Friendly Israel

[midnight Target]

Seems akin to using US Air Force Historical as a source for the Dresden bombings.... Hey wait, that was you who said that was wrong.  

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by midnight Target
Seems akin to using US Air Force Historical as a source for the Dresden bombings.... Hey wait, that was you who said that was wrong.  

Well, Midnight, did I argue over those facts or did I say:
"LOL, USAF Historical section " ?

Do you see a difference? I would have no problem if this moron would say "hey, the information about the second flight of Israeli aircraft carrying napalm is wrong because blah blah blah" or something like that. But he probably doesnt know what to say, probably because the facts are pretty damn good quoted in that article I presented. So instead he chose option b -run away.

The reason I pointed out the dubious nature of your source in the other thread was because you were trying to win the argument using weight, not substance. You were arguing along the lines of "Well, my source is the USAF history department (or whatever), and you are quoting people who I think are revisionists."

I am sick and tired of people who, when faced with an argument,  instead of trying to retort, just retreat under cover of some lame bellybutton remark.

[Charon]

Try reading the ship crew's site for the various arguments. I know just about nobody will, of course, but I'll post the link anyway. Motive, fairly clear. Circumstantial evidence supporting the crew's contention? Makes the evidence in the OJ case look mild.

Both Funked and hortlunds sources are potentially biased, and one could assume the crew's is as well. However, their site does contain all of the positions for an objective (or biased for that matter) reader to take a look at the incident. Again, if anybody actually wants to take the time to go beyond opinion.

Is this site fair and balanced?

Does it present fairly the Israeli position?
Does it show only our own viewpoint?

Some visitors to this site have complained that it overemphasizes the survivors' position without sufficient attention to the Israeli
side of the story.

We attempt to show both sides.  In an effort to do that, the site includes the official Israeli position as reported by an Israeli judge who investigated the attack for the Israeli Government -- even though that report is still considered top secret by the Israeli government. We also present the published viewpoints of a
number of Israeli and pro-Israel writers.  We will add more as we come across them.

We have asked the Israeli Embassy and other Israeli officials for their viewpoints.  They have responded only by repeating some
questionable assertions by one A. Jay Cristol  who seems to serve frequently as an Embassy  spokesman in these matters.  We do not find Mr. Cristol to be a credible source.

The most comprehensive Israeli report on this attack was published in September 1984 in the Atlantic Monthly by two Israeli writers.  We have asked the writers and the magazine to
authorize us to publish that article in the site.  There has been no reply.  If we get permission, we will publish the entire article.

While they will not allow us to publish it, the Israeli Embassy has in the past  distributed copies of that article to citizens  who have inquired.  An Embassy spokesman tells us that they no longer do that, and that  we should refer people not to the Embassy but
to their local public library.

If you do that, please let us know whether you find it persuasive.  

We continue to link to other sites that are critical of our position, and to newsgroups that argue against us.  We are confident of our position and have no fear of such things.

If any visitor to this web site has an argument he would like to see posted here, send it to us.  If it is of reasonable length and not abusive, we will publish it here.

Unfortunately, most of the critics of our story seem to find it necessary to argue in a highly heated, abusive, and often profane
way.  Some of those attacks can be found in the site.  We think they say more about our critics than about us.

If any visitor to this web site would like to create his own web site with the Israeli viewpoint, we would welcome that and would
be pleased to exchange reciprocal links with such a site.

To find ongoing discussions of this issue, the Wide World Web's "Deja News" tool will reveal any newsgroup where USS Liberty or related terms have been mentioned.  We invite
visitors to go there and jump into the debate.

Some of the detailed information can be found by scrolling down to the table grid at the very bottom of the page. The photos are also instructive, particularly where "identification" questions are raised. Judge for yourselves.

http://ussliberty.org/

Charon

[midnight Target]

The reason I pointed out the dubious nature of your source in the other thread was because you were trying to win the argument using weight, not substance. You were arguing along the lines of "Well, my source is the USAF history department (or whatever), and you are quoting people who I think are revisionists."

I am sick and tired of people who, when faced with an argument, instead of trying to retort, just retreat under cover of some lame bellybutton remark.

Wrong.

Go back and read it again.

[Charon]

(click on all images for larger size)

A typical (for the day of the attack) low altitude recon flight by a slow C-47...
http://ussliberty.org/00/0044.htm

[Pre-attack reconnaissance. Israel says there was no pre-attack reconnaissance. Any aircraft we saw, they say, were high in the sky carrying troops to the battlefield. Not so. Here is an Israeli reconnaissance airplane that circled the ship about an hour before the attack. The pilot was heard reporting to HQ that he saw an American flag and men sunning themselves on deck.]

What the crews saw on their recon flights and what the attackers in both planes and PT boats saw ...
http://ussliberty.org/00/sliberty.htm

But that was "misidentified" as this ancient horse carrier -- half the size, lacking large hull numbers, comm/sat/radar antennas and large american flag -- by the highly professional Israeli military ...
http://ussliberty.org/00/elquseir.htm

Charon

[Charon]

And a few more:

PRELUDE TO THE ATTACK:  In all, there were 13 over-flights of the USS LIBERTY on 8 June 1967.  8 of those over-fights were low-level reconnaissance with Israeli jets and reconnaissance planes - passing as low as 200 feet above the USS Liberty's main-mast.  Our personnel were not only able to distinguish the features of the pilots, they waved at them - which they returned.  The USS LIBERTY was positively identified
by the Israeli pilots who reported that fact to their headquarters in Tel Aviv, where we was designated and marked on the Israeli war-room plot-board as a "Neutral American Vessel."  

ISRAEL CLAIMED:  They removed the USS Liberty's marker "because the data was old."

FACT:   The last reconnaissance over-flight - was 1 hour prior to the attack!

and,

THE ATTACK:  The attack lasted a total of slightly over 2 hours, not the
5 minutes as reported by our government.  Additionally, our government
reported only 1 torpedo being launched and striking the USS LIBERTY.

FACT:   In all, there were 5 torpedoes launched.  1 torpedo struck to
blast a 40 X 42 foot tear-drop shaped hole in the research and intercept
compartments below the water-line, killing 25 of our 34 total dead. 171
of the Liberty's 294 man complement were wounded (almost 70% of our
complement - dead or wounded).  There were over 821 rocket, cannon and
machine-gun hits inflicted. Napalm was used. All above deck water-tight
hatches (doors), destroyed or damaged. All antennas, destroyed. The
Captain's-gig (wood boat), rendered totally inoperable. The crew's
motor-launch (wood boat), totally destroyed.  All the Liberty's rubber
life-rafts, except 3 - destroyed. Those 3 remaining life-rafts were put
in the water in response to "prepare to abandon ship," were
intentionally machine-gunned at close range by an Israeli torpedo boat
crew. An action on their part which was, and still is, a violation of
the Geneva Convention II for the Amelioration of the Conditions of
Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked members of the Armed Forces at Sea of 1949
(1991 edition, volume 64,  INTERNATIONAL LAW STUDIES, THE LAW OF NAVAL
OPERATIONS. published by the Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island,
article titled "NAVAL TARGETING: LAWFUL OBJECTS FOR ATTACK" By Sally V.
and William T. Mallison).  One of the torpedo boats then took aboard
their craft our now useless life-rafts depriving us of any means or
chance of survival had the USS Liberty sank to the bottom of the
international Mediterranean waters we were lawfully operating in.  As to the attack on the USS Liberty itself, it has been shown that under international law - Israel had absolutely no right in attacking a non-beligerent vessel in international waters (Naval Law Review, Winter 1986, Vol. 36. "A JURIDICAL EXAMINATION OF THE ISRAELI ATTACK ON THE U.S.S. LIBERTY"  LT.CMD. Walter L. Jacobsen, JAGC, USN).

COMMENT: Could the infliction of the amount of damage and destruction done to the USS LIBERTY have been just pure luck?  Or, putting those reconnaissance over-flights to good use as to what and where to hit so as to insure the Israeli Air and Naval forces could inflict the most possible damage, and hopefully, sink the USS LIBERTY?

And,

FACT:  The USS Liberty's OPERATIONAL RADIO FREQUENCIES along with the
INTERNATIONAL DISTRESS FREQUENCY were radio-jammed to prevent our Radiomen and Communications Technicians from sending a distress call for help.

COMMENT:    How would the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) know what range of frequencies to initiate their radio-jamming on if they had not been using, prior to attacking, sophisticated RDF (Radio-Direction-Finding) equipment to scan for and locate our encrypted and unencrypted radio transmissions.  A procedure, considering the equipment of that era, took quite some time.

and,

Before closing CLAIMS, FACT and COMMENTS I would like to add that Americans (those of the Jewish faith and Gentile alike) who support the State of Israel have denounced the USS LIBERTY VETERANS ASSOCIATION, the survivors, the families of our dead and our supporters of being transmogrified into an Anti-Israel, Anti-Semitic cult.  They have also voiced that: "any memorial to the USS Liberty or her dead is a slap in the face and an insult to the State of Israel."    

Though the supporters of Israel denounce us as Anti-Semitic, how could we be!  For those that are ill- or misinformed, we had shipmates and friends killed in the attack who were of the Jewish faith.  And many of us, the survivors, the families of our dead and our supporters are of the Jewish faith.

And why is offense taken by those that support Israel to the erecting of memorials to the USS LIBERTY and our dead?  We have many memorials in the United States to those of the Jewish faith killed during WWII, and even to Israelis. So, why, then, is offense taken and condemnation voiced by those that support Israel because of the memorials to the men of the USS LIBERTY who were killed by the Israeli Defense Forces - who's religion happens to be Jewish?

Please keep in mind that an investigation is warranted because of the years of research along with the declassified TOP SECRET, SECRET and CONFIDENTIAL documents that have been obtained under the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act). Documents and research which not only call into question Israel's explanations of an "accidental" and "mistaken identity" attack altogether, they go to take them apart piece-by-piece. And an investigation is needed not only because of the many discrepancies and versions in Israel's own accounting of that attack but the comments and actions by the then-Johnson administration in knowing
who our attackers were - before our attackers admitted doing so. Along with then-Secretary of Defense McNamara's duplicity in informing members of Congress the attack was accidental even before an investigation was undertaken.  There were a certain few within the 1967 Israeli government who planned, coordinated and carried out the attack on the USS LIBERTY.
They are the ones th at are responsible, not the entire State of Israel and her people.

As to any and all claims and charges of being Anti-Israel.  I don't
think I have to point out that- Israel is not our country.  As American's, we do not have to love, give allegiance or profess loyalty to a country and government not our own.  Furthermore, as we can criticize, denounce, protest and take to task our government along with our leaders, as well as other governments and their leaders, we can criticize, protest and take to task the government of the State of Israel. I do hope that takes care of any perceived Anti-Israel rhetoric on my part (or our part) for wanting to take the government of the State of Israel to task for their attack on our ship and, for their killing of our friends and shipmates.

But the charges of being Anti-Israel and/or Anti-Semitic by those that support Israel have and are used quite effectivly to keep our
government, the media and the American people from looking closely at the attack on the USS LIBERTY (AGTR-5).  As they are used to keep the American people from delving into and looking closely at the America-Israel relationship as a whole.

Remember, there is a differance between religion and nationality.

Charon

[CH3]

Temper temper Hortlund

"Argue over the facts instead...if you can. If not, keep laughing and get the diddly out of here you moron".

I submit that you are the moron for using that site and Michael Oren as the basis for your original contention. Do your homework next time, as it's clear that you've looked no further than sources that confirm your own prejudices.

[Samm]

In 1967 the NSA worked for Isreal too . It's pretty simple but I guess the most realistic explaination is never going to be as juicy as a conspiracy theory .

The boat was twice misidentified as soviet and egyptian, (remember the near by soviet vessel that offered to help the Liberty) when pilots later identified it as american their superiors did not believe them, and told them to press the attack. The situation was further exacerbated when the Liberty began returning fire . When commanders in Isreal finally realised that they were in a fight with an american  they stopped  . Even americans have mistakenly tried to sink their american ships .

The two glaring flaws with the conspiracy.
1 No motive for going to war with america .
2 They stopped attacking the ship and came to it's aid .

It was probably the same old tragic scenario .
(command)Is that an enemy ship ?
(Pilots) Well it's not ours.
(command) Burn it.
(Pilots) Uh oh, looks like they put up an american flag.
(command)There are no american ships in the area, sink it.
(Pilots) You're right, it's shooting at our boats .
(Pilots)This sure looks like an american job, I think we made a mistake.
(command)We don't make mistakes, do your job .

Was it deliberate ? Of course they were trying to sink it .
Was it a mistake ? Obviously the Isrealis thought so or they wouldn't have stopped .

I realise it's not as appealing and fun as the conspiracy theory .

[Pongo]

Funked..
why did the Isrealies do this?

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by CH3
Temper temper Hortlund

"Argue over the facts instead...if you can. If not, keep laughing and get the diddly out of here you moron".

I submit that you are the moron for using that site and Michael Oren as the basis for your original contention. Do your homework next time, as it's clear that you've looked no further than sources that confirm your own prejudices.

And I note that I have yet to hear a single argument from you on this issue.

Yet another pathetic clown. Do us all a favour and just shut up.

[Charon]

The two glaring flaws with the conspiracy.
1 No motive for going to war with america .
2 They stopped attacking the ship and came to it's aid .

Point 1. If the ship had just "disappeared" what would cause a war? Hell, even as it transpired the Johnson administration found the issue a bit too hot given Democratic support dynamics and the primary concern of the War in Vietnam and russian cold war issues. If it just disappeared with all hands, the incident could be blamed on anyone, including the Egyptians. The likely decision makers (final approval and command level) were tough old birds from the terrorist and 1948 days. These people also had far more experience with a land war against arabs as opposed to a naval engagment with the USN and let their egos make a miscalculation about how easy the operation would be, IMO. They may have wanted to send a message too.

Liberty was a means to an end, and that end was:

http://ussliberty.org/ijic.txt
What was Israel's motive for this act?  The scheduling of
the Israeli assault on the Golan Heights for 8 June was a move to
defeat an intense effort in the United Nations to halt the war, a
cease-fire having been scheduled for 9 June.  Such pressure was
also being applied by the U.S. Government.  The IDF leaders were
under pressure to acquire the Golan before the cease-fire was
imposed, preferably without being labeled the aggressor (as in
1956 when Israel had colluded with Britain and France to attack
Egypt).  But with all the pressure to attack Syria, and after all
the hurried preparations to do so, the Golan attack was suddenly
called off within hours of its scheduled commencement.  Why?
Obviously, someone in the IDF leadership feared the Liberty might
intercept some of the many signals then filling the air that
would expose Israel's preparations for invasion.  They might then
be forced into a cease-fire before they conquered the coveted
territory.

Some say Chirchill made a similar calculation with the Lusitania sinking. Not sure on that one, not as much evidence.

Point 2 is covered here:

http://ussliberty.org/defense.txt
The boats approached at high speed and fired torpedos from 2,000 yards but, owing to a near collision between two boats at the moment of firing, the first shots went wild. One torpedo passed safely astern, where it missed by a bare 25 yards. Another passed so close ahead of the ship that it vanished under the point on the bow. "sounding like a motorboat" to Petty Officer Rick Aimetti, who stood, astonished, on the forecastle. And one torpedo made a direct hit on the ship's cryptologic spaces, where it killed 25 men and momentarily trapped at least 50 more
in the flooded compartment.

1515 Hours
When Liberty miraculously remained afloat with a 40-foot hole in her belly, the torpedomen methodically machine-gunned exposed fire fighters and medical personnel for much of the next 40 minutes while watching the ship sink lower in the water. Finally, at 1515, after word came from the bridge to prepare to abandon ship, Liberty crewmen launched three rubber rafts and tied them astern. The torpedomen machine-gunned the empty rafts, plucked one out of the water, and set a course for their base at
Ashdod.

1545 Hours            
At 1545, the Sixth Fleet, having received Liberty's call for help 96
minutes earlier, finally launched White House-authorized aircraft in
Liberty's defense, advised pilots of their authority to use lethal
force, and filled the airwaves with plain language traffic supporting and describing the mission. Almost instantly, the Israeli government summoned the U.S. Naval Attache to the foreign liaison office to report that Israeli forces had "erroneously attacked a U.S. ship" and to offer "abject apologies."

1632 Hours         
At 1632, the torpedo boats returned to Liberty to ask: "Do you need help?" The reply from the bridge was obscene. The attack, after more than two-and-one-half hours, was over.

Charon

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Charon
But with all the pressure to attack Syria, and after all
the hurried preparations to do so, the Golan attack was suddenly
called off within hours of its scheduled commencement. Why?
Obviously, someone in the IDF leadership feared the Liberty might intercept some of the many signals then filling the air that
would expose Israel's preparations for invasion. They might then
be forced into a cease-fire before they conquered the coveted
territory.

Let me just say that I disagree with the "obviously"-part here. Not only is it pure speculation. It is pure speculation based in the assumption that Israel would rather sink an american ship with tremendous loss of life (remember that the ship would have to be lost with all hands if any cover-up should succeed), than risk recieving an American "ultimatum" to stay away from the Golan heights. It doesnt make sence. There is no Israeli motive here.

[Samm]

Thanks for the link Daff ! Who is that Magnet fellow ? He's smart AND rational, hope he comes to AH .

[Samm]

So you think that the US did not allready know about Isreal's plans for the golan heights ? And you think that the USA did not want the assault on the golan heights to happen ? Who was their intelligence in 1967 ?

The US decries every military action that Isreal undertakes. This is how we retain plausible deniability. Isreal does things that the US would like to have done but would never dare. And when they do these things we admonish them publicly, but breath easier when they do . i.e golan heights, Iraqi nuclear plants, liquidating PA terrorists, destroying soviet/egyptian military, destroying the syrian airforce. Bad Isreal ! shame on you naughty Isreal .

[GRUNHERZ]

I'll simply put it this way to the Israel apologists.

A simple YES/NO will suffice. Ok? Ready, remember YES or NO.

Do you belive Isreal really thought they were attacking an Egyptian horse freighter and not a US Navy ship?

Remember just YES or NO.  

Here again for your benefit one last time.

YES

NO