CDZ Our Ally Israel

So then you concur with this explanation? It was obviously just a case of gross incompetence. I wonder who was punished? Who had to take the consequences for such a monumental "mistake"?
Who was punished when during the Iraq war the US fired on US and coalition forces.

Friendly fire occurs during war.


It could have easily been avoided if the US told Israel that there was a US ship off the Egyptian coast, especially since Israel was in an active war with Egypt at the time and the night before were shelled from the Egyptian coast.
You don't even begin to know what you're talking about.
So then you concur with this explanation? It was obviously just a case of gross incompetence. I wonder who was punished? Who had to take the consequences for such a monumental "mistake"?
Who was punished when during the Iraq war the US fired on US and coalition forces.

Friendly fire occurs during war.


It could have easily been avoided if the US told Israel that there was a US ship off the Egyptian coast, especially since Israel was in an active war with Egypt at the time and the night before were shelled from the Egyptian coast.
So then you're going with the theory of Israeli incompetence. The USS Liberty looked nothing like any Egyptian or Soviet ship, it would have been instantly recognizable to any trained military personnel, easily distinguished from any other type of vessel.
Really genius? How do you figure that?

The flag was not able to be seen as the testimony said because of the calm winds.

Israel was in an active war with Egypt, and the ship was off the Egyptian coast. The day before Israel was shelled from that area.

The ship was not supposed to be in that area.

What should have happened is that the US should have told Israel where the ship would be, and that way Israel would have the heads up.

The mistakes were made by the US.

Once again the transmissions as caught by a US spy plane of the Israeli pilots prove beyond a shadow of any doubt that Israel thought it was an Egyptian ship.
Consult your copy of Jane's Fighting Ships and compare USS Liberty with Egyptian and Soviet naval vessels. You can figure out how to do that can't you?
Yet, it's only Israel that can't make mistakes.

List of friendly fire incidents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

War in Afghanistan from 2001[edit]
  • In the Tarnak Farm incident of 18 April 2002, four Canadian soldiers were killed and eight others injured when U.S. Air National Guard Major Harry Schmidt, dropped a laser-guided 500 lb (230 kg) bomb from his F-16 jet fighter on thePrincess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry regiment which was conducting a night firing exercise near Kandahar. Schmidt was charged with negligent manslaughter, aggravated assault, and dereliction of duty. He was found guilty of the latter charge. During testimony Schmidt blamed the incident on his use of "go pills" (authorized mild stimulants), combined with the 'fog of war'.[103] The Canadian dead received US medals for "bravery", but no apology.
  • Pat Tillman, a former professional American football player, was shot and killed by American fire in 22 April 2004. AnArmy Special Operations Command investigation was conducted by Brigadier General Jones and the U.S. Department of Defense concluded that Pat Tillman's death was due to friendly fire aggravated by the intensity of the firefight. A more thorough investigation concluded that no hostile forces were involved in the firefight and that two allied groups fired on each other in confusion after a nearby explosive device was detonated.
  • On 6 April 2006, a British convoy in Afghanistan wounded 13 Afghan police officers and killed one, after calling in a US airstrike on what they thought was a Taliban attack.[104]
  • In Sangin Province, a female RAF Harrier pilot[105] mistakenly strafed British troops missing the enemy by 200 metres during a firefight with the Taliban on 20 August 2006.
  • Canadian soldiers opened fire on a white pickup truck, about 25 kilometres west of Kandahar, killing an Afghan officer with 6 others injured on 26 August 2006.[106]
  • Operation Medusa (2006): 1 – Two U.S. A-10 Thunderbolts accidentally strafed NATO forces in southern Afghanistan, killing Canadian Private Mark Anthony Graham.
  • On 5 December 2006, an F/A-18C on a Close Air Support mission in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, mistakenly attacked a trench where British Royal Marines were dug-in during a 10-hour battle with Taliban fighters, killing one Royal Marine.[107]
  • Lance Corporal Matthew Ford, from Zulu Company of 45 Commando Royal Marines, died after receiving a gunshot wound in Afghanistan on 15 January 2007, which was later found to be due to friendly fire. The final inquest ruled he died from NATO rounds from a fellow Royal Marine's machine gun. The report added there was no "negligence" by the other Marine, who had made a "momentary error of judgment".[108][109]
  • Canadian troops mistakenly killed an Afghan National Police officer and a homeless beggar after their convoy was ambushed in Kandahar City.[110]
  • Of two helicopters called in to support operations by the British Grenadier Guards and Afghan National Army forces inHelmand, the British Westland WAH-64 Apache engaged enemy forces, while the accompanying American AH-64D Apache opened fire on the Grenadiers and Afghan troops.[111]
  • 23 August 2007: A USAF F-15 called in to support British ground forces in Afghanistan dropped a bomb on those forces. Three privates of the 1st Battalion, the Royal Anglian Regiment, were killed and two others were severely injured. It was later revealed that the British forward air controller who called in the strike had not been issued a noise-cancelling headset, and while he supplied the correct target co-ordinates, in the confusion and stress of the battle incorrectly confirmed one wrong digit mistakenly repeated by the pilot, and the bomb landed on the British position 1000 metres away from the enemy.[112] The coroner at the soldiers' inquest stated that the incident was due to "flawed application of procedures" rather than individual errors or "recklessness".[113]
  • British soldiers in operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, fired Javelin anti-tank missiles at Danish soldiers from the Royal Life Guards, killing two.[114] It is also confirmed from Danish forces that the British fired a total of 6–8 Javelin missiles, over a 1½ hour period and only after the attack was completed did they realize that the missiles were British, based upon the fragments found after the incident.[115]
  • On 12 January 2008, two Dutch soldiers and two allied Afghan soldiers were shot dead by fellow Dutch soldiers inUruzgan, Afghanistan.[116]
  • In the night on 14 January 2008 in Helmand Province, British troops saw some Afghans "conducting suspicious activities". Visibility was too bad for rifle-fire and they were too far away to call in mortar strikes. The squad decided to use a Javelin anti-tank missile they were carrying. British soldiers fired their missile on the nearby roof but the victims were their own Afghan army sentries. One Afghan soldier was killed.[117]
  • On 9 July 2008, nine British soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, The Parachute Regiment were injured after being fired upon by British Army Apache helicopter while on patrol in Afghanistan.[118]
  • A statement issued jointly by the American and the Afghan military commands said a contingent of Afghan police officers fired on United States forces on 10 December 2008 after the Americans had successfully overrun the hide-out, killing the suspected Taliban commander and detaining another man. The US forces after securing the hideout came under heavy small arms fire and explosive grenades from the Afghan Police forces. "Multiple attempts to deter the engagement were unsuccessful," and the US forces returned fire. Afghan police have stated that they came under fire first and that the initial firing on the US forces came from the building next to the police station. This has led the US forces to conclude that the Afghan police forces might have been compromised. Initial reports indicate that this was a tragic case of mistaken identity on both parts.[119]
  • Captain Tom Sawyer, aged 26, 29 Commando Regiment Royal Artillery, and Corporal Danny Winter, aged 28, Zulu Company 45 Commando Royal Marines, were killed by an explosion on 14 January 2009. Both men were taking part in a joint operation with a Danish Battle Group and the Afghan National Army in a location north east of Gereshk in central Helmand Province. The MoD subsequently confirmed that two men died from friendly fire when they were hit in error by a Javelin anti-tank missile fired by British troops.[120]
  • A British Military Police officer was shot dead by a fellow British soldier while on patrol.[121] It was reported that no charges are to be brought against a British army sniper who killed a British Military Policeman because he was allowed to open fire if he believed that his life was in danger.[122]
  • Lance Corporal Christopher Roney from 3rd Battalion The Rifles was shot and killed by a U.S. Apache helicopter during a firefight with the Taliban in December 2009. The incident happened when a firefight was going on between British soldiers of 3rd Battalion The Rifles and the insurgents in Sangin Province. Senior British officers were watching a drone'sgrainy images of the fight from Camp Bastion, about 30 miles from the battle at Patrol Base Almas. The officers mistook the soldiers' mud-walled compound for an enemy position and called down a U.S. Apache airstrike on the base. Roney was fatally shot in the head after a helicopter gunship opened fire on the base. He died later the next day after being taken to Camp Bastion. Eleven other British soldiers were wounded in the attack. The coroner criticised the British commanders for the fact Patrol Base Almas was not marked on military maps, for the 'unprofessional' use of grainy images and for insisting there were no friendly forces in the area to the Apache crew.[123]
  • German soldiers killed six Afghan soldiers in a friendly fire incident on their way to attack a group of Taliban. Afghan soldiers were traveling in support of other Afghan troops in the area. The German Patrol opened fire killing six.[124]
  • Sapper Mark Antony Smith, age 26, of the 36 Engineer Regiment, Royal Engineers, was killed by a smoke shell fired upon by British troops in Sangin Province, Afghanistan. The MoD is investigating his death and said a smoke shell, designed to provide cover for soldiers working on the ground, may have fallen short of its intended target.[125][126]
  • Friendly fire between ISAF and Pakistan on 26 November 2011. ISAF forces opened fire on Pakistani forces killing 24 Pakistani soldiers and causing a great diplomatic standoff between U.S. and Pakistan. ISAF forces argue they were there to hunt down militants at the AF-PAK border. Pakistan had stopped transit of goods through its territory to ISAF in Afghanistan because of the incident. After an official apology by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on 3 July 2012 the NATO supply routes were restored.
  • Two New Zealand soldiers were wounded by friendly fire from a 25mm gun mounted on an armored LAV during a 12 minute firefight with insurgents in Bamyan Province on 4 August 2012.[127][128]
  • A British female soldier and a Royal Marine was mistakenly killed by another British unit on patrol after her unit opened fire on an Afghan policeman assuming he was a Taliban insurgent. The British unit who killed a female soldier and a Royal Marine assumed they were under attack after the firing happened.[129]
  • Five United States Special forces operatives, an Afghan Army counterpart, and an interpreter were killed by friendly fire in Southern Zabul Province on June 9, 2014. Whilst on patrol, and coming under heavy Taliban fire, an air-strike was called in and a B-1 Lancer bomber misdirected its payload killing the seven military pesonnel amongst others.[130][131]


Iraq War from 2003[edit]
Sorry, your browser either has JavaScript disabled or does not have any supported player.
You can
Video of the 28 March 2003 friendly fire incident, showing errors of identification
  • In the Battle of Nasiriyah, an American force of Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAVs) and infantry under intense enemy fire were misidentified as an Iraqi armored column by two U.S. Air Force A-10s who carried out bombing and strafing runs on them. One U.S. Marine was killed and 17 were wounded as a result.
  • A U.S. Patriot missile shot down a British Panavia Tornado GR.4A of No. 13 Squadron RAF, killing the pilot and navigator. Investigations showed that the Tornado's identification friend or foe indicator had malfunctioned and hence it was not identified as a friendly aircraft.[132][133]
  • Sgt Steven Roberts, a tank commander of the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment, was killed when a fellow British soldier manning a tank-mounted machine gun mistakenly hit him while firing at a stone wielding Iraqi protester at a roadblock inAz Zubayr near Basra on 24 March 2003.[134] It was reported that no British soldiers were to be charged for his death.[135]
  • A British Challenger 2 tank came under fire from another British tank in a nighttime firefight. The turret was blown off and two of the crewmembers were killed.[136][137]
  • 190th Fighter Squadron/Blues and Royals friendly fire incident – 28 March 2003. A pair of American A-10s from the 190th attacked four British armoured reconnaissance vehicles of the Blues and Royals, killing L/CoH. Matty Hull and injuring five others.
  • British Royal Marine Christopher Maddison was killed when his river patrol boat was hit by missiles after being wrongly identified as an enemy vessel approaching a Royal Engineers checkpoint on the Al-Faw Peninsula, Iraq.[138]
  • U.S. Patriot missile batteries fired two missiles on a U.S. Navy F/A-18C Hornet 50 mi (80 km) from Karbala, Iraq.[139] One missile hit the aircraft of pilot Lieutenant Nathan Dennis White of VFA-195, Carrier Air Wing Five, killing him. This was the result of the missile design flaw in identifying hostile aircraft.[140]
  • American aircraft attacked a friendly Kurdish & U.S. Special Forces convoy, killing 15. BBC translator Kamaran Abdurazaq Muhamed was killed and BBC reporter Tom Giles and World Affairs Editor John Simpson were injured. The incident was filmed.[141]
  • Fusilier Kelan Turrington, of the 1st Battalion, Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, was killed by machine-gun fire from a British tank.[142]
  • American soldier Mario Lozano killed an Italian intelligence officer Nicola Calipari and is suspected of wounding Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena in Baghdad. Sgrena was rescued from a kidnapping by Calipari, and it was claimed that the car they were escaping in failed to stop at an American checkpoint, whereupon U.S. soldiers opened fire. Video evidence shows the car was respecting speed limits and proceeding with its headlights on. The shooting commenced well before 50 meters, in contrast with what Lozano and other soldiers testified.[143]
  • During a raid on 16 July 2006 to apprehend a key terrorist leader and accomplice in a suburb of North Basra, Cpl John Cosby, of the Devonshire and Dorset Regiment, was killed by a 5.56 mm round from a British-issued SA80. It was ruled to be a case of friendly fire by the coroner. It was reported that the British forces who shot him were unclear about the rules of engagement.[144][145]
  • An American airstrike killed eight Kurdish Iraqi soldiers. Kurdish officials advised U.S. helicopters hit the men who were guarding a branch of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) in Mosul. The U.S. military said the attack was launched after soldiers identified armed men in a bunker near a building reportedly used for bomb-making, and that American troops called for the men to put down their weapons in Arabic and Kurdish before launching the strike.[146]
  • Dave Sharrett, II was shot and killed in a firefight with insurgents near the village of Bichigan, north of Baghdad in January 2008, during Operation Hood Harvest. The incident has since been described as friendly fire.[147]

......because a US Navy ship looks just like people, vehicles and buildings on the ground.
 
"Higher standards" has become code for, I want to find a reason to justify my dislike of these people.
Which obviously you know from reading all my other anti Jewish remarks on this forum........right professor?

No, it's something I know from reading the way the term has been used by all kinds of people over the last few years.
So then all your personal remarks are based on your own stupid speculation. Thanks for clearing that up.

Be honest and rename the thread.
Your grievance is NOT only with the US Liberty, but with the "accursed" Israel in general.
People like yourself are one of the reasons Israel can't be discussed rationally, no criticism of Israeli policies or actions can be tolerated.
PULEEZE Israel seems to be the only country criticized, mainly for things they have never done.

Is the PA criticized for inciting rioting and funding terrorists?

Is Syria criticized for mass murdering their own people.

Is Iran criticized for mass murdering their own people.

Are the arab governments, including the ones in the west bank and Gaza, criticized for not giving their own people basic civil rights?
 
So then you concur with this explanation? It was obviously just a case of gross incompetence. I wonder who was punished? Who had to take the consequences for such a monumental "mistake"?
Who was punished when during the Iraq war the US fired on US and coalition forces.

Friendly fire occurs during war.


It could have easily been avoided if the US told Israel that there was a US ship off the Egyptian coast, especially since Israel was in an active war with Egypt at the time and the night before were shelled from the Egyptian coast.
You don't even begin to know what you're talking about.
So then you concur with this explanation? It was obviously just a case of gross incompetence. I wonder who was punished? Who had to take the consequences for such a monumental "mistake"?
Who was punished when during the Iraq war the US fired on US and coalition forces.

Friendly fire occurs during war.


It could have easily been avoided if the US told Israel that there was a US ship off the Egyptian coast, especially since Israel was in an active war with Egypt at the time and the night before were shelled from the Egyptian coast.
So then you're going with the theory of Israeli incompetence. The USS Liberty looked nothing like any Egyptian or Soviet ship, it would have been instantly recognizable to any trained military personnel, easily distinguished from any other type of vessel.
Really genius? How do you figure that?

The flag was not able to be seen as the testimony said because of the calm winds.

Israel was in an active war with Egypt, and the ship was off the Egyptian coast. The day before Israel was shelled from that area.

The ship was not supposed to be in that area.

What should have happened is that the US should have told Israel where the ship would be, and that way Israel would have the heads up.

The mistakes were made by the US.

Once again the transmissions as caught by a US spy plane of the Israeli pilots prove beyond a shadow of any doubt that Israel thought it was an Egyptian ship.
Consult your copy of Jane's Fighting Ships and compare USS Liberty with Egyptian and Soviet naval vessels. You can figure out how to do that can't you?
:poop::alcoholic:Yes, I am sure if the ships were in the dock side by side, and a person was looking at them whom is knowledgeable would know the difference between the ships.
As any pilot assigned to attack ships at sea would be.......since they wouldn't want to make a mistake and attack the wrong ship in international waters.
 
Which obviously you know from reading all my other anti Jewish remarks on this forum........right professor?

No, it's something I know from reading the way the term has been used by all kinds of people over the last few years.
So then all your personal remarks are based on your own stupid speculation. Thanks for clearing that up.

Be honest and rename the thread.
Your grievance is NOT only with the US Liberty, but with the "accursed" Israel in general.
People like yourself are one of the reasons Israel can't be discussed rationally, no criticism of Israeli policies or actions can be tolerated.
PULEEZE Israel seems to be the only country criticized, mainly for things they have never done.

Is the PA criticized for inciting rioting and funding terrorists?

Is Syria criticized for mass murdering their own people.

Is Iran criticized for mass murdering their own people.

Are the arab governments, including the ones in the west bank and Gaza, criticized for not giving their own people basic civil rights?
Yes genius, Israel and the US are the only countries being criticized in this thread. Brilliant observation.
 
I wonder how Israeli naval vessels could have misidentified a ship while they were blowing holes in the lifeboats from a few hundred feet away?
 
No, it's something I know from reading the way the term has been used by all kinds of people over the last few years.
So then all your personal remarks are based on your own stupid speculation. Thanks for clearing that up.

Be honest and rename the thread.
Your grievance is NOT only with the US Liberty, but with the "accursed" Israel in general.
People like yourself are one of the reasons Israel can't be discussed rationally, no criticism of Israeli policies or actions can be tolerated.
PULEEZE Israel seems to be the only country criticized, mainly for things they have never done.

Is the PA criticized for inciting rioting and funding terrorists?

Is Syria criticized for mass murdering their own people.

Is Iran criticized for mass murdering their own people.

Are the arab governments, including the ones in the west bank and Gaza, criticized for not giving their own people basic civil rights?
Yes genius, Israel and the US are the only countries being criticized in this thread. Brilliant observation.

Someone criticized the US on this thread?
No way!
 
And why the follow up with a helicopter loaded with armed troops? Shouldn't they have sent a rescue helicopter instead?
 
So then all your personal remarks are based on your own stupid speculation. Thanks for clearing that up.

Be honest and rename the thread.
Your grievance is NOT only with the US Liberty, but with the "accursed" Israel in general.
People like yourself are one of the reasons Israel can't be discussed rationally, no criticism of Israeli policies or actions can be tolerated.
PULEEZE Israel seems to be the only country criticized, mainly for things they have never done.

Is the PA criticized for inciting rioting and funding terrorists?

Is Syria criticized for mass murdering their own people.

Is Iran criticized for mass murdering their own people.

Are the arab governments, including the ones in the west bank and Gaza, criticized for not giving their own people basic civil rights?
Yes genius, Israel and the US are the only countries being criticized in this thread. Brilliant observation.

Someone criticized the US on this thread?
No way!
As stated already, the US government obviously colluded with Israelis in the cover up.
 
The people who deny the USS Liberty was purposely and deliberately attacked by Israeli air and naval forces are just about as honest and true as holocaust deniers.
 
The people who deny the USS Liberty was purposely and deliberately attacked by Israeli air and naval forces are just about as honest and true as holocaust deniers.

Ooh! Good one!
And the bottom line is that there are countless cover ups and collusion occurring all the time that we'll never know about.

It could be the commander of the USS Liberty screwed up a bit and somewhere up the line during that short episode officials on both sides of the ocean called for the Liberty to be expendable.
And we'll never really know why.
 
The people who deny the USS Liberty was purposely and deliberately attacked by Israeli air and naval forces are just about as honest and true as holocaust deniers.

Ooh! Good one!
And the bottom line is that there are countless cover ups and collusion occurring all the time that we'll never know about.

It could be the commander of the USS Liberty screwed up a bit and somewhere up the line during that short episode officials on both sides of the ocean called for the Liberty to be expendable.
And we'll never really know why.
Blame the victims, another tactic commonly used by Holocaust deniers.
A USS Liberty’s Hero’s Passing | Consortiumnews
 
The people who deny the USS Liberty was purposely and deliberately attacked by Israeli air and naval forces are just about as honest and true as holocaust deniers.

Ooh! Good one!
And the bottom line is that there are countless cover ups and collusion occurring all the time that we'll never know about.

It could be the commander of the USS Liberty screwed up a bit and somewhere up the line during that short episode officials on both sides of the ocean called for the Liberty to be expendable.
And we'll never really know why.
Blame the victims, another tactic commonly used by Holocaust deniers.
A USS Liberty’s Hero’s Passing | Consortiumnews

Did you expect a paper to mourn him as anything but a hero?

Frank Gifford, football hero...and adulterer.
As I said, we'll never know the real story.

And please rename the thread already.
 
The people who deny the USS Liberty was purposely and deliberately attacked by Israeli air and naval forces are just about as honest and true as holocaust deniers.

Ooh! Good one!
And the bottom line is that there are countless cover ups and collusion occurring all the time that we'll never know about.

It could be the commander of the USS Liberty screwed up a bit and somewhere up the line during that short episode officials on both sides of the ocean called for the Liberty to be expendable.
And we'll never really know why.
Blame the victims, another tactic commonly used by Holocaust deniers.
A USS Liberty’s Hero’s Passing | Consortiumnews

Did you expect a paper to mourn him as anything but a hero?

Frank Gifford, football hero...and adulterer.
As I said, we'll never know the real story.

And please rename the thread already.
You don't seem to know what point you want to make. Do you have one?
 
"Higher standards" has become code for, I want to find a reason to justify my dislike of these people.
Which obviously you know from reading all my other anti Jewish remarks on this forum........right professor?

No, it's something I know from reading the way the term has been used by all kinds of people over the last few years.
So then all your personal; remarks are based on your own stupid speculation. Thanks for clearing that up.

Observation is not speculation.
Your conclusions are based on your own thoughtless stupidity.

insulting me is not a challenge to my observations.

That you can't tell the difference reflects poorly on your intellect and/or honesty.
 
Which obviously you know from reading all my other anti Jewish remarks on this forum........right professor?

No, it's something I know from reading the way the term has been used by all kinds of people over the last few years.
So then all your personal; remarks are based on your own stupid speculation. Thanks for clearing that up.

Observation is not speculation.
Your conclusions are based on your own thoughtless stupidity.

insulting me is not a challenge to my observations.

That you can't tell the difference reflects poorly on your intellect and/or honesty.
My mistake, I had no idea you were smart enough to know when you're being insulted.
 
No, it's something I know from reading the way the term has been used by all kinds of people over the last few years.
So then all your personal; remarks are based on your own stupid speculation. Thanks for clearing that up.

Observation is not speculation.
Your conclusions are based on your own thoughtless stupidity.

insulting me is not a challenge to my observations.

That you can't tell the difference reflects poorly on your intellect and/or honesty.
My mistake, I had no idea you were smart enough to know when you're being insulted.

Only one of many, but it's a start.
 
An accident that lasted almost an hour. I wonder how incompetent the Israelis would have to be to cause an "accident" like that? They must be extremely poorly trained, not a professional force at all. They would have to be very very stupid for that to be an accident.

The incident, which happened at 2 pm didn't last very long but there had been several Israeli reconnaissance flights over the U.S.S. Liberty since 5 am that morning. Without doubt they had identified it as a U.S. Navy "spy ship". A good history channel documentary available here describes the events of that day and plays tapes of conversations between the Israeli pilots and their control. These tapes confirm the ship was identified as American before the attack began. And of course the flag and the large I.D. painted on the ship were unmistakable. When the jets had ran out of ammunition and they sent in the torpedo boats to finish off the Liberty, the Star of David painted on the gunboat's hulls were clearly visible to the Liberty's crew. The torpedo that struck killed 25 of the 34 sailors that died that day.

The Association of Liberty Veterans has demanded answers ever since the tragedy and has accused the Israeli's of war crimes for strafing it's lifeboats that had been deployed and for jamming it's distress calls (which is a violation of international law) as well as its tactical radio. They were also pretty angry that the Israelis tried out one of the new weapons supplied by the U.S. on them - Napalm. The cover up and the political blackmail of President Johnson is revealed in the video by Admiral Inman. The Israelis threatened L.B.J. with accusations of "Blood Libel" and anti-semitism if he pursued a proper investigation.

The motive for the attack that Jeremiah says didn't exist was pretty clear to everyone "in the know". The Israel's had promised the U.S. their war was purely defensive and not a "land grab". They were afraid that the intelligence ship would gather evidence that they intended to occupy the Golan Heights, Jerusalem, and the other territories they ended up with. They also probably feared that the spy ship would gather more evidence that they had started the war.

The Captain of the Liberty (whose Medal of Honor ceremony took place more or less in secret, contrary to the traditional presentation by the President) gave the finger to the Israeli helicopter that showed up eventually to enquire if they needed assistance. Of course this was after the Israeli's had heard the signal one of the radiomen had gotten out after he jury rigged an antenna and managed to communicate with the Sixth Fleet, which was 600 miles away. On hearing that the fleet was sending fighter aircraft the attack was called off.
I wonder if there are any other examples from history of napalm being used to sink a ship? There don't seem to be any. That's because napalm would never be used to sink a ship, it would be ineffective. Though it would be very useful in killing as many crew members as possible.
An accident that lasted almost an hour. I wonder how incompetent the Israelis would have to be to cause an "accident" like that? They must be extremely poorly trained, not a professional force at all. They would have to be very very stupid for that to be an accident.

The incident, which happened at 2 pm didn't last very long but there had been several Israeli reconnaissance flights over the U.S.S. Liberty since 5 am that morning. Without doubt they had identified it as a U.S. Navy "spy ship". A good history channel documentary available here describes the events of that day and plays tapes of conversations between the Israeli pilots and their control. These tapes confirm the ship was identified as American before the attack began. And of course the flag and the large I.D. painted on the ship were unmistakable. When the jets had ran out of ammunition and they sent in the torpedo boats to finish off the Liberty, the Star of David painted on the gunboat's hulls were clearly visible to the Liberty's crew. The torpedo that struck killed 25 of the 34 sailors that died that day.

The Association of Liberty Veterans has demanded answers ever since the tragedy and has accused the Israeli's of war crimes for strafing it's lifeboats that had been deployed and for jamming it's distress calls (which is a violation of international law) as well as its tactical radio. They were also pretty angry that the Israelis tried out one of the new weapons supplied by the U.S. on them - Napalm. The cover up and the political blackmail of President Johnson is revealed in the video by Admiral Inman. The Israelis threatened L.B.J. with accusations of "Blood Libel" and anti-semitism if he pursued a proper investigation.

The motive for the attack that Jeremiah says didn't exist was pretty clear to everyone "in the know". The Israel's had promised the U.S. their war was purely defensive and not a "land grab". They were afraid that the intelligence ship would gather evidence that they intended to occupy the Golan Heights, Jerusalem, and the other territories they ended up with. They also probably feared that the spy ship would gather more evidence that they had started the war.

The Captain of the Liberty (whose Medal of Honor ceremony took place more or less in secret, contrary to the traditional presentation by the President) gave the finger to the Israeli helicopter that showed up eventually to enquire if they needed assistance. Of course this was after the Israeli's had heard the signal one of the radiomen had gotten out after he jury rigged an antenna and managed to communicate with the Sixth Fleet, which was 600 miles away. On hearing that the fleet was sending fighter aircraft the attack was called off.
I wonder if there are any other examples from history of napalm being used to sink a ship? There don't seem to be any. That's because napalm would never be used to sink a ship, it would be ineffective. Though it would be very useful in killing as many crew members as possible.

Yeah, I guess it's pretty obvious the attackers wanted to kill everybody. It was an attempted massacre and not a legitimate act of war, at least that's my take on it. It was the type of act that would be indefensible no matter who perpetuated it. I don't think even in the great naval battles of WW11 that the Japanese navy displayed such savagery, at least I haven't heard of a comparable action by them. Sinking a ship is typically the desired result, not slaughter. And I don't want to give the wrong impression, I am basically an Israeli supporter but I can't excuse anybody's action that goes so far outside the acceptable bounds of human treatment of other humans as the Israelis tend to sometimes in their frequent conflicts.
 
The people who deny the USS Liberty was purposely and deliberately attacked by Israeli air and naval forces are just about as honest and true as holocaust deniers.
Well it seems that the US government whom has thoroughly investigated the accident has concluded that it was an accident.

At least five different US government investigations have verified that it was an accident.

Testimony is now public and can be easily read.

USS LIBERTY COURT OF INQUIRY

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Available evidence combines to indicate the attack on
LIBERTY on 8 June was in fact a case of mistaken
identity.


2. The calm conditions and slow ship speed may well have
made the American Flag difficult to identify.

3. The ship's westerly heading at the time of attack - in
the general direction of Egyptian ports may have
reinforced elements of doubt in the minds of the several
Israeli pilots who looked the ship over in the forenoon.

4. The colors were shot down early in the action and were
replaced prior to the PT attack.

5. The immediate confusion milling around astern followed
by peaceful

[161]

overtures by the attacking surface forces after launching
only two torpedoes of the six presumed available (two on
each PT boat), indicate these craft may well have identified
the colors for the first time when they got in close enough
to see clearly through the smoke and flames billowing, at
times above the mast head.

6. There are no available indications that the attack was
intended against a U. S. Ship.

7. LIBERTY'S position at the time of the attack has been
previously ordered changed farther to seaward by JCS;
however, the messages relating to these changes were not
known to the ship before the attack took place. The reasons
these messages were not known to the ship can be determined
in all instances except for one. Since LIBERTY records and
knowledgeable personnel were lost in the action, it is
impossible to determine the disposition of the message.

8. The communication delays and mis-routing errors which
caused these several non-deliveries combined with delays in
initiating follow-up actions on operational instructions
received, all contributed to the ship itself being unaware
of plans and decisions made for her repositioning. A
detailed accounting of the five pertinent messages are
attached as appendices one through five.

 
In fact, the first responders to the incident were the Israelis.
 
And why the follow up with a helicopter loaded with armed troops? Shouldn't they have sent a rescue helicopter instead?
They didn't.

They sent rescue helicopters.

"The USS Liberty: Case Closed" | Jewish Virtual Library

The claim that Israel's attack on the Liberty was premeditated has also appeared persistently in the press. In 1992, nationally syndicated columnists Roland Evans and Robert Novak dedicated a column, "Twenty-Five Years of Cover-Up,"8 to this charge. Similar accusations have been aired on television programs such as ABC's 20/20 and Geraldo Rivera's Now It Can Be Told.9 The claim is particularly widespread on the Internet, where a search for the "USS Liberty" yields dozens of sites, from those of Arab propagandists (Birzeit.edu, Salam.org, Palestine Forever) and anti-Semitic hate mongers (The Tangled Web, Jew Watch) to the award-winning USS Liberty Homepage, posted by Ennes and other veterans. But while the tenor of these pages may differ - the veterans abjure any anti-Semitism, stressing that several of their crewmates were Jewish - their conclusions are indistinguishable: Israel wantonly attacked the Liberty with the intention of killing every man on board, and then thwarted attempts to investigate the crime.10

Refuting this accusation was difficult if not impossible in the past, when the official records on the Liberty were designated top-secret and closed to the general public. With the recent declassification of these documents in the United States and Israel, however, researchers have gained access to a wealth of primary sources - Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and U.S. military records, Israeli diplomatic correspondence, and memoranda from both the State Department and the White House. With the aid of these materials, the attack on the Liberty can now be reconstructed virtually minute-by-minute and with remarkable detail. The picture that emerges is not one of crime at all, nor even of criminal negligence, but of a string of failed communications, human errors, unfortunate coincidences and equipment failures on both the American and Israeli sides - the kind of tragic, senseless mistake that is all too common in the thick of war.

The USS Liberty was cruising from Norfolk, Virginia to Abidjan on the Ivory Coast when, in mid-May 1967, crisis erupted in the Middle East. Without warning, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser sent thousands of troops into the Sinai desert, ousted the UN peacekeeping forces stationed there and then closed the Straits of Tiran - the critical waterway leading to Israel's southern port of Eilat - to Israeli shipping.

In weighing its response, the Israeli government consulted with President Lyndon Johnson, who, though preoccupied with the Vietnam War, was sympathetic to Israel's plight. The President proposed to challenge the Tiran blockade with an international maritime convoy and on May 24, in preparation for this plan, he ordered the U.S. Sixth Fleet to advance into the eastern Mediterranean. Aware of the danger of becoming embroiled in an Arab-Israeli war, however, Washington cautioned the fleet to remain, until further notice, "outside an arc whose radius is 240 miles from Port Said," on the Egyptian coast.11

At this time, the Liberty was formally under the command of the Sixth Fleet, although in practice its orders came directly from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, operating under the aegis of the National Security Agency (NSA). Code-named "Rockstar," the 455-foot "Auxiliary General Technical Research Ship (agtr)," as it was euphemistically called, was in fact a signals intelligence vessel (sigint) equipped with cutting-edge listening and decoding devices. Among its 294-man crew were several dozen members of the Naval Security Group, who worked below the starboard deck in an area strictly off-limits even to the Liberty's skipper, Cmdr. William L. McGonagle. The ship sported large antennas and radar discs, but apart from four .50-caliber machine-gun mounts, it had no visible armaments. The markings "GTR-5" were freshly painted on its bow, and from its mast flew a standard, navy-issue American flag.

As the Sixth Fleet steamed toward the eastern Mediterranean, the Liberty headed for Rota, Spain. There, in addition to supplies, it took on three Marine Corps Arabic translators, augmenting the three NSA Russian-language experts already on board. Then, on May 30, McGonagle received new instructions to sail "at best speed" to a point just half a mile outside Egyptian and Israeli territorial waters, which extended twelve and six nautical miles, respectively, from the coast. The order, originating with the JCS, superseded a request by the U.S. Naval Command in Europe (cinceur) to hold the Liberty in Rota "until directed otherwise." Neither cinceur nor McGonagle was aware of the Liberty's objective, later described by the Defense Department as "assuring communications between U.S. government posts... and assisting in... the evacuation of American citizens." Though the exact nature of its mission remains classified, the Liberty was most likely sent to track the movements of Egyptian troops and their Soviet advisors in Sinai - hence the need for Arabic and Russian translators.12

Johnson's idea of a convoy aimed at breaking the blockade came to nothing, and Nasser's troops remained mobilized in the Sinai. Syrian and Jordanian forces were also poised to attack. On the morning of June 5, with diplomatic options exhausted, the Israeli government went to war.13 The IDF launched lightning air and ground strikes against Egypt, quickly gaining the initiative, and repulsed attacks from Syria and Jordan. Yet the Israelis remained highly concerned about threats to their coastline, along which most of the country's major industrial and population centers were situated. The Egyptian navy outnumbered Israel's by more than five to one in warships and, in a crisis, could call on the support of some seventy Soviet vessels in the vicinity.14 The failure of theIsraeli navy's attacks on Egyptian and Syrian ports early in the war did little to assuage Israel's fears. Consequently, 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 theLiberty. 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

Before dawn on June 8, three days into the war, the Liberty finally reached its destination, barely within international waters north of the Sinai coast. Plying at a speed of five knots between Port Said and Gaza, the Liberty entered a lane rarely used by commercial freighters, which Egypt had declared closed to neutral vessels. Anxious about his proximity to the fighting, McGonagle asked the Sixth Fleet commander, Vice-Adm. William Martin, for permission to pull back from the shore, or else to be provided with a destroyer escort. Martin rejected these requests, noting that the Liberty "is a clearly marked United States ship in international waters and not a reasonable subject for attack by any nation."

Unbeknownst to both Martin and McGonagle, however, the JCS had repeatedly cabled the Liberty the previous night with instructions to withdraw to a distance of one hundred miles from the Egyptian and Israeli coasts. The transmission was delayed, however, by the navy's overloaded, overly complex communication system, which routed messages as far east as the Philippines before relaying them to their destinations. The JCS' orders would not be received by the Liberty until the following day, June 9, by which time they would no longer be relevant.17

At 5:55 a.m. on June 8, Cmdr. Uri Meretz, a naval observer aboard an Israel Air Force (IAF) reconnaissance plane, noted what he believed to be an American supply vessel, designated GTR-5, seventy miles west of the Gaza coast. At Israeli naval headquarters in Haifa, staff officers fixed the location of the ship with a red marker, indicating "unidentified," on their control board. Research inJane's Fighting Ships, however, established the vessel's identity as "the electromagnetic audio-surveillance ship of the United States, the Liberty." The marker was changed to green, for "neutral." Another sighting of the ship - "gray, bulky, with its bridge amidships" - was made by an Israeli fighter aircraft at 9:00 a.m., twenty miles north of El-Arish, on the Sinai coast, which had fallen to Israeli forces the day before.18 Neither of these reports made mention of the 5-by-8-foot American flag which, according to the ship's crewmen, was flying from the Liberty's starboard halyard.

liberty.jpg

The crew would also testify later that six IAF aircraft subsequently flew over the ship, giving them ample opportunity to identify its nationality. Israel Air Force reports, however, make no further mention of the Liberty.19 There may indeed have been additional Israeli overflights, but the IAF pilots were not looking for the Liberty. Their target was Egyptian submarines, which had been spotted off the coast. At 11:00 a.m., while the hunt for Egyptian submarines was on, the officer on duty at Israel's naval headquarters, Capt. Avraham Lunz, concluded his shift. In accordance with procedures, he removed the Liberty's green marker on the grounds that it was already five hours old and no longer accurate.20

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.

IAF Intelligence Chief Col. Yeshayahu Bareket also claimed to have contacted American Naval Attaché Castle at this point in an attempt to ascertain whether the suspect ship was the Liberty, but the latter professed no knowledge of the Liberty's schedule - a claim later denied by Castle but, strangely, confirmed by McGonagle.24 One fact is clear, however: After two low sweeps by the lead plane, at 1:58 p.m., the Mirages were cleared to attack.

The first salvos caught the Liberty's crew in "stand-down" mode; several officers were sunning themselves on the deck, unaware of the Israeli jets bearing down on them. Before they could take shelter, rockets and 30-mm cannon shells stitched the ship from bow to stern, severing the antennas and setting oil drums on fire. Nine men were killed in the initial assault, and several times that number wounded, among them McGonagle. Radio operators on board found most of their frequencies inoperable and barely managed to send an SOS to the Sixth Fleet. The Mirages made three strafing runs and were then joined by two additional aircraft, Israeli Super-Mysteres returning from the Mitla Pass with a payload of napalm. After fourteen minutes of action, the pilots reported having made good hits - over eight hundred holes would later be counted in the hull. The entire superstructure of the ship, from the main deck to the bridge, was aflame.

Throughout these sorties, no one aboard the Liberty suspected that the planes were Israeli. Indeed, rumors spread that the attackers were Egyptian MiGs. After the first strike, the visibility that had enabled crewmen to identify IAF reconnaissance craft earlier in the day was lost to the smoke of battle. One of the Israeli pilots, curious as to why the vessel had not returned fire, made a final pass at ninety feet. "I see no flag," he told headquarters. "But there are markings on the hull - Charlie-Tango-Romeo-five."25

While Egyptian naval ships were known to disguise their identities with Western markings, they usually displayed Arabic letters and numbers only. The fact that the ship had Western markings led Rabin to fear that it was Soviet, and he immediately called off the jets. Two IAF Hornet helicopters were sent to look for survivors - Spector had reported seeing men overboard - while the torpedo boat squadron was ordered to hold its fire pending further attempts at identification. Though that order was recorded in the torpedo boat's log, Oren claimed he never received it.26 It was now 2:20 in the afternoon; twenty-four minutes would pass before the squadron made contact with the Liberty.

During that interval, the ship's original flag, having been shredded during the attack, was replaced by a larger (7-by-13-foot) holiday ensign. As the crew labored to tend to the wounded, extinguish the fire, and burn classified papers, contact was finally made with the Sixth Fleet. "Help is on the way," replied the carrier America, which quickly unleashed eight of its most readily available warplanes - F-104s [sic - probably A-4] armed with nuclear weapons. Before they reached their objective, however, the jets were recalled by Vice-Adm. Martin. If Rabin feared that the ship was Russian, Martin suspected that its attackers were Russian, and without authorization from the highest level, he did not want to risk starting a nuclear war.27

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.28Oren 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

Of the five torpedoes fired at the Liberty only one found its mark, a direct hit on the starboard side, killing twenty-five, almost all of them from the intelligence section. The Israeli craft closed in, their cannons and machine guns raking the Liberty's hull and, according to the crew's testimony, its life rafts as well. One of those rafts, picked up by T-203, was found to bear U.S. Navy markings - the first indication that Oren had that the ship might be American. His suspicions mounted when while circling the badly listing ship, Oren confronted the designation GTR-5. But still no flag was spotted, and it would take another half an hour, until 3:30 p.m., to establish the vessel's identity.31

"I must admit I had mixed feelings about the news - profound regret at having attacked our friends and a tremendous sense of relief [that the boat was not Soviet]," Rabin later recalled.32 News of the ship's American nationality had arrived during an emergency meeting of the General Staff to discuss possible Soviet reprisals. An apology was immediately sent to Castle, and none too soon, as eight conventionally armed warplanes had been launched from the USS Saratoga and sanctioned to "use whatever force required to defend the Liberty."

As the American jets returned to their carrier, the two Israeli Hornets reached the Liberty and offered assistance. Oren, shouting through a bullhorn, also tried to communicate with the ship. But McGonagle refused to respond. Realizing, finally, that his assailants had been Israeli, he flagged the torpedo boats away and gestured provocatively at the Hornets. Even Castle himself, arriving just before dusk in another Israeli chopper, was denied permission to land. By 5:05 p.m., the Israelis had broken off contact, and theLiberty, navigating virtually without systems, with 34 dead and 171 wounded aboard, staggered out to sea. 33

The center of the crisis then shifted from the Mediterranean to Washington. It was only at 9:50 a.m. eastern time - nearly two hours after the first shots were fired34 - that the White House received word from the JCS that the Liberty, "located 60-100 miles north of Egypt," had been torpedoed by an unknown vessel. Johnson assumed that the Soviets were involved. To forestall further escalation, he hotlined the Kremlin with news of the attack and of the dispatch of jets from the Saratoga.

But then the Israelis informed the Americans of the "mistaken action," and Johnson, like Rabin before him, breathed a sigh of relief.35 While "strong dismay" was conveyed to Ambassador Harman, so too were the Administration's thanks for the speed of Israel's notification. Apologies soon came in from Prime Minister Levi Eshkol ("Please accept my profound condolences and convey my sympathy to all the bereaved families") and Foreign Minister Abba Eban ("I am deeply mortified and grieved by the tragic accident involving the lives and safety of Americans"), as well as from the Israeli chargé d'affaires in Washington, Efraim Evron, a personal friend of Johnson's ("I grieve with you over the lives that were lost, and share in the sorrow of the parents, wives and children of the men who died in this cruel twist of fate"). Within forty-eight hours, the Israeli government offered to compensate the victims and their families.36

At first, Israeli expressions of regret and offers of restitution seemed to satisfy the Administration, whose initial reaction was to downplay the incident. Of particular concern was the danger that the Liberty's presence in the area might reinforce Nasser's charge that the Sixth Fleet had aided Israel in the war - what Washington called "The Big Lie."37 These reservations soon faded, however, as senior officials began to ask pointed questions: Why did the Israelis attack a neutral ship on the high seas, without the slightest provocation? How had they failed to see the Liberty's flag or the freshly painted markings on its hull? How could they confuse theLiberty with the El-Quseir, a far slower, smaller boat, with no distinctive antennas? And finally, how could a ship sailing at 5 knots, whose maximum speed was 18, be gauged at 30?
 

Forum List

Back
Top