| Author | Message | | funglefoot | | Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 7:48 pm Post subject: |
| | Rabbi CB wrote: | Note the sworn testimony of the USS Liberty's Captain...
That the entire attack lasted about 20 minutes, not an hour or more. |
| the same Rabbi CB wrote: | Note the testimony of Lt George Golden, which includes....
That the entire attack lasted no more than 35 minutes. |
One says 20 and the other says upto 35. Quite a difference. Golden estimates almost double the time.
Now let us look at the COI
"Disparities in reported times relating to sequence of events can well be attributed to the number of ship's clocks on board hanging askew and often stopped from shock at various times. It was necessary to reconstruct time sequences because QM notebook was incomplete from 1355 to 1446 since the QM was killed during the first attack" 49 p177
1355 to 1446 = 51 minutes, considerably more than the periods estimated by Golden and the Captain.
IOW they had no common method of keeping time.
Sworn evidence does not imply accurate evidence. In the heat of battle perceptions change. | |  | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:02 am Post subject: |
| | Quote: | IOW they had no common method of keeping time.
Sworn evidence does not imply accurate evidence. In the heat of battle perceptions change. |
And that is what the crew and the family have asked for for 40 years.
A congressional investigation for a first time. A true accounting and recognition of unjust treatment, avoidance and abandonment.
Look who opposes it?
Look who pretends to be a victim?
Who lies and fabricates? | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 4:11 am Post subject: |
|  | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 3:05 am Post subject: |
| | Quote: | | One says 20 and the other says upto 35. Quite a difference. Golden estimates almost double the time. |
You provide diversion from the fact that all estimates have been considerably less than what most conspiracy theorists spout.
That was the real point of my post related to times.
| Quote: | | IOW they had no common method of keeping time. |
Wristwatches had been invented by 1967.
| Quote: | | Sworn evidence does not imply accurate evidence. In the heat of battle perceptions change. |
And we are supposed to believe that perceptions about facts improve over 40+ years, and that memories get better as people age from their 20's and 30's to their 70's?
The crewmembers' sworn testimony at the Navy Court of Inquiry was based on fresh memories by people who were in their physical and mental prime. | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 4:57 am Post subject: |
| Proceedings of the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, 18 June 1967
http://www.usslibertyinquiry.com/evidence/usreports/ncoi.pdf
Spin and diversion regarding the testimony do not change the facts of the testimony...
Note the sworn testimony of the USS Liberty's Captain.
It includes....
The passes from Israeli aircraft earlier in the day were made at a range of 12-15 miles from the craft. Not all passes were at that range, but obviously not all passes were at a close range.
The Liberty's ensign was shot down in the air attack and was not replaced until prior to the torpedo boat attack, and there was too much smoke at the time of the torpedo boat attacks for the Liberty to clearly see the torpedo boats, meaning that there was likely too much smoke for the torpedo boats to see the newly raised ensign on the Liberty.
That the Captain believed that the attack may have been done in error.
That the Liberty fired on the Israeli torpedo boats with at least one machine gun, and the Captain stated that he believed that the Israelis at that time believed that they were under fire from the Liberty.
That after the torpedo struck the Liberty, the torpedo boats were in closer range and ceased the attack.
That the entire attack, in his estimation, lasted about 20 minutes, not an hour or more.
Note the testimony of Lt George Golden, which includes....
The Liberty's ensign was not flying fully extended when Israeli aircraft were flying at closer range prior to the attack at about 12:15. [Note this testimony of the context of LT(jg) Watson's testimony that Mr. Golden had been concerned earlier in the day that the ensign may not be large enough to be readily identified]
That the entire attack lasted, in his estimation, no more than 35 minutes.
Note the testimony of LT(jg) Watson which includes...
Earlier in the day prior to the attack, Mr. Golden had expressed concern that someone may not be able to properly identify the Liberty because in his opinion the ensign being flown was too small to be readily seen.
Note the testimony of Chief Communications Technician Thompson which includes...
After the torpedo struck the Liberty, the crew finally communicated to the torpedo boats "US Naval Ship, US Naval Ship" using a signal light. That is when the Israeli attack ceased, and when one of the torpedo boats pulled up to the Liberty and responded "Do you need help?". The Liberty's Captain declined the assistance. The torpedo boat then signaled "Do you want us to standby?", and the captain again declined. [Note this testimony in the context of the fact that until this point in time the Liberty had declined to transmit or signal its identity, even when requested by the Issraelis]
That after the torpedo boat departed, Israeli helicopters arrived and dropped a message from the US Naval Attache in Tel Aviv, asking whether there were casualties and whether he could come aboard. [That's right. The US had an air/naval attache at Israeli defense headquarters at the time of the attack]
Note the testimony of CTC Lamkin, which includes...
What was interpreted as radio 'jamming' was heard on all frequencies, pretty much dispelling the conspiracy theories that the Israelis were jamming US Navy specific radio frequencies. And that his report of 'jamming' was from someone else.
Note the testimony of RMC Smith which includes...
A radio tranmitter had been 'blown out'.
That in between attacks he found that the radio's frequency had been knocked off one KC, and when he corrected it, the Liberty was able to communicate by radio. But then there was a power failure.
That he was not actually certain that there was jamming, but that if there was it was only during strafing runs. | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 1:33 pm Post subject: |
| The US Naval Court of Inquiry on the Attack on the USS Liberty was abbreviated and incomplete. It lasted on and off for ONLY four days. The USS Stark Court of Inquiry was conducted over 9 months. The Liberty COI made excuses and exonerations of the Israeli attacks without any investigations or proof of such innocence. Only 15 members of the Liberty's crew of the 300 man crew ever gave testimony in the Court of Inquiry. Logs, records, additional testimony and tapes were never examined, not entered, not permitted, not disclosed, ignored and the court's record is filled with "DELETIONS" and "records not available".
"Liberty men were not permitted to speak freely and were directed to reply only to the questions asked. Some men who wished to testify were not permitted to do so. George Golden, who was the second ranking man to survive the attack, was severely limited in the testimony he was permitted to provide. Jim Ennes, who was Officer of the Deck during most of the daylight reconnaissance and could personally testify to the closeness and frequency of overflying aircraft and other key details, provided a sworn statement from his hospital bed, but this statement was not permitted into evidence. Jim's hand-written deck logs for his watch were key evidence, but they were not entered into the record. Instead, they were rewritten and signed by someone else, which is a violation of Navy Regulations." - USS Liberty.com
Cowboy posted A* on Fri Apr 27, 2007 2:36 am
Cowboy posted B*May 01, 2007 10:57 pm
| Quote: | "The Lies of Cowboy"]
Note the sworn testimony of the USS Liberty's Captain (as Cowboy claims.).
It includes....
A*. The passes from Israeli aircraft earlier in the day were made at a range of 12-15 miles from the craft.
B*. The passes from Israeli aircraft earlier in the day were made at a range of 12-15 miles from the craft. Not all passes were at that range, but obviously not all passes were at a close range.
This is not the "sworn testimony" of Captain McGonagle. No where in the Inquiry are these words quoted. It is a deliberate misrepresentation and misdirection of the facts to divert questioning Israeli culpability. In fact Cowboys second statement means absolutely nothing. Cowboy is a liar.
| Captain McGonagle's SWORN TESTIMONY wrote: | | "Aircraft activity of an apparent propeller patrol type flying at very low altitude and parallel to and over the coast in the vicinity of El Arish was noted. It is estimated that the altitude of this plane was approximately 500 feet. At no time did this plane approach the ship in any fashion. His distance remained approximately 12 to 15 miles." |
ENS. J. D. SCOTT, USNR, Damage Control Assistant, USS LIBERTY
SWORN TESTIMONY
[Scott] Yes sir. On the morning of the 8th, I had the 4
to 8 Officer of the Deck watch on the bridge. It was a
routine watch. The only thing out of the ordinary was we
had one reconnaissance plane that flew by us and made a
few circles off our port beam. He circled around about
three or four times, then took off .
Q. About what time?
[Scott] About 0515, I was not able to identify the
aircraft. We looked at it with the binoculars. Due to
the distance we could not see any markings or insignia of
any sort on it. [headed back for Tel Aviv as later stated]
The Navy Court Finding of Facts, plus testimony of various members of the crew indicate reconnaissance overflights of the Liberty at 0515, 0850, 1030, 1056, 1126, 1145, 1220, and 1245" and that the nature of the ship, it's mission that said flights were somewhat routine and not uncommon. The US State Department confiemed this as well in an information bulletin in Aug. 1967 [/b]
A & B* The Liberty's ensign was down from early in the air attack until just prior to the torpedo boat attacks, and there was too much smoke at the time of the torpedo boat attacks for the Liberty to clearly see the torpedo boats, meaning that there was likely too much smoke for the torpedo boats to see the newly raised ensign on the Liberty.
This is not the "sworn testimony" of Captain McGonagle. No where in the Inquiry are these words quoted. It is a deliberate misrepresentation and misdirection of the facts to divert questioning Israeli culpability. Cowboy is a liar.
The Israeli Defense Report and of 21 July 1967 stating several lies underlined.::
| ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCES INQUIRY OF 21 JULY 1967 wrote: |
ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCES INQUIRY OF 21 JULY 1967
DECISION
On Thursday 8th June, 1967, at approximately 1400 hours, aircraft of the
Israel Air Force attacked a vessel situated about 20 miles north-west of
El-Arish, and some 14 miles off the shore of Bardawil. About half an
hour later torpedo boats of the Israel Navy attacked the same vessel and
hit it with a torpedo. Soon, during the attack by the torpedo boats, it
became clear that the vessel thought to be an enemy ship, was a vessel
named "Liberty", of the United States Navy. The attack was immediately
broken-off, but most regrettably, only after, as transpired, loss of
life and material damage had been caused......
(Yet the same report has this conflicting conclusions aka cover-up on the same report 42 days after the attack. A report factually wrong but conducted in greater detail and deliberation than allowed by the US Navy and it's inquiry into the USS Liberty.)
It is to be noted that throughout the contact no American
or any other flag appeared on the ship, and it was only a helicopter, sent after the attack in order to render assistance--if necessary--which
noticed a small American Flag flying over the target. At that stage
the vessel was finally identified as an audio-surveillance ship of
the U.S. Navy.
.....I hold, that there is no sufficient amount of prima facie evidence,
justifying committing anyone for trial.
Before Examining Judge: Sgan-Aluf I. Yerushalmi
http://ussliberty.com/excuse.txt |
A. Jay Cristol's apologist book "The liberty Incident" primary argument is that there was no flag flying on the Liberty as well. He even claims and produces a so-called "aircraft gun cameras" of the initial attack and on his book cover. This has been totally discredited and proven a forgery. A Jay Cristol is a liar.
The telling feature about this book cover is that Cristol "cropped" from the book the front of the ship which would have shown the large hull military designation numbers and proving that the ship was a US naval ship and seen from the start and they don't have Arabic letters and numbers as an Egyptian horse carrier half the USS Liberty's size.
http://ussliberty.com/photofraud.htm
http://ussliberty.com/g/photofraud.jpg
| Cowboy ignores more testimony that proves his lies. Other crew's recollections less than 6 days after the attack. Cowboy will ignore this. wrote: | This is again not "sworn testimony" but Cowboy's desired interpretation. The Liberty's crewmen who testified as to the following concerning their testimonies ship's flag/ensign during the attack.
1) CAPT W. L. McGONAGLE, USN, Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY, Sworn Testimony, US Naval Court Inquiry
"About this time I noticed that our Ensign had been shot away during the air attack and ordered DAVID, signalman, to hoist a second Ensign from the yardarm. During the air attack, our normal Ensign was flying. Before the torpedo attack, a holiday size Ensign was hoisted."
1426 [LOG] NOTICED NORMAL STEAMING ENSIGN SHOT AWAY DURING AIR ATTACK HOLIDAY SIZE ENSIGN HOISTED ON PORT YARDARM.
2) ENS. J. D. SCOTT, USNR, Damage Control Assistant, USS LIBERTY, Sworn Testimony, US Naval Court Inquiry
"Q. Do you recall the flag or the national ensign flying? [Ensign Scott:] Yes sir, it was flying. I noticed at first light that the ensign was flying. I looked up to it to check the wind direction just in the event I had to blow tubes and I wanted to have a favorable wind direction. That's about all I recall about the flag being up on the day and night while we were over here. I don't recall seeing it down at all. "
3) LT. G. H. GOLDEN, USN, Engineering Officer, USS LIBERTY, Sworn Testimony, US Naval Court Inquiry
"[LT. Golden:] Yes sir. At approximately 1145, I completed eating lunch, and went to the 01 level forward to sunbathe along with the Captain and some of the other officers. I have a lounge chair, most of us do have; while laying on my back sunbathing, I noticed a plane flying over. I dozed off, and approximately 25 minutes or so later on, I woke up and saw a plane circling again coming from the port beam, crossing the ship. While watching it, I glanced up and noticed it just crossing over the stack area, and I noticed a small amount of smoke coming out of my stack, and also the flag was flying.
Counsel for the Court: Was it extended? [LT. Golden:] Yes sir, there was a slight breeze blowing. Q. Where was the flag flying from, Lieutenant GOLDEN? [LT. Golden:] The foremast. Q. And It was standing out where it could be seen? [LT. Golden:] Yes sir. Not completely the full length, but it was standing out. "
4) LTJG L. C. PAINTER, USNR, Officer Of the Deck, USS LIBERTY, Sworn Testimony, US Naval Court Inquiry
"Counsel for the Court: Did you have occasion to see the national ensign flying? [LTGJ Painter:] Yes sir, I did. I saw the national ensign flying after the, it was at the time I believe when we were going to abandon ship. I ran out on the main deck to get the life rafts ready. I remember distinctly looking back up and seeing the Ensign flying. This was, I think, after the air raid, after the torpedo attack. Q. Had you seen it earlier that morning? [LTGJ Painter:] I saw it earlier that morning when I came up, I don't know when it was. I came up on and of off that morning checking a patrol plane that had been flying over us. The quartermaster, DAVID QM2, had told me that the night that he was wounded that he had put the flag up at 0730 that morning. Q. So you, in recollection, recall seeing the flag flying in the morning and after the torpedo attack? [LTGJ Painter:] Yes, before and after the torpedo attack. Q. Do you know whether or not it was the same flag? [LTGJ Painter:] I couldn't tell you sir. The way I thought at one time, what the heck was it, I noticed there was something funny about it. I might have seen the flag twice, because once I saw one that had been shot up and it was ragged, and the next time I looked at it I didn't notice whether it was ragged or not. I couldn't say either way whether it was the same flag."
5) RMC W. L. SMITH, USN, Radio Central, USS LIBERTY, Sworn Testimony, US Naval Court Inquiry
"Counsel for the Court: Did you have occasion to see the national colors flying? [Chief Smith:] Yes sir. At the time I ran out of the radio central space to the transmitter room. Q. What time was this? [Chief Smith:] I would say about 1225, this was about two minutes either way. And this was Zulu time because I'm basing it on the log here. I had occasion to look at it because I was under the impression we were being attacked by UAR, and I wanted to see, and by the time that report came down to us from the bridge that they were Israelis, I wanted to check myself personally to see if our flag was flying because I couldn't understand it. For some reason I saw the flag flying at that time. If this was the original flag or not, I do not know sir."
6) LTJG M. N. WATSON, USNR, Main Propulsion Assistant, USS LIBERTY, Sworn Testimony, US Naval Court Inquiry
"Counsel for the Court: Excuse me, any time prior to the attack, did you notice the national colors flying?
[LTJG Watson:] Yes sir. At lunch that day, we were discussing the situation and Mr. Golden made the statement that someone had said something about the ensign flying so the people would know who we were. Mr. Golden made the statement something like, "Don't we have a bigger flag we can fly, maybe the holiday colors ?" Then after lunch we went out on the 01 level forward and most of the officers were around there sunbathing immediately preceding 1300. At approximately 1245, an aircraft flew over approximately 5,000 to 8,000 feet, and his line of flight took it over the radar mast, and I was watching it and made a comment about it that it looked like a C119 flying boxcar. And as it flew over the radar mast, the ensign was flying from the gaff. I noticed that it was flying, at this time there was a breeze. Q. Extended? [LTJG Watson:] Yes sir. President: Was it from the mast aft or the mast directly over the bridge? [LTJG Watson:] The mast directly over the bridge, sir."
7) ENS. D. G. LUCAS, USNR, First Lieutenant & Gunnery Officer, USS LIBERTY, Sworn Testimony, US Naval Court Inquiry
"There was a time when I was in the pilot house that I heard the Commanding Officer holler to someone, perhaps signalman DAVID, to get the Ensign, the colors, off the deck. I went out to the starboard wing, and there was an Ensign on the deck. I went out a little bit further and looked up and we were flying our Ensign. I found that later all of the starboard halyards or hoists had been shot down and that signalman DAVID had run up another Ensign.
Q. Do you recall how long the Ensign was down? [Ensign Lucas:] I cannot recall for sure. From the first air attack, the radar was made inoperative, the antenna on the mainmast was damaged, obviously on the first air pass and the Ensign would be flying just below it and just aft of it. Evidently, the shelling that got the radarscope, well it could have very possibly severed the halyard lines at that time. I do not recall when the Commanding Officer saw the Ensign on the deck and told someone to pick it up, but I do recall going out on the starboard wing, looking up and seeing that there was an Ensign flying.
Q. Do you remember the time frame when you looked and saw the Ensign flying, was it during the surface or the air attack? [Ensign Lucas:] I can't set an exact time on it. I do believe that I recall that at this time the patrol craft was off our starboard side at an approximate bearing of 120. It seems to me that this might have been around the time when I investigated the firing coming from mount 53 and found it was bullets cooking off as opposed to men being there actually firing.
Q. Did you look and see the Ensign flying before the torpedo hit, or was it after? [Ensign Lucas:] I cannot honestly recall whether it was before or after."
Quote:
USSLIBERTY.com: "Navy Regulations require that all findings of fact be supported by evidence in the record. In this case, such evidence is often absent. For example, where the court finds that the flag may not have been seen by the attacking pilots because it may have hung limp at the mast on a windless day, all the evidence in the record points in the opposite direction, indicating that the flag was clearly displayed in adequate wind to hold it aloft for the pilots to see. The court also had access to and reviewed the Ship's Weather Log which showed that there was ample wind at all times to hold a flag aloft and clearly displayed. Yet the court chose to ignore that log and did not enter it into the record. The careful reader will find numerous other discrepancies in the way the hearing was conducted." |
A* That the Captain believed that the attack was done in error.
B* That the Captain believed that the attack may have been done in error.
This is not the "sworn testimony" of Captain McGonagle. No where in the Inquiry are these words quoted. It is a deliberate and malicious misrepresentation and misdirection of the facts to divert questioning Israeli culpability. He even backtrackes when caught in his lies. Cowboy is a liar.
The Captain's ONLY sworn testimony is as follows:
""I realized that there was a possibility of the aircraft having been Israeli and the attack had been conducted in error."
A possibility and a certainty as claimed by Cowboy are two different things. Cowboy is being duplicitous and deliberate in stating a different meaning. It is another of his malicious misrepresentation. Capt. McConagle has scores of quotes for the rest of his life claiming the attack on the USS Liberty was deliberate. Cowboy is a liar.
A & B* That the Liberty fired on the Israeli torpedo boats with at least one machine gun, and the Captain stated that he believed that the Israelis at that time believed that they were under fire from the Liberty.
This is not the "sworn testimony" of Captain McGonagle. No where in the Inquiry are these words quoted. It is a deliberate misrepresentation and misdirection of the facts to divert questioning Israeli culpability. Cowboy is a liar.
Finding of Fact No. 26 "The after starboard gun, opened up at this point, with apparently no one pulling the trigger. The bridge could not see this gun for smoke and flame on the starboard side, so the Commanding Officer sent a runner to tell him cease fire. Before this runner could reach the after starboard [166] gun, effective high volume fire from this gun was peppering the water around the middle PT. It appears as though 50 Cal. ammunition was cooking off from intense fire. The gun was seen to be firing with no one manning it."
A & B* That after the torpedo struck the Liberty, the torpedo boats were in closer range and ceased the attack.
This is not the "sworn testimony" of Captain McGonagle. No where in the Inquiry are these words quoted. It is a deliberate misrepresentation and misdirection of the facts to divert questioning Israeli culpability. Cowboy is a liar.
The Israeli Defense Inquiry of 21 July 1967 stated in it's findings:
It is to be noted that throughout the contact no American
or any other flag appeared on the ship, and it was only a helicopter, sent after the attack in order to render assistance--if necessary--which noticed a small American Flag flying over the target. At that stage the vessel was finally identified as an audio-surveillance ship of
the U.S. Navy
Soon, during the attack by the torpedo boats, it became clear that the vessel thought to be an enemy ship, was a vessel named "Liberty", of the United States Navy. The attack was immediately broken-off
Someone is lying but it's not the crew of the USS Liberty.
A & B* That the entire attack, in his estimation, lasted about 20 minutes, not an hour or more.
This is not the "sworn testimony" of Captain McGonagle. No where in the Inquiry are these words quoted. It is a deliberate misrepresentation and misdirection of the facts to divert questioning Israeli culpability. Cowboy is a liar.
Captain McGonagle submitted and was accepted in the Findings of Fact the ship's logs which stated.
1358 SINGLE A/C SIGHTED APPROACHING SHIP FROM 135 DEG RELATIVE 5 - 6 MILES DISTANCE, ALTITUDE APPROXIMATELY 7000 FT. A/C PASSED DOWN TRACK OF SHIP
1403 LOUD EXPLOSION - PORT SIDE AMIDSHIPS
1405 SOUNDED GENERAL ALARM - LARGE FIRE IN VICINITY OF FRAME 85, 01 LEVEL WHERE FUEL FOR MOTOR DRIVEN FIRE PUMPS ARE LOCATED.
1405 - 1410 SHIP UNDER REPEATED AIR ATTACK WITH TWO OR MORE A/C MAKING COORDINATED STAFING, ROCKET, AND INCENDIARY RUNS OVER SHIP.
1424 3 MTB'S SIGHTED ABAFT STARBOARD 1BEAM DISTANCE 4 -5 MILES
1431 WORD PASSED TO STANDBY FOR TORPEDO ATTACK TO STARBOARD. MTB COMMENCED STRAFING STARBOARD SIDE OF SHIP
1434 TORPEDO PASSED 75 YARDS ASTERN OF SHIP.
1435 TORPEDO HIT STARBOARD SIDE AMIDSHIPS.
1505 MTB'S RETIRED TOWARD SHORE
1536 MTB'S APPROACHING SHIP STARBOARD SIDE 7-8 MILES DISTANT. DURING NEXT HOUR AND A QUARTER THE MTB'S RETURNED TO THE SHIP ________HOVES
( LTG. Painter in his Court testimony: "About 30 minutes later we had word from the Captain that torpedo boats were approaching us again and to prepare for another torpedo attack starboard side. And I know that if another torpedo had hit us, it would have sunk us, so I told the men to standby to abandon ship. We prepared to abandon ship in case we were hit the second time.")
1713 THEY HAD RETIRED OUT OF SIGHT OVER THE HORIZON. |
He will avoid, obfuscate and divert all his lies and the crew's argument, never in 40 years has anyone found any falsehoods in their versions..
Cowboy is a liar first and foremost. A self proclaimed "Navy vet" who never mentioned the Captain, a MoH recipient by name nor showed the slightest respect.
He is what he is.
_________________
2007 will be the 40th anniversary of injustice and murder and coverup.
http://usslibertyinquiry.com/
www.ussliberty.org
Lest We Forget | | | | Ilana_Halevy | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 1:39 pm Post subject: |
| So why MBTs did not attack second time?  | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 2:03 pm Post subject: |
| More diversions Ilana? Refute the above or STFU.
By the way, yuur claims that no "rockets" were fired at the Liberty were thoroughly destroyed. You are as much a goddamn liar as Cowboy.
No one is suprised.
Mr. Lucas'' SWORN TESTIMONY
My third class gunner's mate, ...[he] THOMPSON,.... They somehow missed him on the first strafing attack. Several witnesses said that he had the aircraft under fire while it was circling for the second pass and it was during the second pass that he was cut in half by a rocket
Mr. LUCAS
I mentioned what I assumed were rockets from the aircraft hit in the immediate vicinity.
Richard Frank Pfeiffer, Lieutenant, Medical Officer, USS LIBERTY
My general quarters station is on the main deck aft, the main battle dressing station. I went across the main deck, and at that point I saw another plane passing over the ship and letting loose its supply of rockets on the ship.
We then returned to the main dressing station, just in time to have a rocket land on the overhead near the clean room
FINDINGS OF FACT BY USS LIBERTY COURT OF INQUIRY
19. Aircraft attack on LIBERTY Attack initiated by single aircraft, making a run similar to previous overflights. First warning that this aircraft had attacked ship was a rocket explosion abaft the bridge, port side. In five of six attacks, from various angles, two or more jet aircraft at a time conducted strafing, rocket and incendiary attacks.
24. From the time of first air attack onward, attackers were well coord- inated, accurate and determined. Criss-crossing rocket and machine gun runs from both bows, both beams, and quarters effectively chewed up entire topside including ship control and internal communications (sound powered) network.
46. The Israeli aircraft rockets penetrated topside steel easily, leaving roughly five inch holes, with innumerable shrapnel pock marks on the inside of spaces penetrated.
50 C Topside damage resulting from aircraft strafing and rocket attacks and from MTB strafing (ship was hit by more than 821 shells and rockets, many of them incendiary) summarized:...
You are what you are.
_________________
2007 will be the 40th anniversary of injustice and murder and coverup.
http://usslibertyinquiry.com/
www.ussliberty.org
Lest We Forget | | | | Ilana_Halevy | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 3:19 pm Post subject: |
| If there were rockets they were not high explosive, but napalm/ incendiary. Proof is obvious: there is no any big hole in Liberty beside torpedo.
This is only emphasis my point: planes were not armed with anti ship weapons.
For sure there were no any "heat missiles" since they simply did not exist in 1967.
You still did not answer my question: why MBTs did not attack second time.
For sure you will never answer why planes were not armed with anti ship weapons. | | | | Jefferson Davis | | Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 6:26 pm Post subject: |
| First you claimed there were no rockets used. Now you equivocate and say they were not "high explosives". You don't know anything about the attack but your diverting propaganda.
You're an a Liberty apologists, you have never proven that that the attack was an "accident". Your own IDF report contains fabrications. No one , nor the IDF , nor the COI ever even discussed "ship's weapons" EXCEPT you in your attempts to divert Israel's guilt.
You're a liar like Cowboy, Cristol, harrietbuster . Claim some obscure point as a 'vindication' which it cannot be. Idnore and avoid the truth.
You're irrelevant. | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
