USS Liberty Remembered At Navy Memorial

Revisionists/deniers will never accept the truth however often they hear it.

 

They don't accept it not out of factual accuracy but simply because they are hateful racists who would welcome it to occur again. Their voice cannot go uncorrected lest the week minded be swayed towards this hate and that is why reminding everybody that this occurred is important.

 

Exactly, exactly... and we have quite a few on this Forum living in the UK.

 

Finally we agree on something!

 

So much bullpoopy...so little time.

I've watched the coverage of the Liberty since the day it happened .Surely, after another generation of history re-writers , the US will be found completely responsible for the attack and will happily pay restitution to Israel, along with a decade of groveling apologies. Did you hear the one where the Israelis were working for LBJ when and why they did it? Wait for it.

Besides your declared contempt for anyone who cares to burst your bubble, your writing is deliberately misleading, which proves to me the weakness of your arguments.

The Israeli side claims that the 10 (used to be 15) US investigations all exonerated Israel and closed the case, at least according to that paragon of journalistic excellence, the NY Times. The survivors claim that the politically driven, fast track need to close the book, meant that the Liberty was the only USN ship ever attacked WITHOUT a Congressional investigation AND they put up US$10,000 for anyone who could prove otherwise.

So the idiotic, stupid old men would have pay up. Why haven't you gone after it?

.

 

In regards to 1, power rhetoric. Thanks.

In regards to 2, well someone has a lot of time on their hands. By the way since the vast majority of information on the USS Liberty is in fact documents, and statements, you might try "reading" them. Your reference to "Watching" appears to suggest you do not read or write.

In regards to 3,I have seen some drivel that LBJ asked the Israelis to sink his ship yes. It was yet another theory thrown out with zero basis. Like the anti Israel theories its designed to try call the US President a liar and drive a wedge not just between Israel and the US but between Americans and their own government. Its transparent disinformation. Drivel. Utter drivel. Zero basis.

In regards to 4, no not everyone. Just at this point you and Snake and anyone else coming on this board trying to defend baseless theories as facts. Yes
I find making allegations without basis contemptible. If find trying to insult the US President as deliberately ordering his own navy killed as contemptible as it gets.

In regards to 5, the amount of inquiries and investigations conducted is public record, Israel never claimed the total amount.The total amount is public domain. It did not need to be claimed. This number you picked "15" is an arbitrary number. You care to provide the Israeli government official who used the number 15 so we can see if anyone actually used that number? Right.

You once again showed you want to come on this thread, disagree with my positions which is your absolute and perfect right, but have no positions.

Coming on here and throwing out some name calling and rhetorical statements won't pass as debate. But please, feel free to use the word bullpoopy again. It establishes your credibility.

 

I would like to go on record as stating this Zionist and others like me have a love-hate relationship with the UK.

We detested their duplicity in the Picot agreement with France. We would argue they violated international law and lied about the creation of Jordan. We detested their trying to prevent an Israeli state from coming about.

We also admired Churchill's war against Hitler, the sacrifice of the British against the Nazis. We consider the British the key country in defeating Nazism
and so are very respectful of their role in WW2.

There is always going to be a love hate relationship because the fact is Israel resents what Britain did to them sending many to their death back in Nazi Germany and treating us as scum in Palestine but then on the other hand the Palmach-Haganah was a loyal WW2 ally of the British in the war against Hitler and provided intelligence on the ground in Serbia, Croatia and other places during WW2.

The bottom line is Britain has a shared concern with Israel over Muslim terrorism and that makes it an ally.

I get why Israelis feel tense with the British. They are not in the mood to be dictated to by people that turned their back on them after WW2 and tried to prevent holocaust survivors from fleeing to Palestine.

So in discussions about friendly fire incidents the Israelis on this board re not in the mood to be lectured to by the Brits on this forum who are anti Israeli not when the British themselves have engaged in many friendly fires themselves and also were a target an of an American friendly fire mistake.

I believe the British have an important role in combatting world terrorism.

I also think there are many gentile British who support Israel, based on their genuine belief of tolerance and respect for us.

Then again I am on record on this forum saying I like the Irish and the Yanks too so what do I know. I have strange taste in people.

However I will go on record saying the people of Tonga do not wear underwear not just the Scots.

Now instead of fretting about the so called Scotts or Wlsh or English on this board who don't like Israel, all I will say is they should stop boiling their food and put some chile peppers on their meat. Bland.Bland Bland. Also stop putting kidneys in with the steak in your pies.. Just Stop it. I know its actually sparrows. Blech. Haggis? Sheep vomit. I mean really. That is not kosher or halal. I've had it. Yah I thought it was lumpy oat-meal. Shame on you people. Its no wonder you invented malt to wash it down with.Sheesh.

 

.
I read their website, You should also round out your sources. The NY Times doesn't help your cause anymore than your name calling.

I tell you what..you cut out the name calling and I'll not waste time about some nebbish reading scripts in in his parents basement, which I'm sure wouldn't be real anyway.

Right there $10,000 smackers to anyone who can disprove their claim that the Liberty was, IN FACT, the only US Naval ship in history ever to be attacked without a full Congressional inquiry.

Why don't you take their money? And why no one before you did either?

honestly.
.
.

- - - Updated - - -

.
I read their website, You should also round out your sources. The NY Times doesn't help your cause anymore than your name calling.

I tell you what..you cut out the name calling and I'll not waste time about some nebbish reading scripts in in his parents basement, which I'm sure wouldn't be real anyway.

Right there $10,000 smackers to anyone who can disprove their claim that the Liberty was, IN FACT, the only US Naval ship in history ever to be attacked without a full Congressional inquiry.

Why don't you take their money? And why no one before you did either?

honestly.
.
.

 

Off the top of my head the USS Cole didn't get one either.

 

Then they would've had to pay up?
.

 

No because they never stated what you said they did and added the reward, their website says only ;

Says nothing about what you said which was;

"$10,000 smackers to anyone who can disprove their claim that the Liberty was, IN FACT, the only US Naval ship in history ever to be attacked without a full Congressional inquiry. "

 

Going from memory...unintentional.

May have been a vets group petition to Congress (without the 10G). I'll fetch

But how about the way it is written? Surely someone would have collected.

So any mention of the eleven investigations in favor of the Israel version is dishonest.

No?
.
.

 

Which part, the one that states they want proof there has been five congressional investigations or their version of proof that will satisfy their kangaroo court criteria about intentionality?

 

NO.I'm referring to post #1

"Israel's position as backed by 10 US investigations stated it first thought the boat was Egyptian, then Soviet or American".

Downright dishonest.

 

Then I have no idea of what it is you are going on about then as the OP states ;

And does not contain your quote.

 

I agree, it does not seem to add up.

 

Israeli markings were of no consequence if the goal was the killing of all survivors. They kept them on for their own identification purposes. As for the aircrafts, at this point of the war the world at large wasn't sure about the total destruction of the Gyppo air force. And, in any case, if there were to be no survivors...

Well, 'looks like my most miserable opinion is more than enough for your "20-y long military expertise"...

 

I'll tell you - if it wasn't for all that "mis-identification" and 28-32knts codswallop, I would have believed the Israeli side.

 

That the US investigated ourselves and ultimately agreed with the Israeli position 10 times (at least) seems to be an important argument on the Israeli side. But with a purse of $10G still waiting for anyone who can actually prove it, the use of that argument is deliberately misleading and defines everything written by this person as pure propaganda, and most worthy on myi 1 person ignore list.

For example, :


"I now respond directly to the supposed BBC documentary Snake would have us use as the smoking gun to prove his theories.

Interestingly thew BBC press release says it produced startling new evidence. It did not. In fact the evidence it produced was already rebutted directly by Cristol.

In fact it was not new evidence at all. The alleged quotes from Johnson and MacNamara were not new and the theories it presented are in fact recycled ones.

Israel's position as backed by 10 US investigations stated it first thought the boat was Egyptian, then Soviet or American.

The creator of the documentary and Snake would have you believe Dead In The Water reveals, those at the very top never believed the Israeli version -" and for good reasons".

This is nothing new. Admiral Moorer, Dean Rusk, many other Americans both on the ship and otherwise believe it was not a case of mistaken identity. That is their right to have such an opinion but all this documentary showed is that this was there opinion IN SPITE of evidence given to them to the contrary,

Whether their opinion is based on "good reasons" or their strong faith belief that you can't engage in friendly fire is another issue.

The BBC press release says the documentary shows a " daring ploy by Israel to fake an Egyptian attack on the American spy ship, and thereby provide America with a reason to officially enter the war against Egypt."

This theory was completely and utterly debunked and so if you buy it, you must necessarily believe LBJ and all the subsequent Presidents lied, all 10 US investigations were deliberate lies, all the government documents released are all fake. You must blindly reject all the evidence-totally ignore it, assume its all a lie, suspend all logic and simply take on face value the above.

Even if you dismiss all the evidence to the contrary as false Zionist info, then you are asked to buy into an idiot theory.

You are to believe Israel would send Mirage jets, with their distinct profiles, to sink a US ship and would not be identified as Mirage jets. Egypt did not have the Mysteres Israel had at the time of the attack.

You are also to believe Israel sent hets to sink the ship without bombs and would only use machine guns and napalm instead of a 500 pound bomb.

Also Israel was so stupid when sinking the ship to blame Egypt it would not have thought the Liberty was already being monitored and would have broadcast who hit it.

To take out the ship you would have to literally obliterate it with no chance of anyone saying anything.

What makes this theory absolutely retarded though is that when it fell apart the first time, the same idiots who came up with the theory said, oh I guess the tapes from the pilot we never counted on being released sort of blow that theory out of the air, so say, I know, let's say the Pilot upon realizing he could not blow up the ship, panicked told the Israelis who then back pedalled. That is what you have to believe because in this idiot theory, Israel notified the US as soon as they realized the ship was American and the idiots who came up with this theory did a Michael Jackson back pedal and said, uh yah they did that only after they realized they could not blow up the ship.

What an idiot thing to say. You blow up this ship in a false flag you don't use visible Israeli marked Mysteres and topedo boats, you use a friggin submarine which Israel had.


This documentary claims it shows intercepted recordings revealing how America was convinced the attack was intentional. Of course the crew did. They saw the Israeli jet markings. Of course they would think that.

They would not have known what the Israelis were in fact thinking at the time of the attack or new for example that the Americans had given the wrong coordinates to Israel as to where the ship was and placed it in an area Israel warned was a conflict zone. They would not have known the speed they were travelling at under international was convention between the US and Israel was a speed they had agreed never to engage in if they were not a warship because the speed would be assumed to mean its a warship.

The documentary never looked at that.

The documentary never considered of course the US would have many of its brass angry at Israel-what you want them to admit they made a mistake like Israel. They both screwed up. The American top brass covering their asses did not want people to know they phacked up and forgot to tell the ship to get out of the waters they were in. They phacked up for one of two reasons-one clear line of evidence shows their messages to get the ship out of the area it was in came in too late and only after the attack which is the most probable one, a command error that placed them in friendly fire way.

The other theory which I don't buy but is possible is the US lied to Israel on purpose about the Liberty's true location because it wanted to stay in close and did nto trust Israel because it feared Israel could trigger a war with te Soviets.

The second theory I do not like because the US and Israel were on constant exchange of info because Israel feared a Soviet nuclear attack and it did not want US involvement.

This brings us to the next idiot part of this theory. At the time of this incident, the Egyptian Air Force was finished. So were its ground forces. They were in full retreat. They had a few navy vessels left. Egypt had in the past armed its freighters with machine guns as well.

The last thing Israel needed was US intervention. I was clearly defeating its enemy. If the US intervened necessarily the Soviets would have stepped in.

We also know the Soviets had already made it clear they were planning to invade Israel to save face for Egypt and Syria and it was the Americans who talked them out of it.

The last thing Israel would have done is attack the US who it needed to stay out of the ground war and deflect off the Soviets through back channels.

This idiot documentary that claims the attack was intentional repeats another idiotic statement. Of course at the time of the attack it was intentional. If it was not intended it would not have been carried out. The intent was to take out that ship. What the documentary never showed was ANY proof from ANYONE they have evidence an Israeli sat there and went, lets sink the US ship so they come into the war.

Its a theory with no basis.

Interesting the BBC hype on the documentary says the veterans are still calling for a full investigation by Congress into the incident. It remains the only case of an attack on a US ship without a full Congressional enquiry.

That is utter bull crap. There were 10 full investigations including a Senate inquirt at which time the Pilot who led the attack apologized to the American people.

What an idiot thing to say.

Now the vets who are calling for yet another inquiry are a group I already discussed being egged on by a lobby group that makes its business representing anti Israeli interests on capitol hill.

This is an advertising tool they use to market for business. Look at the bad Israelis we exposed and they beat this dead horse every time they need a new anti Israel client.

Interestingly the hype from the BBC said Dead in the Water puts forward evidence that Israel deliberately attacked a ship belonging to its ally, intending to sink it as quickly as possible. Duh. Anything is possible. UFO's from outerspace could have staged the whole thing for the lizard shape shifters from Syrius. Again what an idiotic thing to say.

Saying something is "possible" is called speculation. It doesn't prove anything. The very reason the hype says it shows its "possible" is precisely because the documentary failed to prove it as a fact. It can't. There is no evidence it presented that provides objective evidence to prove the intent of the Israelis as anything but accidental.

Another idiotic thing the BBC hype on the documentary said is the film also revealed how the Liberty incident provoked the launch of nuclear-armed planes targeted against Cairo from a US aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean.

Its painful the idiocy of this hype. Of course it would have provoked the above. If the US thought it was under attack, it was standard convention for it to respond as to the above and it could very well have thought it was under fire not just from Egypt but the Russians.

Oh but wait. Israel wanted that. It wanted the US dropping nuclear bombs in Cairo after it had already defeated Egypt on the ground and in the air. Yah those idiot Zionists were sitting around saying, use nuclear weapons, Russia won't use their own. Tey'll be no fall out from that.

What makes that theory even more painfully stupid is the fact than in 1967 Israel already had nuclear bombs of their own. If they had wanted to nuke anyone they could have done it.

This idiot statement that the US was called back only just in time, when it was clear the Liberty had not sunk with all hands, and that Israel was responsible saving the world from a nuclear war is hype, melodrama, pathetic at that to get people to watch.

Virtually every incident in the world in the Middle East during the cold war, triggered nuclear alerts between Russia, the US, China, Britain, France. How could they not?

Only an idiot would think through-out the cold war we were not facing nuclear brinksmanship not just in the Middle East but Europe, in Korea, Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, on and on.

Not one new piece of evidence in this documentary.

As for LBJ being furious at Israel of course he was. He openly swore at them on the phone. He also phoned them back when he found out his own brass failed to move the ship out of the zone it said it was not in and both sides realized a mutual friendly fire phack up.

This attempt to say LBJ hated Israel is hilarious. He was one of its strongest supporters in the Senate. In fact it was Dean Rusk who was anti Israel. MacNamara and LBJ as well as the Joint Chiefs of Staff and CIA openly admitted both sides screwed up as did the Israelis.

The Israeli PM, Chief of Military (Yithak Rabin), Abba Eban (foreign Minister) all contacted their counter parts with full disclosure).

Hell even the Captain of the Liberty said he was so mad at Israel when this happened, he ordered his ship to shoot at the Israeli torpedo ships asking it if it wanted help.

There is no conspiracy. It was classic friendly fire.

The US personnal aboard the Liberty suffered and no Israeli covered it up or wanted it to happen.

Cover up? What cover up? Obviously in friendly fire, there are people who back pedal and after the fact speculate on why they phacked up.

People see what they want to see when people make mistakes. In this case the anti Israelis see an opportunity t exploit the anger of US personnal caught in friendly fire.

Its politics. Your enemy is my enemy.

Not all fo the crew of the US Liberty bought into the conspiracy and anger. Many reject the use of their incident to engage in political diatribes against their own government and Israel calling them both liars.

Israel and the US have proud militaries that have relied on each other. Some on this board would love that not to be true.

Stop using the trgedy to exploit your hatred of Israel Snake/Trout. Its stale".

 

Ejca here count:

1.U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry -June 10-18, 1967

summary: attack was a case of mistaken identity.

2- CIA Report -June 13, 1967

summary: attack was not made in malice and was a mistake.

3. Joint Chiefs of Staff Fact Finding Team (Russ Report) -June 9-20, 1967

summary: provided "findings of fact," with no conclusions one way or the other

4. Clifford Report -July 18, 1967

summary: no premeditation, but "inexcusable failures" by Israeli forces constituing "gross negligence."

5. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations -1967

summary: Secretary of Defense McNamara testified he supported conclusion that the attack was not intentional

6. Senate Armed Services Committee - Feb. 1, 1968

summary: no conclusion, Secretary McNamara makes comparison of attack on Liberty to that on Pueblo with regard to uncertainty about what was happening at the time of the incident.

7. House Appropriations Committee April-May 1968

sumary: navy communications "foulup" and no conclusion regarding Israeli actions

8. House Armed Services Committee- May 10, 1971

summary: critical of Navy communications, no conclusion regarding Israeli actions

9-Senate Select Committee on Intelligence- 1979

summary: directly responded to all accusations made by Liberty crewman James Ennes in his book claiming Israel's attack was deliberate. , Senate investigation found no merit to his claim attack was intentional

10-National Security Agency -1981

summary: the Liberty was mistaken for an Egyptian ship as a result of miscalculations and egregious errors


11-House Armed Services Committee-June 1991


summary: in direct response to the Liberty Veterans Association, Subcommitte on Investigations launched probe that concluded there was no evidence to support allegations made by the Association and no reason for further investigation

The U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, consists of more than 700 pages with 154 pages of the sworn testimony of the most-involved officers and crew members, containing 55 findings of fact. The two most relevant finding of facts:

• evidence indicated that the attack on Liberty was, in fact, a case of mistaken identity.


• there was no proof that the attack was intended against a U.S. ship


The Report of Armed Services Investigating Subcommittee, May 10, 1971, and hearings before the Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate on June 12, July 14 and July 26, 1967, are two examples fo Congressional hearings that were held.

To engage in the game of semantics to say they were not "FULL" congressional investigations is a crock.

What's full? Do we keep going until we find one that tells anti Israelis what they want to hear and then call it "full".

What a crock, $10,000.00.

Further this idiotic notion that one debates by making an allegation with ZERO evidence or basis then demanding it be proven untrue deserves further contempt.

 

If my mother had roller skates she'd be a Volvo. Strange that they didn't kill the survivors and instead cut the attack off short considering they had all the time in the world both before and after.

Nobody except everybody knew this;

BBC: 5 June 1967: Israel launches attack on Egypt
Israeli forces have launched a pre-emptive attack on Egypt and destroyed nearly 400 Egypt-based military aircraft.

..

>>>MOD EDIT Off Topic Removed<<<

Strawman ejca, the purse is for proving an author wrong.

The US hearings already have done that over and over but nothing will ever satisfy some.

 

Good enough.

Ignorance of both windows of opportunity and fog of war doesn't mean that they are "conspiracies". Retrospection is convenient. However, here is what was believed in these days:

The numbers of Arab aircraft claimed destroyed by Israel were at first regarded as "greatly exaggerated" by the Western press. However, the fact that the Egyptian Air Force, along with other Arab air forces attacked by Israel made practically no appearance for the remaining days of the conflict proved that the numbers were most likely authentic. Throughout the war, Israeli aircraft continued strafing Arab airfield runways to prevent their return to usability. Meanwhile, Egyptian state-run radio had reported an Egyptian victory, falsely claiming that 70 Israeli planes had been downed on the first day of fighting.

 

Your quote proves my point yet again. Thank you!

 

In all seriousness there is absolutely no reason for Israel to declare war on the US so the bogus far fetched contentions of it being a deliberate attack on the US is what does not add up.

 

.Declare war? Please..

From that den of Israel-haters, Wikipedia.

Subsequently, he published a book about the Liberty incident, "The Liberty Incident: The 1967 Attack on the U.S. Navy Spy Ship".[SUP][5][/SUP] Cristol said the tapes show the attack was an accident, and that the Israelis mistook the ship for an Egyptian one.[SUP][6][/SUP] However, on 2 October 2007, the Chicago Tribune published a special report into the attack, containing numerous previously unreported quotes from former military personnel with first-hand knowledge of the incident, which cast doubt on Cristol's conclusions."[SUP][7]

So with 5 years worth of new information, a journalist for the Chicago Tribune picked his theories apart.

My original position in this thread was that there is so much information/misinformation around, we could NEVER actually know for sure.

Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable to side with who we view as our own. I'm a proud USA-firster, doesn't mean I hate anybody...capiche?

.