War Without End

Jefferson Davis

Perhaps we should call it the 40th anniversary of the apologia.

Why did Israel attack USS Liberty?
By Raffi Berg
BBC News

For former US seaman Gary Brummett, the 40th anniversary of the 1967 Middle East war has stirred painful memories.

As a 21-year-old third class petty officer, Mr Brummett was serving on board the USS Liberty off the coast of Egypt on 8 June, when, without warning, the vessel came under fire, first from fighter planes, then torpedo boats.

The attack, which lasted at least 40 minutes, resulted in the deaths of 34 of Mr Brummett's fellow crewmen, at least 170 injured and catastrophic damage to the ship.

Alarmingly, the assault had been carried out not by enemy forces, but by the US' closest regional ally, Israel.

Israel insists it mistook the Liberty for a hostile Egyptian ship, the El Quseir, and numerous US and Israeli inquiries have concluded the attack was accidental.

But for Mr Brummett and a growing body of conspiracy theorists, the authorities are guilty of a cover-up.

"I have more trouble with it today than when it happened because I know more of the facts about what was going on," said Mr Brummett.

"There's been an egregious wrong done here, there's been an extreme number of lies told to the American people and the American people do not know the truth about what happened."

'Sitting duck'

The attack on the Liberty - the gravest incident in the history of US-Israeli relations - has been a source of controversy for the past four decades.

Claim and counter-claim as to what happened have been fought out in every corner of the media, with the advent of the internet helping to reinvigorate the debate.

Israel's supporters say the incident is merely being used as a tool by critics to malign the Jewish state, while accusers say the attack was a war crime which has never come to light.

According to Israel, the incident was a tragic case of friendly fire occurring in the fog of war.

It says it believed the ship had been bombarding Israeli forces fighting in the Sinai, and that its pilots did not see any US flags (survivors say there were three) on the vessel before they opened fire.

Sceptics however claim the attack was premeditated and that the truth has been suppressed. The assertion of a cover-up was lent weight by a 2003 independent commission of inquiry which reported that the attack on the Liberty "remains the only serious naval incident that has never been thoroughly investigated by Congress".

Among the most popular theories as to why Israel would take such drastic action against its superpower ally is that the Liberty, a $40m state-of-the-art surveillance ship, was eavesdropping on an Israeli massacre of Egyptian prisoners of war.

Israel strongly denies its troops executed Egyptian POWs, saying those who died in an incident at that time were 250 armed Palestinian fighters killed in action.

Another is that the ship had learnt of secret Israeli plans to invade Syria's Golan Heights two days later and had to be destroyed.

'US collusion' theory

Perhaps the most sinister motive is that put forward by journalist Peter Hounam in his 2003 book "Operation Cyanide".

The attack on the Liberty was pre-planned, perhaps from at least a year beforehand
Peter Hounam
Mr Hounam claims secret elements within the US and Israeli governments colluded to bomb the ship and blame the attack on Egypt and their superpower ally, the Soviet Union, triggering massive retaliation which would ensure Israeli victory.

"The attack on the Liberty was pre-planned, perhaps from at least a year beforehand," Mr Hounam says.

"The Liberty was sent into a very dangerous situation, where it was, in my view, placed in a position to be attacked."

Mr Hounam says the intention was to sink the ship and kill everyone on board, but as the Liberty remained afloat the plan was aborted and has been hushed up ever since.

'Presidential order'

Successive US and Israeli inquiries, and the declassification of thousands of pieces of information, have done little to dampen suspicions.

One of the most powerful claims of a cover-up has come from retired US Navy lawyer Capt Ward Boston, counsel to the Navy Court of Inquiry into the incident conducted just days after the event.

Capt Boston says the court's original findings, which he signed, were changed afterwards by government lawyers.

He also claims the president of the court, Rear Adm Isaac Kidd, told him he was ordered by US President Lyndon Johnson and Defence Secretary Robert McNamara to conclude the attack was a case of mistaken identity.

However, Capt Boston's version of events - and the notion that what happened was anything more than a tragic accident - are disputed by numerous academics and authors who have investigated the incident.

"It was a series of blunders by both the United States and Israel that resulted in a terrible tragedy and nothing more," says Jay Cristol, a federal judge and author of the book The Liberty Incident.

"All the official reports came to the same conclusion.

"Unfortunately there are a number of people who are on the other side of the Arab-Israeli conflict who think this is a way to attack the otherwise very strong relationship between the US and Israel, and they keep stirring the pot.

'No evidence'

It is a view with which historian Michael B Oren, a senior fellow at the Shalem Center, a Jerusalem academic research institute, concurs.

"Many thousands of documents related to the Liberty have been declassified and in none of these documents will you find a scintilla of evidence to suggest any of these conspiracy theories are true," he says.

Why would the Israelis try to cover up one atrocity by committing another
Michael B Oren
Historian
"The Golan one is the easiest to disprove because of where the Liberty was, not off the coast of Israel, but Egypt. Its listening devices weren't that powerful that they could listen in on communications in Tel Aviv.

"Moreover the Israelis were very upfront in telling the US that they planned to capture the Golan Heights and the Americans agreed to it.

"Regarding a massacre of Egyptian POWs, there's no evidence of that. And why would the Israelis try to cover up one atrocity by committing another?

He says the attack has remained a source of controversy because "it has all the ingredients of a good spy scandal. It involves espionage and it involves the Israelis, who are forever a focus of conspiracy theories.

"If I could prove the Liberty was attacked in a premeditated fashion, I would write it - it would be a great historical scoop - but the truth is far more mundane."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/6690425.stm

Published: 2007/06/08 11:19:19 GMT

Cowboy · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 4:52 am Post subject:

DanielDives · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 5:15 am Post subject:

Dude, still waiting for you to fill this out

Witnesses’ testimony needed [non-Arabs] - Attack on USS Liberty, 08 June, 1967

IAF Reconnaissance flight/s Pilot or Pilots

Number unknown:

1-

2-

???????

3 IAF pilots –who strafed the USS Liberty with bullets, rockets and napalm during several runs

1 –

2 –

3 –

3 x ISC - MTB personnel

Number unknown:

1 –

2 –

???????

2 IAF ‘Rescue’ Helicopter pilots

1 –

2 –

Armed and dressed in battle-fatigue men, inside both ‘rescue’ helicopters

Number unknown:

1 –

2 –

???????

Those who gave the order to attack the USS Liberty – 08 June, 1967 [Chain of Command]:

[number unknown]

1 –

2 –

???????

DETECTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF THE "LIBERTY".

source: Israel Defense Forces History Report of 1982: "Attack on the Liberty Incident" [response to the publication of 'Assault on the Liberty' in 1979], aka the 1982 IDF History Report or IDFHR.

On 8 June, at 0410 hours, an IAF "Nord" aircraft took oft with a naval officer aboard serving as an aerial observer. This air reconnaissance patrol was part of the routine coastal security measures. The patrol set out at first light, parallel to Israel's shores and over the open sea. (An additional patrol of the same type proceeded from 1530 hours until nightfall). The patrol's mission was to detect ship movements before vessels could enter coastal radar detection [page 7] range. The airborne observer would make a brief report of each detection at the moment visual contact was wade; additional information would be transmitted in the debriefing, after the plane's landing. At approximately 0545, an unclear message was received from the plane at Central Coastal Command (CLC-Combat Information Center-Central Coast). After clarification with the Navy representative at Air Commands the observation plane was reported to have sighted a ship, apparently a destroyer, sailing 70 miles west of Gaza.

The ship was designated as "Skunk-C" on the Control Table, and marked red - i.e. an unidentified target. Later, at 0603 hours, an additional report arrived from the plane, which described the vessel as a supply ship of the US Navy. The report was not unusual. Aerial observers had often reported on the presence of this type of craft, but such vessels would always change direction and disappear far from the coast.7 Although the ship had been identified by the aerial observer, the target remained colored in red since the team at Central Coastal Command (hereafter referred to as CCC) were not positively sure of the ship's identity.8

At approximately 0900 hours, following the discovery of the enemy submarine off Atlit, GOC Israel Navy arrived at the (CCC) bridge. During a break in the activity surrounding the submarine, GOC Navy inquired about "Skunk C", and after receiving en explanation concerning the vessel, instructed that the ship be marked green i.e, a neutral craft.

At about the same time, a report arrived at Regional Control 501; the report stated that an IAF pilot, returning from a mission in Sinai, had spotted a ship 20 miles north of E1 Arish and that when he had tried to identify the vessel it had opened fire upon him.9. Reacting to this report, Head of Naval Operations Section/3 (a section in the Naval Operations Department) instructed Israel Navy destroyers "Jaffa" and "Eilat" (who were patrolling along the coast) to turn south and verity the identity of the vessel. However, the destroyers were ordered to return to their patrol sectors at 0940 hours, after an additional report arrived from Regional Control 501, that in the light of the pilot's debriefing, there was no certainty that he had indeed been fired upon by the ship. 10 The report likewise stated that, "the ship is colored grey blue, very wide and the bridge is in the middle."

Meanwhile, the "Nord" plane which had been patrolling the sea had landed and the observer was debriefed by Lt. Commander Pinchasi, a navy representative at Air Command, The observer reported spotting the marking GTR-5, [page 8] on the ship's side. Lt. Commander Pinchasi checked the marking in a "Janes" manual and learned that the reference was to the intelligence ship named "Liberty". He reported the information to Naval Operations Section/3 and since the reference was to an intelligence ship he likewise reported to Naval Operations Section/4 (intelligence).11

Commander Lunz had relieved the Head of Naval Operations section/3 (who retired to rest) and was the officer who received the report. However, he did not see anything new in the debriefing but rather a complementary report to the one received at 0500 hours, Since he did not have information as to the present location of the "Liberty" he gave the order (at 1100 hours) to erase the vessel from the CCC control table. This order was given in accordance with the accepted updating procedure for maintaining an up-to the minute picture at the CCC control table.12

By this action, the "Liberty" was, for all practical purposes, removed from the agenda. The detection of the "Liberty" at that location (far from the theatre of battle) was not unusual and did not require special attention or tracking. Certainly no danger was discerned that might have necessitated a response and it was reasonable to assume that the ship would turn round and sail away. In addition, it was common practice to erase targets which had disappeared from range.13 These were almost certainly the considerations which guided Commander Lunz when he ordered the erasure of "Liberty" from the CCC control table[/b].14

A short time after the erasure of "Liberty" from the CCC control table, a series of events transpired which led to the detection of the ship a second time now under circumstances which led to a tragic mistake.

Note: according to CCC "...or even the "Liberty's" log describes only three sorties overhead (at 0850, 1056 and at 1126 hours)."
Overhead

source: Israel Defense Forces History Report of 1982: "Attack on the Liberty Incident" [response to the publication of 'Assault on the Liberty' in 1979], aka the 1982 IDF History Report or IDFHR.

Anyway…

Cowboy · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 6:50 am Post subject:

As usual, Dives diverts from the topic to avoid the fact that there was no motive for Israel to knowingly attack a US Navy ship.

DanielDives · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:09 am Post subject:

Yeah, yeah, yeah, and accident lasting over an hour, sure dude, sure.

Now, just fill out this

Witnesses’ testimony needed [non-Arabs] - Attack on USS Liberty, 08 June, 1967

IAF Reconnaissance flight/s Pilot or Pilots

Number unknown:

1-

2-

???????

3 IAF pilots –who strafed the USS Liberty with bullets, rockets and napalm during several runs

1 –

2 –

3 –

3 x ISC - MTB personnel

Number unknown:

1 –

2 –

???????

2 IAF ‘Rescue’ Helicopter pilots

1 –

2 –

Armed and dressed in battle-fatigue men, inside both ‘rescue’ helicopters

Number unknown:

1 –

2 –

???????

Those who gave the order to attack the USS Liberty – 08 June, 1967 [Chain of Command]:

[number unknown]

1 –

2 –

???????

Cowboy · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:10 am Post subject:

As usual, Dives desperately and repeatedly diverts from the topic to avoid the fact that there was no motive for Israel to knowingly attack a US Navy ship.

Jefferson Davis · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:15 am Post subject:

You need to have an open and honest investigation to prove that.

Too bad there has never been one.

Keep avoiding and diverting Mr. AIPAC.

DanielDives · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:29 am Post subject:

Q: to avoid the fact that there was no motive for Israel to knowingly attack a US Navy ship.

R: Dude, UR not an Israeli, Jew, IDFer, IAFer, MTBer, USS Liberty survivor or anything even remotely close to anything linked to the USS Liberty, what do you know for sure, eh?

An accident lasting for over an hour?

Keep pissing on the graves of fellow Americans, coz by now it's clear we can eradicte the 'fellow' in that line up.

The only thing you've provided is McNamara's 'I saw this and heard that' crap.

The USS Libberty survivors want their day/s in and open court. T

ell us again, why don't you want them to have it?

DanielDives · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 3:09 pm Post subject:

Real Americans died that day.

No matter what you say or what excuse you come up with; 34 American nationals were murdered on the 8th of June, 1967, and over 170 mauled, maimed or wounded by Israeli forces.

There's no doubt about that fact.

Live with it.

Cowboy · Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 6:20 pm Post subject:

War Without End

The global war against terror, news about the illegal invasion of Iraq, the corporate puppet presidents, the war criminal Tony Blair, September 11th 2001, the USS Liberty and New World Order crimes against humanity.

BBC: Why did Israel attack USS Liberty?