The attack on the USS Liberty - Friendly Fire/Fog of War or Something Else?

[Ramirez]

You read me wrong, I'm saddened by the lack of anyone willing to look at all the reports not that I think the Israelis can do no wrong. I am saddened by the fact there is no debate but rather that minds are made up already.
we are trying to debate something that happened in a warzone many years ago based on reports made by witnesses from both sides. Yet all that I've been told is that....this is so because this person said so.... despite another person saying it's not so. The witness accounts disagree with each other, a warzone and a ship under attack, Isreali pilots exhausted to the point they make bad judgement calls and yet one one persons view is correct?

No, it was an accident but many people were responsible who should have known better, who should be called to account on both sides. These days it would never take 24 hours for a message to get to a naval ship from it's command, pilots wouldn't be sent into the skies having had no sleep and constant sorties, allies firing at each other, ships not where they were supposed to be, it was an accident waiting to happen and for which blame does lie. It was an awful mess and many people were putting up their umbrellas to deflect the blame.

But people have to have their theories, that it was deliberate, I'm sorry for the crew but being under attack doesn't make them right in that it was deliberate does it? You know how many theories there are that involve the Jews? A lot.

Fair enough, maybe we can put this aside.

I think what is swaying my mind is this

"[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] Bamford writes that unknown to Israel, a US Navy EC-121 intelligence aircraft was flying high overhead the 'Liberty,' electronically recorded the attack. The US aircraft crew provides evidence that the Israeli pilots knew full well that they were attacking a US Navy ship flying the American flag"

So if this is false (and I admit I haven't read the Bamford book), I'll cede it could all be "the fog of war",
[/FONT]

 

[Tez3]

Fair enough, maybe we can put this aside.

I think what is swaying my mind is this

"[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] Bamford writes that unknown to Israel, a US Navy EC-121 intelligence aircraft was flying high overhead the 'Liberty,' electronically recorded the attack. The US aircraft crew provides evidence that the Israeli pilots knew full well that they were attacking a US Navy ship flying the American flag"[/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]So if this is false (and I admit I haven't read the Bamford book), I'll cede it could all be "the fog of war", [/FONT]

The NSA however dispute this though don't they? They say they were monitoring Arab transmissions and had Arabic speaking translators on board not Hebrew translators.
While no copies of the transmissions are available people can say anything, yes they exist, no they don't.
I think a lot of people like the conspiracy theory because it beats being thought of as incompetent ( yes that will go for the Israelis too) it was what we call a cluster **** and no one wants to admit to that. People messed up all over, much better to have people think it was some devious Blackadder type plot to save face.

 

[elder999]

And, after just two pages on this one topic, we can clearly see why I tend to avoid "the debate." Of course, I'm going on record as saying that I have nothing I can add to this discussion.

 

[exile]

What the hell does Noam Chomsky have to do with Eric Margolis?

What the hell it has to do with it is that it speaks to the 'relevance' of Margolis being Jewish, which you mentioned yourself, and which you seemed to think was important for some reason or other.

 

[Ramirez]

What the hell it has to do with it is that it speaks to the 'relevance' of Margolis being Jewish, which you mentioned yourself, and which you seemed to think was important for some reason or other.

Don't be obtuse, the fact that he is Jewish means there is less chance of his writing that column due to his being antisemitic. You don't like that reason too bad, you seem to like the last word, respond back and I won't, then you will have the last word.

 

[Makalakumu]

As with many things that cross the nebulous line into "conspiracy theory" this is probably not every going to come to any satisfactory resolution for any side. People who see this as an accident have to contend with a massive body of data that shows malice and people who think of this as a conspiracy can only go so far because of the veil of secrecy that surrounds the government.

Thus, I think that it would be very difficult to ever come up with a definitive answer.

That said, I personally think it is very hard for apologists to completely blow off allegations that the attack was intended. When so many high level officials who were there come out and say the things that they have said, it becomes an effort in disbelief in order to deny that something foul was amiss.

Check out the video I posted and look at some of the sources suggested. IMO, its very difficult to continue to assert that the USS Liberty attack was merely a friendly fire incident.

Also, IMO, when you consider the testimony given by the crewman, the ships captain, and the carrier group commander who says that President Johnson ordered them not to interfere and that he wanted the ship on the bottom, it becomes more and more plausible that this was indeed a false flag operation.

If that is shocking, consider the fact of how the Gulf of Tonkin incident was obfuscated. 58,000 servicemen died as a result. Up to five million civilians were killed. The GoT was the pretext that drew us into Vietnam and it was a gross distortion of events.

 

[exile]

Don't be obtuse, the fact that he is Jewish means there is less chance of his writing that column due to his being antisemitic. You don't like that reason too bad, you seem to like the last word, respond back and I won't, then you will have the last word.

Careful with your use of the description 'obtuse', Ramirez, just in case it comes back to bite your own ***. The whole point of my examples was that being Jewish is no barrier to being anti-Semitic. So the problem with 'your reason' is that it's a poor one, whether or not you were aware of that. There's this little matter of logic: your premise is wrong, and can be easily shown to be wrong, as per the examples I mentioned, or a thousand more that can easily be supplied. Whether or not I want to have the last word, you see, has nothing to do with the fact that what you said, that I've bolded above, is... well, provably wrong. Sorry about that!

 

[Ninjamom]

You will believe what you chose to believe. I believe someone who was there not others books and articles.

All the sources and articles I referenced were direct eye-witness testimony to the events.

From Wikipedia
The Liberty's captain, Commander McGonagle, was wounded during the air attack, but he remained in command on the ship's bridge.

No, the IDF didn't strafe the lifeboats, other US witnesses don't confirm the IDF fired upon the lifeboats, some US witnesses also say that they opened fired on the IDF..... Countless US inquiries have proved it was an accident, no mention of strafing until long after the event.

There is a fairly good BBC documentary about the USS Liberty incident available on YouTube here. While I disagree with the documentary's conclusions about 'Operation Cyanide', the documentary does provide interviews with a half dozen Liberty survivors, plus interviews with dozens of US and Israeli military, intelligence, and political leaders. These eye-witness accounts include all available points of view, but they specifically contradict the bullets listed above. (See for instance, tape segment 6 from 7:50 to 9:00 for eye-witness testimony of the strafing of the lifeboats given within one month of the incident, that was excluded from the official inquiry, as well as testimony that the Captain had been unconscious due to his wounds during the latter part of the attack, Wikipedia article not-withstanding).

Witnesses on board the USS Liberty did acknowledge return fire from at least one Liberty sailor towards an approaching Israeli gunboat (this is described in LCDR Ennes's book), but only after the aerial strafing had ended, and while the gunboats were already strafing. It was after two liferafts had been strafed and a third taken aboard that the strafing stopped (presumably because the markings on the seized liferaft gave the gunboat sailors their first incontrovertable evidence that they had been firing on an American vessel).

 

[Tez3]

And, after just two pages on this one topic, we can clearly see why I tend to avoid "the debate." Of course, I'm going on record as saying that I have nothing I can add to this discussion.

You and me both. I thought it was to be a discussion not a trial. It was brought up in another thread, to what end I don't know as it had no relevancy which is why it was split off to here.
War is nasty, it's confusing, it's hell and with the best will in the world people involved in it don't always know whats going on, eye witness accounts at the time of trauma aren't the best accounts especially when people have had time to think, others have spoken to them etc. The fact that the Israelis may have been innocent of deliberately firing at the ship but guilty of incompentancy, stupidity or even pride doesn't occur to anyone. Minds are made up.

We could fill the whole of MT up with incidents where Allies have killed allies, their own troops or innocent people, there's no thread here about the American troops that fired on two separate wedding parties and killed the people celebrating, there's no thread about My Lai or Extraordinary Rendition, there's no thread about the Basra road, no thread about American troops opening fire on a peaceful crowd in Basra killing 10 injuring 100 etc etc.
And this is a beauty
http://www.americanheritage.com/pla...ppines-sulu-juramentado-manila-pershing.shtml


The BBC may have a good reputation but you should bear in mind it doesn't make it's own documentaries, it buys them from outside companies, I've just been involved with such a company who are doing a documentary about female MMA. The company were told they could take any view they wanted on the female fighters as long as it was an entertaining programme. With this one we have to have our fingers crossed and trust the company that made the documentary. Female fighters have been interviewed ( eye witness acccounts), fights filmed ( documentary evidence) but until we see the film we have no way of knowing what 'spin' will be put on it. The company have promised we will like it, but will we? the truth will be in the eye of the beholder, some will see a brutal sport some will see female freedom of choice. Its the same with any documentary, it will be spun the way of the director and his issues, the truth sadly is sometimes boring and not entertaining.
I would never take a BBC or any other documentary as truth, I've seen far too many of them on Northern Ireland where the truth was long buried. The BBC also has a long history of being pro Arab and is also left wing verging on communist at times.
http://halldor2.wordpress.com/2006/10/22/bbc-admits-left-wing-bias/
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/...BBC News/article.do?expand=true#StartComments

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/18386/Left-wing-bias-that-shames-the-BBC-


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1446392/BBC-appoints-man-to-monitor-pro-Arab-bias.html

 

[spectrex]

Oh well if you say it's true it must be then mustn't it. The bad Jews have done it again oh and we got blamed for 9/11 didn't we? All a Zionist plan to take over the world and kill Americans. No one is willing to look at all the sides here, for once Wikipedia got the most balanced point of view, showing that many American service personnel also didn't believe it wasn't accidental but we must have a conspiricy theory so we'll stir and stir until people believe it was a conspirecy bearing in mind how much hatred there is of Jews anyway, so always a good target there.
Still if your going to tell a lie tell a big one, never let truth get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

lose the victimcomplex, they isrealis shot upour boat, the matter at hand is why, they,the siraelis are no victims here, sosuck it up.if they mean to do it then why does the formerLiberty crewmember website tell how Kfir pilots were flying overhead the israelis days before.they knew where the boat was and whose it was. the questions are Israel to answer not the US.

I for one, have never understand our apparently blind loyalty to country that clearly hasits own agenda

 

[Tez3]

lose the victimcomplex, they isrealis shot upour boat, the matter at hand is why, they,the siraelis are no victims here, sosuck it up.if they mean to do it then why does the formerLiberty crewmember website tell how Kfir pilots were flying overhead the israelis days before.they knew where the boat was and whose it was. the questions are Israel to answer not the US.

I for one, have never understand our apparently blind loyalty to country that clearly hasits own agenda

Do you want to put that into English? I have no victim complex I can assure you. the case is over and done with btw, Israel answered to America and the case was and is closed so get over it.
Wow imagine a country having it's own agenda eh and after all those dollars you spent trying to buy it.

subject closed as far as I'm concerned though feel free to chunter on.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Alrighty then

Not wanting to interfere with the Zionist and Anti-Semitism part of this post and of course the little side trip form Israel the country the Military in question came from to those of Jewish faith, which by the way, IMO, if you want any rational discussion on this topic Israel and Judaism have to be looked at as two separate things. If you wish to include it in this I would also think you would need to work in to the conversation that the crew of the liberty were from a society that is based on puritan ideals and were likely Protestants and Catholics which seems to me to be rather irrelevant... but maybe that is just me

Here are some other sources on the topic which by the way is the attack on the USS Liberty. And for the record I do not believe it was a friendly fire incident but due to the tone of this post already I think I will happily leave it with the links for those who are interested

http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Incid...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231622759&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Assault-Liberty-James-Ennes-Jr/dp/0972311602/ref=pd_sim_b_1

http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Dead-water-Christpher-Mitchell/dp/B00007DT8I/ref=pd_sim_b_7

 

[Tez3]

Alrighty then

Not wanting to interfere with the Zionist and Anti-Semitism part of this post and of course the little side trip form Israel the country the Military in question came from to those of Jewish faith, which by the way, IMO, if you want any rational discussion on this topic Israel and Judaism have to be looked at as two separate things. If you wish to include it in this I would also think you would need to work in to the conversation that the crew of the liberty were from a society that is based on puritan ideals and were likely Protestants and Catholics which seems to me to be rather irrelevant... but maybe that is just me

Here are some other sources on the topic which by the way is the attack on the USS Liberty. And for the record I do not believe it was a friendly fire incident but due to the tone of this post already I think I will happily leave it with the links for those who are interested

http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Incid...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231622759&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Assault-Liberty-James-Ennes-Jr/dp/0972311602/ref=pd_sim_b_1

http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Dead-water-Christpher-Mitchell/dp/B00007DT8I/ref=pd_sim_b_7

The IDF contains many from the Muslim faith as well as the Christian faiths. It has since it's inception, it's not purely a Jewish force. It also contains atheists, Buddhists ( odd I know) and a few other faiths to boot.

 

[Edmund BlackAdder]

People messed up all over, much better to have people think it was some devious Blackadder type plot to save face.

I am sorry, but I just want to be on record stating I was no where near that area when that happened. Baldrick will vouch for my where abouts. He will tell you that I was at Mrs. Miggins coffee shop drinking a brown liquid that she insists is gourmet imported coffee, but in fact smells and tastes quite like something that has passed through a cats digestive system. Leaves a rather bad taste in ones mouth, almost the same taste I might add, as this thread has sometimes had. Now if you will excuse me, I have to go and beat my man servant again.

Wibbles!

 

[Tez3]

I am sorry, but I just want to be on record stating I was no where near that area when that happened. Baldrick will vouch for my where abouts. He will tell you that I was at Mrs. Miggins coffee shop drinking a brown liquid that she insists is gourmet imported coffee, but in fact smells and tastes quite like something that has passed through a cats digestive system. Leaves a rather bad taste in ones mouth, almost the same taste I might add, as this thread has sometimes had. Now if you will excuse me, I have to go and beat my man servant again.

Wibbles!

Isn't coffee thats been through a cats digestive system supposed to be the best in the world? Certainly the most expensive at £50 a cup!

 

[Xue Sheng]

The IDF contains many from the Muslim faith as well as the Christian faiths. It has since it's inception, it's not purely a Jewish force. It also contains atheists, Buddhists ( odd I know) and a few other faiths to boot.

My point was faith has nothing to do with it actually

 

[Edmund BlackAdder]

Isn't coffee thats been through a cats digestive system supposed to be the best in the world? Certainly the most expensive at £50 a cup!

Whoever it was who first thought that brewing a drink from the contents of a cats litterbox was a good idea was most certainly drunk on something else at the time. I suspect it was most probably invented by a fan of American Football, late in the third quarter during the SuperBowl, after the ale had run out. At that point, they will honestly drink anything.

As for me, I'll take 10 pints, a bag of salted peanuts, and do hurry, I hear the worlds about to end.

Wibble.

 

[elder999]

Do you want to put that into English? I have no victim complex I can assure you. the case is over and done with btw, Israel answered to America and the case was and is closed so get over it.
Wow imagine a country having it's own agenda eh and after all those dollars you spent trying to buy it.

subject closed as far as I'm concerned though feel free to chunter on.

Of course, I have nothing to add........

.....but these gentlemen do:

"I can only conclude that the coordinated attack by aircraft and motor torpedo boats on the U.S.S. Liberty 15 1/2 miles north of Sinai on June 8 which killed 34 officers and men of the Navy and wounded another 175 was deliberate. "The fact that the U.S.S. Liberty was a Victory hull vessel, hundreds of which were produced and used by the U.S. Navy during World War II and since, rules out the possibility of mistaken identity. Every ship recognition book in the world has, for years, identified the characteristic Victory hull and supersturcture of the U.S.S. Liberty as U.S. Navy property . . .
"Whatever the reason for the attack, it was an act of high piracy. Those responsible should be court-martialed on charges of murder, amongst other counts. The Israel Government should pay full reparations to the United States and indemnities to the families of the Americans killed."
Craig Hosmer, then-U.S. Representative, on the floor of the House of Representatives, 29 June 1967

"The shame of the U.S.S. Liberty incident is that our sailors were treated as though they were enemies, rather than the patriots and heroes that they were. There is no other incident--beyond Israeli attack on the U.S.S. Liberty--that shows the power of the Israeli Lobby by being able to silence successive American governments. Allowing the lies told by the Israelis and their minions in the U.S. is disheartening to all of us who are proud of our servicemen."

-- James Abourezk, United States Senate, 1973-79

" . . . an act of military recklessness reflecting wanton disregard for human life."
Then Secretary of State Dean Rusk in a 10 June 1967 diplomatic note to the Israeli Ambassador.
"But I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or soem trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous."
Rusk, As I Saw It, W.W.Norton, 1990. p 388

"I do not know to this day at what level the attack on the Liberty was authorized and I think it is unlikely that the full truth will ever come out. Having been for so long a staunch supporter of Israel, I was particularly troubled by this incident; I could not bring myself to believe that such an action could have been authorized by Levi Eshkol. Yet somewhere inside the Israeli government, somewhere along the chain of command, something had gone terribly wrong--and then had been covered up. I hever felt the Israelis made adequate restitution or explanation for their actions . . ."
Clark M. Clifford, then-Presidential Advisor and Chairman of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, Counsel to the President
"That the Liberty could have been mistaken for the Egyptian supply ship El Quseir is unbelievable. El Quseir has one-fourth the displacement of the Liberty, roughly half the beam, is 180 feet shorter, and is very differently configured. The Liberty's unusual antenna array and hull markings should have been visible to low-flying aircraft and torpedo boats. In the heat of battle the Liberty was able to identify one of the attacking torpedo boats as Israeli and to ascertain its hull number. In the same circumstances, trained Israeli naval personnel should have been able easily to see and identify the larger hull markings on the Liberty."
Clifford, in a memorandum to the President, 18 July 1967

The ship was clearly identified, not only by its unique configuration but by a very large U.S. flag that was flown at the time. The weather was calm and the visibility was excellent. During this unprovoked attack 34 U.S. Navy men were killed and 171 wounded.

Nevertheless, to this day the American public does not know why the attack took place and who was involved overall.

In my opinion, the United States government and the Israeli government must share responsibility for this cover-up. I cannot accept the claim by the Israelis that this was a case of mistaken identity. I have flown for years in both peace and war on surveillance flights over the ocean, and my opinion is supported by a full career of locating and identifying ships at sea. Based on the way this tragedy was handled both in the United States and in Israel, one must conclude that there is much information that has not been made available to the public.

The U.S. Fleet, positioned nearby, received a distress call from the USS Liberty, and one carrier dispatched a squadron to go to the defense of the disabled ship. Before the aircraft reached the Liberty, they received orders from Washington directing their return to their ship. Who issued those orders? So far, no one knows. In the United States all information available to the U.S. government indicating those who participated in controlling this operation from Washington, together with the exact text of orders transmitted to the Mediterranean Fleet, has never been made public.
Thomas H. Moorer, Admiral, US Navy (Ret.), Forword to Assault on the Liberty

"Israeli authorities subsequently apologized for the incident, but few in Washington could believe that the ship had not been identified as an American naval vessel. Later, an interim intelligence memorandum concluded the attack was a mistake and not made in malice against the U.S. . . .
I had no role in the board of inquiry that followed, or the board's finding that there could be no doubt that the Israelis knew exactly what they were doing in attacking the Liberty. I have yet to understand why it was felt necessary to attack this ship or who ordered the attack."
Richard Helms, then-Director of Central Intelligence (CIA Director), A Look Over My Shoulder

"After more than two hours of unremitting assault, the Israelis finally halted their attack. One of the torpedo boats approached the Liberty. This same torpedo boat crew had been circling the ship, machine-gunning anyone who stuck his head above decks, as well as the lifeboats the crew had put over the side.

What had changed? The Israeli government knew that US aircraft carriers had just launched aircraft to come to Liberty's aid and the attack was quickly called off. The Israeli government called the US Embassy and said that they had made a "mistake.""

A torpedo boat officer asked in English over a bullhorn: "Do you need any help?"

The wounded commander of the Liberty, Captain William McGonagle, instructed the quartermaster to respond emphatically: "**** you."

 

[elder999]

And, since Ninjamom keeps saying to read the Chicago Tribune report, I thought I'd just post a pertinent section, with a link to declassified NSA documents on the incident:

Their anger has been stoked by the declassification of government documents and the recollections of former military personnel, including some quoted in this article for the first time, which strengthen doubts about the U.S. National Security Agency's position that it never intercepted the communications of the attacking Israeli pilots -- communications, according to those who remember seeing them, that showed the Israelis knew they were attacking an American naval vessel.

The documents also suggest that the U.S. government, anxious to spare Israel's reputation and preserve its alliance with the U.S., closed the case with what even some of its participants now say was a hasty and seriously flawed investigation.

In declassifying the most recent and largest batch of materials last June 8, the 40th anniversary of the attack, the NSA, this country's chief U.S. electronic-intelligence-gatherer and code-breaker, acknowledged that the attack had "become the center of considerable controversy and debate." It was not the agency's intention, it said, "to prove or disprove any one set of conclusions, many of which can be drawn from a thorough review of this material," available at http://www.nsa.gov/liberty .

 

[Tez3]

The point of posting on here I assumed was so we could discuss it not just post up reams of citations from other sources, how it could have happened, why it could have happened, why would America go along with it if it wasn't accidental, why would Israel do it if it was deliberate, what were the conditions like, why one side said something, why one side said nothing, why would people lie or keep quiet, who had reason to tell the truth or lie, what were the inconsistancies etc. I assumed it would be a proper in depth discussion discussion not a rehash of what has already been said, I thought we'd have original thoughts on this, I was wrong.