir. The officers of the other two boats reached the same conclusion independently, and followed Oren into battle formation.29
Any lingering doubts were soon dispelled as the Israeli boats came under sudden fire from the Liberty. Unaware of McGonagle's order not to shoot at the approaching boats, a sailor had opened up with one of the Brownings. Another machine gun also fired, apparently on its own, triggered by exploding ammunition. Oren repeatedly requested permission from naval headquarters to return fire. Rahav finally approved. 30 “




And when it was identified as an Egyptian cargo ship why did they engage it. I thought their mission was to find the Egyptian warship that was bombarding coastal positions? Wasn't that the priority target? yes and they thought that this was it. They thought it was a cargo ship only near the end.


“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 official Israeli Air Force tape 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.5 Critics claimed the Israeli tape was doctored, but the National Security Agency of the United States released formerly top secret transcripts in July 2003 that confirmed the Israeli version.
A U.S. spy plane was sent to the area as soon as the NSA learned of the attack on the Liberty and recorded the conversations of two Israeli Air Force helicopter pilots, which took place between 2:30 and 3:37 p.m. on June 8. The orders radioed to the pilots by their supervisor at the Hatzor base instructing them to search for Egyptian survivors from the "Egyptian warship" that had just been bombed were also recorded by the NSA. "Pay attention. The ship is now identified as Egyptian," the pilots were informed. Nine minutes later, Hatzor told the pilots the ship was believed to be an Egyptian cargo ship. At 3:07, the pilots were first told the ship might not be Egyptian and were instructed to search for survivors and inform the base immediately the nationality of the first person they rescued. It was not until 3:12 that one of the pilots reported that he saw an American flag flying over the ship at which point he was instructed to verify if it was indeed a U.S. vessel.6”



battle spy ships look like military ones.

What am I saying, they are military ships……

Bull****. A Battle spy ship then for the US was a civilian ship with a **** load of aerials on board. Currently... largely as a result of the Israeli attack and a few other incidents a US spyship is a nuclear attack sub or a modified destroyer. …… first of all that ship did not look like a civilian ship!!

Secondly, yes we know this now and on close inspection, heck this was part of the mistake.
Misidentification happens all the time in all out wars……
"...Mistakes are not uncommon in war. The day before the Liberty was attacked, Israeli warplanes bombed and strafed an Israeli armored column near Jenin in the West Bank. During the Lebanese war, in June 1982, over 20 Israeli servicemen were killed when a Phantom jet pilot mistakenly identified Israeli tanks as Syrian. In May 1987, in the Gulf, the USS Stark was accidentally hit by Iraqi warplanes, killing 37 servicemen. An Iranian civilian airliner was shot down by an over-anxious American battleship crew in May 1988, killing all 290 passengers on board. So it was with the Liberty, an American spy ship, that should not have been where it was, when it was."



"So you say that the liberty spy ship was spying on Israel and that if successful Israel would be destroyed… hmm very interesting indeed. "

No, if it was successful then there would be retribution from the US, I don’t know if you mean retribution from the U.S. populace on the U.S. government for spying on the tiny Jewish state in a time of an all out war, but that’s a moot point now for if indeed that ship was compromising Israel’s security by passing information on to the Arabs and thus endangering the lives of over 3 and a half million Jews then that’s a bigger problem indeed.

Like I said again, I too would love to hear what the U.S. knows if indeed does knw, that it did not yet disclose.


But it is very unlikely they would go public... the whole reason it was secret in the first place is because they didn't want such things to be public. yes makes sense if that’s true, that they wouldn’t want another “holocaust” or a destruction of Israel or damaging it, to go public with the help of their involvement.


"for a lot believe that the ship was strong and that’s why it wasn’t sunk (although like said before and like you say here, that’s a pretty weak argument) "

Cargo ships (which is what Liberty was based on) consist of large open cargo areas and very small machinery areas at the extreme rear. Experience in the gulf shows that oil tankers are very difficult to sink even with anti ship missiles as there is little in them to burn... ie ammo or large amounts of fuel etc etc. . again they didnt suspect it as a cargo ship when they were firing at it. They thought it was an Egyptian war ship and were trying to do as much damage to it but they did not have the requisite armaments to do the job completely and then when they identified it as an American ship they ceased fire.


"you have proof of that??
That’s your theory. "

If they wanted dead Americans why didn't they use bombs or anti ship missiles? . yes exactly we agree on this.


"In fact I would think based on what you wrote that they covered it up to hide that they were spying on Israel. "

It is well known that Israel spies on the US and the US spies on Israel and its other allies too. Have you never heard of Echelon? . it is a reality in this world that all friendly nations spy on all friendly nations. So this we agree on.

I said: The armament carried by the fighters suggests that there was no intention to sink the ship."
You said:
"wow we agree on this!!!!!!"

That just proves that the story of the fighters being sent to engage an egyptian vessel engaged in shore bombardment was bogus. .no its just proves that they were scrambled without any deliberate planning.


It also suggests that they knew the vessel wasn't egyptian as they would have no qualms about sinking an egyptian vessel.which they tried to do but was unsuccessful do to the lack of proper armaments.

Shalom. :D

[walford]

Below is what my organization's founder has to say on the subject:


http://www.aim.org/publications/weekly_column/2003/10/24.html

The U.S.S. Liberty Bombshell
By Reed Irvine

On June 8, 1967, the U.S.S. Liberty, then the worlds most sophisticated intelligence-gathering ship, came under attack in the eastern Mediterranean. After a two-hour attack by planes and torpedo boats, 70 percent of its 294-man crew were either dead or wounded. The attack was launched by a friendly country, Israel, which three days earlier had begun its six-day war with Egypt and was preparing to invade Syria the next day. The Chronicle of the 20th Century, which records newsworthy events briefly in chronological order, says for its entry on June 8, 1967, Sinai: Israelis accidentally attack U.S. ship, killing 10 and injuring 100. That reflects the inadequate and inaccurate reporting by the news media at the time of the attack.

This deplorable incident has festered like a infected wound for 36 years. Israel insisted that its pilots mistook the Liberty for an Egyptian freighter, a claim that those members of the crew who survived the attack deride. They charge that the Israelis conducted aerial surveillance of the Liberty for six hours before they attacked it. They and others familiar with the ship say that it was flying a large American flag, which was replaced by an even larger flag when it was destroyed by the attackers.

They also point out that the claim that the ship was mistaken for an old Egyptian freighter is absurd. As an intelligence ship it was loaded with antennas and carried a large satellite dish on an elevated structure near the stern. It was four times as large as the old Egyptian freighter, and its identification numbers were painted on the bow in white letters 10 feet high. If the numbers couldn'tt be seen by the Israeli pilots, they could not have been missed by the torpedo boats that fired on the life boats deployed by the Liberty.

The Liberty Alliance, an organization formed to counteract the lies said to have been told to justify the Israeli attack and the cover-up by President Lyndon Johnson, deployed its forces on Capitol Hill on October 22. The chairman of the Liberty Alliance, Adm. Thomas H. Moorer, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, presided over the news conference in the Rayburn House Office Building. The most stunning revelation was a statement by Captain Ward Boston, the senior legal counsel for the Navys Court of Inquiry into the attack on the Liberty. His statement was read by Rear Admiral Merlin Staring, a former Judge Advocate General of the Navy. Here are portions of what he read.

The late Admiral Isaac Kidd and I were given only one week to gather evidence for the Navys official investigation. Despite the short amount of time we were given, we gathered a vast amount of evidence, including hours of heartbreaking testimony from the young survivors. The evidence was clear. Both Adm. Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. I am certain that the Israeli pilots that undertook the attack, as well as their superiors who had ordered the attack, were aware that the ship was American.

I saw our flag, which had visibly identified the ship as American, riddled with bullet holes, and heard testimony that made it clear that the Israelis intended that there be no survivors. Not only did the Israelis attack the ship for over two hours with napalm, gunfire and hundreds of rockets and missiles, Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned three life boats that had been launched in an attempt to save the crew-a war crime.

After saying he was moved to speak out by a book titled The Liberty Incident by Jay Cristol, he described it as an attempt to whitewash the facts. He then dropped a bombshell, saying, I have firsthand knowledge from many personal conversations with Adm. Kidd that President Lyndon Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara personally ordered him to cover up the true facts and conclude the attack was a case of mistaken identity despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. He did not mention that LBJ also rescinded an order to send carrier-based fighter planes that were only 15 minutes away to defend the Liberty.

The Liberty Alliance is pressing for an official, openly conducted reinvestigation of the tragedy that will consider this new testimony, along with the evidence that was suppressed or ignored. Some say that cover-ups ordered by presidents cant succeed because someone in the know will talk. Capt. Boston has finally talked. He and the Liberty survivors deserve a hearing.

I still don't see what benefit that the IDF would have had by deliberately targeting a US intelligence ship at that time. Did they fear that we would pass info along to the Arabs? I am unwilling to take a position on this one w/o sufficient info.

It happened a long time ago and it is impossible to get an account of this that is not borne of a vested interest...

[GazB]

figures, you sound like a holocaust denier and as such you would defiantly have no qualms about making this theory up.
(What a stupid answer you gave )


I was merely pointing out that an Official Israeli link would be about as much use here as a Nazi link would be in a discussion about the holocaust... ie of zero use.

Yes, of course that makes me a holocaust denier.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:


"The Israeli pilots opened fire first on an Egyptian “war ship” where there is no need for them to fire on anyone to give any excuse to be fired on for this was in middle of an all out war!!! But the torpedo boats were first attacked by the liberty when they came on the scene a bit later. "

Yes, an Egyptian warship with two 50 cal gun positions that were bombarding the coast. Despite the fog of war and all that this pilot was a moron or a lier.

"no it doesn’t prove that. All it proves is that Israel scrambled those planes without any initial planning for an attack. "

Of course and the aircraft it scrambled were completely incabable of doing the job. Any ship with gun armament powerful enough for shore bombardment is not going to be bothered by 68mm rockets or 30mm cannon fire.

"Meaning it wasn’t planned as any deliberate attack but rather a emergency call after the navy realised it couldn’t catch that ship with its torpedo boats and thus quickly scrambled those jets that were already in the air without the requisite armament to destroy the ship. "

Of course Torpedo boats have problems getting up to enormous speeds like 16knts.

"Making two passes at 3,000 feet, formation commander Capt. Spector (IDF records do not provide pilots' first names) reckoned that the ship was a "Z" or Hunt-class destroyer without the deck markings (a white cross on a red background) of the Israeli navy. Spector then spoke with air force commander Gen. Motti Hod, who asked him repeatedly whether he could see a flag. The answer was "Negative." Nor were there any distinguishing marks other than some "black letters" painted on the hull”. "

Hmmm passing at 3,000 ft they would have seen that it wasn't a destroyer that had just shelled anything and would have moved on looking for the destroyer in question.

"well first of all that’s what you were suggesting. "

I never said the Americans were passing any information to the Arabs. They were detecting the Israelis using American equipment in a way the Israelis had promised they wouldn't in order to receive that equipment. This "accident" was an attempt to get the spyship to move away before it found out what the israelis were doing... it failed.

"ok so we both agree israel didn’t want to sink or kill any americans here "

America and Israel were allies then. They just wanted the spyship to go away so they could continue what they were doing.

"Secondly, so again you contend that the ship was spying on Israel?? "

It was monitoring a conflict... everyone who can do that does that.

"different investigations on this JEWISH ship attacking an American one."

Repeated attacks on one vessel.


There are a few more worse horrible “mistakes” that have gotten less attention or investigations then this one Jewish mistake.

I can only wonder why

Must be a muslim conspirasy, or that evil anti semetic world.


let me understand this correctly. Israel is fighting an all out war for its survival, and then because of “alleged uses of secret equipment” it would potentially want to bring the U.S. into this war …I don’t think so!!.

When you are backed into a corner you take gambles you wouldn't normally take. I could turn it around... in an all out war for survival what does it have to lose.

[GazB]

figures, you sound like a holocaust denier and as such you would defiantly have no qualms about making this theory up.
(What a stupid answer you gave )


I was merely pointing out that an Official Israeli link would be about as much use here as a Nazi link would be in a discussion about the holocaust... ie of zero use.

Yes, of course that makes me a holocaust denier.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:


"The Israeli pilots opened fire first on an Egyptian “war ship” where there is no need for them to fire on anyone to give any excuse to be fired on for this was in middle of an all out war!!! But the torpedo boats were first attacked by the liberty when they came on the scene a bit later. "

Yes, an Egyptian warship with two 50 cal gun positions that were bombarding the coast. Despite the fog of war and all that this pilot was a moron or a lier.

"no it doesn’t prove that. All it proves is that Israel scrambled those planes without any initial planning for an attack. "

Of course and the aircraft it scrambled were completely incabable of doing the job. Any ship with gun armament powerful enough for shore bombardment is not going to be bothered by 68mm rockets or 30mm cannon fire.

"Meaning it wasn’t planned as any deliberate attack but rather a emergency call after the navy realised it couldn’t catch that ship with its torpedo boats and thus quickly scrambled those jets that were already in the air without the requisite armament to destroy the ship. "

Of course Torpedo boats have problems getting up to enormous speeds like 16knts.

"Making two passes at 3,000 feet, formation commander Capt. Spector (IDF records do not provide pilots' first names) reckoned that the ship was a "Z" or Hunt-class destroyer without the deck markings (a white cross on a red background) of the Israeli navy. Spector then spoke with air force commander Gen. Motti Hod, who asked him repeatedly whether he could see a flag. The answer was "Negative." Nor were there any distinguishing marks other than some "black letters" painted on the hull”. "

Hmmm passing at 3,000 ft they would have seen that it wasn't a destroyer that had just shelled anything and would have moved on looking for the destroyer in question.

"well first of all that’s what you were suggesting. "

I never said the Americans were passing any information to the Arabs. They were detecting the Israelis using American equipment in a way the Israelis had promised they wouldn't in order to receive that equipment. This "accident" was an attempt to get the spyship to move away before it found out what the israelis were doing... it failed.

"ok so we both agree israel didn’t want to sink or kill any americans here "

America and Israel were allies then. They just wanted the spyship to go away so they could continue what they were doing.

"Secondly, so again you contend that the ship was spying on Israel?? "

It was monitoring a conflict... everyone who can do that does that.

"different investigations on this JEWISH ship attacking an American one."

Repeated attacks on one vessel.


There are a few more worse horrible “mistakes” that have gotten less attention or investigations then this one Jewish mistake.

I can only wonder why

Must be a muslim conspirasy, or that evil anti semetic world.


let me understand this correctly. Israel is fighting an all out war for its survival, and then because of “alleged uses of secret equipment” it would potentially want to bring the U.S. into this war …I don’t think so!!.

When you are backed into a corner you take gambles you wouldn't normally take. I could turn it around... in an all out war for survival what does it have to lose.



Besides, even if they attack that ship, it is most plausible that wasn’t going to prevent the U.S. from knowing if Israel was using “secret equipment” or not for as we see, here you are after the ship was accidentally (you believe deliberate) attacked and yet you are talking about “secret equipment”.

If you spot a spyship of an ally in your waters and correctly identify it you would scramble aircraft to the area to try to get it to move on before it can intercept and decrypt and work out what you are doing. A fishing vessel with a crystal radio set would not be adequate for the job, there was a lot of fairly high tech equipment, not to mention specialist personel on board the Liberty you know.

"no you don’t know where they were launched from. Reports indicate that the torpedoes got on scene and were fired upon. They returned fire. period!! "

Yes, and if I am right how much credibility is there in official Israeli reports?

"Secondly, yes we know this now and on close inspection, heck this was part of the mistake.
Misidentification happens all the time in all out wars……"

Destroyers and civilian cargo ships don' even nearly look alike. If you are looking for a ship that bombarded shore positions then you expect the target vessel to at least have some deck guns.

"but that’s a moot point now for if indeed that ship was compromising Israel’s security by passing information on to the Arabs and thus endangering the lives of over 3 and a half million Jews then that’s a bigger problem indeed. "

Who said they were passing information to the arabs? The whole point of the secret agreement was to prevent the arabs or the Soviets from knowing about the sophisticated communications interception equipment the US had provided Israel and the tactics used with it as it would likely be used by the US and NATO on the Warsaw Pact during WWIII. Why would the US tell the arabs about such a thing? That makes no sense at all. If they didn't care who knew then everything would be out in the open and there wouldn't have been all these court enquiries.

"no its just proves that they were scrambled without any deliberate planning. "

So why not send row boats, or sailboats? If the Liberty had actually been the ship described so far... an egyptian warship doing up to 30knts then the aircraft sent would have been as effective as a sailboat or a row boat.

"Did they fear that we would pass info along to the Arabs?"

No, they feared that if the US stopped supporting them and took back comms intercept equipment that they might have to fight all of the arab forces together at once, rather than intercept messages between the various arab states and alter the messages to make it look like they were doing much better than they actually were and did not need assistance or for the other forces to scale up their attacks.

[IDFM203]

“cockdila” :D

ok so another round of this……….oh well……….. :roll: :roll:



I was merely pointing out that an Official Israeli link would be about as much use here as a Nazi link would be in a discussion about the holocaust... ie of zero use.
yeah but hers the difference, with the holocaust you don’t need the nazis to corroborate what happened for there are numerous other witness to it. And besides there were nazi’s that admitted to it.

With the liberty you said that unequivocally and I quote “The Israelis have always claimed they thought it was an egyptian transport ship, so it was not seen as a direct threat. .” now that is false….so is up to you to provide proof as to what the ISRAELIS claimed!!! And the only way to have proof of what the Israeli’s claimed is to provide Israeli sources!!!!!

Gees its as simple as that!!!! :bash:


I mean all we have here is your word that Israelis claimed that, not the Israeli’s themselves!!!!!! :roll:

"The Israeli pilots opened fire first on an Egyptian “war ship” where there is no need for them to fire on anyone to give any excuse to be fired on for this was in middle of an all out war!!! But the torpedo boats were first attacked by the liberty when they came on the scene a bit later. "

Yes, an Egyptian warship with two 50 cal gun positions that were bombarding the coast. Despite the fog of war and all that this pilot was a moron or a lier" the pilot misidentified the ship hence the mistake!!!!!

no it doesn’t prove that. All it proves is that Israel scrambled those planes without any initial planning for an attack. "

Of course and the aircraft it scrambled were completely incabable of doing the job. Any ship with gun armament powerful enough for shore bombardment is not going to be bothered by 68mm rockets or 30mm cannon fire. hence the deliberate theory is gone.

Israel scrambled the jets to a threat, but being that it was in an all out war it had to scramble what was in the relative area and it was those jets.

"Meaning it wasn’t planned as any deliberate attack but rather a emergency call after the navy realised it couldn’t catch that ship with its torpedo boats and thus quickly scrambled those jets that were already in the air without the requisite armament to destroy the ship. "

Of course Torpedo boats have problems getting up to enormous speeds like 16knts. as the captian of the torpedo boat called in that he was too far and wasn’t going to make it. The fact is that they were not close to the ship so that’s why they called in the air force as I outlined before.

"Making two passes at 3,000 feet, formation commander Capt. Spector (IDF records do not provide pilots' first names) reckoned that the ship was a "Z" or Hunt-class destroyer without the deck markings (a white cross on a red background) of the Israeli navy. Spector then spoke with air force commander Gen. Motti Hod, who asked him repeatedly whether he could see a flag. The answer was "Negative." Nor were there any distinguishing marks other than some "black letters" painted on the hull”. "

Hmmm passing at 3,000 ft they would have seen that it wasn't a destroyer that had just shelled anything and would have moved on looking for the destroyer in question. yes there was a standing order that any unidentified ship in that radius with traveling at certain speeds(hence the mistke) will be targeted. That’s standard in a war zone in an all out war. In fact all U.S. ship were pulled out of the area as per Israel’s request but yet somehow this one stayed in and as such Israel had not expected that to be an American ship but rather the Egyptian one.

"well first of all that’s what you were suggesting. "

I never said the Americans were passing any information to the Arabs. They were detecting the Israelis using American equipment in a way the Israelis had promised they wouldn't in order to receive that equipment. This "accident" was an attempt to get the spyship to move away before it found out what the israelis were doing... it failed. that’s such a stupid reason.

As I explained before. If that was true, what would sinking that ship stop them from finding that out?? I mean by that time they would have known already. Besides that ship the U.S. had other ways of detecting if Israel was using any alleged equipment. Its simply stupid to say that in a time for an all out war for Israel’s survival they would want to potentially drag the harsh wrath of the U.S. for simply detecting something which they probably would have known about regardless of that ship or not. and even if it was only because of that ship, it is simply absurd to claim that Israel would want the U.S.’s hash wrath due to simple use of alleged equipment

Oh and besides pulling this theory out of your ass, do you have any proof to the of this claim ??? :roll:


"ok so we both agree israel didn’t want to sink or kill any americans here "

America and Israel were allies then. correction!!! America was a friend of Israel but not an ally. By 1967 Israel got most of its military aid and hardwhere from the French.


"Secondly, so again you contend that the ship was spying on Israel?? "

It was monitoring a conflict... everyone who can do that does that. yeah but not in those waters. Because of mistakes like what happened, Israel had requested that no ships be in a those waters so close to its coast. “the IDF Chief of Staff, Gen. Yitzhak Rabin, informed the U.S. Naval Attaché in Tel Aviv, Cmdr. Ernest Carl Castle, that Israel would defend its coast with every means at its disposal. Unidentified vessels would be sunk, Rabin advised; the United States should either acknowledge its ships in the area or remove them.15 Nonetheless, the Americans provided Israel with no information on the Liberty. The United States had also rejected Israel's request for a formal naval liaison. On May 31, Avraham Harman, Israel's ambassador to Washington, had warned Under Secretary of State Eugene V. Rostow that "if war breaks out, we would have no telephone number to call, no code for plane recognition, and no way to get in touch with the U.S. Sixth Fleet."16

"different investigations on this JEWISH ship attacking an American one."

Repeated attacks on one vessel. yes there was repeated attacked after Israel thought that it was being attacked by an Egyptian ship!!!


There are a few more worse horrible “mistakes” that have gotten less attention or investigations then this one Jewish mistake.

I can only wonder why

Must be a muslim conspirasy, or that evil anti semetic world. there is no Muslim conspiracy here that I know of but your damn right its anti Semitic. Again there have been worse “mistakes” that have cost more lives but yet have gotten much less attention and have at times not even been investigated!!! hmmm :roll:

let me understand this correctly. Israel is fighting an all out war for its survival, and then because of “alleged uses of secret equipment” it would potentially want to bring the U.S. into this war …I don’t think so!!

When you are backed into a corner you take gambles you wouldn't normally take. I could turn it around... in an all out war for survival what does it have to lose. what does it have to lose?!? :roll: Are you kidding me?!? :roll: Its enough to take on five or six Arab countries, to add the U.S. into the mix would be beyond hope!!!!

An all out war for survival doesn’t mean that you want to wrath of the U.S. simply because you are using alleged equipment.

I mean listen to yourself. In fact in an all out war, if Israel was using that, the attitude would most probably be who cares if they know for we need it to survive.!!

I mean you should think better before you make this ridicules assumption!! :bash:

Besides, even if they attack that ship, it is most plausible that wasn’t going to prevent the U.S. from knowing if Israel was using “secret equipment” or not for as we see, here you are after the ship was accidentally (you believe deliberate) attacked and yet you are talking about “secret equipment”.

If you spot a spyship of an ally in your waters and correctly identify it you would scramble aircraft to the area to try to get it to move on before it can intercept and decrypt and work out what you are doing. A fishing vessel with a crystal radio set would not be adequate for the job, there was a lot of fairly high tech equipment, not to mention specialist personel on board the Liberty you know. again the U.S. was not an ally!!

Well again, there are other things that the U.S. had at the time that were monitoring Israel. Secondly, it wouldn’t make sense for Israel to target that ship if that’s the case

Thirdly, that ship was in waters that it wasn’t supposed to be in due to these types of mistakes!!!

"no you don’t know where they were launched from. Reports indicate that the torpedoes got on scene and were fired upon. They returned fire. period!! "

Yes, and if I am right how much credibility is there in official Israeli reports? they have as much credibility as anyone else. I mean we have a right to say what we saw and did as well.

I mean an Israeli captain of a torpedo boat has his claim to be valid as much as anyone else. He was there!!

"Secondly, yes we know this now and on close inspection, heck this was part of the mistake.
Misidentification happens all the time in all out wars……"

Destroyers and civilian cargo ships don' even nearly look alike. If you are looking for a ship that bombarded shore positions then you expect the target vessel to at least have some deck guns. that ship did not look like a civilian cargo ship. It had two big guns at that ship!!! Last I checked no civilian ships have those.

Secondly yes it was a mistake, the pilot incorrectly identified it as some type of war ship as we know after the mistake it wasn’t. but in an all out war it is most certainly a plausible mistake to make.

"but that’s a moot point now for if indeed that ship was compromising Israel’s security by passing information on to the Arabs and thus endangering the lives of over 3 and a half million Jews then that’s a bigger problem indeed. "

Who said they were passing information to the arabs? The whole point of the secret agreement was to prevent the arabs or the Soviets from knowing about the sophisticated communications interception equipment the US had provided Israel and the tactics used with it as it would likely be used by the US and NATO on the Warsaw Pact during WWIII. Why would the US tell the arabs about such a thing? That makes no sense at all. If they didn't care who knew then everything would be out in the open and there wouldn't have been all these court enquiries. I already explained the ridiculousness of that equipment charge.

As per my second theory I will tell you why the U.S. would pass on secrets to the arabs. the U.S. was not an ally of Israel at that time and before. The U.S. openly sided with the Egyptians in the Suez war. It was known for years that the defence department would share intelligence with Arab countries. The U.S. had all the motivation in the world to help the Arabs. And of course there is one reason as to why…OIL. At the time of 1967, most people in the world thought that Israel was going to be wiped out this time. Nasser and his Arab neighbours were really preparing big time with the latest soviet equipment to wipe out Israel for good, so the U.S. would have all the motivation in the world to help out covertly the Arabs in order to reap better relations after their assumed victory.

"no its just proves that they were scrambled without any deliberate planning. "

So why not send row boats, or sailboats? If the Liberty had actually been the ship described so far... an egyptian warship doing up to 30knts then the aircraft sent would have been as effective as a sailboat or a row boat. yes in your typical Russian sarcasm you are comparing a fighter jet even if it is not up to the task to a row boat. That’s sarcasm of yours is pretty lame and pure “blet”. :roll:

Israel scrambled jets for the navy did not have time to reach it. These jets did try to sink that Egyptian ship, they tried their best but as you see they did have the requisite armament and when they recognized that it was an American ship they ceased fire.

"Did they fear that we would pass info along to the Arabs?"

No, they feared that if the US stopped supporting them and took back comms intercept equipment that they might have to fight all of the arab forces together at once, rather than intercept messages between the various arab states and alter the messages to make it look like they were doing much better than they actually were and did not need assistance or for the other forces to scale up their attacks. the U.S. was not supporting them.!! France was not the U.S.

As for this alleged comms equipment, so in an all out war, if Israel had that you think they would have given back that alleged equipment if they were asked to.???

Your theory makes no sense for if it were true why would Israel go after that ship in the first day of the war?!? This mistake happened two days into the war.

And also like I said before, in an all out war for survival any normal counteries attitude would be who cares if they know as long as we survive. All that stuff can be worked out after we are here on this panet and not into the sea so to speak.

I mean like you said yourself in your theory, the U.S. wasn’t going to tell the Arabs about that alleged equipment so why would Israel bother with it then??

Shalom

[XASA]

:cantbeli: idfm203, if bullsh** was money you'd be the world's richest man.

[IDFM203]

:cantbeli: idfm203, if bullsh** was money you'd be the world's richest man.wow that was an intelligent and mature response :roll: :cantbeli:


At the same token if your response to intellectual arguments is this stupid immaturity then that speaks much louder about your bulls*it then that ridicules and stupid insiuation directed towards me.

Shalom :D

[Trigger]

http://www.funnybunch.com/1/ebunny.jpg

[XASA]

At the same token if your response to intellectual arguments is this stupid immaturity then that speaks much louder about your bulls*it then that ridicules and stupid insiuation directed towards me.

Shalom :D

If you consider your tiresome posts "intellectual arguments" than you are, indeed, not only full of bullsh** but also misled by your own delusional sense of self-importance.

[IDFM203]

Ok whatever. I am going to try to not go further in this ridiculousness in an attempt to not turn this thread into a flame war.

I got how you feel about my posts and you understand how I feel about yours. Nuff said!!

Shalom :D

[GazB]

yeah but hers the difference, with the holocaust you don’t need the nazis to corroborate what happened for there are numerous other witness to it. And besides there were nazi’s that admitted to it.

And there are Nazis that think Hitler is alive and well and traded rocket secrets to the Russians and Americans in return for assylum (the funniest one was on the far side of the moon).


now that is false….so is up to you to provide proof as to what the ISRAELIS claimed!!! And the only way to have proof of what the Israeli’s claimed is to provide Israeli sources!!!!!


If you are going to say that the statement is false then it is up to you to prove it. It has been quoted on this thread that the Israelis believed the Liberty was an Egyptian warship.

"the pilot misidentified the ship hence the mistake!!!!! "

Misidentified a cargo ship with a huge number of aerials and antennas for a destroyer that was bombarding shore targets??? The guy is a moron. Even someone picked at random from the street could tell you that a ship without gun turrets is unlikely to be the ship he was looking for if he was on the mission the Israelis claim he was. Considering his inappropriate armament wasting ammo on such a target would be very unlikely... unless it was correctly identified as the real target... ie an american spy ship.

"hence the deliberate theory is gone."

Hence the deliberate theory is reinforced. A fighter with 30mm rounds and 68mm rockets would be of little use in sinking or even delaying a destroyer. (30mm fire would mean attacks from long range with much reduced accuracy and probably little damage). If the target was a spy ship then 30mm cannon rounds and 68m unguided rockets would be ideal... very likely to stop the unarmoured ship from doing what it was doing but very unlikely to sink the ship and therefore upset America.

"as the captian of the torpedo boat called in that he was too far and wasn’t going to make it. The fact is that they were not close to the ship so that’s why they called in the air force as I outlined before. "

And it was of course only the fact that the 30knt Liberty stopped to engage the fighters that the FAC managed to close with them and engage them???????

"yes there was a standing order that any unidentified ship in that radius with traveling at certain speeds(hence the mistke) will be targeted. "

And when it reached the target area and saw that the vessel in question was not doing anything like the speed reported and was not armed with anything that could have made it the vessel they were actually looking for why did they waste the ammo they had on it? It was no threat. At the speed it was travelling at they knew the FAC could catch it easily. How many 30mm cannon shells and 68mm rockets do you think a mirage can carry? It is certainly not unlimited.

"that’s such a stupid reason.

As I explained before. If that was true, what would sinking that ship stop them from finding that out??"

The transmissions the Liberty was intercepting were both Arab and Israeli. Both sides used encryption. The secret the Israelis were trying to conceal was that they were intercepting Arab transmissions and changing them and passing them on. For the Liberty to detect that they had to intercept both the original and the altered transmissions and decrypt them both... that isn't as easy as it sounds. They didn't have PCs then, though they did use electronic computers. They also had to use arab translators as well.
There was no reason for the Israelis to think that the US had the information about what they were doing... all they knew is they had to stop them listening... and that is what they did.

"Besides that ship the U.S. had other ways of detecting if Israel was using any alleged equipment."

How would they manage that? The US has always been rather poor at human intelligence collection, and in the human spy game between Israel and the US the Israelis would always have the advantage...

"Israel’s survival they would want to potentially drag the harsh wrath of the U.S. for simply detecting something which they probably would have known about regardless of that ship or not."

And how else would they have found out about that?


Oh and besides pulling this theory out of your ass, do you have any proof to the of this claim ???

Very crude and not worthy of a reply even if I was going to.

"yes there was repeated attacked after Israel thought that it was being attacked by an Egyptian ship!!!"

Yeah, right.

"there is no Muslim conspiracy here that I know of but your damn right its anti Semitic."

It is not anti semetic. If it was then that pilot would be guilty because he was jewish, not because he was a moron.

"what does it have to lose?!? Are you kidding me?!? Its enough to take on five or six Arab countries, to add the U.S. into the mix would be beyond hope!!!! "

The worst the US would do is withdraw support. They still wouldn't tell the Arabs what the Israelis were doing because they still wanted to do that to the Soviets during WWIII and WWIII is far more important than Israel to the US. Without US support/money etc etc then the Arabs would probably eventually have been in a much better position regarding Israel than they are now.

"I mean listen to yourself. In fact in an all out war, if Israel was using that, the attitude would most probably be who cares if they know for we need it to survive.!!"

Because the billions of aid and future supplies of equipment from a real superpower (as opposed to France and Europe then) would do more for your future survival than the lives a a few saliors... besides they covered their asses and stated things like any ships in these waters are fair game... that is a fairly serious gamble... what if it was a Soviet ship... the huge stars and stripes didn't save the Liberty, how would a few red stars help a russian vessel? And the consequences of that would be interesting.


they have as much credibility as anyone else. I mean we have a right to say what we saw and did as well.

I mean an Israeli captain of a torpedo boat has his claim to be valid as much as anyone else. He was there!!


The first victim of war is the truth.

"that ship did not look like a civilian cargo ship. It had two big guns at that ship!!! Last I checked no civilian ships have those."

What two big guns? 50 cal MG positions are not big. Browning Heavy machineguns are of no use whatsovever for shore bombardment.

"Secondly yes it was a mistake, the pilot incorrectly identified it as some type of war ship as we know after the mistake it wasn’t. but in an all out war it is most certainly a plausible mistake to make. "

He sees HMGs that are 1.5-2m long but can't see an enormous flag?


As per my second theory I will tell you why the U.S. would pass on secrets to the arabs. the U.S. was not an ally of Israel at that time and before. The U.S. openly sided with the Egyptians in the Suez war. It was known for years that the defence department would share intelligence with Arab countries. The U.S. had all the motivation in the world to help the Arabs.

Hahahahahahahaha... you aren't even understanding what I am saying are you.
The Egyptian forces... largely armed with Soviet weaponry and very friendly to the russians gets a phone call from the US State department to say that the Israelis are using some equipment the US provided them secretly and is intercepting your communications with other arab countries and changing the messages to make you think the other arab forces are doing better than they actually are to try to get you not to help or increase pressure on your front of the war... we plan to do taht to the Soviets during WWIII... please don't forward this to the Soviets. What would the Soviet adviser in the room say about that?

"These jets did try to sink that Egyptian ship, they tried their best but as you see they did have the requisite armament and when they recognized that it was an American ship they ceased fire. "

But they were supposed to be looking for a destroyer that had been attacking coastal positions, why are they wasting the little weaponry they did have on a cargo ship?


the U.S. was not supporting them.!! France was not the U.S.

If the US was not supporting them then how did they get the equipment they were using in the first place? Not even all the NATO nations had that stuff then.

"As for this alleged comms equipment, so in an all out war, if Israel had that you think they would have given back that alleged equipment if they were asked to.???"

If you get some equipment and misuse it you usually don't get any more. It was rather vital to the campaign strategy that they used. Eventually the Arab forces would realise they had been tricked and upgrade their cryptography... they would turn to the Soviets for that... the NSA would of course be the experts that you would turn to then.

"Your theory makes no sense for if it were true why would Israel go after that ship in the first day of the war?!? This mistake happened two days into the war. "

Planning, hesitation... even if you had to do it it is still not a nice thing to do. Equally it was not until after the war had started that the disinformation became necessary anyway... for all the Israeli military knew the arab armies might have just folded... in such a case the disinformation would have been unecessary.

"And also like I said before, in an all out war for survival any normal counteries attitude would be who cares if they know as long as we survive. All that stuff can be worked out after we are here on this panet and not into the sea so to speak."

There are short term and long term aspects to such an issue. I doubt it was taken lightly even if it was their only option.

"I mean like you said yourself in your theory, the U.S. wasn’t going to tell the Arabs about that alleged equipment so why would Israel bother with it then?? "

Because if you get assistance from someone and it turns out to be very successful you kinda want to continue the relationship... having a superpower on your side is not a bad thing, and Israel was rather short of friends in the international community.

[IDFM203]

yeah but hers the difference, with the holocaust you don’t need the nazis to corroborate what happened for there are numerous other witness to it. And besides there were nazi’s that admitted to it.

And there are Nazis that think Hitler is alive and well and traded rocket secrets to the Russians and Americans in return for assylum (the funniest one was on the far side of the moon). yeah but the difference is that the only way to prove what the Israeli were saying was from the Israelis themselves. You have not proved from any Israeli source as to what you claim the Israelis said. Your continence of these smoke and mirrors illusions and sidetracking that point is just that, smoke and mirrors and not at all relevant to what we are talking about.

now that is false….so is up to you to provide proof as to what the ISRAELIS claimed!!! And the only way to have proof of what the Israeli’s claimed is to provide Israeli sources!!!!!

If you are going to say that the statement is false then it is up to you to prove it. It has been quoted on this thread that the Israelis believed the Liberty was an Egyptian warship. and I did, I brought down quotes and analysis that were taken from official Israeli sources that back up what the Israeli’s said.

It is up to you to disprove that and the only way to do that is to bring officail Israeli sources that claim the Israeli's said other wise (what YOUR caliming).

You have not!!


"the pilot misidentified the ship hence the mistake!!!!! "

Misidentified a cargo ship with a huge number of aerials and antennas for a destroyer that was bombarding shore targets??? The guy is a moron. Even someone picked at random from the street could tell you that a ship without gun turrets is unlikely to be the ship he was looking for if he was on the mission the Israelis claim he was. Considering his inappropriate armament wasting ammo on such a target would be very unlikely... unless it was correctly identified as the real target... ie an american spy ship. yes the pilot made a mistake but it was most certainly a plausible mistake being that it was in time of a war, that was a military spy ship with weapons on board, it was not supposed to be an American ship, for there weren’t supposed to be any in Americans in those waters and as such the Israeli thought it was an Egyptian ship which probably was the one that just bombarded the coast


"hence the deliberate theory is gone."

Hence the deliberate theory is reinforced. A fighter with 30mm rounds and 68mm rockets would be of little use in sinking or even delaying a destroyer. (30mm fire would mean attacks from long range with much reduced accuracy and probably little damage). If the target was a spy ship then 30mm cannon rounds and 68m unguided rockets would be ideal... very likely to stop the unarmoured ship from doing what it was doing but very unlikely to sink the ship and therefore upset America. no it just proves that Israel had scrambled those planes that were flying on missions near that area and they didn’t have the requisite armament for they didn’t plan any such thing. Again it just shows how it was not deliberate.

And when those planes got there they did try to sink it but after realising who that ship belonged to, they ceased fire!!!


"as the captian of the torpedo boat called in that he was too far and wasn’t going to make it. The fact is that they were not close to the ship so that’s why they called in the air force as I outlined before. "

And it was of course only the fact that the 30knt Liberty stopped to engage the fighters that the FAC managed to close with them and engage them??????? yes because the liberty was attacked first by the air force and there is no doubt that they returned fire but 50 cal was useless but not against the torpedo boats for which they did fire on it.


"yes there was a standing order that any unidentified ship in that radius with traveling at certain speeds(hence the mistke) will be targeted. "

And when it reached the target area and saw that the vessel in question was not doing anything like the speed reported and was not armed with anything that could have made it the vessel they were actually looking for why did they waste the ammo they had on it? It was no threat. At the speed it was travelling at they knew the FAC could catch it easily. How many 30mm cannon shells and 68mm rockets do you think a mirage can carry? It is certainly not unlimited. again the pilot miscalculated the speed hence one of the mistakes!!!! They thought it was that ship. Whatever the case they did not think it was an American one for they were under the impression that there were no American ships in that area!!!


"that’s such a stupid reason.

As I explained before. If that was true, what would sinking that ship stop them from finding that out??"

The transmissions the Liberty was intercepting were both Arab and Israeli. Both sides used encryption. The secret the Israelis were trying to conceal was that they were intercepting Arab transmissions and changing them and passing them on. For the Liberty to detect that they had to intercept both the original and the altered transmissions and decrypt them both... that isn't as easy as it sounds. They didn't have PCs then, though they did use electronic computers. They also had to use arab translators as well.
There was no reason for the Israelis to think that the US had the information about what they were doing... all they knew is they had to stop them listening... and that is what they did. I explain again

As I explained before. If that was true, what would sinking that ship stop them from finding that out?? I mean by that time they would have known already. Besides that ship the U.S. had other ways of detecting if Israel was using any alleged equipment. Its simply stupid to say that in a time for an all out war for Israel’s survival they would want to potentially drag the harsh wrath of the U.S. for simply detecting something which they probably would have known about regardless of that ship or not. and even if it was only because of that ship, it is simply absurd to claim that Israel would want the U.S.’s hash wrath due to simple use of alleged equipment



"Besides that ship the U.S. had other ways of detecting if Israel was using any alleged equipment."

How would they manage that? The US has always been rather poor at human intelligence collection, and in the human spy game between Israel and the US the Israelis would always have the advantage... oh but they had NSA spy planes and satellites listening in. I mean they did intercept the pilots interceptions right?!? Yes the U.S. had other means.

Secondly again it doesn’t make sense for Israel in an all out war for survival to really care if the U.S. finds out (if in fact Israel was using such equipment). All that can be worked out after Israel survives.


"Israel’s survival they would want to potentially drag the harsh wrath of the U.S. for simply detecting something which they probably would have known about regardless of that ship or not."

And how else would they have found out about that? oh so the U.S. doesn’t have the NSA, oh so the U.S. doesn’t have spy planes, oh so the U.S. doesn’t have satellites, oh so the U.S. doesn’t have the CIA….etc……they have all that!!!

Oh and besides pulling this theory out of your ass, do you have any proof to the of this claim ???

Very crude and not worthy of a reply even if I was going to. ok so to rephrase. Besides pulling that theory out of thin air, do you have any concrete proof to your claim’s?????


"yes there was repeated attacked after Israel thought that it was being attacked by an Egyptian ship!!!"

Yeah, right. oh so its not plausible that the “Egyptian (liberty) ship would return fire after being attacked????


"there is no Muslim conspiracy here that I know of but your damn right its anti Semitic."

It is not anti semetic. If it was then that pilot would be guilty because he was jewish, not because he was a moron. no the anti Semitism is when there is no proof of any guilt for in fact the most plausible theory was that it was an accident but yet there have been worse such “accidents” that have killed more people but yet have received much less attention and investigatory scrutiny!!!


"what does it have to lose?!? Are you kidding me?!? Its enough to take on five or six Arab countries, to add the U.S. into the mix would be beyond hope!!!! "

The worst the US would do is withdraw support. what support??? Besides a few little alleged thing’s, Israel at that time got most of their support from France!!


. Without US support/money etc etc then the Arabs would probably eventually have been in a much better position regarding Israel than they are now. yes but Israel did not know that during the 1967 war. It was only after wards that the U.S. decided to become a full ally. There was no indication of that whatsoever during or before the 1967 war.


"I mean listen to yourself. In fact in an all out war, if Israel was using that, the attitude would most probably be who cares if they know for we need it to survive.!!"

Because the billions of aid and future supplies of equipment from a real superpower (as opposed to France and Europe then) would do more for your future survival than the lives a a few saliors... again Israel did not know any such thing was coming their way (billions of dollars)

Again in a war of survival, why would Israel jeopardise that a U.S. ship if a, they would know anyway and b, who cars if they know so what. In a time of an all out war, if Israel had that alleged equipment and was using it, it would be better for Israel to use it and pay the supposed consequences from the U.S. after they have survived. I mean it much better then paying the harsher consequences from the U.S. if they had attacked that ship.

It makes more sence that if israel were to pay concequnces from the U.s. it would be much harsher if israel attacked that ship then if they had not and the U.S simply found out. (if there was such a thing as this use of this equptment)

Just curious, where do you have proof that the U.S. gave Israel such equipment and where do you have proof that the U.S. told Israel to not use it???


besides they covered their asses and stated things like any ships in these waters are fair game... that is a fairly serious gamble... what if it was a Soviet ship... the huge stars and stripes didn't save the Liberty, how would a few red stars help a russian vessel? And the consequences of that would be interesting. they did that for just these mistakes. It was an all out war and the U.S. and other non-war party ships were told to stay out and they did. The U.S. had told Israel that they were not in the area. And as such israel did not think that it was an American ship.

As for Russian well actually a few Israeli’s did think that they had hit a Russian ship I already brought down how at first there was a debate in headquarters if it was an Egyptian or a Russian ship.


they have as much credibility as anyone else. I mean we have a right to say what we saw and did as well.

I mean an Israeli captain of a torpedo boat has his claim to be valid as much as anyone else. He was there!!

The first victim of war is the truth. true and that goes for all sides in this. But again, the Israeli pilots who attacked have their opinions to be valid for it is they who are the ones who made the mistake and it is they who thought they were attacking an Egyptian ship and not an American one. Their opinion is most defiantly valid here.


"that ship did not look like a civilian cargo ship. It had two big guns at that ship!!! Last I checked no civilian ships have those."

What two big guns? 50 cal MG positions are not big. Browning Heavy machineguns are of no use whatsovever for shore bombardment. this is now all semantics here. the bottom line is that that ship did not look like a civilian one as you tried to insinuate. As for everything else we already went over it.


"Secondly yes it was a mistake, the pilot incorrectly identified it as some type of war ship as we know after the mistake it wasn’t. but in an all out war it is most certainly a plausible mistake to make. "

He sees HMGs that are 1.5-2m long but can't see an enormous flag? he did not see a U.S. flag period!!! Again these mistakes happen in war. Friendly fire happens all the time and there have been cases when you ask how they didn’t identify for there was this and there was that, but again humans make mistakes and they made a mistake.

There is indeed many contentions over the flag and we can go on and on but the bottom line is that the Israeli pilots did not see it!!!

As per my second theory I will tell you why the U.S. would pass on secrets to the arabs. the U.S. was not an ally of Israel at that time and before. The U.S. openly sided with the Egyptians in the Suez war. It was known for years that the defence department would share intelligence with Arab countries. The U.S. had all the motivation in the world to help the Arabs

Hahahahahahahaha... you aren't even understanding what I am saying are you.
The Egyptian forces...
no, I am understanding that and as I have shown you before it is very implausible. I only brought down the above to answer you previous question of why the U.S. would pass on secrets and how I felt that above was more plausible then your ridicules theory.

But again I believe that both are very implausible theories!!


"These jets did try to sink that Egyptian ship, they tried their best but as you see they did have the requisite armament and when they recognized that it was an American ship they ceased fire. "

But they were supposed to be looking for a destroyer that had been attacking coastal positions, why are they wasting the little weaponry they did have on a cargo ship? again they did not think that was a cargo ship!!! They thought it was that Egyptian war ship. Hence the mistake!!!

the U.S. was not supporting them.!! France was not the U.S.

If the US was not supporting them then how did they get the equipment they were using in the first place? Not even all the NATO nations had that stuff then. what equipment?? You have proof that the U.S. gave Israel that equipment???

Secondly even if they had that’s not called any major support for again Israel got most of it from France!!!!


"As for this alleged comms equipment, so in an all out war, if Israel had that you think they would have given back that alleged equipment if they were asked to.???"

If you get some equipment and misuse it you usually don't get any more. It was rather vital to the campaign strategy that they used. Eventually the Arab forces would realise they had been tricked and upgrade their cryptography... they would turn to the Soviets for that... the NSA would of course be the experts that you would turn to then. well at the time they didn’t think they could turn to the U.S. for they were getting most from France and not the U.S., secondly again, that is not a reason to attack a ship as I explined before.


"Your theory makes no sense for if it were true why would Israel go after that ship in the first day of the war?!? This mistake happened two days into the war. "

Planning, hesitation... even if you had to do it it is still not a nice thing to do. Equally it was not until after the war had started that the disinformation became necessary anyway... for all the Israeli military knew the arab armies might have just folded... in such a case the disinformation would have been unecessary. this answer is pure unadulterated spin at the purest sense of that word!!!!

Again if Israel were great at panning the destruction of all the Arab armies air force in a period of three hours thy most certainly would have been well planned to attack that ship on the first day if that was the intention to attack that ship.

It wasn’t and that ship was accidentally hit after two days into that war.


"And also like I said before, in an all out war for survival any normal counteries attitude would be who cares if they know as long as we survive. All that stuff can be worked out after we are here on this panet and not into the sea so to speak."

There are short term and long term aspects to such an issue. I doubt it was taken lightly even if it was their only option. whether you say something was taken lightly or not, the fact is that if there was such a discussion the conclusion would have been that it makes no sense…as I have explained before.


"I mean like you said yourself in your theory, the U.S. wasn’t going to tell the Arabs about that alleged equipment so why would Israel bother with it then?? "

Because if you get assistance from someone and it turns out to be very successful you kinda want to continue the relationship... having a superpower on your side is not a bad thing, and Israel was rather short of friends in the international community. yes exactly but at the time Israel did not have the U.S. as a super power backing them up, in fact attacking that ship would most potentially prevent that from ever happening as opposed to simply continuing to allegedly use it.

[XASA]

Latest update on U.S.S. Liberty finds gross negilence on part of Israelis but survivors not happy with findings because they were not interviewed.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/01/12/us.israel.ussliberty/index.html

[Whistler]

There are plenty of unanswered questions in the Liberty case.

One thing to take note of though, is that around the same time as the Liberty attack there were several similiar attacks, involving US Navy ships and AMERICAN fighters, accidently attacking eachother in Vietnam.

Not to mention friendly fire is still very common even today, as seen in Iraq.

Now we all know that the US didn't intentionally bomb their own ships in Vietnam, and they didn't intentionally bomb British APCs in Iraq, so its impossible that the Israelis make mistakes too .

[UoUo]

Don't forget what we did to ourselfs in 82 war.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

I think it's pretty clear from the NSA intercepts that the Israelis misidentified the ship. After reading that, it would appear that they should have ID'd it better before firing on it. Even after there were people in the water they were still trying to ID it. Not a deliberate attack on an American ship. Unless all that radio chatter was rehearsed, which is very far fetched.

As an aside, I damn near shat myself when I opened the first .pdf file I downloaded from the NSA site. Right there at the top of the scanned document it says SECRET SPOKE & I got all shaky, fell off my chair, and coughed up a black skillcraft government pen. They made me sign stuff saying they cut lop off my b4lls if I ever combined those 2 words in public. I guess old habits die hard....

[Kitsune]

I think the most likely scenarios are these two:

1)Either it was a tragic mistake. This is the most simple and straightforward explanation.

2)Or it was an deliberate act. If the last was the case why did the Israelis made such an clumsy attack and did not sink the ship? There is one possible reason: They tried to trick the USA into the war against Egypt (the US had entered wars after being attacked: Lousitania incident, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonking...). As far as I know it is said that the jets attacking the Liberty were unmarked. In this case it makes sense not to sink the ship...some survivors make the matter more dramatic.

Of course, version 2 will be very unpopular with any patriotic Israeli. But very popular with any anti-semit.
But fact is we do not know what is the truth.

[UoUo]

Why whould israel want the U.S go into the 67...67 war was the best war that israel fightin the past 50 years...

We simply didn't need USA in those days to win the war for us.

[Kitsune]

@UoUo

Just to answer your question:

1)The war was still underway, Israel could not know how long it would take and how it would end.

2)With the USA activly fighting at Israels side, Americas commitment would have been guaranteed for the future.


And plz...do not say "we". Even if this would be true it does not mean that every Israeli is evil. Only a few people would know the truth in any case...even the pilots would be told some cover up story. In any case people like yourself are innocent. So no "we" please.

[UkrainianAmerican]

In my opinion, if israel had a conspiracy to sink the ship, they would probably send in "extermination squads" to "silence" the survivors, instead of rescuing them and sending them back to US. I mean if this actually was a conspiracy, it was a very strangely executed one to say the least.

[army cadet_ngcsu]

I believe it was an accident, why would Israel want to piss off one of its biggest supporters, especially at that time when the Soviets were backing everyone and the US was backing Israel. It is a simple case of friendly fire, the same **** happens today like in Iraq and A-stan. It is unfortunate but that is war....that is the fog of war.