It certainly looks like it couldn't be an accident.

I'm not saying they did do it on purpose, but IF they did, WHY?

What would the payoff be?

Source?

The Assault on the USS Liberty Still Covered Up After 26 Years

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0693/9306019.htm

This Month in History

The Assault on the USS Liberty Still Covered Up After 26 Years

By James M.  Ennes Jr.

June 1993, Page 19

Twenty-six years have passed since that clear day on June 8, 1967 when Israel attacked the USS Liberty with aircraft and torpedo boats, killing
34 young men and wounding 171.  The attack in international waters followed over nine hours of close surveillance.  Israeli pilots circled the ship at low level 13 times on eight different occasions before attacking.  Radio operators in Spain, Lebanon,Germany and aboard the ship itself all heard the pilots reporting to their headquarters that this was an American ship.  They attacked anyway.  And when the ship failed to sink, the Israeli government concocted an elaborate story to cover the crime.

There is no question that this attack on a U.S.  Navy ship was deliberate.  This was a coordinated effort involving air, sea, headquarters and commando forces attacking over a long period.It was not the "few rounds of misdirected fire" that Israel would have the world believe.Worse, the Israeli excuse is a gross and detailed fabrication that disagrees entirely with the eyewitness recollections of survivors. Key American leaders call the attack deliberate.  More important, eyewitness participants from the Israeli side have told survivors that they knew they were attacking an American ship.

Israeli Pilot Speaks Up

Fifteen years after the attack, an Israeli pilot approached Liberty survivors and then held extensive interviews with former Congressman Paul N.  (Pete) McCloskey about his role.  According to this senior Israeli lead pilot, he recognized the Liberty as American immediately, so informed his headquarters, and was told to ignore the American flag and continue his attack.  He refused to do so and returned to base, where he was arrested.

Later, a dual-citizen Israeli major told survivors that he was in an Israeli war room where he heard that pilot's radio report.  The attacking pilots and everyone in the Israeli war room knew that they were attacking an American ship, the major said.  He recanted the statement only after he received threatening phone calls from Israel.

The pilot's protests also were heard by radio monitors in the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon.  Then-U.S.Ambassador to Lebanon Dwight Porter has confirmed this.  Porter told his story to syndicated columnists Row land Evans and Robert Novak and offered to submit to further questioning by authorities.  Unfortunately, no one in the U.S.  government has any interest in hearing these first-person accounts of Israeli treachery.

Key members of the Lyndon Johnson administration have long agreed that this attack was no accident.Perhaps most outspoken is former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Thomas Moorer.  "I can never accept the claim that this was a mistaken attack, " he insists.

Former Secretary of State Dean Rusk is equally outspoken, calling the attack deliberate in press and radio interviews.  Similarly strong language comes from top leaders of the Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency (some of whose personnel were among the victims),National Security Council, and from presidential advisers such as Clark Clifford, Joseph Califano and Lucius Battle.

A top-secret analysis of Israel's excuse conducted by the Department of State found Israel's story to be untrue.  Yet Israel and its defenders continue to stand by their claim that the attack was a"tragic accident" in which Israel mistook the most modern electronic surveillance vessel in the world for a rusted-out 40-year-old Egyptian horse transport.

Despite the evidence, no U.S.  administration has ever found the courage to ever found the courage to defy the Israeli lobby by publicly demanding a proper accounting from Israel.

How Does Congress React to These Complaints?

Most members of Congress respond to inquiries about the Liberty with seemingly sympathetic promises to "investigate.  " Weeks or months later they write again to report their "findings": "The Navy investigated in
1967 and found no evidence that the attack was deliberate," they say. "Israel apologized, calling the attack a tragic case of misidentification, and paid damages for loss of life, injuries and property damage.  The matter is closed.

The fact is, however, that the Navy's "investigation" examined only the quality of the crew's training, the adequacy of communications and the performance of the crew under fire.  The Navy was forbidden to examine Israeli culpability and Navy investigators refused to allow testimony showing that the attack was deliberate or that Israel's excuse was untrue.

The Navy blocked all testimony about Israeli actions.

Instead of determining whether the attack was deliberate, the Navy blocked all testimony about Israeli actions.  No survivor was permitted to describe the close in machine-gun fire that continued for 40 minutes after Israel claims all firing stopped.  No survivor was allowed to talk about the life rafts the Israeli torpedo men machine-gunned in the water.  No survivor was permitted to challenge defect sand fabrications in Israel's story.  Even my eyewitness testimony as officer-of-the deck was withheld from the official record.  No evidence of Israeli culpability was "found" because no such testimony was allowed.  To survivors, this was not an investigation.  It was a cover-up.

Congress Goes Through the Motions

Occasionally a member of Congress will seem to probe a bit deeper, as Ted Kennedy once did.  In response to requests, Kennedy asked Liberty survivors and others for input,whichhis staff then"studied" for more than a year.

Kennedy asked no questions, conducted no interviews, and showed no curiosity about the many discrepancies in Israel's story.  Then Kennedy reported his "findings" in a letter to survivors.Carefully avoiding the circumstances of the attack, Kennedy's letter deplored the "tragic circumstances and loss of life" and declared that the facts about the Liberty must be uncovered "to the maximum extent humanly possible.  "

That letter, however, represented Kennedy's maximum effort.  Appeals to Kennedy for some real help go unanswered.

The Guest Goes On

The best forum in the '90sfor this story and related stories of the Middle East may well be electronic mail, the complex of computer and electronic mail systems that now span the globe.

For instance, the USS Liberty and the Middle East are hot topics in the "Prodigy interactive computer service" run by Sears and IBM.  With over
2 million members, Prodigy's "Israel" forums guarantee some lively and often bitter debates.

Unfortunately, the playing field often seems uneven.  The cover-up side heavily outnumbers its critics, and is allowed tactics rarely tolerated from others.  Criticism of Israeli policies is seen as"attacks on the Jewish homeland.  " Pro-Israel debaters charge that Israel's critics are "disciples of hate,"and "pathological haters of Israel and all things Jewish.  "

The language gets worse.  Prodigy allows Israel's critics to be called "sodomists," and "derrierebussing anti semites.  " The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, which prints an update on progress toward a congressional investigation every year on the June anniversary of the tragedy, comes in for special vitriol.  The magazine is described almost daily as I a hate rag."Yet Prodigy's censors often reject even mild and factual rebuttals of such charges as "insulting.  "

Thanks... I didn't know about that.

I'm sure [b]EricTheHun[/b] will be along shortly to enlighten you on this incident.

Edited to add: The definitive [i]Liberty[/i] ARFCOM debate at this [url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=162333&w=searchPop]link[/url].

One theory has it that they were P.O'd that we were eavesdropping and
a.  mad about that
b.  afraid the intel would get leaked to the other sides
c.  concern about info on atrocities allegedly revealed

There is no shortage of resources on this at your fingertips.  

You can find everything from conspiracy theories ranging from plausible to very far-out, and of course the Israeli explanation as put out by various entities, from the government itself to 'think tank' front organizations trying to intellectualize the issue.

Their Mossad of course probably has a position that is either overt or covert or both.

PRK Out

This is always the most amazing thing about this issue.
WHY.

I find it odd that some people have a wealth of information, links, proof, etc., all proving that it was no accident.
But they never seem to attempt to answer why.
They'll even rebutt any "whys" that are offered.
But they never offer one in return.

I think 'some' people just like to chalk it up to the Jews/Israelis being bloodthirsty, by nature.
Or sometimes there's a hint about "greed" and money.

Never an insightful analysis though.

Ahhh...one of my favorites.  Pass the popcorn.

Gotta go now...but back later for some fun!

[:D]

I'll get a keg, and a coupla bottles of gin...

Well, I've got dinner reservations at 7:00PM, so you guys are gonna have to do this without me.
Have fun [:)].

Why would Israel purposely sink the USS Liberty?

Simple.  The money grubbing bastards wanted more money.

That's a particularly stupid, poorly thought out answer with no explanatory power whatsoever.

[b]RikWriter[/b]:
It was a simple answer from a simple mind, perhaps.

The Israelies knew that the Liberty was smuggling drugs to Greece to help fund Tibetan terrorist groups.

My understanding is that Israel launched an offensive to take the Golan Heights against Syria after Syria accepted the UN brokered cease fire. They didn't want someone spying on them doing that.

Or they wanted to punish us for spying on them, for that matter.

Nope, this one's not hot yet. Try back later.

I concur. I also read about an Israeli pilot who refused a direct order to attack the Liberty after he identified it as American. He clearly saw the Stars and Stripes.

Ooops, I guess that was already mentioned.

Gettin' warmer...

Same old crap new troll...

To keep people from findng out they could read Egyptian signals almost verbatum. The US was just as suspect to them in 1967 as the Russians were. We were NOT their ally in 1967. We were a ally of Jordan, one of their enemies. American Jews were financing Isreal-but NOT the American goverment. We were still religiously obeying the 1948 UN weapons embargo against Israel. Because Iran, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia insisted on it, and the State Department then as now is riddled with men lining their pockets with cash from the Oil Sheiks.

Not untill AFTER Richard M. Nixon was inaugerated in Jan 1969 did US policy toward Isreal become like it is now. In June 1967 we were not friends. Not enemies certainly, but we were not close-we were closer to DeGaul's France at the time than to Israel.

If we cut of relations with every country that attacked US Navy ships or killed US servicemen over the years we would be very lonely. France, England, Japan, Germany, Phillipines, Spain, Italy, we would have to disassociate from all of them. That is if any logically driven standard applied- however since such claims are only driven by raceism and religous bigotry which is by definition illogical...

And the far far most likely cause of the attack was that Liberty was mistaken for the mothership for the Egyptian Komar boats that had already sunk the IDFS Eliat with a Styx missile. Even naval aviators trained and practiced in ship attack misidentify ships that look almost nothing alike. IDF pilots had no antiship training and the fighters they were flying had no air to surface radar or optronics. Their attacks were conducted with a reflector sight and Mk 1 eyeball, same as WWII but from more than twice the speed and altitude.

And after Liberty was on fire there was no way that the IDF "Nasty" boats could tell her markings. They were either burned off or obscured by the smoke and flame. Those boats had only WWII era sensors and weapons technology as well.

IBTL

[img]http://photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=9229[/img]

It was sarcastic bait.  You swallowed. [rolleyes]

need some UFO pics

More undecover neo-nazi bullshit trolling


Next

Good point. I wonder how many foreign troops/vehicles/ships have been attacked by our guys by accident. Not that I'm putting down our troops by any means, but these things happen sometimes.

Of course, I don't know much about the Liberty incident, other than the basics.

Yeah, just ask the Canadians about that...

Unlike many of the people conjecturing about the incident, I knew the CO of the Liberty.  He was awarded the Medal of Honor for his actions on the occasion.  http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/pers-us/uspers-m/w-mcgngl.htm

He was convinced that it was not an accident.  The Israelis knew what they were doing.  Like most professionals involved in a variety of military activities, he wouldn't elaborate on the reasons things happen.

The Israelis have a marriage of convenience with the US (both ways).  They cooperate with us as long as it is convenient, we support them as long as it is convenient or politcally beneficial.  If they get a government that decides they are going to run all the Palestinian out of the West Bank for it's own political survival and the Arab Bloc makes it clear that this would be a causus belli, I'm sure the US would try to prevent the Israelis from acting even if it caused the Israeli government to fall.  If the went ahead, I don't know if the US would support the Israelis in a situation like that.   Our support like theirs has limits.

Don't blame me for his poor use of sarcasm.

Typical Rikwriter. Can't even admit the obvious.

Wrong Gobby---I already admitted that you and Duncan are so self-deluded that you're beyond help.  That became patently obvious over 8 pages of your refusal to accept reality.

I'm currently reading 'Body of Secrets' by James Bamford. The book is about the NSA. The author claims that the reason the Liberty was attacked was because the IDF was commiting war crimes in the Siani, and the Liberty was in position to intercept the line of sight radio signals. Israel has always relied on a larger than usual supply of post WWII guilt to assist it's political aims when dealing with it's offensive military actions. They didn't want the truth to get out.

Now what the hell kind of "war crimes" could the israelis have been committing in Sinai that the Liberty could monitor?  About the only crime you could commit against an armed enemy would be to shoot prisoners and I can't see how a ship at sea could monitor that.

Sorry, but without complete details of what the Liberty was monitoring, I have to consider that statement as complete bullshit

Yep, you got stoned, it's in black and white, and you still can't bring yourself to admit it.

Your character is in the spotlight, champ, and it ain't looking so good right now.

If Ferris Bueller was a character in the movie "Heat" what kind of gun would he have used?

What's incredibly sad is that you probably actually believe that.  Really man, I started out a bit irritated by your (seemingly purposeful) neutronic density, but now I am just feeling very very sorry for you.

Whatever floats your boat, captain.

Now that makes sense (at least to me)[:D] Finally, an explanation I can live with.

Thank you,sir.

Makes a lot of sense.  If you recall who was in the White House back then, it wouldn't surprise me at all.  I think the Israelis were wrong to attack the ship, but that doesn't make what Johnson was doing by playing both sides any smarter or more justifiable.

First of all, don't call bullshit unless you can back it up. I'm going to summerize some of the info and quote some. If you want to dispute the info, read the book. All the information comes from chapter chapter 7 (Blood).

Page 200; (summerized)
Commander McGonagle was concerned about the proximity to shore. The NSA officer, Lt Cmdr Lewis replied that staying farther out to sea would hurt the mission. The NSA was looking for UHF line of sight transmissions. The closer the better.

Page 201, and I quote directly:
'A convoy of Indian peacekeeper soldiers, flying the blue UN flag from their jeeps and trucks, were on their way to Gaza whan they met an Israeli tank column on the road. As the Israelis approached, the UN observers pulled aside and stopped to get out of the way. One of the Israeli tankes rotated it's turret and opened fire from a few feet away. The Israeli tank then rammed it's gunthrough the windshield of the Indian jeep and decapitated the two men inside. When other Indians went to the aid of their comrades, they were mowed down by machine gun fire. Another Israeli tank thrust it's gun into a UN truck, lifted it, and smashed it to the ground, killing or wounding all of the occupants. In Gaza, Israeli blasted rounds into UN headquarters, which was flying the UN flag. Fourteen UN memers were killed in these incidents.'

The next three pages document the extent of the Israeli war crimes against the Egyptian POW's. Acording to the book, the senior Israeli Army leadership knew about the crimes, but no one bothered to denounce them. Addressing the question of Israeli war crimes, Sharon said in 1995, "Israel dosen't need this, and no one can preach to us about it-no one".


Page 201-202 direct quote:
'As the Liberty sat with eyeshot of El Arish, evesdropping on surrounding communications, Israeli soldiers turned it into a slaughterhouse, systematically butchering their prisoners.'


I could go on and on, but I think you ge the picture. I bullshit you not.

That is my recollection also.

[url]http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/bamford.html[/url]

What you quote is complete bullshit for the UN wasn’t even there, for they were ordered to leave by Nasser (the Egyptian president) before the war started(the UN left without even a letter of complaint.......this should give a hint as to why us Jews or a bit sceptical(understatement!!)to UN “ peacekeepers” coming into the region now). It shows clear stupidity on your part to even drudge up this ridicules claim of so called Israeli war crimes in the Sinai.

As for the liberty incident. The reason Israel attacked it was for the valid suspicion that the u.s. was spying on it. Like it was mentioned before, the u.s. did not have any special relationship with Israel, in fact at the time it was in the u.s. interests to side with the Arabs, lest you upset them and have them in turn refuse to sell the u.s. any oil(im not sure times have changed). It is quite stupid to claim Israel did it maliciously without any cause for why in the world would tiny Israel, who at the time was fighting five Arab countries at once, want to out of the blue invite a superpower to also attack. If any of you try for a second to look at it from an Israeli point of view you will see how ridicules you sound. For just think what Israel was going through at the time. Israel was in a fight for its own survival. it was fighting a five different countries, on all sides of its borders at the same time. Israel was outnumbered 12 to one. All these countries had the latest soviet equipment while Israel had a mixture of French and old British and American equipment (there were even old shermans from ww2 used) At the time most people including the Jews thought that Israel was finished. With all that in mind, why in the world would it want to attack the u.s. and invite them to be an enemy of yours. When you think of it from an Israeli prospective you see that the reason was justified for that ship was rightly suspected of spying on Israel and Israel had to do whatever it could to make sure it survives.

What you must understand is that amongst us Jews there is a real belief that the holocaust could happen again but what is different this time around is that we are not going to go to the gas chambers with our hands behind our backs, this time we will fight. If you are our side that’s great but if you are helping the enemy then we will have no choice but to do whatever it takes to defend ourselves as I am sure anyone of you would do!!

I'm not trying to start a flame war, so where did you get you information from? Without any kind of reference, it's just he said, she said. Do a little more reserch next time.


QCMGR,

Thanks for the link. Quite informative.

Well firstly this is from the historical chain of events that occurred during that time. I do understand that you Jew haters out there like to forget the real history and make up new events or deny old ones so I agreed to your request and I have brought down two sources. One is from a Jewish website where it brings down in great detail and in chronological order the chain of events and describes in detail the UN withdrawal before the war. I understand that alone wont suite you so I also brought the reference form the UN itself where I have found the actual document (document A/6730/Add. 2.) of where it details the UN' withdrawal. This all took me five seconds of research and I am sure if I spent a little more time I could flood you with hundreds of websites from other reliable sources that support this actual history.
Here are the two sources...

[url]http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/UN/UNEF1.html[/url]

[url]http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/d21af95689e8f2c00525660b0051640f?OpenDocument[/url]

ok I brought the reaserch and now  authoritatively say that what you quoted was bullshit!!!

What is with some members automatically calling us Jew Haters if you use the word Jew or Agree with the Arabs in any way?  Its a fact Israelis are Jews, like most Arabs are Muslim. Just because our opinion doesnt agree with yours doesnt mean we are anti-semites. The guys doing the accusing are some of the most prolific hate-mongers on this board.  

Disagreeing with what Israel factually does is one thing but making stuff up is something entirely different. If Israel does something that you disagree with that’s fine and I will recognise it as such but making shit up is wrong and I think it is justifiable to claim anti semetisim. By saying that Israel committed war crimes in the sinai(which is such a ridicules statement to make where it leaves no choice but to conclude some negative bias) is not disagreeing for I have made clear it never happened. It is anti semitism when it is made up shit to smear Israel.

I think you are overreacting. I have been kinda surprised that this thread has remained on the calmer side.

But the post by Denton_T_Young:

[red]Why would Israel purposely sink the USS Liberty?

Simple. The money grubbing bastards wanted more money.[/red]

Seems pretty imflammatory.

Then again the whole Liberty incident comes up every 2 weeks. Who keeps bringing it up?? And Why?

Where is the disccusion about the USS Pueblo?? Or the Tonkin Bay incident? What about all the "friendly" fire incidents that Americans have suffered at the hands of Americans? What about the Afghan wedding party an AC-130 wiped out? Or the F-16's vs. Canadians incident?

Why do all of those get so much less discussion here?

Most of the times in war condtions when US forces flatten something they shouldn't have, or kill or injure people they shouldn't have, they immediate reaction is something similar to "bullets were flying, it's war, stuff happens".

Hmmmm, when the Liberty was attacked what was happening in the area? (Read quoted text from last paragraph) But it's different because Americans were attacked.

I wonder what would happen if the US was in a shooting war, with an effective enemy, and a "neutral country" parked a spyship 10 miles away, in the combat zone. What do you think the US's reaction would be?

Think about it, we'll re-post all this in 2 weeks anyway.