USS Liberty Remembered At Navy Memorial

[Desperado]

So the fact that a few crazy, antisemitic manpigs just so happened to be in the area means that they are fully qualified to speak on the political motives behind an alleged attack?

So you are calling survivors of the USS Liberty "crazy, antisemitic manpigs"?
Sure seems like you are! What is very apparent is that your first loyalty is not to the United States but rather to Israel. This is not a problem because now we know where your head is at.

 

[Peach]

A singular tragedy, for which Israel compensated:

On the night of 7 June Washington time, early morning on 8 June, 01:10Z or 3:10 am local time, the Pentagon issued an order to Sixth Fleet headquarters to tell the Liberty to come no closer than 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) to Israel, Syria, or the Sinai coast (Oren, p. 263).[19] (pages 5 and Exhibit N, page 58).

According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)


In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 (US$22.5 million in 2014) as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the final U.S. bill of $17,132,709 for material damage to the Liberty herself plus 13 years' interest.[8]

Those that "saw the eyes" on the American ship were not those that fired at her.

 

[dilloduck]

So the fact that a few crazy, antisemitic manpigs just so happened to be in the area means that they are fully qualified to speak on the political motives behind an alleged attack?

Let's pretend for a moment that the hateful, paranoid assertions made by the crew of the Liberty are accurate. Where did they get this information? Were the Israeli pilots shouting "WE'RE EGYPTIAN, PLEASE IGNORE THICK HEBREW ACCENT"? Were the torpedoes marked with "Made in Egypt and totally not Israel"? How could any soldier on the front lines of a battle possibly know the top secret plans of the upper echelons of the Israeli military?

You're seriously calling members of the USS liberty anti semitic manpigs ? Does that include the ones that were killed by Israel ?

It includes only the ones who have made antisemitic allegations that this was a deliberate attack.

Classic liberal whiney bullshit. No one has made any anti semitic remarks. The claim is simply that Israel intentionally attacked an American ship. Dont' try to turn this into something that it's not.

 

[Discombobulated]

A singular tragedy, for which Israel compensated:

On the night of 7 June Washington time, early morning on 8 June, 01:10Z or 3:10 am local time, the Pentagon issued an order to Sixth Fleet headquarters to tell the Liberty to come no closer than 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) to Israel, Syria, or the Sinai coast (Oren, p. 263).[19] (pages 5 and Exhibit N, page 58).

According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)


In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 (US$22.5 million in 2014) as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the final U.S. bill of $17,132,709 for material damage to the Liberty herself plus 13 years' interest.[8]

Those that "saw the eyes" on the American ship were not those that fired at her.

So it sounds like the USS Liberty was in international waters when the attacks happened, and Israel assumed legal responsibility. Imagine them doing something like that for an incident that never happened.......boggles the mind doesn't it.

 

[Kondor3]

Maybe some just like to see both sides of the story heard without having to resort to silly and high speculative allegations.

1967, any tragedies like this since? Any reason Israel would benefit from an attack on a US ship?

Yes----mentioned already several times in this thread.

Perhaps it's time that someone working the "It was intentional" side of the aisle to serve-up a reasonably comprehensive and authoritative numbered list of possible 'sane reasons' why the Israelis would have intentionally fired upon a United States Navy vessel.

This would allow each to be addressed in a more methodical and serious fashion.

We've heard things like "Israel wanted to blame Egypt" and "The Liberty intercepted radio transmissions not intended for them" and stuff like that, but it's been random, disjointed, and not supported by fact.

It would be best if that list of possible reasons came from the "It was intentional" side of the aisle, rather than the Opposition and Doubting Thomases putting words in your mouths.

 

[Kondor3]

A singular tragedy, for which Israel compensated:

On the night of 7 June Washington time, early morning on 8 June, 01:10Z or 3:10 am local time, the Pentagon issued an order to Sixth Fleet headquarters to tell the Liberty to come no closer than 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) to Israel, Syria, or the Sinai coast (Oren, p. 263).[19] (pages 5 and Exhibit N, page 58).

According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)


In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 (US$22.5 million in 2014) as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the final U.S. bill of $17,132,709 for material damage to the Liberty herself plus 13 years' interest.[8]

Those that "saw the eyes" on the American ship were not those that fired at her.

So it sounds like the USS Liberty was in international waters when the attacks happened, and Israel assumed legal responsibility. Imagine them doing something like that for an incident that never happened.......boggles the mind doesn't it.

Huh? Did somebody say that it never happened, or that Israel was not the one who pulled the trigger?

 

[Peach]

A singular tragedy, for which Israel compensated:

On the night of 7 June Washington time, early morning on 8 June, 01:10Z or 3:10 am local time, the Pentagon issued an order to Sixth Fleet headquarters to tell the Liberty to come no closer than 100 nmi (120 mi; 190 km) to Israel, Syria, or the Sinai coast (Oren, p. 263).[19] (pages 5 and Exhibit N, page 58).

According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)


In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 (US$22.5 million in 2014) as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the final U.S. bill of $17,132,709 for material damage to the Liberty herself plus 13 years' interest.[8]

Those that "saw the eyes" on the American ship were not those that fired at her.

So it sounds like the USS Liberty was in international waters when the attacks happened, and Israel assumed legal responsibility. Imagine them doing something like that for an incident that never happened.......boggles the mind doesn't it.

Huh? Did somebody say that it never happened, or that Israel was not the one who pulled the trigger?

I wondered about that also; it happened, all US inquiries found the target was unitentional. Errors in both the US signal system, and Israel's systems.

 

[Kondor3]

Crickets...

1967, any tragedies like this since? Any reason Israel would benefit from an attack on a US ship?

Yes----mentioned already several times in this thread.

Perhaps it's time that someone working the "It was intentional" side of the aisle to serve-up a reasonably comprehensive and authoritative numbered list of possible 'sane reasons' why the Israelis would have intentionally fired upon a United States Navy vessel.

This would allow each to be addressed in a more methodical and serious fashion.

We've heard things like "Israel wanted to blame Egypt" and "The Liberty intercepted radio transmissions not intended for them" and stuff like that, but it's been random, disjointed, and not supported by fact.

It would be best if that list of possible reasons came from the "It was intentional" side of the aisle, rather than the Opposition and Doubting Thomases putting words in your mouths.

 

[SAYIT]

Why would Israel have shot-up a United States Navy ship?

What possible advantage would that have brought to Israel?

Other than pissing off the most powerful nation on the face of the planet.

The only nation that could quickly replenish the munitions the IDF was firing-off in 1967.

I have heard it said that the Israelis fired upon the USS Liberty intentionally, in order to warn-off other US ships, and to discourage them from electronically snooping off Israel's shoreline.

I have heard it said that the Israelis fired upon the USS Liberty intentionally, in order to preven tthe US from giving wartime intel to the Arabs as it sat offshore.

Neither of those reasons make any sense to me.

In 1967, the US and Israel had not yet cemented their relationship, and Israel was still obtaining much of its weaponry from France and the rest of Europe, and some US arms through third-party brokers around the world, as well as a little here-and-there from the US itself.

But, by then, the surrounding Arab states were all either Soviet client-states or buddy-buddy with the Russians, with most of them receiving copious weaponry from the Soviets, and all Israel had was France, and some small-time operators, with a little diplomatic cover from the US et al, to offset the massive weaponry being donated to her enemies.

Under such circumstances, Israel's best hope was to create and cement a much better relationship with the US, and ask the US to become its 'sugar daddy' for weaponry, but they were still working on that relationship, and it had not yet been locked-down, if memory serves correctly, at the time of the USS Liberty incident.

I am entirely willing to concede that some aspects of this prolonged attack sequence sound damned fishy to me... re: flags being run-up, target identification, etc., but against those eyebrow-raisers is the main question...

"What did Israel stand to gain by intentionally firing upon the USS Liberty, at a time when it needed every friend that it could lay its hands on, especially a superpower whom it was hoping to latch onto as a weapons sugar-daddy?"

I confess to being totally perplexed and confused by the whole damned thing.

But, at a distance of 47 years, I don't think we're likely to see any renewed investigation, nor are we likely to have access to all the key players and key information that one would need, in order to do a decent job of it.

It's a puzzler, alright.

I'm an American, first, and a supporter of Israel, second.

My first loyalty is to my own country and to my own countrymen.

But I just don't see why our friends over there would have done such a thing on purpose.

Israel did not, the usual anti-Israel crowd wanted a subject to attack Israel; nothing new. No thread about US ships lost, and now honored, in current events, just a reminder of a tragedy 47 years ago.

There is so much controversy surrounding the attack on the Liberty that saying what really happened depends on who you believe.

True but several official US inquiries determined it was a tragic case of friendly fire.
There is no doubt about what happened here:
USS Cole bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[georgephillip]

What 'sane reason(s)' for an intentional attack come to mind?

The two most likely reasons for a deliberate attack involve intercepts the Liberty made regarding the possible murder of hundreds of Egyptian POWs by the IDF in the Sinai, and, more likely, Liberty intercepted Israel's decision to invade and occupy the Golan Heights AFTER Syria announced it was withdrawing from the conflict. Motive is one more good reason for a full public investigation before all the principals die of old age.

1. were such signals about such sensitive matters actually transmitted over the airwaves rather than by courier or land-line telephone?

2. did the Israelis have reason to believe that the Liberty had intercepted them?

3. did the Liberty relay these up the chain of command?

4. did the Israelis have reason to believe that the Liberty had already transmitted same?

5. did the Israelis break our codes?

6. did Israeli leadership really believe that it was worth risking its relationship with the United States over such transitory matters?

7. did the survivors indicate that such transmissions were, indeed, intercepted and/or relayed?

You're asking several good questions the US Congress should've answered before you were born (probably)

Motive could be unraveled during a full investigation into the incident which has never happened other than a Naval Board of Inquiry that was rushed and for which the verdict was preordained in DC.

http://www.gtr5.com/evidence/attack_sigint.pdf

 

[dilloduck]

1967, any tragedies like this since? Any reason Israel would benefit from an attack on a US ship?

Yes----mentioned already several times in this thread.

Perhaps it's time that someone working the "It was intentional" side of the aisle to serve-up a reasonably comprehensive and authoritative numbered list of possible 'sane reasons' why the Israelis would have intentionally fired upon a United States Navy vessel.

This would allow each to be addressed in a more methodical and serious fashion.

We've heard things like "Israel wanted to blame Egypt" and "The Liberty intercepted radio transmissions not intended for them" and stuff like that, but it's been random, disjointed, and not supported by fact.

It would be best if that list of possible reasons came from the "It was intentional" side of the aisle, rather than the Opposition and Doubting Thomases putting words in your mouths.

They were at war and did not want ANYTHING transmitted anywhere that would endanger their battle plan.

 

[georgephillip]

Israel did not, the usual anti-Israel crowd wanted a subject to attack Israel; nothing new. No thread about US ships lost, and now honored, in current events, just a reminder of a tragedy 47 years ago.

There is so much controversy surrounding the attack on the Liberty that saying what really happened depends on who you believe.

True but several official US inquiries determined it was a tragic case of friendly fire.
There is no doubt about what happened here:
USS Cole bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No inquires have ever assigned blame.
Probably because no investigative body even bothered to interview the Jews responsible.

"There have been a number of reports relating to USS Liberty. Most of them are nothing more than summaries of materials gathered by others, not investigations where testimony and other evidence was presented. Still there are some who try to pass these summaries off as 'investigations that exonerate Israel.' On the contrary, where any opinion is expressed at all, it usually tends to incriminate Israel."

USS Liberty Reports

 

[Kondor3]

The two most likely reasons for a deliberate attack involve intercepts the Liberty made regarding the possible murder of hundreds of Egyptian POWs by the IDF in the Sinai, and, more likely, Liberty intercepted Israel's decision to invade and occupy the Golan Heights AFTER Syria announced it was withdrawing from the conflict. Motive is one more good reason for a full public investigation before all the principals die of old age.

1. were such signals about such sensitive matters actually transmitted over the airwaves rather than by courier or land-line telephone?

2. did the Israelis have reason to believe that the Liberty had intercepted them?

3. did the Liberty relay these up the chain of command?

4. did the Israelis have reason to believe that the Liberty had already transmitted same?

5. did the Israelis break our codes?

6. did Israeli leadership really believe that it was worth risking its relationship with the United States over such transitory matters?

7. did the survivors indicate that such transmissions were, indeed, intercepted and/or relayed?

You're asking several good questions the US Congress should've answered before you were born (probably)

Motive could be unraveled during a full investigation into the incident which has never happened other than a Naval Board of Inquiry that was rushed and for which the verdict was preordained in DC.

http://www.gtr5.com/evidence/attack_sigint.pdf

Every once in a thousand years or so, we find ourselves agreeing, like now.

But without the answers to such questions, we cannot label the incident as anything overly sinister or malicious.

 

[Peach]

1. were such signals about such sensitive matters actually transmitted over the airwaves rather than by courier or land-line telephone?

2. did the Israelis have reason to believe that the Liberty had intercepted them?

3. did the Liberty relay these up the chain of command?

4. did the Israelis have reason to believe that the Liberty had already transmitted same?

5. did the Israelis break our codes?

6. did Israeli leadership really believe that it was worth risking its relationship with the United States over such transitory matters?

7. did the survivors indicate that such transmissions were, indeed, intercepted and/or relayed?

You're asking several good questions the US Congress should've answered before you were born (probably)

Motive could be unraveled during a full investigation into the incident which has never happened other than a Naval Board of Inquiry that was rushed and for which the verdict was preordained in DC.

http://www.gtr5.com/evidence/attack_sigint.pdf

Every once in a thousand years or so, we find ourselves agreeing, like now.

But without the answers to such questions, we cannot label the incident as anything overly sinister or malicious.

There were also numerous NSA & Congressional inquiries, all agreed the tragic occurrence was the result of system failures, and the smoke that billowed out after she was first hit.

 

[LiberalMedia]

You're seriously calling members of the USS liberty anti semitic manpigs ? Does that include the ones that were killed by Israel ?

It includes only the ones who have made antisemitic allegations that this was a deliberate attack.

Classic liberal whiney bullshit. No one has made any anti semitic remarks. The claim is simply that Israel intentionally attacked an American ship. Dont' try to turn this into something that it's not.

Don't try to dodge the issue. You are attempting to stir up hatred of Jews by claiming that Israel, AKA "The Jewish State," attacked U.S. assets on purpose. There can be literally no other reason for you to push this preposterous claim so forcefully other than your own irrational hatred of Jews.

 

[Peach]

It includes only the ones who have made antisemitic allegations that this was a deliberate attack.

Classic liberal whiney bullshit. No one has made any anti semitic remarks. The claim is simply that Israel intentionally attacked an American ship. Dont' try to turn this into something that it's not.

Don't try to dodge the issue. You are attempting to stir up hatred of Jews by claiming that Israel, AKA "The Jewish State," attacked U.S. assets on purpose. There can be literally no other reason for you to push this preposterous claim so forcefully other than your own irrational hatred of Jews.

When Holocaust deniers roam the streets of the USA, no despicable, filthy, dirty, loathsome claim can be ruled out.

 

[georgephillip]

You're asking several good questions the US Congress should've answered before you were born (probably)

Motive could be unraveled during a full investigation into the incident which has never happened other than a Naval Board of Inquiry that was rushed and for which the verdict was preordained in DC.

http://www.gtr5.com/evidence/attack_sigint.pdf

Every once in a thousand years or so, we find ourselves agreeing, like now.

But without the answers to such questions, we cannot label the incident as anything overly sinister or malicious.

There were also numerous NSA & Congressional inquiries, all agreed the tragic occurrence was the result of system failures, and the smoke that billowed out after she was first hit.

Not exactly:

"The U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry record contains testimony by fourteen Liberty crew members and five subject matter experts; exhibits of attack damage photographs, various messages and memorandums; and findings of fact.

"The testimony record reveals 'a shallow investigation, plagued by myriad disagreements between the captain and his crew.'[60]

"As to culpability, 'It was not the responsibility of the court to rule on the culpability of the attackers, and no evidence was heard from the attacking nation', the court concluded that 'available evidence combines to indicate ... (that the attack was) a case of mistaken identity.'

"Additionally, the Court found that 'heroism displayed by the Commanding Officer, officers and men of the Liberty was exceptional.'

"The Joint Chief of Staff's Report contains findings of fact related only to communication system failures associated with the Liberty attack. It was not concerned with matters of culpability, nor does it contain statements thereof..."

USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You can find examples of reports which considered certain aspects of the assault on Liberty, but you will never find an example of a full congressional investigation in to that event.

Liberty is the only event of its kind that has never been fully investigated by the entire US Congress.

 

[Peach]

only to communication system failures associated with the Liberty attack.

The reason for the bombing, yes. Also The Liberty was only 15 miles away from the war. Israel had warned the US to keep ships 100 miles away.

 

[dilloduck]

It includes only the ones who have made antisemitic allegations that this was a deliberate attack.

Classic liberal whiney bullshit. No one has made any anti semitic remarks. The claim is simply that Israel intentionally attacked an American ship. Dont' try to turn this into something that it's not.

Don't try to dodge the issue. You are attempting to stir up hatred of Jews by claiming that Israel, AKA "The Jewish State," attacked U.S. assets on purpose. There can be literally no other reason for you to push this preposterous claim so forcefully other than your own irrational hatred of Jews.

You are trying to use liberal logic to define the my motives and using trite " shoot the messenger " strategies to try to deflect from the truth.
FAIL.
I don't even find fault with Israel attacking the USS Liberty. The attacked it intentionally because they were trying to save their own asses. I would have done the same thing.

 

[LiberalMedia]

Classic liberal whiney bullshit. No one has made any anti semitic remarks. The claim is simply that Israel intentionally attacked an American ship. Dont' try to turn this into something that it's not.

Don't try to dodge the issue. You are attempting to stir up hatred of Jews by claiming that Israel, AKA "The Jewish State," attacked U.S. assets on purpose. There can be literally no other reason for you to push this preposterous claim so forcefully other than your own irrational hatred of Jews.

You are trying to use liberal logic to define the my motives and using trite " shoot the messenger " strategies to try to deflect from the truth.
FAIL.
I don't even find fault with Israel attacking the USS Liberty. The attacked it intentionally because they were trying to save their own asses. I would have done the same thing.

False dichotomy.

Explain what "they were trying to save their own asses" from, or I will be forced to assume that this is just another unqualified face-saving attempt of yours.