Remember the USS Liberty

[Granite_State]

Some new evidence on the 1967 attack:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-liberty1002,0,3053738.story?page=1&coll=bal-home-he

[Tom Odom]

See the USS Liberty Memorial (http://www.gtr5.com/) for more.

This series of attacks is one of those things Americans just seem to not want to grasp.

Tom

[Granite_State]

See the USS Liberty Memorial (http://www.gtr5.com/) for more.

This series of attacks is one of those things Americans just seem to not want to grasp.

Tom

Maybe, but it always struck me as something that most Americans have never heard of. The elite, political and media, doesn't usually want to talk about it, so most people never hear about it.

[Steve Blair]

Maybe, but it always struck me as something that most Americans have never heard of. The elite, political and media, doesn't usually want to talk about it, so most people never hear about it.

I'd tend to go with this as well. The whole Liberty incident tends to get swept under the rug in most general history classes, and that's all many Americans ever get.

[Tom Odom]

I'd tend to go with this as well. The whole Liberty incident tends to get swept under the rug in most general history classes, and that's all many Americans ever get.

Swept under the rug? Make that hidden and nailed shut; virtually nothing was out until Assault on the Liberty came out and the suppression machine swung into high gear. The Moorer Commission statement in 2003 was damning but given little coverage:



The "Moorer Commission" (Chaired by Adm. Moorer) investigated the attack and made the following findings:

"We, the undersigned, having undertaken an independent investigation of Israel's attack on USS Liberty, including eyewitness testimony from surviving crew members, a review of naval and other official records, an examination of official statements by the Israeli and American governments, a study of the conclusions of all previous official inquiries, and a consideration of important new evidence and recent statements from individuals having direct knowledge of the attack or the cover up, hereby find the following:

1. That on June 8, 1967, after eight hours of aerial surveillance, Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against USS Liberty, the world's most sophisticated intelligence ship, inflicting 34 dead and 173 wounded American servicemen (a casualty rate of seventy percent, in a crew of 294);

2. That the Israeli air attack lasted approximately 25 minutes, during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on USS Liberty's bridge, and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels;

3. That the torpedo boat attack involved not only the firing of torpedoes, but the machine-gunning of Liberty's firefighters and stretcher-bearers as they struggled to save their ship and crew; the Israeli torpedo boats later returned to machine-gun at close range three of the Liberty's life rafts that had been lowered into the water by survivors to rescue the most seriously wounded;

4. That there is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew; evidence of such intent is supported by statements from Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Undersecretary of State George Ball, former CIA director Richard Helms, former NSA directors Lieutenant General William Odom, USA (Ret.), Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, USN (Ret.), and Marshal Carter; former NSA deputy directors Oliver Kirby and Major General John Morrison, USAF (Ret.); and former Ambassador Dwight Porter, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon in 1967;

5. That in attacking USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States;

6. That fearing conflict with Israel, the White House deliberately prevented the U.S. Navy from coming to the defense of USS Liberty by recalling Sixth Fleet military rescue support while the ship was under attack; evidence of the recall of rescue aircraft is supported by statements of Captain Joe Tully, Commanding Officer of the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga, and Rear Admiral Lawrence Geis, the Sixth Fleet carrier division commander, at the time of the attack; never before in American naval history has a rescue mission been cancelled when an American ship was under attack;

7. That although Liberty was saved from almost certain destruction through the heroic efforts of the ship's Captain, William L. McGonagle (MOH), and his brave crew, surviving crew members were later threatened with "court-martial, imprisonment or worse" if they exposed the truth; and were abandoned by their own government;

8. That due to the influence of Israel's powerful supporters in the United States, the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack from the American people;

9. That due to continuing pressure by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, this attack remains the only serious naval incident that has never been thoroughly investigated by Congress; to this day, no surviving crew member has been permitted to officially and publicly testify about the attack;

10. That there has been an official cover-up without precedent in American naval history; the existence of such a cover-up is now supported by statements of Rear Admiral Merlin Staring, USN (Ret.), former Judge Advocate General of the Navy; and Captain Ward Boston, USN, (Ret.), the chief counsel to the Navy's 1967 Court of Inquiry of Liberty attack;

11. That the truth about Israel's attack and subsequent White House cover-up continues to be officially concealed from the American people to the present day and is a national disgrace;

12. That a danger to our national security exists whenever our elected officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any foreign nation, and specifically are unwilling to challenge Israel's interests when they conflict with American interests; this policy, evidenced by the failure to defend USS Liberty and the subsequent official cover-up of the Israeli attack, endangers the safety of Americans and the security of the United States.

[Steve Blair]

Yeah...I find the whole thing disgusting in the extreme myself.:mad:

[Ken White]

One of MANY reasons why Lyndon is not one of my favorite people...

[skiguy]

This is quite pathetic. Not only that they did it,but that we helped so much in covering it up for them.

Just curious, how many Israeli troops or brigades are in Iraq right now? If they are allegedly our #1 ally in the Middle East, I would imagine quite a few. But something tells me that's not going to be the answer.

[Jedburgh]

....Just curious, how many Israeli troops or brigades are in Iraq right now? If they are allegedly our #1 ally in the Middle East, I would imagine quite a few. But something tells me that's not going to be the answer.
If there is even the slightest semblance of a real cooperative relationship between the US and Israel, they will keep completely out of Iraq. Any overt or covert involvement, support or interference of any sort by Israel in Iraq would be massively counterproductive. Even rumors of such activity feed the threat IO mill.

...just to throw something else on for the Liberty:

Declaration of Ward Boston, Jr., Captain, JAGC, USN (Ret.) (http://www.wrmea.com/archives/March_2004/0403010.html)

I, Ward Boston, Jr. do declare that the following statement is true and complete:

1. For more than 30 years, I have remained silent on the topic of USS Liberty. I am a military man and when orders come in from the Secretary of Defense and President of the United Stares, I follow them.

2. However, recent attempts to rewrite history compel me to share the truth.

3. In June of 1967, while serving as a captain in the Judge Advocate General Corps, Department of the Navy, I was assigned as senior legal counsel for the Navy’s Court of Inquiry into the brutal attack on USS Liberty, which had occurred on June 8th.

4. The late Admiral Isaac C. Kidd, President of the Court, and I were given only one week to gather evidence for the Navy’s official investigation into the attack, despite the fact that we both had estimated that a proper Court of Inquiry into an attack of this magnitude would take at least six months to conduct.

5. Admiral John S. McCain, Jr., then Commander-in-Chief, Naval Forces Europe (CINCUSNAVEUR), at his headquarters in London, had charged Admiral Kidd (in a letter dated June 10, 1967) to “inquire into all the pertinent facts and circumstances leading to and connected with the armed attack; damage resulting therefrom; and deaths and injuries to naval personnel.”

6. Despite the short amount of time we were given, we gathered a vast amount of evidence, including hours of heartbreaking testimony from the young survivors.

7. The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. Each evening, after hearing testimony all day, we often spoke our private thoughts concerning what we had seen and heard. I recall Admiral Kidd repeatedly referring to the Israeli forces responsible for the attack as “murderous bastards.” It was our shared belief, based on the documentary evidence and testimony we received first-hand, that the Israeli attack was planned and deliberate, and could not possibly have been an accident.

8. I am certain that the Israeli pilots that undertook the attack, as well as their superiors, who had ordered the attack, were well aware that the ship was American.

9. I saw the flag, which had visibly identified the ship as American, riddled with bullet holes, and heard testimony that made it clear that the Israelis intended there be no survivors.

10. Not only did the Israelis attack the ship with napalm, gunfire and missiles, Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned three lifeboats that had been launched in an attempt by the crew to save the most seriously injured – a war crime.

11. Admiral Kidd and I both felt it necessary to travel to Israel to interview the Israelis who took part in the attack. Admiral Kidd telephoned Admiral McCain to discuss making arrangements. Admiral Kidd later told me that Admiral McCain was adamant that we were not to travel to Israel or contact the Israelis concerning this matter.

12. Regrettably, we did not receive into evidence and the court did not consider any of the more than sixty witness declarations from men who had been hospitalized and were unable to testify in person.

13. I am outraged at the efforts of the apologists for Israel in this country to claim that this attack was a case of “mistaken identity.”

14. In particular, the recent publication of Jay Cristol’s book, The Liberty Incident [Brassey's Military, Washington, D.C., 2002], twists the facts and misrepresents the views of those of us who investigated the attack.

15. It is Cristol’s insidious attempt to whitewash the facts that has pushed me to speak out.

16. I know from personal conversations I had with Admiral Kidd that President Lyndon Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara ordered him to conclude that the attack was a case of “mistaken identity’” despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

17. Admiral Kidd told me, after returning from Washington, D.C., that he had been ordered to sit down with two civilians from either the White House or the Defense Department and rewrite portions of the Court’s findings.

18. Admiral Kidd also told me that he had been ordered to “put the lid’” on everything having to do with the attack on USS Liberty. We were never to speak of it and we were to caution everyone else involved that they could never speak of it again.

19. I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of that statement as I know that the Court of Inquiry transcript that has been released to the public is not the same one that I certified and sent off to Washington.

20. I know this because it was necessary, due to the exigencies of time, to hand correct and initial a substantial number of pages. I have examined the released version of the transcript and I did not see any pages that bore my hand corrections and initials. Also, the original did not have any deliberately blank pages, as the released version does. Finally, the testimony of Lt. Painter concerning the deliberate machine gunning of the life rafts by the Israeli torpedo boat crews, which I distinctly recall being given at the Court of Inquiry and included in the original transcript, is now missing and has been excised.

21. Following the conclusion of the Court of Inquiry, Admiral Kidd and I remained in contact. Though we never spoke of the attack in public, we did discuss it between ourselves, on occasion. Every time we discussed the attack, Admiral Kidd was adamant that it was a deliberate, planned attack on an American ship.

22. In 1990, I received a telephone call from Jay Cristol, who wanted to interview me concerning the functioning of the Court of Inquiry. I told him that I would not speak to him on the subject and prepared to hang up the telephone. Cristol then began asking me about my personal background and other, non-Court of Inquiry related matters. I endeavored to answer these questions and politely extricate myself from the conversation. Cristol continued to return to the subject of the Court of Inquiry, which I refused to discuss with him. Finally, I suggested that he contact Admiral Kidd and ask him about the Court of Inquiry.

23. Shortly after my conversation with Cristol, I received a telephone call from Admiral Kidd, inquiring about Cristol and what he was up to. The Admiral spoke of Cristol in disparaging terms and even opined that “Cristol must be an Israeli agent.” I don’t know if he meant that literally or it was his way of expressing his disgust for Cristol’s highly partisan, pro-Israeli approach to questions involving USS Liberty.

24. At no time did I ever hear Admiral Kidd speak of Cristol other than in highly disparaging terms. I find Cristol’s claims of a “close friendship” with Admiral Kidd to be utterly incredible. I also find it impossible to believe the statements he attributes to Admiral Kidd concerning the attack on USS Liberty.

25. Several years later, I received a letter from Cristol that contained what he purported to be his notes of our prior conversation. These “notes” were grossly incorrect and bore no resemblance in reality to that discussion. I find it hard to believe that these “notes” were the product of a mistake, rather than an attempt to deceive. I informed Cristol that I disagreed with his recollection of our conversation and that he was wrong. Cristol made several attempts to arrange for the two of us to meet in person and talk but I always found ways to avoid doing this. I did not wish to meet with Cristol as we had nothing in common and I did not trust him.

26. Contrary to the misinformation presented by Cristol and others, it is important for the American people to know that it is clear that Israel is responsibly for deliberately attacking an American ship and murdering American sailors, whose bereaved shipmates have lived with this egregious conclusion for many years.

Dated: January 8, 2004
At Coronado, California.

WARD BOSTON, JR., CAPTAIN, JAGC, USN (RET.)
SENIOR COUNSEL TO THE USS LIBERTY COURT OF INQUIRY

[Tom Odom]

Cristol was trotted out as the Israeli defense--along with the Israeli Embassy in DC--on a History Channel program. I remember him claiming that Boston and Kidd had "cleared" the Israelis of a deliberate attack(s) versus a mistaken attack(s).

As usual, Jed great post. I had not seen this statement.

Best

Tom

[Adam L]

Look, I've heard info on every side of this issue and whatever it reads out to my question is "why?" Look whatever the situation was wether or not it was intentional doesn't really matter. If it wasn't it was incompetence and it shouldn't have been covered up. If it was reckless troops blowing up everything in site, the same thing. If it was intentional you have to ask why. There does not seem to be any reason here for a direct attack. If the attack was not an accident there probably is some sort of reason and there is no way in hell anybody is going to release the documents. There are too many inconsistencies on both sides. Frankly, if its been kept secret this long somebody somewhere, on both sides (probably including someone in our executive branch,) really f*%ked up. As far as a congressioinal investigation, there should be one, if that hasn't happened yet something that is too potentially embarassing, to both us and them, exists. In conclusion, there isn't going to be an investigatioin.

[bourbon]

Look, I've heard info on every side of this issue and whatever it reads out to my question is "why?"

James Bamford stirred debate in his 2001 book on NSA Body of Secrets, alleging the attack on the Liberty was to cover up the execution of Egyptian POWs at El Arish.

USS Liberty: Cover Up By James Bamford, History News Network, 8-13-01 (http://hnn.us/articles/191.html)

[Tom Odom]

Look, I've heard info on every side of this issue and whatever it reads out to my question is "why?" Look whatever the situation was wether or not it was intentional doesn't really matter. If it wasn't it was incompetence and it shouldn't have been covered up. If it was reckless troops blowing up everything in site, the same thing. If it was intentional you have to ask why. There does not seem to be any reason here for a direct attack. If the attack was not an accident there probably is some sort of reason and there is no way in hell anybody is going to release the documents. There are too many inconsistencies on both sides. Frankly, if its been kept secret this long somebody somewhere, on both sides (probably including someone in our executive branch,) really f*%ked up. As far as a congressioinal investigation, there should be one, if that hasn't happened yet something that is too potentially embarassing, to both us and them, exists. In conclusion, there isn't going to be an investigatioin.

El Arish perhaps. Most likely reason to prevent US interecpt of IDF orders to move on Syria and take the Golan, after a UN ceasefire went into effect.

There were 3 separate attacks, Adam. Fighter, helicopter, and torpedo boats. That makes the "accident claim" really stretched. Intentional versus accidental is critical.

As for reasons for the coverup, well look at your reaction. The embarrassment was tremendous; the Navy awarded the Medal of Honor to the skipper in a private ceremony. That is not "business as usual."

As for the possibility of an investigation, I fear you are correct. And that makes Point 12 of the Moorer Commission more compelling:


12. That a danger to our national security exists whenever our elected officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any foreign nation, and specifically are unwilling to challenge Israel's interests when they conflict with American interests; this policy, evidenced by the failure to defend USS Liberty and the subsequent official cover-up of the Israeli attack, endangers the safety of Americans and the security of the United States.

Tom

[goesh]

"Many of those who believe the Liberty was purposely attacked have suggested that the Israelis feared the ship might intercept communications revealing its plans to widen the war, which the U.S. opposed. But no one has ever produced any solid evidence to support that theory, and the Israelis dismiss it. The NSA's deputy director, Louis Tordella, speculated in a recently declassified memo that the attack "might have been ordered by some senior commander on the Sinai Peninsula who wrongly suspected that the LIBERTY was monitoring his activities." - per Tom's cited reference

Moshe would have been contacted first and approved of the strike and Golda would have told him the call was his to make. To weigh and judge this probability behooves one to speculate on what our Government would have done with the Intel on Israel's intentions of expanding the fight. The logical conclusion to the speculation in the above quote is that Israel weighed X number of potential American KIAs from the USS Liberty strike against their own potential KIAs based on an assumption that America would have sacrificed Israeli lives to prevent the war's expansion. That is the heart of the matter that will never see the light of day, never.

[tequila]

Moshe would have been contacted first and approved of the strike and Golda would have told him the call was his to make.

Levi Eshkol was Israeli PM during the '67 War.


The logical conclusion to the speculation in the above quote is that Israel weighed X number of potential American KIAs from the USS Liberty strike against their own potential KIAs based on an assumption that America would have sacrificed Israeli lives to prevent the war's expansion. That is the heart of the matter that will never see the light of day, never.

That Israel would choose to make a national security decision based on Israeli interests over American should come as a shock to no one. It has done so repeatedly in the past, as with its decision to pass on American secrets gained from Jonathan Pollard to the Soviets and also through its sale of American defense technology to China. Israeli behavior is an excellent reminder of how Lord Palmerston's old saw remains true.

[goesh]

When we can penetrate the myriad of Islamic fundamentalist groups 1/3rd as good as Mossad does, then the ledger can be balanced but until then we will love and hate them like we do the Saudis. As long as they can be a thorn in the side of Arabs, they will get our cash, weapons and be tolerated. I got a crisp $20.00 says they will be allowed to buy a dozen Raptors in a year or so, at a discount price of course.

[Tom Odom]

When we can penetrate the myriad of Islamic fundamentalist groups 1/3rd as good as Mossad does, then the ledger can be balanced but until then we will love and hate them like we do the Saudis. As long as they can be a thorn in the side of Arabs, they will get our cash, weapons and be tolerated. I got a crisp $20.00 says they will be allowed to buy a dozen Raptors in a year or so, at a discount price of course.

Mate when you get beyond the peculiar myth about the effectiveness of the Mossad then maybe your bet will make sense. In 50 plus years now Israeli intelligence has not gotten it right. And you assume that the the Arabs are the enemy--hence the need for a thorn.

You are probably partially correct on the Raptors--if they get them they will not pay for them. We will.

Tom

[Ken White]

the Minister of defense for the Six-Day war.

[tequila]

You are probably partially correct on the Raptors--if they get them they will not pay for them. We will.


Kind of makes one wish we had subsidized the Lavi back in the day to the fullest - it might have saved us money now. Then again, if we'd done that the Chicoms would probably have the F-16 copied in full by now - and then God knows how many Raptors we'd have to buy. :eek:

[Steve Blair]

Kind of makes one wish we had subsidized the Lavi back in the day to the fullest - it might have saved us money now. Then again, if we'd done that the Chicoms would probably have the F-16 copied in full by now - and then God knows how many Raptors we'd have to buy. :eek:

Maybe we can "sell" them the ones with the bad GPS units...

[Abu Buckwheat]

James Bamford stirred debate in his 2001 book on NSA Body of Secrets, alleging the attack on the Liberty was to cover up the execution of Egyptian POWs at El Arish.

USS Liberty: Cover Up By James Bamford, History News Network, 8-13-01 (http://hnn.us/articles/191.html)

As a former CT I am biased because one of my old CT instructors was a survivor who was supposed to be in the collection room before it was obliterated by the torpedo ... we studied this attack in our A-school as a failure of mission self-defense (cryptologically speaking) . I've read everything UNCLAS or DECLAS on this and I agree with the theory put out by a writer in the Naval Institute's Proceedings and the book Assault on the Liberty. The most logical reason for why they attacked was that they Israelis delayed the invasion of the Golan until the Liberty was out of the way. Forget Bamford as his "killing POWs" theory holds no water.

Having worked with the Israelis I know that protecting Israel is job #1. The Liberty was bringing undue attention from the Russian Intel, Israel decided to make an example of it. Maybe they thought it would be acceptable to mistake it for an Egyptian tanker. It worked and the best effect of it was to move collection from AGRs to warships.

[Tom Odom]

As a former CT I am biased because one of my old CT instructors was a survivor who was supposed to be in the collection room before it was obliterated by the torpedo ... we studied this attack in our A-school as a failure of mission self-defense (cryptologically speaking) . I've read everything UNCLAS or DECLAS on this and I agree with the theory put out by a writer in the Naval Institute's Proceedings and the book Assault on the Liberty. The most logical reason for why they attacked was that they Israelis delayed the invasion of the Golan until the Liberty was out of the way. Forget Bamford as his "killing POWs" theory holds no water.

Having worked with the Israelis I know that protecting Israel is job #1. The Liberty was bringing undue attention from the Russian Intel, Israel decided to make an example of it. Maybe they thought it would be acceptable to mistake it for an Egyptian tanker. It worked and the best effect of it was to move collection from AGRs to warships.

AB

Off thread. I am reading your book. Good job!

Tom

[wm]

"Many of those who believe the Liberty was purposely attacked have suggested that the Israelis feared the ship might intercept communications revealing its plans to widen the war, which the U.S. opposed. But no one has ever produced any solid evidence to support that theory, and the Israelis dismiss it. The NSA's deputy director, Louis Tordella, speculated in a recently declassified memo that the attack "might have been ordered by some senior commander on the Sinai Peninsula who wrongly suspected that the LIBERTY was monitoring his activities." - per Tom's cited reference

Moshe would have been contacted first and approved of the strike and Golda would have told him the call was his to make. To weigh and judge this probability behooves one to speculate on what our Government would have done with the Intel on Israel's intentions of expanding the fight. The logical conclusion to the speculation in the above quote is that Israel weighed X number of potential American KIAs from the USS Liberty strike against their own potential KIAs based on an assumption that America would have sacrificed Israeli lives to prevent the war's expansion. That is the heart of the matter that will never see the light of day, never.

While this is pure speculation, if we accept complicity in the attack at the highest levels of the Israeli government, then another possible understanding of the Israeli motive was an attempt to bring the US into the affair as an overt partner. Had the Israelis sunk the Liberty off El Arish with unmarked aircraft, they could have foisted it off on the Egyptians and deflected US anger that way, perhaps getting the US to enter the war on Israel's side. The Israelis could have significantly expanded the war if the US also committed forces to the effort, particularlly in the Suez against Egypt. Imagine how things may have turned out against Syria had the entire IDF been available there and not parcelled between the Sinai and the Golan Heights. Shades of Fall, 1956, when Britain and France conducted military operations to ensure the Suez Canal stayed open. (Not to be confused with the earlier 1956 Suez Crisis after Nasser nationalized the waterway).
Following this "conspiracy theory", the MTBs may originally have had orders to pick up the survivors and look like the good guy rescuers of their American allies. Once the aircraft bungled the job and didn't sink the Liberty, the Israelis required other attacks to finish things up; hence the MTB attacks.

One thing really has me puzzled and amazed: the apparent ineptitude of the Israeli attacks. If this came from the top, one would think the IAF would have studied up on aircraft vs. ship attack TTPs, such as those the Japanese used against the Prince of Wales in the Malaya Straits in WWII. The poor showing in these attacks inclines me to believe that this was an attack executed at a lower level on the orders of a field commander with the assets he had available, rather than a high level effort using the best availalble means in the entire IDF.

As others have noted, I doubt we will learn the truth in our lifetimes.

[tequila]

One thing really has me puzzled and amazed: the apparent ineptitude of the Israeli attacks. If this came from the top, one would think the IAF would have studied up on aircraft vs. ship attack TTPs, such as those the Japanese used against the Prince of Wales in the Malaya Straits in WWII. The poor showing in these attacks inclines me to believe that this was an attack executed at a lower level on the orders of a field commander with the assets he had available, rather than a high level effort using the best availalble means in the entire IDF.

It was a short war, not a lot of time for planning, and probably a snap decision under pressure on the part of the Israeli leadership once presented with evidence of the ship's existence and capabilities. Even if well planned, this does not remove the possibility of incompetence --- if the Lebanon War did not remove the IAF's aura of invincibility, I'm not sure what will. The crew's injuries, testimony, and the repeated attacks certainly point towards intent and enthusiasm if not necessarily capacity.

[bourbon]

As a former CT I am biased because one of my old CT instructors was a survivor who was supposed to be in the collection room before it was obliterated by the torpedo ... we studied this attack in our A-school as a failure of mission self-defense (cryptologically speaking) . I've read everything UNCLAS or DECLAS on this and I agree with the theory put out by a writer in the Naval Institute's Proceedings and the book Assault on the Liberty. The most logical reason for why they attacked was that they Israelis delayed the invasion of the Golan until the Liberty was out of the way. Forget Bamford as his "killing POWs" theory holds no water.

Having worked with the Israelis I know that protecting Israel is job #1. The Liberty was bringing undue attention from the Russian Intel, Israel decided to make an example of it. Maybe they thought it would be acceptable to mistake it for an Egyptian tanker. It worked and the best effect of it was to move collection from AGRs to warships.

Thank you, Assault on the Liberty will be added to my constantly growing reading list. Is this the Proceedings article you reference?: Friendless Fire? By David C. Walsh, Proceedings, June 2003 (http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,NI_Friendless_0603,00.html)


Absolutely no question that the national interest comes first, last, and only. If anything I can admire and appreciate that. But I’ll contest the assertion made in our nation, that the U.S. and Israel’s national interests are intertwined. It is an argument that no matter how many times repeated, defies logic, no two nations will always have the same interests.

Israel may be getting a dozen Raptors, but I think that means the Saudi’s will be getting a dozen Raptors. And the PRC will be getting a Raptor, or at least significant related technology transfers via Israel. And my hunch is the increased Raptor production will drive down unit cost, which will bring about a successful push to increase U.S. purchases. So we will spend billions more dollars,of which we don’t have, on a plane designed to fight the Chinese (who by the way will be financing our purchase), and is of marginal use in our “war on terrorism”.

[Ken White]

don't allocate them at all well.

Raptors, like the Virginia class and M1A2 SEPs may not have much use in the terror tangle but they do have other uses and we really do need to be a full spectrum force. Keeps a lot of folks honest; there's a reason North Korea is playing better with others and Iran is unduly nervous.

Not to mention the fact that technology is a moving train... :)

* Read Congress... :mad:

[goesh]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/909552.html

"Israeli communications said to prove IAF knew Liberty was U.S. ship

By Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondent ........................

The report stated that the U.S. National Security Agency - to which the intelligence gathering ship belonged - was able to intercept IAF communications according to which, at some stage, the pilots identified the ship as American but were nonetheless instructed to push ahead with the attack.

According to the report, some of the transcripts and intelligence information have disappeared, while the rest can be found in U.S. government archives"

Nobody is yet pointing a finger at Meir Amit, chief spook of Ha-Mossad in those days who maybe called the shot. Under his tenure, Syria had been penetrated via Eli Cohen, he orchestrated the defection and grab of the new Mig-21 via an Iraqi defector and he had penetrated the Egyptian military - quite a resume' and demonstrated ability to make important decisions. One can easily imagine such a decision being made by him or delegated to him to make. What were his assets telling him about America's presence in the region? Why did he step down in 1968 after 5 years with such success? How long had the Liberty been cruising and had we for any reason been in touch with the aggressors against Israel, other than routine diplomatic exchanges? We would like to think not because of course we would never cause any harm to a friend who wasn't clearly seeing the big picture and long range strategic interests of all involved.

[tequila]

Israel may be getting a dozen Raptors, but I think that means the Saudi’s will be getting a dozen Raptors.

Difference is with the subsidy. The Israelis will be getting theirs free from us, while the Saudis will be paying us and subsidizing the Israelis' buy (they pay for theirs and can't use them). :D

I don't think the Israelis would be that brave to sell Raptor tech to the PLAAF --- unless Giuliani wins in '08. :wry:

[Jedburgh]

NSA 1981, public release 2003:

Attack on a SIGINT Collector: The U.S.S. Liberty (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB24/nsa10.pdf)

[Rank amateur]

This is what Kilcullen means what he says:




People are not mobilized individually, by cold consideration of rational facts

They are mobilized in groups, by influencers and opinion leaders, through cultural narratives that include 7 basic elements:

A simple, easily expressed story or explanation for events
A choice of words and story format that resonates with the target group
Symbolic imagery that creates an emotional bond (ideally at the unconscious level)
Elements of Myth (“sacred story”) that tap into deep cultural undercurrents of identity and appeal to universal ideals
......



People believe Israel is David against Goliath. They won't believe that 600 nuclear weapons makes you a Goliath.

Their simple explanation for the Middle East is that Israel only kills terrorists and therefore they they won't believe the facts about the USS Liberty.

That's why I keep saying Abu Ghraib, Blackwater, Haditha etc. matter in COIN. Once the population creates simple explanations, contrary facts won't change their mind.

[skiguy]

*off topic somewhat

I was googling some of the names in Jed's post #9 and came across this article:
WITHIN A MONTH! THE BRINGING DOWN OF BOBBY RAY INMAN (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ir/Ch13.html)

How true or accurate is this?

The most fascinating, but oddly enough the least reported, aspect of the Inman Affair, is the source of the implacable hostility that Safire and his allies have borne for many years toward Bobby Ray Inman. Inman revealed the source in his famous January 18 press conference, but he failed to bring out the background. The source: In early 1981, Israel suddenly bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor. Puzzled, Inman, then deputy head of the CIA, realized that Israel could only have known where the nuclear reactor was located by having gotten access to U.S. satellite photographs. But Israel's access was supposed to be limited to photographs of direct threats to Israel, which would not include Baghdad. On looking into the matter, furthermore, Inman found that Israel was habitually obtaining unwarranted access to photographs of regions even farther removed, including Libya and Pakistan. In the absence of Reagan's head of the CIA, Bill Casey, Inman ordered Israel's access to U.S. satellite photographs limited to 250 miles of its border. When Casey returned from a South Pacific trip, his favorite journalist and former campaign manager, Bill Safire, urged Casey to reverse the decision, a pressure that coincided with complaints from Israeli Defense Minister General Ariel Sharon, who had rushed to Washington to try to change the new policy.



If true, then we have overlooked (and swept under the rug) Israel committing war crimes and acts of war against us, committing treason, and violating human rights with the Palestinians. (Why is a wall built around the Warsaw Ghetto considered evil and Satanic, yet when Israel does the same thing to the Palestinians, it's fine?)
This is absurd. I'm glad they're not in Iraq. (or at least that we know of) Thanks for posting all this information (even though it makes my blood pressure rise). IMHO, it looks like we have a better ally with the Arabs.

There's a few evangelical Christian friends I know who I need to have a talk with.

[Ken White]

...

People believe Israel is David against Goliath. They won't believe that 600 nuclear weapons makes you a Goliath.

Their simple explanation for the Middle East is that Israel only kills terrorists and therefore they they won't believe the facts about the USS Liberty.

That's why I keep saying Abu Ghraib, Blackwater, Haditha etc. matter in COIN. Once the population creates simple explanations, contrary facts won't change their mind.

I cannot recall ever talking to anyone who hasn't said, essentially, that in the Israeli-Palestinian muddle, there's plenty of blame for both sides. I have seen contrary articles in the media as you say -- but then I don't put much stock in reporters...

Similarly, I've met only four people I can recall who defended the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty -- and two of them were Israelis, only one of whom even attempted to paint it as a total accidental attack. Most people at the time were extremely skeptical and most of those with whom I've discussed it since are similarly inclined.

I don't think anyone with any sense at all doubts that Abu Gharaib, Blackwater, Haditha etc. matter in COIN or that once any population creates simple explanations, contrary facts won't change minds. Certainly no one in the Armed Forces doubts that and most work quite hard to prevent such incidents. Blackwater is pretty much roundly despised according to anyone in uniform I've talked to who's seen them in operation. Thus, I think that while you're certainly entitled to say it where ever and as often as you wish, here, you're sort of preaching to the proverbial choir, I doubt you'll get any real disagreement.

[Jedburgh]

How true or accurate is this?
Well, the bit about the imagery is confirmed on the CIA's own public website:

Israel's Quest for Satellite Intelligence (https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/docs/v44i5a04p.htm)

....In early June 1981, Israeli Air Force aircraft successfully bombed an Iraqi nuclear facility near Baghdad. Curious about how the Israelis had obtained the necessary targeting information to carry out the dramatic long-range strike, Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI) Bobby Inman asked for a review of imagery and other materials that had been provided to Israeli intelligence officials. As previously noted, policies in effect at the time called for limiting Israeli access to satellite imagery to those photos showing potential direct threats to Israel. Inman quickly found that the Israeli and United States concepts of what constituted such threats differed substantially. During their nearly six months of renewed access to US satellite imagery, the Israelis had obtained "a lot" of information not only about Iraq, but also about Libya, Pakistan, and other countries lying at considerable distances from Israel. The DDCI immediately restricted future distribution of satellite photography. The Israelis were to be allowed to receive imagery only of areas within 250 miles of Israel's borders. They could, however, make specific requests for any other coverage desired, to be approved or denied by the DCI on a case-by-case basis.

Israel's then-Minister of Defense Ariel Sharon, according to Inman, was "furious," and immediately protested the decision directly to Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, who backed the DDCI. DCI Casey, who had been traveling abroad, disagreed with his deputy's decision, but did not reverse it on his return. Instead, he effectively ignored it. Retired Israeli Maj. Gen. Yehoshua Saguy, who served as the head of Israeli military intelligence from 1979 to 1983, confirmed that "Casey [said] ‘yes' all the time" to Israeli requests for satellite photography of areas lying farther than 250 miles from Israel's borders. An unnamed Israeli official has been quoted as saying that the level of support in furnishing satellite intelligence provided by DCI Casey was considered extremely valuable by the Israelis, and that they referred to it among themselves as "Casey's gift."....

[Abu Buckwheat]

Thank you, Assault on the Liberty will be added to my constantly growing reading list. Is this the Proceedings article you reference?: Friendless Fire? By David C. Walsh, Proceedings, June 2003 (http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,NI_Friendless_0603,00.html)



No it was an article written in 1975-1976 (??) it was a detailed analysis of the attack as an Israeli plan to stop brining Russian attention to why they were loitering off Northern Israel... and was followed up by an article from Capt McGonagle who blasted the Israelis. I was a Sea Cadet when i read it ... Yes I was a Navy geek from the start... blame my Old Man, the Master Chief!

[Rank amateur]

Similarly, I've met only four people I can recall who defended the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty

Maybe people don't defend it, but that is setting the bar pretty low. I think that the fact the deaths of these US servicemen are the only deaths of US servicemen the average working stiff doesn't care about is significant.


here, you're sort of preaching to the proverbial choir

There's a difference between "It's bad," and "It makes it almost impossible for us to do our mission." I'm in the latter camp, because, innocent people getting shot always bothers average working stiffs who live in the neighborhood and they rarely warm to outsiders who are more interesting in protecting their friends then getting justice. They define "justice" based on their myths. A couple months in the brig doesn't cut it, no matter how factually harsh that punishment may be.

[Ken White]

Maybe people don't defend it, but that is setting the bar pretty low. I think that the fact the deaths of these US servicemen are the only deaths of US servicemen the average working stiff doesn't care about is significant.

"Most people don't defend it" effectively means they object to it or at least do not believe the US government spin on it?

I suggest the average working stiff today is barely aware of the deaths of the crew members on the Liberty because it happened 40 years ago. Most of 'em aren't all that wrapped around the axle about Viet Nam -- or Desert Storm -- either. A great many aren't worried about last years casualties in Iraq or Afghanistan for that matter...


There's a difference between "It's bad," and "It makes it almost impossible for us to do our mission." I'm in the latter camp, because, innocent people getting shot always bothers average working stiffs who live in the neighborhood and they rarely warm to outsiders who are more interesting in protecting their friends then getting justice. They define "justice" based on their myths. A couple months in the brig doesn't cut it, no matter how factually harsh that punishment may be.

Who are this batch of "working stiffs?" American? Iraqi? If American, we disagree. If there's any nation more dismissive of bloodshed than (most, not all) Americans, I have yet to find it. If Iraqi, we can generally agree but I'd point out that the mores and criteria for punishment are quite different.

None of those things, BTW, make it impossible for the kids to do their jobs, slightly more difficult perhaps but if so only very slightly. I can't use the 'us' because I'm not one of them. However, I do have a son who is one and his unit just happened to be pulling exterior security at Abu Gharaib when that mess popped. They became aware of the problem and his unit fed it upstream long before it broke in the media. He and his unit were probably a whole lot more upset about it than you were or are because they were out dodging bullets and IEDs catching people, being reasonably careful not to hurt or degrade them and turning 'em over to the reasonably safe MPs at AG only to find out some of the MPs were acting like idiots. One could say, in fact, they were really hostile toward the MPs and more so at the NCOs and Officers that allowed that to go on.-- but it didn't make their job a bit harder.

The Haditha case is crumbling around NIS deserving ears as we speak. Blackwater is probably another tempest in a teapot but I propose to wait until the FBI investigation is over before I go into judgment mode.

Nothing in the ME is as it seems...

[Culpeper]

Some new evidence on the 1967 attack:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-liberty1002,0,3053738.story?page=1&coll=bal-home-he

Here we go again with the USS Liberty sailing in waters that just happened to be in the middle of a major shooting war during a time when the Israeli Air Force virtually destroyed the entire Egyptian Air Force still on the ground for the most part. An Israeli Air Force that was on the highest of alerts and looking for threats and every angle in a extremely fast shooting conflict. I happen to agree with with the fog of war explanation of the Israelis and they made good, as far as that can go, with settlements. Let's talk about Omar Bradley bombing our own ground forces not once but twice during Operation Cobra. I don't see a lot of people crying about that too much. The attack on the USS Liberty was only twenty-three years later. Today, it would be like looking back at friendly fire incidents during Grenada or Panama. The attack on the USS Liberty inflicted damage, disability, and even death. So, did our attack helicopters looking right at our men and equipment and still firing on them. What makes this news, as opposed to Operation Cobra, is the fact that the Israelis were involved. It was during the Cold War. We supplied the Isaelis and the Soviet Union supplied everyone else. The USS Liberty was at the wrong time and place on purpose. A calculated risk that was ignored or accepted. Given the underlying canon for the SWC I would go so far as to say it was entirely the fault of United States command and control.

[Ken White]

a better comparison would be the friendly fire incidents by A-10s in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Proving that low altitude strafing can hit the wrong targets.

Of course, all three of those were incidents where one pilot made a three second mistake on a single pass. Same thing is true of Attack chopper firing, short term, burst or two. The Liberty incident was different.

The Liberty was hit by multiple passes by at least two aircraft and by three Torpedo Boats over a period of almost an hour. That after having been overflown on at least two occasions by Israeli aircraft the day before -- and whose pilots exchanged waves with Liberty's crew...

You believe that the Liberty was solely a victim of US Command and control errors and the Israelis are effectively innocent?

Fascinating.

[Culpeper]

a better comparison would be the friendly fire incidents by A-10s in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Proving that low altitude strafing can hit the wrong targets.

Of course, all three of those were incidents where one pilot made a three second mistake on a single pass. Same thing is true of Attack chopper firing, short term, burst or two. The Liberty incident was different.

The Liberty was hit by multiple passes by at least two aircraft and by three Torpedo Boats over a period of almost an hour. That after having been overflown on at least two occasions by Israeli aircraft the day before -- and whose pilots exchanged waves with Liberty's crew...

You believe that the Liberty was solely a victim of US Command and control errors and the Israelis are effectively innocent?

Fascinating.

No, I don't think the Israelis were innocent. And I don't think the Americans were innocent as well. No different than I think Omar Bradley was innocent of carpet bombing our troops not once but twice during the Battle of Normandy based on a tactical decision to fly across our own FEBA rather than fly horizontally on the Germans' FEBA using an Army Air Corps whose only objective use of bombers were strategic in nature. The bottom line is the USS Liberty shouldn't have been where it was. The fact that units of Israelis recognized the ship and other units didn't is no different than any other circumstances surrounding any other friendly fire incident. It is sensationalized because it involves Jews making a mistake. Any time Israel makes a mistake it conjures up all sorts of conspiracy theories and smear campaigns.


Some people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen to coincide with their self-interest...[such as] wages isn't income and only gold is money.

Such is that the USS Liberty was deliberately attacked with extreme prejudice, 911 was executed by our own government, and the Holocaust never occurred. The only elephant in the room whereas the USS Liberty is concerned is speculation. Something we try to avoid on the SWC [facetious and emphasis added].

How many Americans were killed and maimed by friendly fire in Vietnam during the same days of the Six Day War?

What is fascinating is that there is enough information readily available to answer the number of casualties and damage of the USS Liberty. Researching friendly fire incidents in Vietnam during the same time period might be a little more difficult to obtain.

[Adam L]

As much as I may disagree with Culpeper on certain things, he has a point.
[/quote]
the USS Liberty is concerned is speculation. Something we try to avoid on the SWC [facetious and emphasis added].
[/quote]
Look, I know I am knew, but what attracted me to this site was the lack of speculation where there is no information to speculate on. He has a point. This is one of the few issues where this site has gotten like this.

Also, unless some of the people here have knowledge they aren't telling us we are going on nothing. We know it was a messed up incident that makes no damn sense, but thats about it. We can speculate that something definetly going on in both the Israeli and American governments to warrant such a large cover up. It is reasonable to speculate (it is speculation even though we are pretty sure) that there was a cover due to the amount of disinformation around the issue, but due to the amount of insanity we cannot reasonably judge wheter this was in fact a giant cover up or just a bunch of incompetent beurocrats scrambling during war time to cover thier asses and stirring up so much dust it looks like a sandstorm.

Although, I strongly beleive there was a cover up I keep my speculations out of it. All you need to do is live in a foreign country, Canada (yes, it is a foreign country, regretably), for a few years to see why this stuff can just be insane. You may not hear much about it down here but there are a hell of a lot of people (especially in parts of the forces) who have plenty of arguments claiming the US bombed the Canadian soldiers on purpose. I am very serious about this, you would not believe the stuff I have heard and been subjected to. I've heard this from Liberal Party (its a real party up ther) and NDP [National Democratic Party which has no equivilent party in the US] nutcases, but most of it has come from members of the Forces.

Every incident we've had with other country has people (a lot of them) throughing speculation around. Someone I used to know showed me the articles Japanes papers (legitimate ones) have published about American attacks on Japanese fishermen. Although, this definetely was an attack (quite possibly on purpose) we don't know why. We are speculating on Israeli motives (no matter how many there may be) and then sepculating on speculation on speculation. At the same time nobody is speculating on what WE were doing, and by that I mean every part of the government. Who knows what the CIA was doing. If there is one thing we can learn from History (which I believe is something all of us have studied) is that nothing is that simple.

Sorry if I am being a bit agressive with this, but after dealing with stuff like this in Canada I want to make sure I never end up doing what they were [no insult to most Canadians, but you have to admit that your society (which like the US consists of many], like the US and all of the western world, is getting more and more obsessed with what is politically and socially trendy.]

Sorry about the rant, but I really have an issue with this.

Adam

[Adam L]

I appologize if I got too emotional and critical here, but you really get a different perspective on this stuff when your the "bad guy" in a hostile society (No offense intended Canadians. Again, I am refering to a specific section of Canadian society which unfortunately is growing and getting nuttier. If it is any consolation I will admit that we have the same thing in the US. Britain has it too. Also, France, but who doesn't know that. Oh yeah, Germany. Well, pretty much everybody has the problem. Forgive me Canadians I like most of you, but I can't bring myself to forgive you for the plans to change the Mounties' dress uniform. LOL!)

Adam

P.S. Did I spell Mounty right. LOL!:D

[tequila]

The fact that units of Israelis recognized the ship and other units didn't is no different than any other circumstances surrounding any other friendly fire incident. It is sensationalized because it involves Jews making a mistake. Any time Israel makes a mistake it conjures up all sorts of conspiracy theories and smear campaigns.


This is pretty amazing to me. So you are willing to concede that the Israelis recognized Liberty as an American ship, and yet still believe that a sustained attack on it by air and naval vessels is the exact same as American strategic bombers dropping their loads short in WWII or an A-10 pilot conducting a single mistaken strafing run.

I suppose by that definition, I could bump into my wife in the basement when I thought she was in the living room, shoot her full of holes, and then claim that my pistol fired accidentally. Yes, officer, I recognized her as my wife, then I raised the weapon and shot her multiple times - but you see, she wasn't where I expected her to be, so it's like my gun went off once on its own. Where's Slapout - I want to see if this defense will fly in court.

[slapout9]

Hi tequila, I would not recommend that as a defense:wry: but in todays world I would believe someone would try it. To me the worst and most damming evidence was when they did strafing runs on the sailors while they were in their LIFE RAFTS!! even if it was a mistake how could you justify that? I think that is what you call a war crime to boot.

[skiguy]

If anyone else did this to us, it is very likely we wouldn't have hesitated to declare it an act of war. (Good God, if an Arab nation did this, we'd be all over it) Why is it so different when it comes to Israel's war crimes?

Here's my conspiracy theory thought of the day: Why do we sweep this under the rug? Because the pro-Israel lobby has far too much influence over everyone in DC (Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, and Democrats alike), and over our foreign policy. That's why. Are we still THAT guilt-ridden by the holocaust that we let Israel get away with murder?
And consider this: holocaust deniers are immediately labelled as insane. What about Armenian or Palestinian genocide deniers? They might as well just remove the "with the same judgement you use, it will be used against you" verse from the Bible.

/rant over.

[Steve Blair]

Hi tequila, I would not recommend that as a defense:wry: but in todays world I would believe someone would try it. To me the worst and most damming evidence was when they did strafing runs on the sailors while they were in their LIFE RAFTS!! even if it was a mistake how could you justify that? I think that is what you call a war crime to boot.

Concur...but they have the get out of jail free card. And trying to equate this with amicide incidents in Iraq, Afghanistan, or World War II is simply foolish. It MIGHT come closer to NKVD troops shooting their own comrades if they fell back from a failed assault, but even then it's a stretch.

Regarding life rafts...there were many incidents during World War II of this taking place...but I don't recall a single one where USN PT boats opened fire on British sailors in life rafts and continued firing once they were identified. That would be about the equivalent.

[Tom Odom]

This is pretty amazing to me. So you are willing to concede that the Israelis recognized Liberty as an American ship, and yet still believe that a sustained attack on it by air and naval vessels is the exact same as American strategic bombers dropping their loads short in WWII or an A-10 pilot conducting a single mistaken strafing run.

I suppose by that definition, I could bump into my wife in the basement when I thought she was in the living room, shoot her full of holes, and then claim that my pistol fired accidentally. Yes, officer, I recognized her as my wife, then I raised the weapon and shot her multiple times - but you see, she wasn't where I expected her to be, so it's like my gun went off once on its own. Where's Slapout - I want to see if this defense will fly in court.


Well close.

You have to do that three times, using different weapons each time.

That is where "speculation" goes astray when it comes to accidents and intentional acts.

Best

Tom

[Ken White]

No, I don't think the Israelis were innocent. And I don't think the Americans were innocent as well...

We can probably agree on that. We'd probably disagree on apportionment -- I have no problem with such a disagreement and, as they say, we should be able to do that agreeably.


...The bottom line is the USS Liberty shouldn't have been where it was...

However, not in agreement on that. International waters, the burden of positive identification was on the attacker. Period.


...The fact that units of Israelis recognized the ship and other units didn't is no different than any other circumstances surrounding any other friendly fire incident...

Perhaps, we don't know. We do know very few friendly fire incidents with excellent visibility and surface contact occur over a two day period.


...It is sensationalized because it involves Jews making a mistake. Any time Israel makes a mistake it conjures up all sorts of conspiracy theories and smear campaigns.

I've noticed that. I've also notice undue defensiveness on those topics. That does not mean I‘m disposed toward or agree with either course.


Such is that the USS Liberty was deliberately attacked with extreme prejudice,...

Neither you or I know whether that's the case or not. You seem to not and I know I do not buy that; I think it was simply a screwup -- but a particularly egregious and inexscusable one.


... The only elephant in the room whereas the USS Liberty is concerned is speculation. Something we try to avoid on the SWC [facetious and emphasis added].

Really? Hard to tell sometimes. Beyond speculation is the location of the ship and the time taken for the incident to occur; every source pretty much agrees on those two items.


How many Americans were killed and maimed by friendly fire in Vietnam during the same days of the Six Day War?

A bunch, probably about the same number; who knows.


What is fascinating is that there is enough information readily available to answer the number of casualties and damage of the USS Liberty. Researching friendly fire incidents in Vietnam during the same time period might be a little more difficult to obtain.

No question. Fortunately, we don't have to do that because it has absolutely no relevance. As you know, the stats are somewhere, it's just digging them out that is a pain.

Thus, I find it surprising that you cannot see the very significant difference simply due to the public nature of the Liberty incident. I've seen the biggest complaint voiced by most with whom I've discussed the whole thing revolve around the actions of Johnson and MacNamara. I know those two are my big gripe.

The US screwed up, the Isaraelis screwed up a bit more IMO and those two dangerous people at the top of the US power structure capped it all. I can understand comm glitches, I can understand overreaction in combat and I can forgive both those things. Dishonesty above the normal political BS in high places I don't accept.

It isn't the incident, it's the coverup.

[goesh]

I live with the belief that that someone at a high level in the US was feeding Intel to the Arabs with hopes of producing a stalement and prevent the Soviets and the US from being fully sucked in. Dean Rusk truly believed diplomacy could win the day and the hotline with the Soviets was first used during this crisis. The Epygtian military was penetrated by Mossad as were Syrian forces and when word came to Meir Amit that the Americans were sharing info, he felt there was no choice but to take out the source that was monitoring tactical communication of IDF forces. He had the resume' of experience and power to make this happen in such a time of crisis. My conspiracy theory explains the complicity in a mutual coverup at high levels and kept voters from asking embarassing questions of why Intel was being shared with enemies of allies. It also explains why such a talent as Amit would duck out of sight the following year.

[Adam L]

I live with the belief that that someone at a high level in the US was feeding Intel to the Arabs with hopes of producing a stalement and prevent the Soviets and the US from being fully sucked in. Dean Rusk truly believed diplomacy could win the day and the hotline with the Soviets was first used during this crisis. The Epygtian military was penetrated by Mossad as were Syrian forces and when word came to Meir Amit that the Americans were sharing info, he felt there was no choice but to take out the source that was monitoring tactical communication of IDF forces. He had the resume' of experience and power to make this happen in such a time of crisis. My conspiracy theory explains the complicity in a mutual coverup at high levels and kept voters from asking embarassing questions of why Intel was being shared with enemies of allies. It also explains why such a talent as Amit would duck out of sight the following year.

Now that is a well rounded and logical conspiracy theory. It has motive, which was lacking in much of the posted speculation, that would in such a war explain why such an extreme actioin would be taken. A lot of the politicians, the media and public too, were worried about the U.S. and USSR getting pulled into this.

Adam

[Jedburgh]

Amit didn't have the authority. It was Dayan - he was the Defense Minister - and he acted on his own initiative, executing without consultation. On record, Dayan was initially opposed to breaking the cease-fire to take the Golan. Once the Liberty was taken out, he suddenly changed his mind, and Operation Hammer was launched. This is in alignment with AB's statement (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=27821&postcount=21) earlier in this thread.

In any case, I find that this thread is moving along a path that seems pre-determined with topics of this nature. Amongst the speculation and conspiracy theories, there are shades of topics for a couple of different substantive threads - which I encourage the members to intitiate. I applaud the members for their restraint on a subject which on other boards has frequently intiated flame-wars.

However, at this point I am going to make the utterly unfair move of locking the thread in a pre-emptive strike before it does move further downhill....

http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/ali2.jpg