| Author | Message | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:25 pm Post subject: WHO SAYS THE LIBERTY ATTACK WAS DELIBERATE? |
| WHO SAYS THE LIBERTY ATTACK WAS DELIBERATE?
The following is a partial list of individuals who support the
position that the attack was deliberate
Admiral Isaac C. Kidd, President of the Navy Court of Inquiry:
According to Kidd's legal counsel, Captain Ward Boston, USN,
Kidd discussed with him his belief that the attackers were aware
they were attacking an American ship. The Court ruled otherwise
because they were so directed by Washington. (Navy Times,
6/26/2002)
Captain Ward Boston, legal counsel to the Navy Court of Inquiry.
"I feel the Israelis knew what they were doing. They knew they
were shooting at a U.S. Navy ship." (Navy Times, 6/26/2002)
George Christian, Press Secretary to President Lyndon Johnson.
"No one in the White House believed that the attack was an
accident." Letter to James Ennes, 1978.
Dean Rusk, US Secretary of State. Accidents don't occur through
repeated attacks by surface vessels and aircraft. It obviously
was a decision made pretty high up on the Israeli side, because
it involved combined forces. The ship was flying an American
flag. My judgment was that somewhere along the line some fairly
senior official gave the go ahead. I personally did not accept
the Israeli explanation. (Recorded interview,
www.ussliberty.org)
Rear Admiral (then captain) Merlin Staring, Staff Legal Office
for Commander in Chief US Naval Forces Europe and later Chief
Judge Advocate General of the Navy. After reviewing the Court
of Inquiry, he concluded that the evidence did not support the
findings that the attack was an accident and declined to
recommend that his Commander sign and forward it to Washington.
(Statement to Navy Times, 3 June 2002 and elsewhere)
Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, former Chief of Naval Operations and
former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. "I have never believed
that the attack on the USS Liberty was a case of mistaken
identity. That is ridiculous. Israel knew perfectly well that
the ship was America." (Americans for Middle East
Understanding, June 8, 1997)
Richard Helms, former director, Central Intelligence Agency.
"It was no accident." (Navy Times, 6/26/2002) Asked to say
more, Helms remarked that he did not want to spend the rest of
his life testifying in court about the attack. (A Look Over My
Shoulder by Richard Helms)
Rufus Taylor, Admiral, Deputy CIA director, told Helms, "To me,
the picture thus far presents the distinct possibility that the
Israelis knew that Liberty might be their target and attacked
anyway. (A Look Over My Shoulder by Richard Helms)
John Morrison, Major General, US Air Force, Deputy Chief NSA
Operations during the attack and later Chief of NSA Operations.
"....did not buy the Israeli ‘mistake' explanations either.
Nobody believes that explanation." When informed by author
Bamford of gruesome war crime (killing of large numbers of POWs)
at nearby El Arish, Morrison saw the connection. "That would be
enough," he said. "They wouldn't want us in on that. You've
got the motive. What a hell of a thing to do." (Body of
Secrets by James Bamford, p233).
Oliver Kirby, former deputy director for operations/production,
National Security Agency. "I can tell you for an absolute
certainty that they knew they were attacking an American ship."
Kirby participated in NSA's investigation of the attack and
reviewed translations of intercepted communications between
pilots and their headquarters which he reports show conclusively
that they knew their target was an American ship. Kirby is
considered the "Godfather" of the USS Liberty and USS Pueblo
intercept programs. (Telephone interviews with James Ennes and
David Walsh for Friendless Fire, Proceedings, June 2003)
William Odom, former director, National Security Agency,
reported that on the strength of intercept transcripts of pilots
conversation during the attack, the question of the attack's
deliberateness "just wasn't a disputed issue" within the agency.
(Interview with David Walsh on March 3, 2003, reported in Naval
Institute Proceedings, June, 2003)
Bobby Ray Inman, Admiral, USN, Director National Security Agency
1977-1981. Inman said he "flatly rejected" the Cristol thesis
that the attack was an accident. "It is just exceedingly
difficult to believe that [USS Liberty] was not correctly
identified" based on his talks with NSA seniors at the time
having direct knowledge of intercepted communications. No NSA
official could be found who dissented from the "deliberate"
conclusion. (Proceedings, June, 2003)
Captain William L. McGonagle, Commanding Officer, USS Liberty.
"USS Liberty is the only US Navy ship attacked by a foreign
nation, involving large loss of life...that has never been
accorded a full Congressional hearing."
George Ball, former under secretary of state. "The Liberty's
presence and function were well known to Israel's leaders.
...Israel's leaders concluded that nothing they might do would
offend the Americans to the point of reprisal. If American
leaders did not have the courage to punish Israel for the
blatant murder of American citizens, it seemed clear that their
American friends would let them get away with almost anything.
(The Passionate Attachment: America's Involvement with Israel,
pages 57-58.
Clark Clifford, Secretary of Defense under Lyndon Johnson.
"Inconceivable that it was an accident – 3 strafing passes, 3
torpedo boats. Set forth facts. Punish Israelis responsible.
(Minutes of NSC Special Committee Meeting, 9 June 1967)
Dr. Louis Tordella, former deputy director, National Security
Agency. Believed that the attack was deliberate and that the
Israeli government attempted to cover it up. Tordella expressed
that view to authors James Ennes and James Bamford and to
Congressman George Mahon (D-Texas), and in an internal
memorandum for the record. He noted "a nice whitewash" in the
margin of the official Israeli excuse for the attack. ("A nice
whitewash" remark was noted in NSA Gerhard report 1982)
Norman Finkelstein, PhD, author, professor of political science,
DePaul University. (In a review of "Six Days of War" by Michael
Oren.) "Oren...frequently descends to vulgar propaganda.
Deeming the Israeli combined air and naval assault on the USS
Liberty ...an accident,' Oren rehashes official Israeli tales
and embellishes them with his own whoppers." (Journal of
Palestine Studies, Spring, 2003, p85)
Marshal Carter, former director, National Security Agency, in a
telephone interview with James Ennes, described the attack as
clearly deliberate.
Lucius Battle, former presidential advisor, as keynote speaker
for 1982 USS Liberty reunion described attack as clearly
deliberate.
FBI Officials. "FBI officials counter that ‘friendly' spying
can be as damaging as spying for enemies, they note, as in 1967
when Israeli jets deliberately attacked the electronic
intelligence- gathering ship USS Liberty...." (Washington
Times, November 26, 1998)
James Akins, former US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. "How much
better if Congress would....call to account those who were
involved in spreading lies about the tragedy." (Special Report,
The Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty, June 8, 1967, The
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, December, 1999)
Victor Ostrovsky, author and former Mossad officer. "The attack
was deliberate and not an accident." (Telephone conversation
with Memo to File, former Congressman Pete McCloskey, October
10, 1991, and several conversations with James Ennes.)
Dwight Porter, former US Ambassador to Lebanon, who saw
transcripts of Israeli communications during the attack. "It's
an American ship!" the pilot of an Israeli Mirage fighter-
bomber radioed Tel Aviv as he sighted the USS Liberty on June 8,
1967. Israeli headquarters ordered the pilot to carry out his
mission, he reports. (Syndicated column "Remembering the
Liberty" by Rowland Evans and Robert Novak, November 6, 1991.)
Sergeev Oleg Korneevitch, retired Colonel, Soviet GRU. "The
historical event which took place in June 1967 can hardly be
called enigmatic and mysterious. ...It is difficult to
understand that the Israelis could not identity the USS Liberty,
since the ship had a unique antenna and equipment and especially
since the Israelis had identified the ship with long term
observation." (Translated from a taped interview.)
Walter L. Jacobsen, Lieutenant Commander, US Navy. "The
government of Israel intentionally attacked the ship. ...The
attack was not legally justified. ...(there were) two further
violations of international law...the use of unmarked military
aircraft (and)...the wanton destruction of life rafts." (Naval
Law Review, Vol 36, Winter 1986)
Stephen Green, author. "He indicates that the attack was not an
accident." (Antelope Valley Press, April 5, 1984)
Paul Findley, author and former Member of Congress 1961-1983.
"Certain facts are clear. The attack was no accident. The
Liberty was assaulted in broad daylight by Israeli forces who
knew the ship's identity. ...The public, however, was kept in
the dark. Even before the American public learned of the
attack, U.S. government officials began to promote an account
satisfactory to Israel. The American Israel Public Affairs
Committee worked through Congressmen to keep the story under
control. The President of the United States, Lyndon B. Johnson,
ordered and led a cover-up so thorough that years after he left
office the episode is still largely unknown...." (They Dare to
Speak Out, by Paul Findley, 1985, page 166)
William F. Buckley, journalist and publisher. "Is the Liberty
episode being erased from history. So it would seem...What has
happened to our prying journalistic corps and our editors,
normally so indignant of attempted suppression of the news?...We
believe that a joint select committee of Congress should
investigate the strange case of the USS Liberty..." (National
Review, June 27, 1967)
Lloyd M. "Pete" Bucher, US Navy, Commanding Officer USS Pueblo
when captured by North Korea in January 1968. "The attack on
the USS Liberty was planned and there is and was a cover-up."
"If the very valuable lessons of the Liberty were known, the
capture of the USS Pueblo could not have happened." (Telephone
conversations with James Ennes and Sepember 6, 2002, with
Richard Schmucker)
Donald Neff, author. "Nearly everyone who is not affiliated
with Israel...and who has seriously looked into the attack
believes that it was deliberate. ...The bare facts of the attack
rule out any other conclusion." (Washington Report on Middle
East Affairs, August, 2002, p29)
Adlai E. Stevenson, former United States Senator. In 1980,
Senator Stevenson announced his interest in holding
Congressional hearings on the attack. He pointed out that the
survivors have been consistent in their accounts of what
happened and that the attack was, in his word, "premeditated."
(William J. Small, United Press International, September 28,
1980)
Ralph Hoppe, Colonel, US Army, retired. Hoppe reports that
dozens of intelligence reports soon after the attack described
the attack as deliberate including a "consensus report" which
summarized the collective view of the US intelligence community.
Soon orders came from Washington to collect and destroy all such
reports. Nothing more in official channels described the attack
as deliberate. (Aerotech News and Review, March 2, 2001, by
John Borne, PhD, and conversations with James Ennes)
Andrew and Leslie Cockburn, authors. "It is clear that the
Israelis knew that they were attacking a vessel of the US Navy,
especially as it was flying a large Stars and Stripes at the
time. The fact that they spent six hours reconnoitering and
executing the attack, which included machine-gunning the
lifeboats, attest to the deadly intent of the operation.
("Dangerous Liaison, the Inside Story of the US-Israeli Covert
Relationship," by Andrew and Leslie Cockburn, p152.)
Professor Hayden Peake, author, former CIA officer and member,
Association of Former Intelligence Officers. "...A. Jay
Cristol's virtual minority of one assessment is not supported by
the detailed non-technical common sense evidence to the contrary
in "Body of Secrets" (by James Bamford). "There is nothing
surprising in Bamford's conclusion that the attack was
deliberate. Liberty survivors have made that case convincingly
for years." (The Intelligencer, Vol. 12, No.1, Summer 2001)
Ahron Bregman, PhD, author. Book reviews transcripts of
communications during the attack which establish that the attack
was deliberate. (Israel's Wars, 1947-1993, by Ahron Bregman)
USS Liberty Survivors. Survivors of the attack are unanimous in
their conviction that the attack was deliberate. Among other
things, their belief is based upon the intense pre-attack
reconnaissance, the fact that the firing continued from close
range long after the attackers examined the ship and its
markings from a few feet away, and because the Israeli version
of events as reported to the United States is grossly untrue.
Carl Salans, State Department Legal Advisor and author of highly
critical detailed analysis of the Israeli excuse. In telephone
interview from his home in France, Mr. Salans described the
attack as deliberate.
Walter Deeley, NSA department head. Conducted still-classified
investigation of the attack. Remarked later in telephone
interview that he regards the attack as deliberate.
Charles Tiffany, Richard Block and Ron Gotcher are among several
Air Force intelligence analysts who have come forward to report
that they saw real-time transcripts of communications from the
attacking forces which show clearly that they were aware they
were attacking an American ship. Others who saw these
transcripts include Dwight Porter and Oliver Kirby, mentioned
above, and several top offiicials of the American intelligece
community.
John Borne, PhD, adjunct professor of history, NY University.
Published doctoral thesis establishing that the attack was
deliberate.
John Stenbit, Assistant Secretary of Defense for C3I. "The
Israeli's told us 24 hours before that ...if we didn't move it,
they would sink it. Unfortunately, the ship was not moved, and
by the time the message arrived the ship was taking on water."
(AFEI/NDAI Conference for Net Centric Operations, Wednesday,
April 16, 2003)
| |  | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:30 pm Post subject: |
| As usual do we have to beg, plead, and cajole the Israeli apologists to make their case?
WHO BELIEVED THE LIBERTY ATTACK WAS AN ACCIDENT? | | | | Ilana_Halevy | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 2:45 pm Post subject: |
| Filth you are trying to replace quality with quantity as usual by creating numerous of topics.
If Israelis planned attack they could sink Liberty in two minutes with no traces.
But instead Israelis did everything opposite to planned attack. I repost my message:
| Quote: | Lets say Israel planned to sink Liberty. What would they do? Israelis would take squadron of Myster planes (that look similar to MiG-19), paint their marks, arm them with general purpose bombs and send on Liberty. They would also tell them to not lead any radio conversations.
Thats all. Planes would sink Liberty in 5 minutes. If someone would survive he would tell that unmarked planed looked like MiG-19 attaked them. Thats all, no other evidences. Very simple mission with minimal risk (possible to make attack more cunning: paint Egyptian marks on planes use Arab speaking pilot that will lead conversation on Arab frequences).
What happaned in reality? First well marked Mirage III, with distinguish shape attacked Liberty with cannons. Later well marked Mysters attacked with napalm rockets.
All the time pilots were leading open wave uncoded radio conversations in Hebrew, which easily could be (and were) recorded by everyone in tens miles around.
Twenty minutes later arrived torpedo boats carrying Israel flags. They fired torpedos. One torpedo hit. Then they approached closer identified ship and ceased attack.
Why Israelis behaved like this? There are only two possible explanations:
1) Either attack was not deliberate.
2) Either all Israelis are lobotomized idiots with IQ 50 like Pedisan.
Keep in mind that just 3 days before Israel carried out one of the most brilliant and complex air attacks in human history | | | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 3:42 pm Post subject: |
| | I have read your post Ilana. I don't agree with it. Neither do many of the above distinguished and high ranking members of the U.S. Navy, writers, researchers, politicians and members of the intelligence service. So what makes all these experts wrong, and you, a rank amateur, so right? Were you even alive in 1967? | | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 4:00 pm Post subject: |
| | There is one theory that suggests itself to me. Israeli High Command ordered the attack and the sinking of the Liberty regardless of identification,. The forces sent to carry out the task, the fighter jets and the MTB's, recognized that it was an American ship and so they chose a middle way. They attacked but they 'pulled their punches'. In all conscience, unlike their ruthless, murdering leaders with long experience of murder, they could not kill off a sitting duck in cold blood. There was, if you like, an unplanned, uncoordinated mini-mutiny - a reluctance on the part of the Israeli fighting men to commit murder on their strongest ally. We know that one Israeli pilot turned back to base rather than attack an American ship. He was imprisoned for his strength of character. | | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 4:42 pm Post subject: |
| Victor Ostrovsky, author and former Mossad officer. "The attack
was deliberate and not an accident." (Telephone conversation
with Memo to File, former Congressman Pete McCloskey, October
10, 1991, and several conversations with James Ennes.) | | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 5:10 pm Post subject: |
| ERROR
I have read your post Ilana. I don't agree with it. Neither do ANY (not many) of the above distinguished and high ranking members of the U.S. Navy, writers, researchers, politicians and members of the intelligence service. So what makes all these experts wrong, and you, a rank amateur, so right? Were you even alive in 1967? | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 5:42 pm 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. | | | | funglefoot | | Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 8:09 pm Post subject: |
| How many men served on the Liberty?
How many men survived the attack?
How many men gave testimony at the Navael Court of Inquiry?
Why was so much testimony ignored?
Rear Admiral (then captain) Merlin Staring, Staff Legal Office
for Commander in Chief US Naval Forces Europe and later Chief
Judge Advocate General of the Navy. After reviewing the Court
of Inquiry, he concluded that the evidence did not support the
findings that the attack was an accident and declined to
recommend that his Commander sign and forward it to Washington.
(Statement to Navy Times, 3 June 2002 and elsewhere)
No less than 5 U.S. Navy admirals all state that the attack was deliberate.
A lot of other distinguished persons all state the same, yet Cowboy, experience and intimacy with the details unknown, states the attack was an accident. Why should we take your opinion in preference to the opinion of this long list of war heroes etc? | | | | Cowboy | | Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 5:27 am Post subject: |
| | fake American JD wrote: | 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 |
Proceedings of the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, 18 June 1967
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/uss-liberty/2007/04/27/proceedings-of-the-u-s-navy-court-of-inquiry-18-june-1967.php
Sworn Testimony of Commander William L. McGonagle, US Navy, Captain of the USS Liberty
Page 40
Immediately after the ship was struck by the torpedo, the torpedo boats stopped dead in the water and milled around astern of the ship at a range of approximately 500 to 800 yards. One of the boats signalled by flashing light, in English, "Do you require assistance?
Page 44
At 1957, the helicopter dropped a message on the forecastle. The message was written on the back of a calling card, identified as Commander Ernest Carl Castle, Naval Attache for Air Embassy, USA. The message on the back read as follows: "Have you casualties?"
Page 51
I read from the card I now hold in my hand. It is a calling card from "Commander Ernest Carl Castle, United States Navy, Naval Attache for Air, Embassy of the United States of America, Tel Aviv." This is on the face of the card. On the bacl of the card is written, "Have you casualties?" It's noted that this card is smeared with oil smudges on both sides."
Sworn Testimony of Chief Communications Technician Harold J. Thompson, US Navy, Crewmember of the USS Liberty
Pages 88-89
Word was passed again to standby for torpedo attack starboard side and again word went out for signalmen. Once again I told them I could not read flags, but if I could be of service. I was asked to report to the bridge, which I did. When I got up there, Signalman David was attempting to rig a hand light. I assisted him. We went to the starboard wing of the bridge and one torpedo boat was making a run straight at us off the starboard beam while the other two stood off. At the Captain;s directions, David sent, "US Naval Ship" "US Naval Ship". When they were about 500 yards off, the torpedo boat turned astern and came up on the stern on the starboard side and flashed, "Do you need help?"
Q. Was this before the torpedo hit?
A. This was after the torpedo hit us, and we were surprised by the attack. The Captain gave us word. He said, "no, thank you." We sent this back to the boat, and our steering was somewhat erratic and they came up on the port side then. David went across, I followed him, and saw on the last part of that message, David said, "Do you want us to standby?" I passed this word to the Captain. He said, "no, thank you." We sent this to the patrol boat. They came up along port side, I say roughly 100 yards off, flashed "good luck" and dropped astern along with the other two which had come up to the stern, to a mile or a mile and a half back, just out of sight. Then they made one high speed run directly astern and somewhere between a quarter and a half mile back mad a u-turn and disappeared. That was the last we saw of them. Shortly afterwards, an Israeli helicopter came, hovered off the bridge and tried to hand signal us, and dropped a note on the forecastle which was brought to the bridge... | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
