I have no doubt that the attack on the USS Liberty was deliberate and an act of WAR by Israel. What I do not understand is why. The cover up was and is counter to all I believe in, and a serious affront to our navy and those killed or injured.
I still remember what happened to the Pueblo, and the far east navy wide op immediate radio traffic that resulted. As I remember it, the politicians could not decide what to do, and the commander far east did not want to respond without guidance from Washington.


RE: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,151319,00.html

To be honest, siding with the Israel all these years has been a thorn in my side. They have done nothing except cause us (America) grief. I believe that the incident was deliberate, but I doubt they will ever admit to that.

Noone will admit to anything and the US govt is loathe to investigate.Documents will be released (censored to no end) per FOIA and thats it.We got all hot and bothered on this subject a short while back and nothing came of it.Nothing ever will.

I have discussed this many times in the past. Let me just say this: Israel was attacked by all the Arabs in the world and won. Do you think Israel was incapable of sinking the Liberty?

Pravda reported 2 Russian subs were damaged during the same time period the Liberty was damaged. A boomer and an attack sub. Could there be a connection?

A Russian Venus deep space probe was launched 2 days after the Liberty was damaged. What could that possibly have to do with the Liberty?

Answer those questions and you will know what happened.

Clark Clifford is the new evidence? Do you know how many times he made mistakes in his Naval Career advising important people?

Notice the antenna in this picture:


Compare it to this one:

The US Deep Space Intelligence Collection program

The truth is out there.

And here we are going to debate it all over again.
This issue has a tendency to arise each time anew, pretty much like the proverbial Phoenix.

Chuck757:

1)Our planes did not have the iron bombs needed to sink that ship. That points out towards indeliberate attack.
2)Officially the issue is closed. Reparations as well as excuses were sent to families by state of Israel. Fell free to search for more evidence and open a new official investigation that may reopen the issue.
3)More detailed replies of mine are posted all over the forum where this issue was debated.

quote:

1)Our planes did not have the iron bombs needed to sink that ship. That points out towards indeliberate attack.

This one I don't buy. There was plenty of time and opportunity to arm the planes with the ordinance to sink the ship. It wasn't an oversight. It was deliberate.

What of the dozen or so torpedoes fired by the patrol boats? Are the Israelis really that bad they can't hit a slow moving ship? I don't think they were launching the torpedoes at the Liberty. So what were they trying to torpedo? Was the torpedo that struck the Liberty an Israeli torpedo?

Could the deaths of 7 Russian submarine crewman that occurred on two Russian submarines have been caused by "accidents?"

What of the reports of rafts in the water being machine-gunned by the Israeli patrool boats? Were the rafts from the Liberty?


The truth is out there.

quote:

Originally posted by bill_kananen: ...

quote:

1)Our planes did not have the iron bombs needed to sink that ship. That points out towards indeliberate attack.

This one I don't buy. ...

They didn't sink the ship: who needed the iron bombs? Sounds to me like the pilots had no desire to attack, much less sink, the Liberty.

I don't recall having ever heard about the incident until almost 20 yr later, when I discovered my Jewish bunkmate reading Ennes's book, Attack on the Liberty. He told me what it was about; I wasn't sure I'd heard right. Long time later, I realized how inculcated we are with stereotypes: ally Israel attacked a U.S. ship? That can't be right.

Since then, I've read Ennes's book. After reading of the errors, misjudgments, miscues, & alts. in protocol (withheld & missent flash comms.), I am convinced that U.S. authorities knew about the attack before it began. & Any coverup's been a deliberate effort to protect the stereotype: good guys don't do bad things. We know better now.

quote:

They didn't sink the ship: who needed the iron bombs? Sounds to me like the pilots had no desire to attack, much less sink, the Liberty.

If I remember correctly an Israeli pilot was court marshalled for refusing to attack after seeing the American flag.

Think of the 'good' that this incident has done.

Since then no threats to US ships have been ignored. Vigorous responses to Viet Nam, Libya, Iraq and Iran saw aircraft shot down, naval craft attacked and in one instant a full-scale war started over 'attacks' on US naval craft.

The Israelis should be thanked for their 'wake-up call'.

T

quote:

Originally posted by Praxistiad:

quote:

Originally posted by bill_kananen: ...

quote:

1)Our planes did not have the iron bombs needed to sink that ship. That points out towards indeliberate attack.

This one I don't buy. ...

They didn't sink the ship: who needed the iron bombs? Sounds to me like the pilots had no desire to attack, much less sink, the Liberty.

I don't recall having ever heard about the incident until almost 20 yr later, when I discovered my Jewish bunkmate reading Ennes's book, Attack on the Liberty. He told me what it was about; I wasn't sure I'd heard right. Long time later, I realized how inculcated we are with stereotypes: ally Israel attacked a U.S. ship? That can't be right.

Since then, I've read Ennes's book. After reading of the errors, misjudgments, miscues, & alts. in protocol (withheld & missent flash comms.), I am convinced that U.S. authorities knew about the attack before it began. & Any coverup's been a deliberate effort to protect the stereotype: good guys don't do bad things. We know better now.

The treatment meted out to USS Liberty survivors by their country for years after the Israeli assault constitues a mark of shame. Denied respect and real recognition, they were never accorded their proper place in US Navy history. Eventually awarded the Combat Action Ribbon, crewmembers still never saw their action joing the pantheon of heroic sea engagements. Only relatively recently has the recognition Liberty Vets so richly deserve come their way. Instead of being shunned, the record of that ship should go down in the Navy's proud past as the vessel that engaged in the most intense surface combat since WWII. It is also an ironic twist of historical fate, it was a Russian guided-missile destroyer that first arrived to offer assistance to the Liberty. Though declined, the Soviet ship stood by until US warships made it to the scene of the action in international waters 13 nautical miles off the Sinai Peninsula near El Arish.

Pres. Johnson should have been dragged out of the White House and hung.

If and when the truth comes out, I believe Isreal asked the U.S. to remove the Liberty from that part of the Med Sea because they were not sure that we were not monitoring them and passing info to the Arabs.They were a country battling for their very existence and when we ignored the request, they attack the Liberty to prove to the U.S. they meant business.......IMHO mlm

Yeah...passing info to the Arabs, ok.
Calling all Arabs.....the US wants to help you beat Israel....Attention please.Jesus.

quote:

Originally posted by m0m01:
If and when the truth comes out, I believe Isreal asked the U.S. to remove the Liberty from that part of the Med Sea because they were not sure that we were not monitoring them and passing info to the Arabs.They were a country battling for their very existence and when we ignored the request, they attack the Liberty to prove to the U.S. they meant business.......IMHO mlm

how about the israelis were involved in unseemly activities and didn't want any evidence??

like summarily executing captured Egyptian soldiers? once they had been routed, the cyclops chose to head'm off at the pass and liquidate them instead of just chasing them back across the canal.

or actually stiking FIRST in the Golan Heights? Washington was stronly opposed to any attack on Syria or acquisition of west bank or golan real estate, but Israel felt taking possesion of that territory was a must -- regardless of any previous treaties or agreements.

That would explain why the ship's electronic capabilities were disabled, but it wasn't sunk. I mean why use napalm on a ship except to disable the electronics?

I too never heard a peep about it till I had an E-8 who was in the 6th fleet at the time tell me about it while we were at sea in 1975. I was incredulous, I mean how could our good buddies do such a thing? then again, I was young and impressionable at the time.

that chief was bitter and cynical -- he was my hero

Our relationship with Israel often reminds me of the WB cartoon with the tandem of the big, slow talking dimwitted bull dog and the yappy, smart alec little beagle who's always picking fights.

Jesus get over it. Yes it was a tragedy but these people need to get a grip.

quote:

That would explain why the ship's electronic capabilities were disabled, but it wasn't sunk. I mean why use napalm on a ship except to disable the electronics?

Finally someone sees some method in this madness. Actually it was to prevent the Russians from determining how much of their deep space program we were able to monitor. It was to keep them from guessing how much of their information we were able to record for analysis.

The mission of the Liberty was taken over by Kagnew Station in Ethiopia. I was on site for the Russian Venus 6 mission. We collected telemetry from launch through landing on Venus up to when it failed and stopped transmitting.

It had nothing to do with the Arab/Israeli war.

This event is ancient as it took place in 1967. Why bring it up now after the event has been thoroughly investigated and closed?

To me it appears someone wants to bring up the past as they are anti-Isreal. But then again, what else is new?

Keep in mind that Isreal is our strongest ally in the middle east, something we need more of...allies in the middle east.

Exnavy_76 DM(A)2
Proud Vietnam Vet

quote:

Originally posted by m0m01:
If and when the truth comes out, I believe Isreal asked the U.S. to remove the Liberty from that part of the Med Sea because they were not sure that we were not monitoring them and passing info to the Arabs.They were a country battling for their very existence and when we ignored the request, they attack the Liberty to prove to the U.S. they meant business.......IMHO mlm

Take heart Sarge, You're probably closer to the truth than most of the comments on the board. Just a decade before the Liberty bombing we can attest for doing exactly what you were talking about. These good folks don't recall the tri-occupiers of the Suez canal of Israel, United Kigndom and France shoving Nasser to the ropes and exercizing their perogitive of returning the canal to freindlier hands. The U S under President Eisenhower sent recon squadrons to keep an eye on the situation, reporting to the Security Council in the UN. I understand the General thought this was his most grevious error in his administration, more so the Gary Powers being shot down.

Remember, the U S and Israel did not come to agreements on humanitarian and military aid until the Nixon administration (1973).