# USS liberty



## JBeukema (Sep 8, 2009)

settle it once and for all

(poll)


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

If you HONESTLY research the attack there is NO other explanation for using UNMARKED WAR PLANES then to hide their identity as Israeli. It was either a "false flag" operation or an attack to SINK a US warship.


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

JBeukema said:


> settle it once and for all
> 
> (poll)


 Maybe you can settle the question of who shot JFK while you're at it.


----------



## JBeukema (Sep 8, 2009)

Ravi said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> > settle it once and for all
> ...


I'll never confess that I shot him


wait... dammit....


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

There is no other explenation for the Israeli's pushing the attack for several HOURS!!!


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

Somewhere between oops and someone fucked up.

But what does it matter, really? Mistakes happen and otherwise friendly nations sometimes kill each other's citizens by mistake.

IMO, repeatedly talking about it and blaming the Israelis is nothing but propaganda.


----------



## JBeukema (Sep 8, 2009)

Ravi said:


> Somewhere between oops and someone fucked up.
> 
> But what does it matter, really? Mistakes happen and otherwise friendly nations sometimes kill each other's citizens by mistake.
> 
> IMO, repeatedly talking about it and blaming the Israelis is nothing but propaganda.



Can we blame C.Bass and Canada?


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

Sorry Ravi but neither OOPS nor Fucked Up explains flying UNMARKED war planes.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

Give me ONE just ONE justification for flying UNMARKED war planes.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

Oh I guess I came up with one........The paint delivery was late.


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

Ravi said:


> Somewhere between oops and someone fucked up.
> 
> But what does it matter, really? Mistakes happen and otherwise friendly nations sometimes kill each other's citizens by mistake.
> 
> IMO, repeatedly talking about it and blaming the Israelis is nothing but propaganda.



it was no mistake idiot...and it matters


----------



## JBeukema (Sep 8, 2009)

If it 'wasn't a mistake' what reason would they have to attack the nation that pretty much makes sure they exist


----------



## strollingbones (Sep 8, 2009)

_i opt to believe the men of the uss liberty_


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 8, 2009)

My Uncle Himmie, along with my Uncle Morty, Uncle Shlmo and Uncle Weiss love the taste of American Gentile blood. They were flying the Israeli planes and by the wheel of the attack boats. They couldn't help themselves when they smell fresh American Gentile blood. It makes them go absolutely insane. So they attacked hoping to grab the remains for the big victory feast they were having soon to celebrate the royal ass-kicking during the 6 day war, hoping no one would notice! 

Can you blame them gentile blood tastes the absolute BEST with matzo and greplock? Everyone knows Jews can't eat food not mixed with gentile blood! 

Oh yea, they wanted to make sure they didn't have a shortage of organs. I mean there was a war taking place. That was motivation also!


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> My Uncle Himmie, along with my Uncle Morty, Uncle Shlmo and Uncle Weiss love the taste of American Gentile blood. They were flying the Israeli planes and by the wheel of the attack boats. They couldn't help themselves when they smell fresh American Gentile blood. It makes them go absolutely insane. So they attacked hoping to grab the remains for the big victory feast they were having soon to celebrate the royal ass-kicking during the 6 day war, hoping no one would notice!
> 
> Can you blame them gentile blood tastes the absolute BEST with matzo and greplock? Everyone knows Jews can't eat food not mixed with gentile blood!
> 
> Oh yea, they wanted to make sure they didn't have a shortage of organs. I mean there was a war taking place. That was motivation also!






Oh you get an A for deflection but you have yet to answer for ANY of the FACTS that I have produced.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

So tell me GHook WHY once again WHY!!!!! they were flying UNMARKED WAR PLANES!!!! ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION OR SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT IT!!!! Oh and I apologize for putting the lives of AMERICAN SAILORS over the Israelis......Must just be my rampant nationalism!!!


----------



## Sunni Man (Sep 8, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> My Uncle Himmie, along with my Uncle Morty, Uncle Shlmo and Uncle Weiss love the taste of American Gentile blood. They were flying the Israeli planes and by the wheel of the attack boats. They couldn't help themselves when they smell fresh American Gentile blood. It makes them go absolutely insane. So they attacked hoping to grab the remains for the big victory feast they were having soon to celebrate the royal ass-kicking during the 6 day war, hoping no one would notice!
> 
> Can you blame them gentile blood tastes the absolute BEST with matzo and greplock? Everyone knows Jews can't eat food not mixed with gentile blood!


It's sick GHook that you would mock the deaths of so many innocent American sailors


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

JBeukema said:


> If it 'wasn't a mistake' what reason would they have to attack the nation that pretty much makes sure they exist



they wanted to blame the attack on egypt and gain americain support...so they used unmarked planes....Isreal still bites the hand that feeds




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWpWc_suPWo]YouTube - Israel spies on the USA part 1[/ame]


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

GHook is OBVIOUSLY not interested in any facts that paint the Israeli's in anything but glowing colors. The Israeli's can NEVER DO WRONG even killing US servicemen because they are so put upon.


Edited because of hurt feelings.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

With "friends" like Israel who needs enemies!!??


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

I'll tell you one thing though......I respect the skill and ruthlesness of the Irali Moosad.


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 8, 2009)

EOTS, use some common fucking sense for one. Your theory, like every idea you have, has major holes!

(1) The US already supported Israel with arm shipments! 
(2) Israel already firmly had the jaws of victory in their grasp. They didn't any supports from anyone.
(3) The Soviets supposed Egypt, that was motivation enough for American support.
(4) If your theory is correct, why did they stop the attack. Why not finish the job and take out everyone? Dead men don't tell tales, as the story goes. Instead they took full responsibility for the error!



eots said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> > If it 'wasn't a mistake' what reason would they have to attack the nation that pretty much makes sure they exist
> ...


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

Circumstantial evidence proves nothing.

Unmarked planes proves someone claimed there were unmarked planes, it doesn't mean that because there were unmarked planes the Israelis attacked on purpose.

That some of the crew of the USS Liberty think they were attacked on purpose only means that some of the crew of the USS Liberty think they were attacked on purpose.

Next we will learn that because some people think Bush was behind 9/11 that is proof that Bush was behind 9/11.

As conspiracy theories go this one is very lame and really only keeps alive the propaganda that the Jews are responsible for everything that is bad in the world.


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 8, 2009)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> GHook is OBVIOUSLY an Israeli Firster. The Israeli's can NEVER DO WRONG even killing US servicemen because they are so put upon.



BS homo! I see myself as American and only American! But I will combat antisemitic bullshit when I see it! So go fuck yourself!


----------



## Sunni Man (Sep 8, 2009)

Ravi said:


> Circumstantial evidence proves nothing.
> 
> Unmarked planes proves someone claimed there were unmarked planes, it doesn't mean that because there were unmarked planes the Israelis attacked on purpose.
> 
> ...


This is NO conspiracy theory Ravi

Israel attacked a well marked American ship on a clear day.

Why????


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> Cold Fusion38 said:
> 
> 
> > GHook is OBVIOUSLY an Israeli Firster. The Israeli's can NEVER DO WRONG even killing US servicemen because they are so put upon.
> ...



its not anti-semitism.to be critical of the israeli government anymore than it is anti-American to criticize the American government...don't pretend


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 8, 2009)

eots said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > Cold Fusion38 said:
> ...



That might be true, but it is antisemitism to buy into every back-water theory about Jews no matter how insane they might be!

My last post in another useless thread!


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> Cold Fusion38 said:
> 
> 
> > GHook is OBVIOUSLY an Israeli Firster. The Israeli's can NEVER DO WRONG even killing US servicemen because they are so put upon.
> ...






Oh now I'm a Jew hating HOMO!!! Just tell my WHY they had UNMARKED WAR PLANES!!! Just answer that one little question. It is a violation of Geneva conventions and NOT done by accident.

The fact is they probably though we were intercepting comunications. But the fact is we were intercepting Egyptian comunications.



Just go look it up.....Look at the two ships they CLAIM they could not tell apart.


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Circumstantial evidence proves nothing.
> ...



the israeli government was responsible for the attack on the liberty...the everything bad in this world.....jew... blah blah stuff are your words and the propaganda


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > GHook93 said:
> ...



walk on home.. boy


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > GHook93 said:
> ...







This is NOT some BS "back-water" conspiracy these are WELL DOCUMENTED FACTS!!! Why would they do it? Hmmm I don't know maybe because they were developing NUCLEAR weapons and didn't want a spy ship that close to Israel.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 8, 2009)

Ravi said:


> Circumstantial evidence proves nothing.
> 
> Unmarked planes proves someone claimed there were unmarked planes, it doesn't mean that because there were unmarked planes the Israelis attacked on purpose.
> 
> ...






Actually when you add PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE with the FACT that there was massive damage inflicted by SOMEONE on the USS Liberty AND the War planes that attacked were UNMARKED which in and of itself is a violation of Geneva conventions then it become a VERY DELIBERATE AND PREPLANED ATTACK on a US warship.....Which IS, IN FACT an act of WAR!


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Circumstantial evidence proves nothing.
> ...


Nothing you've said disputes my post.

And no, it isn't against the Geneva Conventions to use unmarked war planes.


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

QUOTE=Ravi;1497062]





Cold Fusion38 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Circumstantial evidence proves nothing.
> ...


you don't really know anything do you...you just make it up as you go along


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

eots said:


> you don't really know anything do you...you just make it up as you go along


No offense, eots, but just the fact that you believe the Israelis deliberately targeted the USS Liberty is reason enough to doubt it. Even without knowing anything about the case.

There is nothing in the Geneva Conventions that states unmarked warplanes are not allowed...but you may link the pertinent passage if you can loosen up your tinfoil hat long enough to find it.


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

Ravi said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > you don't really know anything do you...you just make it up as you go along
> ...



I'm glad you admit to knowing nothing and the basis in which you form your opinions


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

Where's your link, eots?


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

The USS Liberty Cover-Up


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

eots said:


> The USS Liberty Cover-Up


No, I don't want your link to some website that editorializes.

I want you to show me where in the Geneva Conventions it is stated that unmarked warplanes are a no-no.

It really shouldn't be too difficult for you dude.


----------



## JBeukema (Sep 8, 2009)

Ravi said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > The USS Liberty Cover-Up
> ...


Wouldn't that fall under the same rule requiring combatants on foot to identify themselves?


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

i didn't have a dog in that fight my assertion was the attack was intentional as was the use of unmarked aircraft...I'm sure there are rules that govern the markings of planes  but i don't know if it is contained in the geneva convention


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

JBeukema said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


The GC basically governs how to treat civilians and captured soldiers. Nothing that I've read of it pertains to this case.


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

eots said:


> i didn't have a dog in that fight my assertion was the attack was intentional as was the use of unmarked aircraft...I'm sure there are rules that govern the markings of planes  but i don't know if it is contained in the geneva convention


Props for that...it doesn't. I don't think it is covered in the rules of war, either. 

This was neither, regardless. Unless you have a confession from the Israelis this was nothing more than bad judgment or a mistake.


----------



## JBeukema (Sep 8, 2009)

Ravi said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



Combatants are required to be clearly identifiable. That's how GW argued that Al Queda doesn't qualify for Geneva protections, since they refuse to wear uniforms or identify themselves


----------



## Douger (Sep 8, 2009)

eots said:


> > Ravi said:
> >
> >
> > > Circumstantial evidence proves nothing.
> ...



All I know is if one moves in next door you better make damn sure your property markers are permanent !


----------



## jillian (Sep 8, 2009)

i also want to add that it gives me the warm fuzzies to see all the anti-semites who think it was a "jewish conspiracy"...

damn, if jews are so powerful, how come BS propaganda like that is still circulated? you know, given that jews cowed the american govt and military enough for israel to go unpunished for its myriad of sins.


----------



## jillian (Sep 8, 2009)

JBeukema said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > JBeukema said:
> ...



link?

you're confusing the requirement of identifiable with marking air craft... and there are differing interpretations as to whether the geneva protections should apply...

but as for aircraft:







now i might be wrong, but that doesn't look marked. perhaps someone with more expertise on this subject than you or i should comment.


----------



## Sunni Man (Sep 8, 2009)

jillian said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


Put on your glasses Jillian

The picture of the F117 you posted clearly has US Air Force markings on the wing and fuselage


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

jillian said:


> i also want to add that it gives me the warm fuzzies to see all the anti-semites who think it was a "jewish conspiracy"...
> 
> damn, if jews are so powerful, how come BS propaganda like that is still circulated? you know, given that jews cowed the american govt and military enough for israel to go unpunished for its myriad of sins.



those are your words...to  distract from the fact that the israeli government has engaged in all kinds of nefarious acts over the years..


----------



## jillian (Sep 8, 2009)

yeah... and there was a huge planned demolition in the middle of one of the busiest places in the world and no one noticed it being set up.

yeppers...


----------



## eots (Sep 8, 2009)

jillian said:


> yeah... and there was a huge planned demolition in the middle of one of the busiest places in the world and no one noticed it being set up.
> 
> yeppers...



well that's not the issue at hand.. and  only shows your having difficulty with yiour argument....


----------



## Ravi (Sep 8, 2009)

JBeukema said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > JBeukema said:
> ...


Ah, but the Israelis weren't combatants. 

gw's argument falls flat since the CIA and the military admitted most of the "combatants" were swept up and there was no real way of knowing if they were innocent bystanders or not.

The Israelis, on the other hand, unless you can prove they purposely targeted the American ship, were guilty of a friendly fire incident.


----------



## Sunni Man (Sep 8, 2009)

jillian said:


> i also want to add that it gives me the warm fuzzies to see all the anti-semites who think it was a "jewish conspiracy"...


Typical zionist jew response to everything.

"Your an anti-semite"!!!!

Jillian, it was the Israeli government we say is guilty of this terrible attack on the Liberty.

Not jews in general


----------



## JBeukema (Sep 8, 2009)

jillian said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


It doesn't? What's that (old) Air Force marking on the wing, then?

You're blind, retarded, or both.


Stupid ****.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 9, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > GHook93 said:
> ...






Hey Ghook since you're so facinated by homos then y don't u go find some ISRAELI dick to suck. Oh and neg rep me for posting the truth ALL YOU WANT cause there are PLENTY here who will GIVE me Rep for speaking the TRUTH!!


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 9, 2009)

Jillian/Ravi have you even BOTHERED to search for info on the USS Liberty? You REALLY should and by all means do so with a critical eye but I think the more you look the more you won't like what you find.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 13, 2009)

So Jillian/Ravi have you investigated the incident yet?


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 13, 2009)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> Jillian/Ravi have you even BOTHERED to search for info on the USS Liberty? You REALLY should and by all means do so with a critical eye but I think the more you look the more you won't like what you find.



Have you? Ya brain dead prick! Doubtful, except from stormfront, kkk.com and davidduke.com!


----------



## Sunni Man (Sep 13, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> Cold Fusion38 said:
> 
> 
> > Jillian/Ravi have you even BOTHERED to search for info on the USS Liberty? You REALLY should and by all means do so with a critical eye but I think the more you look the more you won't like what you find.
> ...


Typical zionist response.

Say anything even remotely not supporting Israel.

And the "your a nazi" will come out every time.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 13, 2009)

Yeah I have investigated the incident THOUROUGHLY and the explanaitons of those who DEFEND a totally unprevoked attack on an AMERICAN SHIP in INTERNATIONAL waters by Israel that KILLED several dozen US sailors are total BULLSHIT!!! Have you even LOOKED at the two ships that the Israeli military attacked? If you have then you would know that one of the best airforces in the world could have NEVER mistaken the two.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 13, 2009)

Yeah I don't think they know the difference between being Jewish and being ISRAELI. I have ZERO problem with Jewish people (why would I) but I have a MAJOR problem with ISRAEL.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 13, 2009)

You know if another country say Viet Nam had attacked a Us warship it would be an act of WAR!


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 13, 2009)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> Yeah I have investigated the incident THOUROUGHLY and the explanaitons of those who DEFEND a totally unprevoked attack on an AMERICAN SHIP in INTERNATIONAL waters by Israel that KILLED several dozen US sailors are total BULLSHIT!!! Have you even LOOKED at the two ships that the Israeli military attacked? If you have then you would know that one of the best airforces in the world could have NEVER mistaken the two.



Answer, I am not sure why I ask because you lack common sense, what advantage to a deliberate would Israel have gotten?

Before your dumbass tries to say to get America on Israel's side or to America to intervene military! Stop and DO YOUR RESEARCH! America was already on Israel's side and Israel was already kicking ass. The war last a whole 6 day (more like 6 hours)! Israel obviously didn't need any one's help! So motivate goes out the window! Now try a little common sense!


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 14, 2009)

Ah yeah the MOTIVE is Israel's alone the FACT remains that those two ships were EASILY told apart.


----------



## Sunni Man (Sep 14, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> Cold Fusion38 said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah I have investigated the incident THOUROUGHLY and the explanaitons of those who DEFEND a totally unprevoked attack on an AMERICAN SHIP in INTERNATIONAL waters by Israel that KILLED several dozen US sailors are total BULLSHIT!!! Have you even LOOKED at the two ships that the Israeli military attacked? If you have then you would know that one of the best airforces in the world could have NEVER mistaken the two.
> ...


Israel loves to play the victim card even when winning.

That way they can demand, and receive, more military and financial aid from the US and Europe.


----------



## noose4 (Sep 14, 2009)

intentional attack.


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 14, 2009)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> Ah yeah the MOTIVE is Israel's alone the FACT remains that those two ships were EASILY told apart.



Man your dense! Have you ever looked at things on the ground from a plane! Things that look very different close are not easily distinguishable up close! I love how you ASSume that the Israeli pilots are clearly aware of how these 2 ships look like. I mean you ASSume that they have seen both ships before and know the difference. You ASSume that these were very experience pilots in telling the difference between ships they might have never seen or had experience with. You know when you ASSume too much, you take on the first 3 letter of the word! 

Funny how you so easily discount clearly no true motive or benefit whatsoever, and put extensive stock in two ships that look different close up


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 14, 2009)

Sunni Man said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > Cold Fusion38 said:
> ...



Playing the victim card is strengthen by an intentional attack on America!  I have to ask, are you truly a retard or only play one at USMB?


----------



## eots (Sep 14, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> Cold Fusion38 said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yeah the MOTIVE is Israel's alone the FACT remains that those two ships were EASILY told apart.
> ...



the pilots admitted they recognized the ships and requested to call off the attack


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 14, 2009)

eots said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > Cold Fusion38 said:
> ...



First, that is bullshit!
Second, the attack was called off AFTER they released it was friendly fire.

In fact Israel greatly fired that they accidentially attacked a Soviet ship and would be at war with the Soviets. At that point the 6 day war would be followed by the 1 day war of annihilation!


----------



## eots (Sep 14, 2009)

3) USS Liberty Israeli Denial - Israeli Pilot Speaks Up 

From: Ian Henshaw 

A few days ago came the latest Israeli attempt to deny that allegations that the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty during the Seven Days War in 1967 was a cold blooded murder designed to trigger a US attack on Egypt. 

The Israeli story has always been that they mistook a modern US surveillance ship flying then US flag for an Egyptian boat, not once but in multiple attacks. This excuse is not credible, as the recent BBC documentary showed. The film screened by BBC 2 in June 2003 had a US radio intercept officer recounting on camera that he heard the Israeli pilots twice warn their base that the ship was American. 

They had a US commander state that US planes were on their way to Cairo in retalliation with a nuclear payload, and that, as the news unexpectedly leaked out that the ship had been destroyed by Israel, Johnson and McNamara had to personally abort the operation. It was even suggested that the White House had planned the operation with Israel, sending the ship undefended a few miles off the Gaza coastline. Now this version is confirmed from the following leak from the Israeli side. Ian Henshall, publisher 911dossier.co.uk, www.dumpblair.co.uk 






Israeli Pilot Speaks Up 

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0693/9306019.htm 

Fifteen years after the attack, an Israeli pilot approached Liberty survivors and then held extensive interviews with former Congressman Paul N. (Pete) McCloskey about his role. According to this senior Israeli lead pilot, he recognized the Liberty as American immediately, so informed his headquarters, and was told to ignore the American flag and continue his attack. He refused to do so and returned to base, where he was arrested. 

Later, a dual-citizen Israeli major told survivors that he was in an Israeli war room where he heard that pilot's radio report. The attacking pilots and everyone in the Israeli war room knew that they were attacking an American ship, the major said. He recanted the statement only after he received threatening phone calls from Israel. 

The pilot's protests also were heard by radio monitors in the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon. Then-U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Dwight Porter has confirmed this. Porter told his story to syndicated columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak and offered to submit to further questioning by authorities. Unfortunately, no one in the U.S. government has any interest in hearing these first-person accounts of Israeli treachery.


----------



## GHook93 (Sep 14, 2009)

Wow Eots! 2 conspiracy website with no creditability and 1 washington post" article that open up to anything! Congrats you proved nothing other then conspiracy websites can mold the weak minded very easily!




eots said:


> 3) USS Liberty Israeli Denial - Israeli Pilot Speaks Up
> 
> From: Ian Henshaw
> 
> ...


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 15, 2009)

GHook93 said:


> Cold Fusion38 said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yeah the MOTIVE is Israel's alone the FACT remains that those two ships were EASILY told apart.
> ...







The Egyptian ship is HALF the SIZE of the Liberty......I have already pointed out to you that my father in the BLINK OF AN EYE must be able to know class and nationality of surface vessels. Now unless you want to claim that the Israeli airforce is TOTALLY INCOMPETANT then you need to accept the FACT that this was NO MISTAKE!!! Not to mention the torpedo boats that attacked from the surface.

Oh and the Israeli airforce is recognised as one of the BEST in the world.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 15, 2009)

You know what GHook......You clearly ARE an Israeli Firster. You have left ZERO doubt about that FACT!


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 15, 2009)

You remember when we killed a few Canadians? There was HELL to pay for that and yet NOTHING done about a BRUTAL UNPROVOKED attack of a navy vessel flying an AMERICAN FLAG!!


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 15, 2009)

GHook the israeli firster is neg reping me for posting the TRUTH just like a good little Israeli Firster.


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Sep 15, 2009)

The more you neg rep me the bigger I'll grow. You can't stop me you can't insult me you can only make me stronger. You are a sad pathetic little ankle biter. Go beg for a treat from you Israeli masters.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 29, 2009)

JBeukema said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


it does


----------



## theHawk (Oct 9, 2009)

I have no doubt it was a Jewish plot to get the US to join their war.

Despite getting caught red-handed, the pro-zionist lobby in the US was too much, and they got what they wanted.


----------



## Naz1Mick (Sep 18, 2010)

These Poor Men were Murdered by zionist Filth!


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> So tell me GHook WHY once again WHY!!!!! they were flying UNMARKED WAR PLANES!!!! ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION OR SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT IT!!!! Oh and I apologize for putting the lives of AMERICAN SAILORS over the Israelis......Must just be my rampant nationalism!!!



They weren't.


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

What douche bags.

1) At least five US government agencies investigated it and concluded it was an accident.

2) The transcripts of the Israeli pilots were caught by an American spy plane, and those transcripts were unclassfiied and released, confirming beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was an accident.

3) You anti semitic nazi scum make me sick. By now you know these things since I have posted it numerous times, and you still continue posting the same lies.

Below is to the actual NSA document of the transcript. Page 3 confirms that Israel thought it was an Egyptian ship

http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/uss_liberty/audio_trans_104.pdf


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

This is the conclusion of the US Naval Court Of Inquiry into it. It's the transcript.

*FINDINGS OF FACT

1.  Available evidence combines to indicate the attack on
   LIBERTY on 8 June was in fact a case of mistaken
   identity.*
2. The calm conditions and slow ship speed may well  have
  made the American Flag difficult to identify.

3.  The ship's  westerly heading at the time of attack - in
   the general direction of Egyptian ports may have
   reinforced elements of doubt in the minds of the several
   Israeli pilots who looked the ship over in the forenoon.

4.  The colors were shot down early in the action and were
   replaced prior to the PT attack.

5.  The immediate confusion milling around astern followed
by peaceful

                       [161]

overtures by the attacking surface forces after launching
only two torpedoes of the six presumed available (two on
each PT boat), indicate these craft may well have identified
the colors for the first time when they got in close enough
to see clearly through the smoke and flames billowing, at
times above the mast head.

6.  There are no available indications that the attack was
intended against a U. S. Ship.

7.  LIBERTY'S position at the time of the attack has been
previously ordered changed farther to seaward by JCS;
however, the messages relating to these changes were not
known to the ship before the attack took place. The reasons
these messages were not known to the ship can be determined
in all instances except for one.  Since LIBERTY records and
knowledgeable personnel were lost in the action, it is
impossible to determine the disposition of the message.

8.  The communication delays and mis-routing errors which
caused these several non-deliveries combined with delays in
initiating follow-up actions on operational instructions
received, all contributed to the ship itself being unaware
of plans and decisions made for her repositioning.  A
detailed accounting of the five pertinent messages are
attached as appendices one through five.

9. The absence of any identifiable threat to the ship
apparently caused the foregoing referred to operational
actions to be taken and implemented in routine manner, i.e.,
without resorting to highest precedence (Flash) traffic.

10. USS LIBERTY  was assigned technical research tasks to be
performed in the eastern Mediterranean by the Joint Chiefs
of Staff.  LIBERTY first became aware of this new tasking
when she received sailing orders from Abidjan on the Ivory
Coast on the 24th day of May 1967.  The precise tasking by
which LIBERTY was ordered to depart Abidjan is significant.
In this tasking language, LIBERTY was directed to proceed to
her new operating area in the eastern Mediterranean via Rota
for pick-up of specifics at "best speed."

                       [162]

11.  LIBERTY received her basic operational and mission
guidance from the JCS through her new operational chain in
JCS 011545Z.  LIBERTY proceeded to comply.

12. The Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY conducted the
operations of his ship in accordance with the intent of
directives received by him. The operating area of LIBERTY on
8 June was in accordance with the announce- ments of
intended movement promulgated by the Commanding Officer USS
LIBERTY.  Such operating areas were normal to the
accomplishment of LIBERTY's mission.  These announcements
were addressed to, and presumably received, by all seniors
in the chain of LIBERTY's operational command. LIBERTY
received no directive, prior to the attack, that higher
authority desired that the ship operate at least 100 miles
from the coastline of the UAR.

13.  LIBERTY responded to her newly assigned mission by
 departing Abidjan promptly within some four hours from the
 time of receipt of her sailing orders.  LIBERTY experienced
 minor engineering difficulties enroute Rota which caused
 her arrival there somewhat later than originally planned.
 On departure Rota, LIBERTY filed her movement report and
 declared therein her intention to make best speed in
 compliance with the JCS detailed tasking assignments set
 forth in JCS message dtg 011545Z June 1967.  It is
 significant to note that in this JCS tasking, two time
 frames were identified, one covering the period between 1
 June through 8 June, the second covering the period 9 June
 to 30 June.  During the first period (1 through 8 June),
 LIBERTY's movements were prescribed by the JCS to cover her
 transit along the north African littoral; and therein were
 prescribed minimum closest points of approach allowed to
 national maritime boundaries.  The terminal point in this 1
 through 8 June time frame was to be a navigational position
 at latitude 32 North, longitude 33 East. The second time
 frame addressed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, assigned
 LIBERTY an operating area bounded  on the North by latitude
 32 North, the north African/Israeli littoral on the south
 and between longitudes 33 East and 34 East.  It might well
 occur to some that LIBERTY's attack occurred on 8 June,
 which would have placed her considerably farther to the
 North of the African coast, had she conformed explicitly
 with the aforementioned JCS directive.  However, as LIBERTY
 proceeded eastward through the Mediterranean from Rota, she
 filed three separate messages

                       [163]

reports of position and intent which advised superiors of
her plans to anticipate arrival on station - that is, to
arrive somewhat earlier than prescribed by the Joint Chiefs
of Staff.  Moreover, LIBERTY advised superiors of her
specific intentions to proceed to and operate in the closer
of the two areas to the north African coast - that is south
of latitude 32 north.  Finally in this regard, LIBERTY
reported her arrival at her final destination to appropriate
addressees.

14.  It is understood from representatives of the JCS Fact
Finding Group that it was receipt of LIBERTY's 7 June
SITREP/POSIT report which stated her final destination which
prompted concern in the JRC as to her proximity to the
African coast on the night of June 7th.  This concern by
responsible authorities, who initially has tasked LIBERTY,
resulted in follow-on actions and directives to the ship
which were either never received or were transmitted on the
fleet broadcast from NAVCOMMSTA Asmara after the attack has
taken place.

15.  Pertinent to the findings of fact is the matter of
communication conditions regarding USS LIBERTY during the
period of 1 and 8 June.  The ship is known not to have
received at least five messages sent prior to the attack,
each of which was not only important but, in that respect,
critical to the events which terminated in the aggravated
attack on this ship on June the 8th.

16.  Higher authority modified  LIBERTY's original
operational guidance between June first and the attack on
the eighth, which, if she had received it, would have
resulted in her being further off shore.

17.  Combination and compounding of many delayed
communication deliveries related to LIBERTY incident denied
the ship the benefit of command decisions actually made
prior to the attack which, among other things, would have
caused the ship, as a minimum, to be heading further
off-shore from her 081200Z actual position.

18.  Pre-attack overflights of LIBERTY: (First air attack
occurred at 1403 local) Unidentified aircraft circled
LIBERTY at:

                       [164]

0850 ( 5 hours 13 minutes prior to attack) (080742Z refers)
1056 ( 3 hours  7 minutes prior to attack) 1126 ( 2 hours 37
minutes prior to attack) 081022Z refers

Hull markings were clean and freshly painted - ensign was
flying from foremast halyard.

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.

20.  Motor Torpedo Boat attack on LIBERTY. Twenty minutes
following air attack, MTB's closed ship to a position 2000
yards on starboard quarter and signaled ship by flashing
light.  At this time ship had been making turns for FLANK
speed for 9 minutes (Estima- ted SOA 15-17 knots).  Holiday
ensign was flying from the starboard yardarm for at least
five minutes before torpedo attack was launched.  LIBERTY 50
cal. guns opened fire while the MTS was signaling.  The
torpedo attack was launched shortly after the MTBs were
fired upon, and MTB's strafed the ship with machine gun fire
as, at least, one MTB passed down the starboard side.

24. Offers of assistance. Post air attack signaling by MTB's
(before torpedo attack), may have been an offer of
assistance.

Thirty minutes after attacking LIBERTY the MTBs signaled in
 English, "Do you need help?"

Two hours and 10 minutes after torpedo attack (2 hours 40
minutes after air attack) an Israeli helo apparently offered
assistance.

Israeli defense forces reported they conducted air and
surface searches for survivors at the scene of the attack
responding to a U. S. request.

22.  Groups of up to two and three jet and propeller
aircraft begin coming

                     [165]

out from shore and circling ship at altitudes ranging from
500 up to several thousand feet at about eight hundred local
on day of attack.  Planes in question were otherwise active
over El Arish on Sinai north coast which was plainly visible
from the ship some sixteen miles off shore.

Ship's navigation was sound and practical, using bearings on
minaret in El Arish and radar range to beach at that point.

23. The ship had exercises at full G. Q. and secured only a
short time prior to the unprovoked attack.  After securing
from G. Q., the Commanding Officer had admonished all hands
over the PA system that large billowing clouds of black
smoke ashore were evidence of intense military activity,
therefore, crew should be "heads up ball players" as long as
she was in that close.

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.  Well directed initial air attacks
had wiped out the ability of the four 50 cal. machine guns
to be effective.

25.  PT attack first developed from starboard side and was
identified as a high speed run in.  Center and lead PT began
flashing signal light and very shortly thereafter the
Commanding Officer identified the Star of David flag on this
lead boat.  LIBERTY's signal light had been shot away
requiring dependence upon an Aldis lamp to try and penetrate
the smoke on the bearing of the PTs.

26.  The Commanding Officer had passed word to stand by for
torpedo attack and the forward starboard 50 cal. fired a
very short burst in the direction of the boats on the
gunner's own initiative.  Having seen Israeli flag on the
PT, the Commanding Officer waved to the forward gunner to
cease firing. 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.

27.  The reaction of all three PTs immediately after launch,
when they stopped and milled around close aboard LIBERTY and
then offered help by signal light, combine to indicate this
was the first time the U. S. large colors flying were
actually positively identified.  Not having signal lights
available, the Commanding Officer then made the
international flaghoist meaning, "Not Under Command."

28.  Flat, calm conditions and the slow five knot patrol
speed of LIBERTY in forenoon when she was being looked over
initially may well have produced insufficient wind for
steaming colors enough to be seen by pilots.

29.  USS LIBERTY had installed communications equipment
whose reliability and degree of sophistication produced a
feeling of maximum confidence in operators, the
Communications Officer, and the Commanding  Officer
regarding the reliability of reception on fleet broadcast
which minimized the number of missed numbers.

30.  In amplification of the proceeding statement, the
superior communi- cation capability inherent in LIBERTY's
embarked element for technical research purposes combined
with interests of economy in personnel have dictated that
during LIBERTY's operation in her present configuration she
used the best embarked equipments and personnel available to
serve both her technical research requirements as well as
operational and administrative requirements for the ship
itself.  The resulting consolidation of functions found
LIBERTY organized internally in a way such that, in the
person of a single officer we find both LIBERTY's
Communication Officer and the Assistant Director of
Technical Research. This system had well.  After the attack,
those LIBERTY personnel left alive who had been serving in
combined capacities of this sort reported their conviction
that such practices should continue.

                     [167]

31.  The aforementioned facts relative to communication
procedural peculiarities unique to ships of LIBERTY's
mission resulted in the ship transmitting under the
scheduling control of the research department. This practice
permitted optimum performance by the research department,
scheduling outgoing transmissions during lull periods of
research activities; furthermore, when available research
lull periods were short, the practice had grown up, quite
naturally, to combine into single transmission packages all
of the outgoing traffic which had accumulated. Such
procedures necessitated transmission of each ships
communication package under a classification applicable to
the highest classification of any single element within the
package itself.  Such transmission packages would frequently
contain research material, ship position reports, and,
periodically, requests for messages missed on the regular
ship broadcast schedule.  A built-in delay factor exists in
this procedure however, inasmuch as not all shore-based
terminals are equipped to accommodate research material.  In
the case of LIBERTY during the time period under
consideration, the closest available eligible terminal for
LIBERTY research material was NAVSECGRUDET Morocco, rather
than NAVCOMMSTA Asmara, which happened to be serving LIBERTY
as a subscriber at the time of the attack.   The above
conditions are detailed to point up occurrence of delays
which must be anticipated in any such system.  In summary,
if LIBERTY had a normal outgoing message requesting missing
sked numbers, it would first have to wait, under normal
circumstances, for transmission during a lull period.  It
would next, by virtue of leaving the ship as part of a
package containing research data, go to NAVSECGRU- DET
Morocco where the combined communication package would be
broken down in its component parts; thirdly, the element of
the package requesting retransmission of missed fleet
broadcast numbers would then have to be sent from NAVCOMMSTA
Morocco back to NAVCOMMSTA Asmara for action, Asmara being
the transmitting station serving LIBERTY at the time.

                     [168]

32.  Detailed questioning of available surviving
communication witnesses disclosed that LIBERTY had never
before found missing messages, subsequently requested and
received, to have been critical to ship's operational
commitments.

This fact was explained by ship's personnel as being due to
the very few messages ever missed.  This condition was
attributed to superior equipment in the ship coupled with
the fact that the ship operated independently as a regular
practice and had not found herself wanting at any time
previous.

33.  It is important to be aware at this point that there
are no logs and or records available in LIBERTY.  There are
no communication officers left alive with first hand
knowledge of the missed message backlog on 8 June.  It could
only be determined from testimony that the ship had been
copying transmissions from NAVCOMSTA Asmara with no apparent
difficulty from 70000lZ and the time of the attack.  One
witness who was on watch on the Asmara broadcast between the
hours of 0645 and 1615 on 7 June stated that he had logged
no missed message numbers during the period of his watch and
that the reception of the JRAIT broadcast was excellent.

34.  LIBERTY's technical mission was one that made it
necessary, in exercising the aforementioned close
cooperation, to use minimum electronic transmissions and
radiations on certain frequencies - radio transmissions
particularly.  LIBERTY was continually subjected to and used
to the prejudicial effects such transmissions  would on the
degree of efficiency of her primary functions.  In summary
on this point, ships of LIBERTY's configuration, like
submarines, are members a "silent service" all their own.

35.  It is found that it has been, and continues standard
practice, in ships of this type to cultivate great patience
with regards to desires to get electrical traffic off the
ship because of the prejudicial effect on the ship's
mission.

36.  It is evident that communications procedures for ships
of this type would be improved were they to be considered in
a communication category analogous to submarines.

                     [169]

37.  On the matter of operational control of LIBERTY vis a
vis the precise directives to the ship governing the
application of her embarked capabilities, it is important to
understand LIBERTY's situation as a mobile platform, under
naval command, transporting capabilities belonging to a
service or agency other than the Navy.  This condition and
situation, while not unique to naval platforms, requires a
complete awareness and understanding of the very close
coordination and cooperation between those responsible for
operation of and positioning of the platform itself in
relation to those responsible for the embarked capabilities.
Detailed testimony discloses that LIBERTY found absolutely
no difficulties accommodating to this conditions, unique
within the navy to ships off this particular type.

38.  The on-line crypto capability has engendered a
dangerous willingness to send more classified traffic than
in days of manual decoding without required proportionate
increase in experienced supervisory personnel to ride herd
on traffic quantum increases.  Conversely, we find often
very inexperienced personnel being the first to give
attention to misrouted messages such as those in question.

39.  Key messages critical to international relations were
not in this case, paralleled on other circuits.

40.  High precedence of operational messages is too often
not enough to overcome circuit choking resulting from large
volume of such as FBIS of the same precedence competing for
inexperienced operator attention at the same time.

41.  LIBERTY's embarked "warning" capabilities apparently
gave no indication of impending danger during the period
prior to the attack.

42.  LIBERTY had experienced periodic reconnaissance on this
and other operating stations which tended to create a
feeling of "acceptance without undue concern" conditions as
they were on 8 June 1967.

Reconnaissance experiences known to LIBERTY and other ships
of LIBERTY's class in other parts of the world minimized
concern by LIBERTY personnel

                     [170]

over recon efforts on 8 June.

43.   Commanding Officer LIBERTY appropriately reported
recon early on A.M. of 8 June through her "locating two".
This report was transmitted promptly by ship despite
temporary interruption of her mission, at the direction of
the Commanding Officer.

44.   Up to the time of the attack, testimony disclosed no
reasons to abort LIBERTY's mission in accordance with
paragraph 1A of Appendix B to SM 676-66 of 19 August 1966.

45.  The degrees of coordination and accuracy of the air and
surface attacks combined first to wipe out defense and
shipboard control capabilities, followed by the crippling
blow of a torpedo.

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.

47.  The heroism displayed by the Commanding Officer,
officers and men of the LIBERTY was exceptional.  The
Commanding Officer is being recommended for the
Congressional Medal, and the ship for an appropriate unit
citation.  These planned actions are fully supported by
testimony to the Court.

48.  LIBERTY apparently experienced a phenomenon identified
as electronic jamming of her voice radio just prior to and
during air attacks.  This jamming was described as a steady
carrier without modulation.

49.  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.

50.  Extent of Damage. The major material damage to LIBERTY
resulted from the torpedo explosion, as follows:

A.  SHELL DAMAGE:  Hole centered at FR 60 and extending 24
ft downward from just below second deck and longitudinally
from frame  53

                     [171]

to frame 66 (39 feet).  The hole was teardrop in shape,
larger at bottom.

B.  Interior structural damage:  Outboard 15 feet of first
platform and associated structure badly damaged.  Lesser
damage  to second platform deck (tank top).  Second deck and
frames buckled from frame 52 to frame 62 and extending
inboard 15 feet.

C.  Major damage to all interior joiner bulkheads below
second deck frame 52 to 78, entire width of ship.

In summary of above, the two research compartments, which
extend the entire width of the ship, suffered severe
structural damage and were flooded.  Installed equipment and
fittings were reduced to twisted wreckage.

Topside damage resulting from aircraft strafing and rocked
attacks and from MTB strafing  (ship was hit by more than
821 shells and rockets, many of them incendiary) summarized
as follows:

Pilot house and signal bridge forward deck house, all gun
tubs, many antennas including radar antenna, numerous
bulkheads and decks holed by explosive rockets.  Whale boat
destroyed in davits by incendiary rockets and many life
rafts holed or burned in their stowages. Flag bags burned
and numerous fires resulting from incendiary munitions.

The gyro compass, air conditioning plant and many minor
items of equipment, located in superstructure spaces, were
damaged or destroyed. Numerous living spaces and personnel
effects damaged by holing, shrapnel and wetting during
firefighting.

Cost estimated - Value of destroyed research equipment $6-8
million, 12 months lead time.  Structural repairs to ship
and ship's equipment $2-4 million, 3-4 months.

51. The Israeli government set forth 7 points of rationale
to explain their position relative to the attack on LIBERTY
in USDAO Tel Aviv message DTG 091520Z.  Legal opinion and
other comments on each is appended hereto (Appendix VI).

                     [172]

52.  That any killed or wounded personnel attached to the
USS  LIBERTY during the attack are eligible for the Purple
Heart under the provisions of SECNAVINST. P1650.1C Chapter
TWO SECTION THREE ARTICLE 231 PARA 12 b. sub-paras (4) and
(5).  The Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY is preparing a
listing of eligible personnel to be recommended.

                     [173]

                   [signature] Isaac C. KIDD, Jr.
                   Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy
                   President

                   [signature] Bernard J. LAUFF
                   Captain, U.S. Navy Member

                  [signature] Bert N. ATKINSON,
                  Jr. Captain, U.S. Navy Member

[signature] Isaac C. KIDD, Jr. Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy
President

[signature] Ward BOSTON, Jr. Captain, U.S. Navy Counsel for
the Court


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

CMike, the facts dont matter for these racist delusional asswipes


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> CMike, the facts dont matter for these racist delusional asswipes



Thanks Dive and I agree.

It's really annoying that they have to go back decades to make shit up.

Also I have posted the facts numerous times, and they just ignore it and repeat the same lies 

I really really dislike dishonest people.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

CMike said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > CMike, the facts dont matter for these racist delusional asswipes
> ...


you tell them it was a "fog of war" situation, and these morons reply with "but it was a clear day"


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 18, 2010)

It would be easier to believe Israel if it didn't lie regularly.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> It would be easier to believe Israel if it didn't lie regularly.


clearly you need to remove that beam from your eyes before you try to remove the mote from the Israeli eye


----------



## eots (Sep 18, 2010)

Fifteen years after the attack, an Israeli pilot approached Liberty survivors and then held extensive interviews with former Congressman Paul N. (Pete) McCloskey about his role. According to this senior Israeli lead pilot, he recognized the Liberty as American immediately, so informed his headquarters, and was told to ignore the American flag and continue his attack. He refused to do so and returned to base, where he was arrested.

Later, a dual-citizen Israeli major told survivors that he was in an Israeli war room where he heard that pilot's radio report. The attacking pilots and everyone in the Israeli war room knew that they were attacking an American ship, the major said. He recanted the statement only after he received threatening phone calls from Israel.

The pilot's protests also were heard by radio monitors in the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon. Then-U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Dwight Porter has confirmed this. Porter told his story to syndicated columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak and offered to submit to further questioning by authorities. Unfortunately, no one in the U.S. government has any interest in hearing these first-person accounts of Israeli treachery. [Washington Report]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ujoc1DYjuPE]YouTube - BBC - Dead in the Water - The Attack on the USS Liberty 1of7[/ame]
The USS Liberty Cover-Up


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

What was the pilots name?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

CMike said:


> What was the pilots name?


and the "Major"


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > What was the pilots name?
> ...



+1.

Funny how all these people in these conspiracy theories are anonymous 

Once again, I posted the declassified transcript of the Israeli pilots, as obtained from a US spy plane.

That is solid proof that it was an accident.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 18, 2010)

CMike said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...


Here's a name you might remember:

Dean Rusk, U.S. Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote:

"I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. 

"Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous."


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



It doesn't matter if he was satifised with it. That is his personal opinion.

The government agencies that concluded that it was an accident were:

The US Naval Court Of Inquiry.

The CIA

The NSA

The Senate Intelligence Committee

The joint chief's report.

They ALL concluded it was an accident.

The transcripts of the Israeli pilots proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

BTW you are a douche bag.


----------



## eots (Sep 18, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



Zionist ??


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

eots said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Honest. You should try it sometime


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 18, 2010)

Do you believe bureaucrats like those posted above who were ordered to cover up the attack on Liberty or do you believe the survivors of Liberty?

"In 2002, Captain Ward Boston, JAGC, U.S. Navy, senior counsel for the Court of Inquiry, claimed that the Court of Inquiry's findings were intended to cover up what was a deliberate attack by Israel on a ship it knew to be American. 

"In 2004, in response to the publication of Jay Cristols book The Liberty Incident, which Boston claimed was an 'insidious attempt to whitewash the facts' he prepared and signed an affidavit[51]  in which he claimed that Admiral Kidd had told him that the government ordered Kidd to falsely report that the attack was a mistake, and that he and Kidd both believed the attack was deliberate. On the issue Boston wrote, in part:

    The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. 

"Each evening, after hearing testimony all day, we often spoke our private thoughts concerning what we had seen and heard. I recall Admiral Kidd repeatedly referring to the Israeli forces responsible for the attack as 'murderous bastards.'

"' It was our shared belief, based on the documentary evidence and testimony we received first hand, that the Israeli attack was planned and deliberate, and could not possibly have been an accident.'"

Currently, the classification of the attack on Liberty as deliberate is the official policy of the association to which all know Liberty survivors belong.

Which side is more likely to be lying?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 18, 2010)

It is interesting that none of these fake inquiries had the testimonies of those who were actually there.

It was a whitewash just like the 911 whitewash commission report.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> It is interesting that none of these fake inquiries had the testimonies of those who were actually there.
> 
> It was a whitewash just like the 911 whitewash commission report.


ah
figures you are a fucking troofer moron too


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

let me guess, you think the Jews did it


----------



## CMike (Sep 18, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> It is interesting that none of these fake inquiries had the testimonies of those who were actually there.
> 
> It was a whitewash just like the 911 whitewash commission report.



Wrong. The US naval court of inquiry has their sworn testimony.

Anyone can read it.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> let me guess, you think the Jews did it



We could find out if we looked at all those put options that happened the weeks before 911.

Oh, that's right, the 911 whitewash commission never looked at that.

I guess "follow the money" is no longer a legitimate investigative technique.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > let me guess, you think the Jews did it
> ...


thanks for proving you are a fucking delusional asshole


----------



## eots (Sep 18, 2010)

divecon said:


> p f tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



so who funded those 9/11 attacks according to the 9/11 commission dive ?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

eots said:


> divecon said:
> 
> 
> > p f tinmore said:
> ...


like i fucking care
i know it wasnt the JOOOOOOS


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 18, 2010)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_d-AIseBPI]YouTube - The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later - Part 1/25[/ame]


----------



## MikeK (Sep 18, 2010)

Ravi said:


> Somewhere between oops and someone fucked up.
> 
> But what does it matter, really? Mistakes happen and otherwise friendly nations sometimes kill each other's citizens by mistake.
> 
> IMO, repeatedly talking about it and blaming the Israelis is nothing but propaganda.


What gives you the idea it was a mistake?

And who else is to blame for it but the Israelis who did it?


----------



## eots (Sep 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > divecon said:
> ...



and how do you know that exactly telepathy ?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 18, 2010)

eots said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


because i'm not a fucking moronic troofer 
like YOU


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 18, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



I know, the truth has never been your thing.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

JBeukema said:


> If it 'wasn't a mistake' what reason would they have to attack the nation that pretty much makes sure they exist


Most likely because _Liberty_ was a communications surveillance vessel whose intercepts flatly contradicted Israel's claim, made at the war's beginning on 5 June, that Egypt had attacked Israel, and that Israel's massive air assault on three Arab nations was in retaliation. In fact, Israel began the war by a devastating, Pearl-Harbor style surprise attack that caught the Arabs in bed and destroyed their entire air forces.  Moishe Dyan didn't want this information revealed.  He intended to sink the Liberty and blame it on the Egyptians, but he failed after a sustained two hour attack in which he killed 34 American sailors and wounded 170 more.  

Israel was also preparing to attack Syria to seize its strategic Golan Heights. Washington warned Israel not to invade Syria, which had remained inactive while Israel fought Egypt. James Bamford, in his excellent investigation of this incident, _Body of Secrets,_ (available from Amazon) says Israel's offensive against Syria was abruptly postponed when 'Liberty' appeared off Sinai, then launched once it was knocked out of action. *Israel's claim that Syria had attacked first could have been disproved by 'Liberty.'*  (That according to statement by Lt. James Ennes, who was on the Liberty and tells the whole story in his book, _Assault on The Liberty_ (also available from Amazon).  

Most significant, 'Liberty's' intercepts would have shown that Israel seized upon sharply rising Arab-Israeli tensions in May-June 1967 to launch a long-planned war to invade and annex the West Bank, Jerusalem, Golan and Sinai.

You should understand that there never has been a formal investigation of this act of war on the U.S. by a supposed ally.   That should tell you something.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 19, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


there is a huge difference between truth and troofer
troofer dont give a rats ass about the truth and most of them get caught in LIES

like you have
so fuck off moron


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

Ravi said:


> JBeukema said:
> 
> 
> > [...]
> ...


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

GHook93 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > GHook93 said:
> ...


It's not bullshit.  The story was covered by Ha'aretz, which, as you know, is an Israeli newspaper.  Here's the link:  

www.haaretz.com/.../israeli-communications-said-to-prove-iaf-knew-liberty-was-u-s-ship-1.230486 -


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> GHook the israeli firster is neg reping me for posting the TRUTH just like a good little Israeli Firster.


Wear it proudly.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

CMike said:


> What douche bags.
> 
> 1) At least five US government agencies investigated it and concluded it was an accident.


There never has been a formal investigation of Israel's attack on the USS Liberty.  There have been several informal hearings none of which included testimony from essential witnesses.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

CMike said:


> This is the conclusion of the US Naval Court Of Inquiry into it. It's the transcript.
> 
> *FINDINGS OF FACT
> 
> ...


Note that nowhere in this transcript of the most shameful cover-up in American military history is contained the testimony of the actual survivors of the attack, all of whom insist that the attack was deliberate.  Those who might be swayed by this official-looking document need only read Lt. James Ennes' book, _Assault on Liberty,_ to understand that you're being lied to by cowardly, self-serving government officials and Naval officers.  The only real investigation of this incident was informal and was conducted by a former intelligence officer, James Bamford, and he presents the facts about this coverup quite clearly in his book, _Body of Secrets._ 

Lt. Ennes was there.  He was wounded and nearly killed by IDF personnel on torpedo boats who came so close to the ship that Ennes could read see the insignia on their sleeves, but who claimed they couldn't see an 8' x 5' American flag flying on the ship.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...


None of whom were there.   

All who were there, the survivors, insist the attack was deliberate.  Why would they engage in a conspiratorial lie?

Read the survivors' book.  Then try to answer why it is that in spite of their demands to be heard their collective voice has been methodically ignored by the Navy and the U.S. Government.  These are not crazy men or criminals.  They are U.S. sailors who were attacked by a foreign military and are being ignored.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> It is interesting that none of these fake inquiries had the testimonies of those who were actually there.
> 
> It was a whitewash just like the 911 whitewash commission report.


Right.  And the coverup of the Waco massacre.  But the public swallows it because it looks official.  They just can't believe the government would lie like that.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 19, 2010)

CMike said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > It is interesting that none of these fake inquiries had the testimonies of those who were actually there.
> ...


Nonsense!  Where is it?  

The only place where you can read the survivors' testimony is in Lt. James Ennes' book, _Assault on Liberty,_ and in part in James Bamford's book, _Body of Secrets._


----------



## hipeter924 (Sep 19, 2010)

JBeukema said:


> settle it once and for all
> 
> (poll)



At least 70% have a reason other than a Jewish conspiracy that's a good sign. 

Second thoughts: This poll goes beyond 100%....

63%+ have a reason other a Jewish conspiracy. Phew that's better.


----------



## CMike (Sep 19, 2010)

MikeK said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > What douche bags.
> ...



Hey douchebag?

The USS Liberty Attack

U.S. Reports 
U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, June 18, 1967" Available evidence combines to indicate the attack on the Liberty on 8 June was in fact a case of mistaken identity." 

CIA Report, June 13, 1967
The attack was a mistake. In 1978, in a response to an inquiry, Director of Central Intelligence Stansfield Turner wrote: "It remains our best judgment that the Israeli attack on the U.S.S. Liberty was not made in malice toward the United States and was a mistake." 


Joint Chiefs of Staff, Russ Report, June 9-20, 1967 General Russ did not make any findings about the actual attack. The report compiled all message traffic and contains no evidence that the attack was not a mistake. 

Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, Clifford Report, July 18, 1967
"The information thus far available does not reflect that the Israeli high command made a premeditated attack on a ship known to be American. " 

National Security Agency, 1981
"Liberty was mistaken for an Egyptian ship as a result of miscalculation and egregious errors." 

Israeli Report 
Ram Ron Commission of Inquiry, June 16, 1967
"[T]he attack on the ship by the Israeli Defense Forces was made neither maliciously nor in gross negligence, but as a result of a bona fide mistake."


----------



## CMike (Sep 19, 2010)

http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/liberty.pdf

Above is the actual document.

The NSA got the transcipts of the Israeli pilots.

Here it is...again.

USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

_On July 2, 2003, the National Security Agency released copies of the recordings made by the EC-121 and the resultant translations and summaries.[9] These revelations were elicited as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by Florida bankruptcy judge and retired naval aviator Jay Cristol. Two linguists who were aboard the EC-121 when the recordings were made, however, have claimed separately that at least two additional tapes were made that have been excluded from the NSA releases up to and including a June 8, 2007, release.[6]

English transcripts of the released tapes indicate that Israel still believed it had hit an Egyptian supply ship even after the attack had stopped. [10] [11] After the attack, the rescue helicopters are heard relaying several urgent requests that the rescuers ask the first survivor pulled out of the water what his nationality is, and discussing whether the survivors from the attacked ship will speak Arabic. [12]

A summary report of the NSA-translated tapes [13] indicates that at 1234Z Hatzor air control began directing two Israeli Air Force helicopters to an Egyptian warship, to rescue its crew: "This ship has now been identified as Egyptian." The helicopters arrived near the ship at about 1303Z: "I see a big vessel, near it are three small vessels..." At 1308Z, Hatzor air control indicated concern about the nationality of the ship's crew: "The first matter to clarify is to find out what their nationality is." ._

Also, the first rescue helicopters were Israeli.


----------



## CMike (Sep 19, 2010)

MikeK said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > This is the conclusion of the US Naval Court Of Inquiry into it. It's the transcript.
> ...




1) Douchebag the people on the ship had no way of knowing why they were attacked. They weren't privy to what the Israeli pilots were saying to each other and to the Israeli command center.

2) The USS Naval Court Of Inquiry does have the sworn testimony. I just posted the conclusion, because it was too long to post the whole thing.

Here is the link.

USS LIBERTY COURT OF INQUIRY

3) Douchebag in war sometimes there is something called friendly fire.

These are incidents that occurred in Iraq.

Friendly fire incidents and accidents - War on Iraq - smh.com.au

FRIENDLY FIRE INCIDENTS: 

_March 22: A British Royal Air Force (RAF) Tornado jet is accidentally shot down by a US Patriot missile. The Tornado's two crew are killed. 

March 24: Two British soldiers are killed when their tank is mistakenly targeted by another British tank in southern Iraq. 

March 27: 37 US Marines are injured when US troops mistakenly fire at each other near the southern city of Nasiriyah. 

March 28: A British soldier is killed and four others are injured in the region of Basra when a US A-10 ground attack aircraft fires on them. 

April 2: An F-18 US fighter jet is downed, probably by a US Patriot missile. The pilot is reported missing. 

April 3: A US serviceman mistaken for an Iraqi soldier is shot dead by his own troops in central Iraq. 

April 6: 18 Kurdish fighters are killed and 45 wounded near Arbil in northern Iraq when US aircraft mistakenly bomb a joint US-Kurdish convoy. 

According to the website of the American War Library, just over half of the coalition troops killed or injured during the 1991 Gulf War were victims of friendly fire incidents. 

Of those, about 165 US casualties were due to "friendly fire" out of a total of 367 Americans who lost their lives, it said. 

OTHER INCIDENTS: 

March 22: A US soldier at a camp in Kuwait lobs grenades into the tents of fellow soldiers, killing two and wounding 11 others. 

March 30: 15 American soldiers are injured at a military camp in northern Kuwait when a disgruntled Egyptian employee rams a truck into the group. The truck driver sustained two gunshot wounds_

The above incidents occurred when American forces accidently attacked American forces or British forces. The technology during the Iraq war between coalition forces was a lot greater than at the time of the 1967 war.

In addition to the above incidents in Iraq, the air force accidently dropped cluster bombs on the marines.

In war these things happen.

5) Anti-semitic scumbags like yourself make me sick.

I posted these facts numerous times. Any person with a tinsy bitty brain can easily tell it was an accident.


----------



## Freeman (Sep 19, 2010)

who are the goons who vote N°1, 
friendly fire who lasted 1 hour!!!!


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 19, 2010)

"Every official interview of numerous Liberty Crewmen gave consistent evidence that indeed the Liberty was flying an American flag - and, further, the weather conditions were ideal to ensure its easy observance and identification."

Some of these same crewmen received some of the highest honors the military can bestow, including the Congressional Medal of Honor:

"McGonagle received the Medal of Honor, the highest U.S. medal, for his actions.[40][41] The Medal of Honor is generally presented by the President of the United States in the White House,[41][42] but this time it was awarded at the Washington Navy Yard by the Secretary of the Navy in an unpublicized ceremony, breaking with established tradition.[41]

"Other Liberty sailors received decorations for their actions during and after the attack, but most of the award citations omitted mention of Israel as the perpetrator. 

"In 2009, however, a Silver Star awarded to crew member Terry Halbardier, who braved machine-gun and cannon fire to repair a damaged antenna that restored the ship's communications, in the award citation named Israel as the attacker."

Perhaps some of the vets here can tell the rest of us if the Silver Star and CMO are awarded for friendly fire incidents?

Liberty Incident


----------



## CMike (Sep 19, 2010)

Once again, the sailors on the ship had no way of knowing why they were attacked.

The marines who had the air force drop cluster bombs on them by accident didn't know why they were attatked, just that they were attacked.

The British fighter didn't know why he was shot down by a US missile.

None of the people in friendly fire incidents know why they were attacked, just that they were attacked.

Here it is again, from the US Navy Court Of Inquiry.

USS LIBERTY COURT OF INQUIRY

 FINDINGS OF FACT

1.  Available evidence combines to indicate the attack on
   LIBERTY on 8 June was in fact a case of mistaken
   identity.

2. The calm conditions and slow ship speed may well  have
  made the American Flag difficult to identify.

3.  The ship's  westerly heading at the time of attack - in
   the general direction of Egyptian ports may have
   reinforced elements of doubt in the minds of the several
   Israeli pilots who looked the ship over in the forenoon.

4.  The colors were shot down early in the action and were
   replaced prior to the PT attack.

5.  The immediate confusion milling around astern followed
by peaceful

                       [161]

overtures by the attacking surface forces after launching
only two torpedoes of the six presumed available (two on
each PT boat), indicate these craft may well have identified
the colors for the first time when they got in close enough
to see clearly through the smoke and flames billowing, at
times above the mast head.

6.  There are no available indications that the attack was
intended against a U. S. Ship.

7.  LIBERTY'S position at the time of the attack has been
previously ordered changed farther to seaward by JCS;
however, the messages relating to these changes were not
known to the ship before the attack took place. The reasons
these messages were not known to the ship can be determined
in all instances except for one.  Since LIBERTY records and
knowledgeable personnel were lost in the action, it is
impossible to determine the disposition of the message.

8.  The communication delays and mis-routing errors which
caused these several non-deliveries combined with delays in
initiating follow-up actions on operational instructions
received, all contributed to the ship itself being unaware
of plans and decisions made for her repositioning.  A
detailed accounting of the five pertinent messages are
attached as appendices one through five.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 19, 2010)

This is just another incident where the official narrative does not match the facts on the ground.


----------



## eots (Sep 19, 2010)

yes we all read the cover-up


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 19, 2010)

CMike said:


> Once again, the sailors on the ship had no way of knowing why they were attacked.
> 
> The marines who had the air force drop cluster bombs on them by accident didn't know why they were attatked, just that they were attacked.
> 
> ...


"During the morning of the attack, early June 8, the ship was overflown by Israeli Air Force (IAF) aircraft including a Nord Noratlas "flying boxcar" and Mirage III jet fighters eight times.[20][21] At least some of those flybys were from a close range...

"Many Liberty crewmen gave testimony that one of the aircraft flew so close to Liberty that its propellers rattled the deck plating of the ship, and the pilots waved to the crew of Liberty, and the crewmen waved back."

If it's true your heroic Jews machine-gunned life rafts filled with wounded Americans, would you still defend them?


----------



## CMike (Sep 19, 2010)

That's where in the us navy court of inquiry testimony?


----------



## eots (Sep 19, 2010)

I put other because the u.s government was complicit in the cover -up


----------



## The Rabbi (Sep 19, 2010)

Can we take everyone who voted that it was a Jewish conspiracy and throw them in mental institutitions?  Can we administer drug treatments to restore their lost sanity?


----------



## hipeter924 (Sep 20, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> Can we take everyone who voted that it was a Jewish conspiracy and throw them in mental institutitions?  Can we administer drug treatments to restore their lost sanity?


We should, but the vast majority of western governments are too stupid and incompetent to do such a thing.


----------



## eots (Sep 20, 2010)

hipeter924 said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Can we take everyone who voted that it was a Jewish conspiracy and throw them in mental institutitions?  Can we administer drug treatments to restore their lost sanity?
> ...



awe the final solution....


----------



## Kalam (Sep 20, 2010)

eots said:


> hipeter924 said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



It's different when Jews do it. Trust me.


----------



## The Rabbi (Sep 20, 2010)

eots said:


> hipeter924 said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



The final solution to stupidity, you mean.  Anyone who believes such a thing needs to be medicated.


----------



## eots (Sep 20, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > hipeter924 said:
> ...



No way man..anyone who _doesn't_ believe it needs to be medicated.._so there_...told you...guess that settles that...


----------



## hipeter924 (Sep 20, 2010)

eots said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


People like you wouldn't be let near needles.


----------



## eots (Sep 20, 2010)

hipeter924 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > The Rabbi said:
> ...



No way people like you wouldn't be let near needles...ha !..fixed yer wagon , never saw that one coming.. did ya... who's crying now ?


----------



## hipeter924 (Sep 20, 2010)

eots said:


> hipeter924 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


I already have a needle right here. 

No wait... it's got your address on it.


----------



## eots (Sep 20, 2010)

stop talking about needles ..its ..._weird_


----------



## hipeter924 (Sep 20, 2010)

eots said:


> stop talking about needles ..its ..._weird_


Kinda like how every time Jews are accused of something its always a leftist group doing the bitching, rather than the military itself.


----------



## eots (Sep 20, 2010)

hipeter924 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > stop talking about needles ..its ..._weird_
> ...



No nothing like that at all.. actually..seeing as I consider the military to be the crew of the liberty not the political bureaucracy that covered the crimes.,the survivors of the uss liberty have been" bitching" for justice for 40 years


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 20, 2010)

The Israeli air assault on Liberty focused first on destroying the vessel's communication infrastructure. When Terry Halbardier won his Silver Star by restoring a damaged antenna, Liberty dialed 911 and the Sixth Fleet responded.

"U.S. rescue attempts: At least two rescue attempts were launched from U.S. aircraft carriers  nearby but were recalled, according to the Liberty's senior Naval Security Group officer, Lieutenant Commander David Lewis. 

"Lewis made an audio recording and later wrote about a meeting 6th Fleet Rear Admiral Lawrence Geis requested in his cabins: 'He told me that since I was the senior Liberty survivor on board he wanted to tell me in confidence what had actually transpired. 

"'He told me that upon receipt of our SOS, aircraft were launched to come to our assistance and then Washington was notified. 

"'He said that the Secretary of Defense (Robert McNamara) had ordered that the aircraft be returned to the carrier, which was done. RADM Geis then said that he speculated that Washington may have suspected that the aircraft carried nuclear weapons so he put together another flight of conventional aircraft that had no capability of carrying nuclear weapons. These he launched to assist us and again notified Washington of his actions. 

"'Again McNamara ordered the aircraft recalled. He requested confirmation of the order being unable to believe that Washington would let us sink.

*'"This time President Johnson ordered the recall with the comment that he did not care if every man drowned and the ship sank, but that he would not embarrass his allies*. 

"'This is, to the best of my ability, what I recall transpiring 30 years ago.'"

USS Liberty Incident


----------



## MikeK (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "Every official interview of numerous Liberty Crewmen gave consistent evidence that indeed the Liberty was flying an American flag - and, further, the weather conditions were ideal to ensure its easy observance and identification."
> 
> Some of these same crewmen received some of the highest honors the military can bestow, including the Congressional Medal of Honor:
> 
> ...


It must be mentioned that every decoration awarded to the Liberty's survivors was issued quietly in an obscure location and without formal announcement.  There was none of the usual ceremony nor was the Stars and Stripes news service notified as is customary.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> 1) Douchebag the people on the ship had no way of knowing why they were attacked. They weren't privy to what the Israeli pilots were saying to each other and to the Israeli command center.
> 
> 2) The USS Naval Court Of Inquiry does have the sworn testimony. I just posted the conclusion, because it was too long to post the whole thing.


Whose testimony?  The Israelis?  Or that of the intimidated members of the Johnson Administration and subservient military officers?  The testimony of the crew is contained in Lt. Ennes' book.  It clearly insists that the attack was no accident and it demands a formal investigation -- which was not forthcoming.  Does that concern you at all?  



> Here is the link.
> 
> USS LIBERTY COURT OF INQUIRY
> 
> ...



You posted questionable testimony.  An orchestrated _Court of Inquiry_ is not a formal investigation in which witnesses are summoned and cross-examined.  That is how facts are determined.  

Have the survivors of or witnesses to any of the foregoing incidents argued that they were anything other than accidents?  Do you believe there is any more qualified to describe what happened than those who were there?  _Friendly fire_ incidents typically occur consequent to and within the framework of a momentary error, such as a missile launch.  The Liberty was under attack for two solid hours and it involved aircraft and PT boats that frequently came close enough to be clearly identified by the Liberty's crew.

Have you or any other defenders of Israel's attack on an American Naval vessel offered a theory as to why the Liberty's survivors have unanimously insisted that what they suffered was a deliberate attack by Israel's Defense Forces?  Why would they do that?  Do you believe not one of them was sufficiently competent to know the difference between a deliberate attack and a mistake?  Or are you suggesting that they have entered into a rehearsed conspiratory deception for some insidious purpose?

Have you read Lt. Ennes' book, _Assault On Liberty?_  Have you read James Bamford's book, _Body of Secrets?_  If not you are posing a biased argument, which is supported mainly by your personal prejudice.  But I expect nothing more from you or any of your kind, whose first loyalty is to Israel rather than to the military of your own country.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

Somewhere I've read the attack on Liberty is the only incident of its kind NEVER to have been investigated by the FULL US Congress.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee during hearing of the 1967 Foreign Aid Authorization bill in July of 1967 and a House Armed Services Committee Investigation considered "evidence" submitted by the DoD, but never heard testimony from crew members.

Even so, some Senators were not happy with the responses the received from McNamara:

"The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony contains, as an aside matter during hearings concerning a foreign aid authorization bill, questions and statements from several senators and responses from then Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, about the Liberty attack. 

"For the most part, the senators were dismayed about the attack, as expressed by Senator Bourke B. Hickenlooper: 'From what I have read I can't tolerate for 1 minute that this [attack] was an accident.' Also, there was concern about obtaining more information about the attack, as expressed by Committee Chairman J. William Fulbright: 'We asked for [the attack investigation report] about 2 weeks ago and have not received it yet from Secretary Rusk. ... By the time we get to it we will be on some other subject.'

"Secretary McNamara promised fast delivery of the investigation report ("... you will have it in 4 hours."), and concluded his remarks by saying: 'I simply want to emphasize that the investigative report does not show any evidence of a conscious intent to attack a U.S. vessel.'

"Since the hearings concerned a foreign aid bill, the committee's report omitted any mention of the Liberty incident."

Those of us who were alive in 1967 remember well how attitudes toward Israel changed in this country as a result of the Six Day War.

Had Liberty received a full public investigation AND had Israel's claims of being attacked first been subjected to critical examination, the Middle East might be a much different problem for us today.

USS Liberty Incident


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

What a douche bG.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

MikeK said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > 1) Douchebag the people on the ship had no way of knowing why they were attacked. They weren't privy to what the Israeli pilots were saying to each other and to the Israeli command center.
> ...



Hey douche bag, the US Naval Court Of Inquiry was a formal investigation where witnesses were sworn in and questioned under oath. I posted the link to it numerous times.

The crew members were questioned under oath.

I don't care about what people say in their books.

What we have to confirm it was an accident:

1) The transcript of the Israeli pilots as obtained by a US spy plane. That alone is irrefutable.

2) The US Navy Court Of Inquiry, that has the testimony of the crew members under oath. I posted the link and anyone can read the entire investigation which was public and under oath.

3) The joint chiefs

4) CIA

5) Senate Foreign Intelligence Committee

What we have to show it was intentional? Bullshit from conspiracy theorists 

Yanno...by calling all these formal government agencies corrupt, you are in fact calling America corrupt, including the admiral and three captains that signed the conclusion for the US Naval Court Of Inquiry report.

It's not surpising from people who hate america.

What I find really hypocritical, is that this coming from the same crowd, who hate the american military, yet all of sudden they seem to care about american sailors. 

Douche bags.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

MikeK said:


> You posted questionable testimony.  An orchestrated _Court of Inquiry_ is not a formal investigation in which witnesses are summoned and cross-examined.  That is how facts are determined.
> Have the survivors of or witnesses to any of the foregoing incidents argued that they were anything other than accidents?  Do you believe there is any more qualified to describe what happened than those who were there?  _Friendly fire_ incidents typically occur consequent to and within the framework of a momentary error, such as a missile launch.  The Liberty was under attack for two solid hours and it involved aircraft and PT boats that frequently came close enough to be clearly identified by the Liberty's crew.



Thanks for putting your foot in your mouth. You said the facts are determined by a formal investigation in which witnesses are summoned and cross examined. "That's how facts are determined," you said.


The testimony says that the flag was hard to see because of calm waters, and it was shot away early in the fight.

It also says that there were a lot of communication erroris and the ships wasn't were it was supposed to be.

Also the first rescuers of the ship were the Israelis.

From US Naval Court of Inquiry

It's not the whole think since it's pretty long.

USS LIBERTY COURT OF INQUIRY

I now request Captain Raish to read these messages.

Captain Raish:  Exhibit 1 is a Joint Chiefs of Staff Secret
message 011545Z JUN 67 from JCS to USCINCEUR, info CNO,
CINCLANTFLT, CINCUSNAVEUR, COMSIXTHFLT, CTF 64, USS LIBERTY,
DIRNSA, NSAEUR, DIRNAVSECGRU, ADIRNAVSECGRU,
DIRNAVSECGRULANT, DIRNAVSECGRUEUR, subject USS LIBERTY SKED,
reference DIRNSA G/104/311906Z (NOTAL-BOM).  1. When RFS
request sail LIBERTY in accordance with the following
schedule:  A. 2 June depart Rota. B. 2-8 June ENROUTE VIA
GIBRALTAR STRAIT CPA AS PERMITS. THEN VIA NORTHERN  AFRICA
COASTAL ROUTE TO POSIT 32-00N 33-00E. CAP MOROCCO  MALTA 8
NM CLAIMED DIST 3 NM. CPA SPAIN TUNISIA SARDINIA SICILY
CRETE 7 NM CLAIMS EFBDIT(?) 6 NM. CPA ALGERIA LIBYA UAR 13
NM CLAIMED DIST 12 NM. C.  9-30 JUNE CONDUCT OPS SOUTH OF
32-00N AND BETWEEN 33-00E AND 34-00E.

                         [3]

WHILE CONDUCTING OPS CPA UAR 12.5 NM CPA ISREAL 6.5 NM.  2.
REQUEST JCS (JRC) CNO CINCLANT (JRC) CINCLANTFLT BE INCLUDED
AS INFO ADDEES ON ALL MOVREPS, DAILY SITREP AND INCIDENT
REPORTS.  3. ENROUTE TECH TASKING LAW RE?.  4. PROCEDURES
FOR DEVELOPING JULY SKED FOLLOW.  Exhibit 2 is a Joint
Chief's of Staff message, Confidential 072230Z JUN 67, from
JCS to USCINCEUR, info CNO, CINCLANT, CINCLANTFLT,
CINCUSNAVEUR, COMSIXTHFLT, CTF 67, USS LIBERTY, HQNASAEUR,
NASAEUR OFF GERMANY, DIRNSA, DIRNAVSECGRU, ADIRNAVSECGRU,
DIRNAVSECGRULANT, DIRNAVSECGRUEUR, subject USS LIBERTY,
reference JCS 6724/011545Z JUN 67.  1. IN VIEW PRESENT
SITUATION EAST MED, OPERATING AREA SPECIFIED REF FOR
GUIDANCE ONLY AND  MAY BE VARIED AS LOCAL CONDITIONS
DICTATE.  2. CHANGE CPA UAR TO 20 NM, ISRAEL 15 NM. Exhibit
3 is a Joint Chiefs of Staff Top Secret message 080110Z JUN
67, from JCS to USCINCEUR, info CNO, CINCLANT, CINCLANTFLT,
CINCUSNAVEUR, COMSIXTHFLT, CTF 64, USS LIBERTY, HQNSAVEUR,
NSAEUR OFF GERMANY, DIRNSA, DIRNAVSECGRU, ADIRNAVSECGRU,
DIRNAVSECGRULANT, DIRNAVSECGRUEUR, subject USS LIBERTY,
references A. JCS 7337/072230Z JUN 67,  B. COMSIXTHFLT
071503Z JUN 67 (NOTAL), 1. CANCEL REF A. 2. REQ LIBERTY
COMPLY NEW OP AREAS DEFINED LAST SENTENCE PARA 2 REP B,
UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE, I.E., NOT CLOSER THAN 100 NM TO
ISRAEL, SYRIA, EGYPT AND 25 NM to CYPRUS.  Exhibit 4 is a
COMSIXTHFLT Secret message 080917Z JUN 67, from COMSIXTHFLT
to USS LIBERTY, subject USS LIBERTY OPERATIONS, references
A. JCS 011545Z JUN 67, B. JCS 080110Z JUN 67, C. COMSIXTHFLT
062349Z JUN 67. 1.  PARA 1 REF C is MODIFIED BY REF B.
PROCEED IMMED TO OPERATE WITHIN A 25 MILE RADIUS OF POSIT
33-40N/32-30E UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.  DO NOT APPROACH COAST
OF UAR, ISRAEL, SYRIA OR LEBANON CLOSER THAN ONE HUNDRED
MILES AND CYPRUS CLOSER THAN TWENTY FIVE MILES.  2. NO TASK,
ORGANIZATION ASSIGNED TO LIBERTY, 3. ACKNOWLEDGE.  Exhibit 5
is a COMSIXTHFLT Secret message 101205Z JUN 67, from
COMSIXTHFLT to CINCUSNAVEUR, references A, CINCUSNAVEUR
101036Z JUN 67, B. JCS 080110Z JUN 67. 1.  REF A TAKEN FOR
ACTION, 2. ACCORDING TO CO, USS LIBERTY, REF B AND ALL
ASSOCIATED MESSAGES TO PASS CONTENT OF REF F WERE NOT
RECEIVED ON BOARD LIBERTY PRIOR TO ATTACK.

                         [4]

Q.  From the information in the exhibits, was USS LIBERTY at
the time of the attack, at the position that she was ordered
to proceed to?

A.  Yes, however, she did not receive two key messages which
in effect canceled the orders under which she was operating.

Q.  Which are the two key messages you are referring to.

A.  JCS 080110Z and COMSIXTHFLT 080917Z.

Q.  Will you please explain to the Court, in a narrative
manner, the substance of these messages and the
applicability of the messages to USS LIBERTY ?

A.  LIBERTY  was operating pursuant to a JCS message,
011545Z, June 67, which directed her to proceed to position
32o North, 33 East.  These orders were later modified by JCS
072230Z, which specified that the operating area specified
in JCS 011545Z was for guidance only and may be varied as
local conditions dictate.  This message also indicated
"change the CPA to UAR to 20 NM and Israel 15 NM.  The next
message, JCS 080110Z, a Top Secret message directed
USCINCEUR to change the operating area of LIBERTY such that
she remained at least 100 miles off the coast of Syria,
Israel, and UAR, and at least 25 miles off the coast of
Cyprus. This message was also info to several addees
including CINCUSNAVEUR, COMSIXTHFLT, and USS LIBERTY.
Action on this message was directed to CONSIXTHFLT.

Q.  Is there any information available that LIBERTY received
the JCS message 080110Z?

A. The LIBERTY did not receive that message.

Q.  On what basis do you form that opinion?

A.  I form that opinion on the information received from
COMSIXTHFLT, who had queried the Captain of the LIBERTY,
COMMSIXTHFLT 101205Z.

Q.  In other words, it is clear and certain that USS LIBERTY
did not receive the message directing it to stay outside of
100 miles of the coast?

A.  Yes.  Additionally, COMSIXFLT, by his 080917Z repeated
the substance

                         [5]

of the JCS 080110Z when he directed the LIBERTY to comply
with the later message.

Q.  What response to indicated from the LIBERTY?

A.  The LIBERTY did not receive that message either.

Q.  As a communications specialist, will you please advise
the Court of your opinion predicated on the exhibits in
evidence, why these two messages were not received by
LIBERTY?

A.  Yes.  The analysis reveals that the JCS message,
080110Z, was erroneously routed by the communications center
serving the JCS to NAVCOMSTAPHIL for delivery to USS
LIBERTY.  At 080449 NAVCOMSTAPHIL took the correct action
and re-routed JCS 080110Z to NAVCOMSTA MOROCCO for delivery
to LIBERTY.  Up to the current time this message has not
arrived at NAVCOMSTA MOROCCO, and we are still attempting to
trace the reason for non-delivery to NAVCOMSTA MOROCCO.
COMSIXTHFLT's  080917Z which directed LIBERTY to comply with
JCS 080110Z and essentially repeated its text as well, was
sent from the LITTLE ROCK at 081058.  The elapsed time in
getting this message off the ship was about one hour and 45
minutes.  NAVCOMSTA MOROCCO routed COMSIXTHFLT's message to
Asmara via San Pablo Spain Defense Communication System -
USAF major relay.  At 081200, COMSIXTHFLT's message was
received by the U. S. Army Communications Center at Asmara
for further relay to NAVCOMMSTA ASMARA for placing on the
broadcast to USS LIBERTY.  At 081215Z the U. S. Army
Communications Canter Asmara relayed the COMSIXTHTFLT
message erroneously to NAVCOMMSTA GREECE for relay to
LIBERTY.  At 081506, and there is some question about the
preciseness of this time, NAVCOMMSTA GREECE returned the
COMSIXTHFLT message back to the U. S. Army Communications
Center Asmara.   At 081510 U. S. Army Communications Center
Asmara then relayed the COMSIXTHFLT message correctly to
NAVCOMMSTA Asmara and it was placed on the broadcast at
081525.  Clearly, LIBERTY had not received this message as
she was hit at least three hours before.

Q.  In recapitulation, the official records from
CINCUSNAVEUR, which you have read into these proceedings,
indicate that at the time USS LIBERTY

                         [6] was under attack, she had not
received either of these two messages, COMSIXTHFLT 080817Z
and JCS 080110Z?

A.  Yes, that is correct. Do any members of the Court have
questions of the witness?

Captain LAUFF: Q.  Can you give an opinion, based on your
experience, as to why these failures to deliver occur in our
system?

A.  Yes, in my opinion these errors in routing turned out to
be human errors on the part of the persons doing the routing
in the Communications Center serving the JCS and in the Army
Communications Center at Asmara. I would like to further
point out that at the time these mis-routes occurred we were
several days in a critical situation in the Mid East with a
tremendous volume of high precedence traffic being handled
and that the undoubtedly young kids who were doing this work
were up against traffic volume and probably lack of
experience.  Communication systems like weapons systems
these days are sophisticated but still perform an well as
the people who operate them.

Q.  Under the conditions such as you have just described,
what do you estimate a normal delay time of the precedence
of  the JCS message 080110Z or the COMSIXTHFLT message
080917Z - what would be the delay time to the ship on
average?

A.  It would be unrealistic to give you an average because
there are so many contingencies.  The DCA has established
standards which we use for guidance, however, meeting these
standards is difficult to achieve particularly under the
circumstances that we have been involved over the past week.

Q.   Had the errors connected with the routing of the
messages in question not occurred, would the messages have
been received by LIBERTY in a timely fashion?

A.  The answer to that to yes.

                         [7]

Rear Admiral KIDD: Do you gentlemen have any more questions?

No Sir.

Captain, I have two or three questions I would like to ask.

Q.  Are all of the terminals in the system related to
delivery of the messages in question, to the best of your
knowledge. now on-line crypto- equipped?

A.  Affirmative.

Q.   Has the introduction of the on-line system, in your
experience, introduced a situation where we are perhaps
becoming increasingly confident and dependent upon
automation in general terms, beyond that which existed
before the on-line systems were made a part of the
communications network?

A.  Yes sir.  We are both confident and dependent, and in my
opinion this is all to the good due to the increased
capability of the system and increased speed of handling
messages.

Q.  Has the incidence rate of identifiable problems typified
by these two messages increased, decreased, or remained
about the same since the introduction of on-line crypto?

A.  I have no way of comparing that sir, this in like saying
were there more automobile accidents in the 1947 model
automobiles compared to the 1967 automobiles.

Q.  I think captain, you have really answered the question
indirectly in the affirmative, that there to an increased
incidence rate because with the increased capability, has
not the volume increased also?

A.  It wasn't my intention to give you that impression, sir.
Yes, there has been a quantum increase in volume, ergo, the
chances for errors would be greater, I grant you that.  But
on a percentage basis, I doubt it. On the old system, you
were dependent on human beings all along the line. Under the
new system, of course, you are still dependent on human
beings, but in fewer places.

Q.  Are the human beings on whom we are depending now of the
same or different qualification and experience levels?

                        [8]

A.  Depending on the point you make the comparison, but
prior to on-line systems we use to have officer coding
boards usually made up of junior officers.  Now coding
boards are generally a thing of the past and enlisted men
operating on-line equipment do this work.  I would say,
quality of personnel in some respects is down, particularly
in the communications field, because reenlistment for hard
driving communicators is not the best.  In my opinion, the
Navy is accomplishing with youngsters, that is with strikers
and third class petty officers, that which commercial
communication companies wouldn't attempt to do unless they
had personnel with considerably more experience.  Efficiency
of personnel is a relative thing as I see it, associated
with experience.  We are operating a sophisticated
communications system with a substantial percentage of first
term personnel.  On the officer side, we are doing the job
with essentially a hard corps of LDO's and the rest are
young reserve officers, the great majority of whom are short
timers.

Q.   When a message of the precedence of the two in question
is received in a communications terminal, what if any alarms
or other signals are used to alert the individuals at the
receiving point that a particularly important message has
arrived?

A.  The communicators are governed by precedences.  They do
not have the time nor are they expected to analyze texts of
messages in addition to determining importance.  Flash
messages are associated by either alarm bells or a warning
light of some kind.  As I recall, neither of these were
flashed.  Operational immediate messages and the practice in
communications centers to shout out "op immediate coming
through" or something similar so that personnel concerned
have their attention drawn to the fact that an op immediate
is being processed.

Q.  Now, when you have hundreds of op immediate messages
arriving in the same center, then I would imagine that this
system collapses of its own weight?

A.  I wouldn't say it collapses, but human beings might tend
to lose respect for the precedence because of its obviously
excessive use.

                         [9]

However, wherever I have been, they say "op immediate coming
through". Sometimes several times a minute - they still say
it - they try.

Q.  The point I am seeking, Captain, relates to the order in
which these messages could expect attention by the
individual who would first address himself to it after it
left the mechanical and electrical machines in order to
first identify, in this case, an error in routing indicator.

A.  The basic rule of communicators is "first in, first out
by precedence". Thus, if there were twenty op immediates in
process and the 21st came in, it would wait its turn and
then move along.

Q.  Does my recollection serve me correctly, Captain, that
during the period of time under consideration, the days
preceding,  and immediately following, the LIBERTY's attack,
the circuits were relatively well choked; or perhaps that is
an over-statement with FBIS intercepts and similar traffic
transmitted at a very high precedence?

A.  We were very busy with traffic of that nature,
particularly with FBIS intercepts.  All of which were at
least op immediate.   However, these conditions had little,
if anything to do in directly causing the mis-routes.

Q.  My point, Captain, is that a mis-routed message arriving
- it seems to me would have to wait its turn to find the
mis-route and identify it, is that correct?

A.  You are correct, sir, it would wait its turn under the
first in first out by precedence rule.

Q.  My next question, Captain, relates to possible
safeguards in the communications system wherein a message
originated with a particular precedence and which
experienced inordinate delay, what safeguards, if any are
available for intermediate stations to raise the precedence
where delays have been experienced up to the time of receipt
where the delay is identified?

A.  Here is where experience counts.  An experienced
communicator will notice this and do something about it.
This is something you can't legislate, sir.  A mechanical
safeguard is not feasible, but an experienced person can do
something about it.

                         [10]

Q.  Have you, in your career, had occasion to personally
observe instances where precedences have been raised under
such circumstances?

A.  The assignment of a precedence to the responsibility of
the originator, thus the communicators would not raise the
precedence per se, however, depending on their experience,
they could handle it in a manner as though it had a higher
precedence; and this I have seen done often.  For example,
sir, in many cases there are either direct circuits or the
NAVCOMOPNET available and messages can be sent over such
circuits and taken out of competition with all other general
traffic.

Q.  Did Asmara, or does Asmara have such a NAVCOMOPNET?

A.  Affirmative.

Q.  I would gather then that the two critical messages in
question did not enjoy this type of service, is that
correct?

A.  Certainly, the one message from COMSIXTHFLT was not
routed over that circuit, it went over DCS circuits.

Q.  Would the situation that we have just  been discussing,
Captain, come under the heading which you mentioned earlier,
of lack of experience being a key to identifying a message
that had been delayed, in this particular incident?

A.  Possibly, sir, in the case of the COMSIXTHFLT message.
This message was mis-routed by the Army's comm center in
Asmara and sent to NAVCOMMSTA GREECE.  The soldier who did
the mis-route may have been inexperienced, or what have you,
but then NAVCOMMSTA GREECE apparently was a little slow in
getting this message back to Asmara and here experience
might have been a factor.  On the other hand, we know
NAVCOMSTA GREECE had been handling a lot of FBIS type
messages and the delay could have been under the first in
first out rule.  Also, the NAVCOMSTA GREECE personnel could
have returned this message direct to NAVCOMSTA ASMARA had
the experience factor been present.  Mind you, this business
is surmised because I do not know the rate and enlistment
time of the traffic handlers involved.

Let the record show at this point that Captain Raish has
been asked to develop a set of questions for submission to
communication officers,


                    [11]


Relay stations, and centers involved to ascertain the reason
for the delays experienced by the two messages under
discussion.

The witness was duly warned and withdrew.

The Court adjourned at 0250 hours, 11 June 1967, to be
reconvened at the call of the President.

The President, Counsel to the Court and Reporter proceeded
to Souda Bay, Crete and boarded USS LIBERTY at sea enroute
to Malta.  The Court met aboard LIBERTY at 0630 hours, 12
June 1967, but adjourned until arrival of LIBERTY at Malta
to meet with full court.


                     -SECOND DAY- 



At Malta, the hour 0755, the date 13 June 1967.  This court
of inquiry is now in session again.  All persons connected
with the Court who were present when the Court adjourned in
London, England on 11 June 1967 are again present in Court
except that the Assistant Counsel for the Court who is now
present will be sworn.

The Assistant Counsel for the court, Lieutenant Commander
Allen Feingersch, U. S.  Navy, was sworn.

Ensign David G.  Lucas, U.  S.  Naval Reserve, took the
stand as a witness, was duly sworn, advised of his rights
under article 31, Uniform Code of Military Justice and
examined as follows:

                   DIRECT EXAMINATION

Questions by counsel for the Court:  

Q.  Please state your name, rank, organization, and present
duties station.   

A.  Ensign David G. Lucas, First Lieutenant and Gunnery
Officer, USS LIBERTY (AGTR-5).

Let the record show that this witness is being called out of
order in order that he may be medically evacuated  to a
hospital ashore for [deleted] and that he is experiencing
considerable physical discomfort at this time.

   Q.     Mr. Lucas, as you are well aware, this Court of
Inquiry has been convened to inquire into the circumstances
attendant with the armed

                          [12]

attack on the U. S. Naval vessel, USS Liberty, which
occurred on 8 June 1967.  Will you please describe to the
court the circumstances of that incident that you recall?

A..  Yes Sir.  We had a general quarters drill which secured
shortly prior to 1400.  After securing from the drill I came
to the wardroom and was in the presence of Lieutenant Golden
and Ensign Scott.  Ensign Scott left the wardroom and we
heard the word passed over the 1MC to stand clear of the
motor whaleboat while testing engines.  Very shortly after
that word was passed we heard what sounded like a very loud
thump or crash.  Mr. Golden and I half jumped from our
seats, we looked at each other, and both thought that the
motor whaleboat had fallen from its davit onto the deck.  We
went to the closest porthole, pulled the curtains, and did
see some dust and black smoke rising.  It was at this time
that the general quarters alarm was sounded, and we knew
that we had been attacked.  I went into the passageway
outside the wardroom via athwartships passageway to the
starboard side of the main deck and from there used the
ladder to go to the bridge, the 03 level.  Upon arriving on
the bridge I got my battle helmet and my life jacket from
the starboard gear locker and was just getting ready to go
to my general quarters station which is on the 04 level, the
flying bridge.  We were hit by what I assume to be the
second pass of aircraft.  Another man was next to me.  I
think he was a signalman.  We both hit the deck just outside
the starboard hatch leading to the pilothouse.  Three or
four shells hit in our area.  After that shelling had
ceased, I went into the pilothouse, didn't figure it was too
safe to go to the 04 level at that time.  Another pass was
made and everyone in the pilothouse hit the deck. When I did
enter the pilothouse, the officer of the deck for general
quarters, LT. O'CONNER, had already been injured and had
been carried into CIC,   which is just aft of the
pilothouse. The junior officer of the deck at general
quarters, LT ENNIS, was lying in the after portion of the
pilothouse and appears to have [deleted].  I can't recall
what other personnel were on the bridge at that time.  It
consisted

                          [13]


of several phone talkers and a third class quartermaster,
BROWN, was at the helm, which was his general quarters
station.  I left the pilothouse, came to the wardroom to
learn the condition of LT. O'CONNER and LT Ennis. Came down
the ladder in the superstructure.  When I got to the 02
level, the men were carrying the Executive Officer LCDR
ARMSTRONG, down to the wardroom for medical aid.  At the
time I saw him, he appeared to be in shock, was very pale,
and was not saying anything.  Mr. ENNIS had gotten partially
down - they were having difficulty carrying him down and he
was in the passageway outside his stateroom, waiting for
attention to his leg.  I came into the wardroom and there
were at least half a dozen casualties in there being
treated.  Several of the enlisted men had been in the spaces
forward of the superstructure, and the IC shop and the
emergency diesel room.  These areas had been shelled very
heavily on one of the first passes.  I found out the
emergency diesel did not work and that the gyro was not
functioning either.  I left the wardroom area. Somehow we
received word that there was a fire burning on the 01 level,
port side.  It was in the vicinity where two 55 gallon drums
of P-250 fuel was stored.  Some enlisted men in the
passageways got a hose and were putting out the fire.  The
fire had spread aft of the P-250 cans and the four life
rafts were burning on the 01 level.  I can't remember the
exact amount of time that I did spend in the superstructure
area. When I was in the passageways, I hear we did receive
some more shelling. I returned to the bridge.  To the best
of my knowledge, when I did return to the bridge, the only
people present were the Commanding Officer, one phone
talker, who was lying on the deck in the chart room,
quartermaster BROWN on the helm and myself.  Before I went
back to the bridge, we had received word over the phones
that were working, we had very little communication as such,
the 1MC was hit and not functioning. The only communications
we had were via sound-powered phones.  We had received the
word "standby for a torpedo attack".  It was very shortly
after I returned to the bridge the Commanding Officer
hollered in to pass over all circuits, "standby for another
torpedo attack, starboard side".


get the numbers of both helicopters in the quartermasters
log.  They were either "04 or D4" and "08 or D8".  There
also appeared to be a "Star of David" on the side of the
helo.  The helo was waved away shortly after the calling
card was thrown over, we saw no more of the helos.  Now it
was the matter of still trying to get the ship out of the
area.  We had no idea whether we would be attacked again or
not.  The list had held steady at approximately 10 degrees.
After steering was able to keep us on somewhat of a
northerly course, although we were weaving anywhere from 30
to 40 degrees either side of our chosen magnetic course of
000.  I was getting the rudder angles to steer for awhile
called back to after steering and then the Commanding
Officer was giving them after that.  The Commanding Officer
had been injured in his right leg on what must have been the
first aircraft pass.  He was bleeding profusely.  The
Captain had been administered first aid and he had a belt
tourniquet around his leg.  He insisted on being everywhere
that he could.  He was on both wings, in and out of the
pilothouse, taking pictures.  I believe at the time I was
giving orders to after steering the bleeding had started
again on the Captains leg wound.  I'm just theorizing that
the shell fragment that was lodged in the leg had been
discharged by his movement. We called the corpsman, and the
Captain was stretched out on the port wing, being
administered first aid.  He was still calling orders in to
me to relay on to after steering.  Bleeding did stop and the
Commanding Officer once again was, well, this time he was
placed in his chair on the port wing.  He gave orders there
for quite awhile.  It was also a matter of identification.
We, ourselves, were asking the question, "Who made the
attacks?", "And why?".  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.

                          [18]

Things quieted down somewhat at this time. We still had no
indication if we were still under attack or not.  I know
that there were several times later in the afternoon and
early evening that we did take cover at the order of the
Commanding Officer when some aircraft did approach at a
distance.  We were still doing the best we could to head due
North.  We still had considerable deviation from the base
course.  I can't recall what speed we finally did attain.
I think we tried to make turns for 8 knots, and found it too
difficult at that speed to hold the course, and dropped back
to all ahead 1/3.  We had main control make turns for five
knots.  There were several times when we were almost dead in
the water. Believe that just before or just after the
torpedo attack we had no turns. Another time that I can
recall that lube oil suction was lost.   Both boilers were
on the line.  We had to wait until that situation was
corrected.  Seems as if there were several other occasions
when it was not possible to get power.  After the attack
from the patrol boats had stopped, and before we had
steadied up, or successfully steadied up on an approximate
course of 000, I was checking the fathometer, which was the
only piece of  equipment on the bridge that I know was
functioning and it was only functioning on the 100 fathom
scale at the time.  Our readings started decreasing rapidly.
Commanding Officer ordered me to go to the forecastle, get
some men and to standby to let go an anchor.  We proceeded
to the forecastle, had the starboard anchor ready for
letting go, the bridge said "make the port anchor ready".
We were trying to pick up the chain stopper, but the pelican
hook was up almost against the stopper and we could not
raise the stopper.   I grabbed a bar of some kind, another
man grabbed a sledge and we were pounding at the stopper to
try to raise it. We received an order from the bridge that
was shouted to us from  the Commanding Officer to let go the
port anchor, and we could not let go the port anchor.  We
finally pried the stopper up, this was maybe a minute later,
the ship was backing down at that time, all back 1/3. The
readings were increasing, the fathometer readings. We
received an order not to let go the port anchor.  After
backing down,

                          [19]

getting a sufficient depth under the keel,  we then come
around to our northerly course again.  After we got on our
northerly course, the Commanding Officer came in to his
chair inside the pilothouse and gave all orders to after
steering.  Later, this would have been perhaps 1800 or so,
steering was shifted from after steering back to the bridge.


Rear Admiral KIDD: Q.  I'd like to interrupt and ask you a
question at this  point.  Was the Commanding Officer on the
bridge all this time?

A. The Commanding Officer never left the bridge, was there
from the time CQ was sounded.   Perhaps he had stayed there
since  the drill had secured. He did not leave the bridge
until, I'd say, 0400  the following  morning to make a head
call.   He made two or three head calls in the course of the
morning, but he did not leave the bridge until the DAVIS was
alongside the  following morning at 0700,  on the  morning
of 10 June.  We weren't positive that our magnetic compass
was responding correctly.  Every now and then the Commanding
Officer would  go out on the wing and would make minor
course adjustments by sighting the North Star.  Sometimes
after sunset, a message was delivered to the bridge from
radio central and it stated that the attack had in fact been
made by Israeli forces and  that they had extended  their
apologies.   Prior to this message, we had received word
from the Sixth Fleet that help was on the way.   I believe,
initially, they just said, "help".  Later on we learned that
two destroyers were coming to rendezvous with us.   During
the night, as I said previously, the Commanding Officer left
the bridge only to make a head call and all during the
evening, night, and following morning until the arrival of
the DAVIS, there was an officer with him at all times.
Either LT BENETT,  LTJG  PAINTER or myself.


Questions by Counsel for the Court: To your knowledge, was
the Commanding Officer  requested to leave the bridge by the
doctor in order to obtain medical attention?

A.  I didn't hear the order, it's quite possible, but it
would have taken ten people the doctor's size to even begin
to get him off the bridge.

                          [20]

Q. How would you describe his reaction to his injuries

A.  He was in great pain, there were several times when he
was still walking around, but it was obvious he was in great
pain. He had lost a considerable amount of blood.  At
several times felt dizzy.  He would not leave, but if he
started to get dizzy, he would turn to me, or if Mr. BENNETT
or Mr. PAINTER were there, he would say this to what course
were on, what speed to make.  He would give instructions.


Q. Backtracking to a point during the heat of combat, did
you observe the Captain when he was initially wounded.

A. Yes, I did.


Q.  And he continued on in this condition without stopping
for assistance by medical?

A.  That is correct.  It was quite awhile before he did slow
down enough to have the belt tourniquet put on the leg. I
assisted with that.  I used my belt, and after that a
corpsman came up just long enough to adjust the tourniquet
and take a look at the Commanding Officer.  He did not want
any further medical attention and he did not receive any
more until the bleeding started a second time, when I think
the shell fragment was worked loose.


Q.  What period of time had elapsed?

A.  Over an hour.  I can't say for sure, but it had been at
least an hour. How he managed to stay up on the bridge and
keep on his feet, to keep the cool head the way that be did,
is beyond me.  He was giving orders to us in the pilothouse,
he was taking photographs of the aircraft, the patrol craft,
attempting to identify them with his binoculars, giving
orders to the gun mounts when they were still manned, was
directing the fire fighting parties, seemed like he was
everywhere at one time.  Also giving commands to get the
ship out of the area, away from land as fast as we could.

Questions by Captain ATKINSON: Q.  Mr. LUCAS, approximately
when did you receive word that the Israelis

                          [21]

had attacked - about how long after the attack?

A. It was right around sunset.

Q. Until that time, you all felt you might be subject to
re-attack?

A. That is correct. 

Questions by Counsel for the Court: Q.  At this point I
would like to interrupt your narrative testimony in order to
present this exhibit to the record.  I have in my custody as
Counsel for the Court, the quartermasters notebook, USS
LIBERTY.  I show you page 102 dated 8 June and ask you if
this is the page you referred to when you testified to
making entries in it?

 A.  That is the page, starting with the entry at the time
 1446, and I continued making entries until 1655.


Q.   Let the record also show that page 102 is considerably
splattered with what appears to be blood.

A.  It is.


 I request the reporter to mark this exhibit number 6.  At
this time, the Counsel for the Court offers the
quartermasters logbook into evidence, A true copy thereof
will be substituted in its place.

Q. Will you please read this first entry?

A.  "1446, one gunboat tentatively identified as number
206-17." And this was seen by both the Commanding Officer
and myself from the. starboard wing.  I mentioned earlier,
the patrol craft was going exactly the opposite direction
that we were.  This number was read when it was abeam to
starboard at approximately 500 yards.

Counsel for the Court: It is requested that the Court note
page 138 of Janes Fighting Ships for 1966, which has Israeli
vessels described on that page 138.  I will now ask the
witness to identify the patrol craft on page 138, and ask if
it is similar to the one he saw?

A.  The patrol craft here, THOMAS, appears to be the exact
same one that I identified. If I had had a camera and taken
a picture of it, I would have gotten the same angle, same
presentation, as is present here in this photograph. There
is one slight difference, there is no dash between the first
three and the last two digits, and what I thought to be 17,

                          [22]

I found out later from Mr. BENNETT, when I examined this
book, that it was an Israeli symbol that looks like a 17,
but is connected by a horizontal line at the bottom. It's
quite possible that, well I know that, it was difficult to
read the number, not because of the distance, but because of
the bow wake coming over and obscuring the numbers.

Counsel for the Court: I will now ask the court members if
they have any questions on the exhibits that have been
introduced.

Captain ATKINSON: Q.  You say communications were bad.  What
communications were you referring to?

A.  I don't know much about the communications or research
setup at all.

Q.  This is not the bridge communications?

A. That is correct.  I believe that was outgoing
communications from the transmitter room.

 Q.  Were there voice communications passed to the bridge? 

A.  Not from radio central.  We had communications with main
control, damage control central and after steering.

Q.  In radio communications do you know where the hicom not
is? 

A.  We knew nothing of what was going on.  All messages,
outgoing and incoming were hand carried up to the bridge
from the radio central personnel.  We had been receiving,
monitoring Sixth Fleet communications several days prior to
the attack, but during the attack the only way we could get
hold of somebody was after transmitter room and everything
that was sent out or received came up to the bridge via
handed message.

Q. Do you know specifically what circuits were being
monitored when you said you were monitoring Sixth Fleet
communications before the attack?

                          [23]

A.  I don't know the call signs of the ships involved or
still on the status board in the pilothouse,  I can't
recall.


Q.  You mentioned that there were fathometer readings
decreasing.  Where were you getting this information from?

A.  The only fathometer that was working was in CIC, just
aft of the pilothouse, and at that time it was only working
on the 100 fathom scale.


Q.  Do you recall the depth?

A.  I believe they rapidly approached the middle teens.  You
see, we had no radar. This was knocked out, evidently, on
the first air pass.  We had to DR from our last fix to give
an approximate 1400B position.  We included that position in
the message requiring assistance.


Q.  Were you in sight of land at about the time of the pass?

A.  Yes we were.  After dinner, as is customary on here, we
often go to the 01 level forward on deck chairs to soak up
some sun.


Q. Excuse me, you mean noonday? 

A. Noon.  There were six officers on the 01 level forward
until turn to at 1300.  There was smoke visible from land
off the port side and also during the general quarters
drill.  When I was on the 04 level more smoke was visible
and the land itself was barley visible.  This was through
the telescope or high powered binoculars on the 04 level.


Q.  In the first portion of your testimony, you mention
shelling, what did you intend to convey by the word
"shelling"?

A.  The first hit, the first noise that LT GOLDEN and I
heard when we were in the wardroom was obviously a heavy
hit.  I assumed this was aircraft and it sounded to us as if
It hit on the starboard side.  Like I said, we thought it
was the motor whaleboat falling from its davit onto the
deck.  I mentioned shelling again just as soon as I had put
on my battle helmet and life jacket on the bridge.  This
again, I would say was aircraft cause there was a whistling
sound several seconds before the actual burst and noise
itself came.  After I had gone inside the pilot- house and
was on the deck, there was another series of whistling
sounds preceding the hits.  Here again, I assume it was
aircraft.  When I had

                          [24]

come down to the wardroom, was lending a hand to getting the
hose to fight the fire on the port side, there were more
easily discernible whistling sounds, even in the
passageways, that were aircraft hits. The two men who were
handling the hose were keeping an eye out for aircraft.
They would put out the fire until another plane came over
and then they ducked back inside.

Q.  Did the motor torpedo boats fire on you with ordnance
other than torpedoes?

A. Yes, they did.  This we could easily hear.  I can recall
it coming from the starboard side on several occasions.  At
the time quartermaster BROWN was on the helm, the fragment
that caught him came from the starboard side and I can't be
sure if it was from the gun boats or from our own shells
baking off.  I'm pretty sure it was from the gun boats. And
there were several other occasions of obvious shelling from
the torpedo or motor boats themselves.

Q.  Do you have any idea how many aircraft were involved?

A.  I did not actually see any of the aircraft.  There were
definitely three motor boats.

Q.  Are you the Gunnery Officer?

A. Yes, I am.


Q.  Do the surface lookouts come under your glance at
general quarters? 

A.  There, at general quarters the lookouts are on the 04
level.  The actual lookout training was done by the
Navigator or another member of the Operations Department.
They had received refresher training, this was sometime
since we left Rota on the 2nd of June, and had been
refreshed on reporting all surface contacts to include
relative bearing, approximate range, and target angle.  Had
also been given refreshers on reporting aircraft properly,
on elevation, what angle, other factors pertaining to
properly reporting all surface and air contacts to the
officer of the deck.  This had been stressed heavily in the
first week in June, before we did reach our operating area.


Q.  Was their method of reporting via sound-powered
telephone?

                          [25]

A.  When we were normally steaming at our modified condition
three, the lookouts were on the port and starboard wings, so
it was just a matter of shouting into the officer of the
deck directly.  We had stationed, or had one man in each of
the two forward gun mounts.  We had ammunition at the guns,
but not actually in the breech.  These two men had sound-
powered phones on. We could call them from the bridge
anytime, but for them to call us on the circuit, they would
blow a whistle and we would pick up the phone on the bridge.
I can't recall what circuit it was, but at a toot of a
whistle they could have someone on the bridge alerted to
pick up the phone and talk with them.


Q.  During the time that you were on the bridge, did you
receive any lookout reports via sound-powered telephones?

A.  During the attack?


Q.  During the attack.

A.  When I got up to the bridge, as I said I did not get to
the 04 level which was my general quarters station.  During
general quarters, the two air lookouts were on the 04 level,
but they had not made it up there either.  I cannot recall
seeing a surface lookout on either side of the bridge when I
got there.  The shelling from the aircraft had either
injured them, or they had taken cover inside the pilothouse.


Q.  During, and after the attack, did you have sound-powered
communications with your gun mounts?

A.  To the best of my knowledge, we never had contact with
the gun mounts. Let me explain the connection there.  My
general quarters station is on the 04 level at gunnery
control.  To get an order to the gun mount, it was easier
for the bridge to call a phone talker stationed on the 04
level.  He in turn would convey the message to a second
phone talker who had communications will all of the mounts.
No direct communications from the mounts themselves to the
pilothouse, and since no one was able to be on the 04 level,
there was no direct communications.  At one time, while the
torpedo boats were firing at us, my man in charge of mount
53, seaman QUINTERO, hollered to me, "should I fire back?",
and I gave him an

                          [26]

affirmative on that.  This was before he and the other men
in mount 53 had been chased away by the fire and flames from
the motor whaleboat. On the forward mounts, I said we had no
communications up there.  My third class gunner's mate,
THOMPSON, according to several witnesses, and to the members
of repair two, which is located directly beneath mount 51,
said that petty officer THOMPSON went to mount 51 when GQ
sounded.  He was below decks.  His station is with me on the
04 level.  Guess he figured he didn't have time to get up
there.  He went to the closest gun and from the account
given by the people in repair two, it sounded as if he got
off half a box of ammo at the aircraft. 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, but he had the aircraft
under fire and got off at least half a box of 50 caliber
ammo.


Q.  Do you recall how long the Ensign was down? 

A.  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?

A.  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.

                          [27]

Q.  Did you look and see the Ensign flying before the
torpedo hit, or was it after?

A.  I cannot honestly recall whether it was before or after. 


Q.  When did you receive your injuries?

A.  As soon as I had gotten to the bridge and put on the
battle helmet, I mentioned what I assumed were rockets from
the aircraft hit in the immediate vicinity.  I hit the deck
and picked up several pieces of [deleted] One of them was
bleeding enough that I took out my handkerchief and wrapped
it around [deleted].  The piece of fragment that hit me in
the [deleted]  occurred much later, after I had been to the
wardroom, returned to the bridge, and after the
quartermaster had been killed on the helm.  The commanding
Officer came from the port wing into the pilothouse, and he
said "standby for another attack".  I  don't recall if it
was surface, air, or torpedo.  He said "take cover".  I
heard some firing, some ricocheting off the starboard side.
I assumed it was from the patrol craft.  I was in the rear
portion of the pilothouse and tried to crawl behind the
water fountain as best I could, and I got most of me back
when I felt something hit me just to the right of
[deleted] it started bleeding rapidly.  I tore off the
[deleted] over the wound and just continued on from there.


Q.  When did you receive treatment for your wounds? 

A.  I didn't know that I had any metal in me as such,
   [deleted]                                             I
   had no pain.  I would guess the first time that I was
   looked at was on the 10th of June.  I went back to
   sickbay.  The night before I had a little bit of
   swelling, so went back to have the doctor have a look at
   it.  This was just the injury.  He took an xray and did
   find that there was a chunk of metal in there.  I believe
   he said it was  [deleted]


Q.  Do you recall that the patrol boats strafed the ship
after the torpedo attack, and if so, how many times?

A. Sir, I cannot honestly answer that.

                          [28]

Q.  Let me put the question a little bit differently -
earlier in your statement you observed that the patrol boats
were attempting to communicate with flashing light?

A.  This was definitely after the torpedo attack.

Q.  The flashing lights from the boats were after the
torpedo attack?

A.  Yes, that is correct.

Q.   I also understood from you that the ship was unable to
respond to the flashing lights from the boats?

A.  To the first signaling, that is affirmative, because the
smoke that was between the patrol craft and us.

Q.  And I believe, also, the starboard wing 24-inch
searchlight had been shot away earlier in the action.  Is
that not correct?

A.  The only signaling light we had available was a small
portable light, the face of which was approximately six
inches in diameter.

Q.  I believe that is called an Altis Lamp and the intensity
of that light, from personal knowledge, would probably be
completely inadequate to penetrate the smoke?

A. Yes sir.  All power to all of the other lights was off.
Even if it had been on, there was only one operative light
on either the 03 or 04 level.  The only one that had not
been hit.

Q.  To the best of your recollection, after the motor
 torpedo boats signaled, were there any further attacks from
 them?

A.  No, there were not.  After this first signaling,  I
don't believe so. After they signaled "do you need help?",
and we answered in the negative, I am positive there were no
more attacks after that time.

Q.  With regard to the signal from the torpedo boats, when
did you first observe the signaling, with respect to the
torpedo attack?

A. The first signaling that I observed was the unsuccessful
attempts to determine what they were signaling us, and of
course, we did not have a chance to answer back to them.
This was after the torpedo attacks. The only other signaling
that I recall seeing is when we did successfully receive
their message and sent a negative answer to it

                          [29]

Q.  Mr. LUCAS, did you bring with you any examples of
ordnance or shrapnel recovered aboard USS LIBERTY subsequent
to the attack?

A.  With the exception of one fragment that was located this
morning, the remainder of these fragments and shells were
brought up to the pilothouse in the course of the evening
and the following morning after the attack. These were
turned in by various personnel throughout the ship. Several
of these have been turned in since the night of the 8th and
the morning of the 9th.

Counsel for the Court:  At this time it to requested that
these examples be marked exhibit 7, that they be introduced
into evidence and copies of photographs be made for record
purposes.

President: Let the record also show that these fragments are
but a cross- sectional sample of the type of bullets and
shrapnel which "holed" the ship.

President:. Q.  A question if you please - would you be kind
enough to expand on the performance of duty of a young man
mentioned earlier in your testimony, named LARKINS?

A.  Seaman LARKINS helps man mount 54, 03 level, port side,
as his general quarters station.  He was on that mount, and
stayed on that mount, until the fire coming from the 01
level chased him away.  He did recall seeing a plane
approaching from the port side and lobbing a cylinder that
was attached under the wing.  A cylinder five to six feet
long, approximately ten inches in diameter.  This cylinder
approached the 01 level port side in an end over end
fashion.  After it hit, and the fire started, he climbed
over the skylight to mount 53 and helped the gun crew there
until the fire from the motor whaleboat drove all people
away from that mount.  I later personally saw him helping to
extinguish the fire on the port side and still later, he, by
himself, manned mount 51 and fired one shot before he
received a cease fire from the Commanding Officer.

President: No further questions - before you leave to go to
the hospital, the Court would like to express itself with a
feeling of great pride to

                          [30]

be associated with the service's uniform you wear, young
man, and we thank you very much for your cooperation and
fine testimony.

Mr. LUCAS: Thank you, Admiral.

The witness was duly warned and withdrew.

The Court recessed at 1045 hours, 14 June 1967 from taking
further testimony in order to examine exhibits received by
the Board.

The Court opened at 1300 hours, 14 June 1967.  All persons
connected with the inquiry who were present when the court
recessed are again present in court.

Commander William L. McGonagle, U. S. Navy, took the stand
as a witness, was duly sworn, advised of his rights under
Article 31, Uniform Code of Military Justice and examined as
follows:

                  DIRECT EXAMINATION 

Questions by counsel for the court: Q.  Please state your
name, rank, organization and present duty station.

A.  Commander William L. McGonagle, U. S. Navy, Commanding
Officer, USS LIBERTY (AGTR-5).


Let the record show that although the witness is
experiencing considerable pain from shrapnel wounds in his
leg, that he willingly appeared at this hearing.

Q.  Captain McGonagle, as you are well aware, this Court of
Inquiry has been convened to inquire into the circumstances
attendant with the armed attack on the U.S. Naval vessel
which you command, USS LIBERTY, which occurred on 8 June
1967. Will you please describe to the Court the
circumstances of that incident as you recall it?

A.  At the time of the incident, LIBERTY was performing her
mission in accordance with JCS message dtg 011545Z June
1967.  At the time of the incident, the ship was operating
under the operational control of Commander, U. S. Sixth
Fleet.  The ship had arrived in its assigned operating area
on the morning of 8 June 1967 after having departed from
Rota, Spain on 2 June 1967. The ship was steaming in
international

[31]

waters and was so at all times.  A condition of readiness
three modified was set.  The condition three modified watch
consisted of normal steaming watch with the exception that
one man was stationed in the forward two 50 caliber machine
guns 51 and 52.  Lookouts on the bridge were designated to
man machine guns 53 and 54 in the event of surprise air or
surface attack.  Each machine gun had a box of ammunition
attached to the machine gun with a round up to but not in
the chamber of each mount. During the 0800 to 1200 watch on
the morning of 8 June at about 1030, a flight of two
unidentified jet aircraft orbited the ship at about 10,000
feet three times at a distance of approximately two miles.
It was not possible to identify any insignia on the aircraft
and their identity remains unknown.  A locating two report
was submitted on this sighting. It is not known at this time
whether the sighting report was transmitted from the ship or
not.  Records are not accessible at the time.  It was also
possible to see on the 8 to 12 watch in the morning the
coastline of the Sinai peninsula.  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. It was possible to visually
sight the minaret which is quite conspicuous at El Arish.
This was used as a navigational aide in determining the
ship's position during the morning and afternoon of 8 June.
It became visible at about 0930 and the ship's position was
verified, and was within our established operating area.
Radar ranges were taken on the nearest land on the same
bearing as the minaret.  The minaret was also identifiable
by radar.  There were no other conspicuous or outstanding
navigational features in the area.  At about 1056 in the
morning of 8 June, an aircraft similar to an American flying
boxcar crossed astern of the ship at a distance of about
three to five miles. The plane circled the ship around the
starboard side, proceeded forward of the ship and headed
back toward the Sinai peninsula. [40]

crew able to assist.  Following the torpedo hit, those
personnel from the research area who were able to so, left
their stations.  One of the torpedo boats was identified by
a hull number of 204-17.  Pictures were taken of the torpedo
boats prior to and subsequent to the attack.  About 1515,
two helicopters approached the ship and circled around and
around the ship at a distance of about 100 yards. The
ensignia the Star of David was clearly visible.  Hull number
on one of the helicopters was 04 or D4.  The other had a
hull number of 08 or D8.  It was not known whether these
helicopters intended to strafe the ship or not.  However,
they did not approach the ship in a hostile manner, but kept
pointed parallel to the ship as they continued around and
never made a direct approach as such.  They were not taken
under fire by Liberty, nor did they fire at us.  The torpedo
boats left the general area of the ship at about 1515.
About 1537, after they had departed the ship and gone to a
range of about five miles, they again headed toward the ship
at high speed. Their intentions were unknown.  At about this
same time two unidentified jet aircraft were also noted
approaching the ship from our starboard side, in similar
fashion to that which preceded the initial attack.  All
hands were again alerted to the possibility of repeated
attacks.  No attacks occurred however, and the jets
disappeared from the scene.  To further assist in
identification of the ship, at 1611 I ordered the ship's
international call sign hoisted.  Both boilers had been put
back on the line at approximately 1520, but at 1523 lube oil
suction was lost to the main engines and the ship again
became dead in the water.  The heading of the ship at this
time is not known.  About 1555, communications were
restored, and at 1600 a message was sent providing
additional information concerning the attack by unidentified
aircraft and the fact that the torpedo boats had been
identified as Israeli.  Preliminary estimate of the number
of dead and casualties, as well as the condition of the
ship, was also provided.  At the time this message was being
dictated to Lieutenant Bennett on the port wing of the
bridge, I was laying on the deck with a

[41]

tourniquet being applied to my right leg at the thigh.  A
few moments prior to this I felt myself blacking out from
loss of blood, and called for assistance of CT1 Carpenter to
apply a tourniquet.  I had assumed the con immediately upon
the air attack and retained the con until rendezvous was
affected with the destroyers about 0630 on the morning of 9
June 1967, leaving the bridge only about 3 times during the
night hours to make brief head calls on the 02 level.  No
bodies were noted in the area of ship following the
explosion.  Several life rafts, however, were released and
placed into the water by various crew members whom I was
unable to communicate with prior to their placing the boats
in the water. They exercised their initiative on the scene,
and no fault can be found with their estimate, not having
the information that I had.  When the messenger was sent to
tell them to leave the lifeboats alone, that the ship was in
no danger of sinking at that time, but that the lifeboats
might be needed at a later time, no additional lifeboats
were placed in the water.  Misinterpretation of the
situation by personnel in combat following the order to
prepare for torpedo attack to starboard also resulted in the
ship's radar being purposely destroyed.  Again, I find no
fault with this action under the circumstances.  At about
1637, the torpedo boats commenced retiring from the area
without further signal or action.  At this time, the ship
was attempting to make good a course of 340 magnetic, at
speed 8 knots.  Emergency manual steering was being
conducted from after steering.  The amount or rudder was
given to after steering over emergency rigged sound powered
telephones.  They would apply the rudder.  When the ship had
come to the approximate magnetic heading, the rudder would
be shifted to attempt to maintain that heading. It was
possible to maintain within plus or minus 30 degrees of the
ship's heading most of the time.  The exact position of the
ship was not known at this time.  At 1653 an attempt was
made to steer and make good a course of 000 magnetic.  It
was not known what effect the nearby explosions might have
had on the pilot house magnetic  compass.  The gyro compass
was

[42]

out.  It was not known what the azimuth of the setting sun
was, but this was used as a rough guide and it appeared that
the magnetic compass had not been unduly affected.  The
ship's fathometer in combat was working following the
attacks.  At about 16??, the fathometer sounding reported
approximately 26 fathoms under the keel.  I realized at this
point that the ship might be south of its track and could be
approaching the shoal areas outside of our operating area.
Since I was not positive of the ship's position, I ordered
Mr. Lucas to round up as many personal as he could, and
proceed to the forecastle and standby to anchor.  My
intentions was to anchor until it became night so that I
could visually sight the North Star to see whether the
magnetic compass had been unduly affected or  not.  Once I
was able to sight the North Star, then I would know in which
direction the ship was actually proceeding.  Mr. Lucas and
personnel did go to this forecastle, and at one point I did
order the port anchor to let go.  But before the port anchor
could be let go, I reversed my decision and backed all
engines two-thirds to see it I could back clear of the
apparent shoal area.  I commenced backing the ship at about
1704 and continued backing until 1722, at which time the
fathometer reading was approximately 48 fathoms under the
keel.  With the ship going ahead two-thirds and right full
rudder we quickly came to a magnetic heading of about 350
magnetic and continued on to a heading of 025 magnetic about
1729.  The ship was at this time making a speed of about 8
knots.  At 1730, the ship lost lube oil to the main engines,
and all engines were stopped. At, 1731, the ship  was on a
heading of 022 magnetic with 50 fathoms of water under the
keel.  Lube oil pressure was regained to the main engines
within a very short period of time, and the ship continued
right to a magnetic heading of 040 at 1737, at which time 72
fathoms was indicated under the keel.  At 1743, the ship's
heading was 068 magnetic and 82 fathoms of water under the
keel.  At this time I considered the ship to have stood
clear of the immediate danger of grounding and at 1748
increased speed to ten knots on a magnetic heading of 050.
The ship remained at general

[43]

quarters, and reports from damage control central were to
the effect that all water tight boundary bulkheads were
holding satisfactory.  Dr. KEEFER, and the two corpsman,
were doing outstanding work in assisting injured crew
members.  They advised me from time to time of the number of
casualties, the extent of injuries, and efforts being made.
At 1750, a message was received from COMSIXTHFLT to the
effect that escorts were on the way and that the ship was to
proceed on a course of 340 magnetic at maximum speed until
100 miles from present position, then turn 270 magnetic.
The ship attempted to carry out this directive.  At 1757,
COMSIXTHFLT advised that escorts were proceeding to
rendezvous with us at maximum speed of destroyers. At 1841,
an Israeli helicopter approached the ship and hovered at
bridge level approximately 30 feet from the ship.  They made
various attempts to indicate by visual means that they
wished to land a man on board.   At one point, I considered
granting the request, but considering the obstructions in
the area of the forecastle, signaled a waveoff to them.
Lettering on the tail of the helicopter was SA32K.  On the
fuselage were the numerals 06 or D6.  At 1857, the
helicopter dropped a message on the forecastle. The message
was written on the back a calling card, identified as
Commander Ernest Carl Castle, Naval Attach&#65533; for Air Embassy,
USA. The message on the back read as follows:  "Have you
casualties".  We attempted to advise them by flashing light
with an Aldis lamp that, "affirmative", we did have
casualties.  It was evident that they were unable to
understand what we were saying.  After some ten to fifteen
minutes of unsuccessful efforts to communicate between the
helicopter and the ship, the helicopter departed from the
area, at a time unknown, but as dusk was approaching the
ship.  Three musters were taken during the night to identify
the dead, the seriously injured, and to determine those who
were missing.  It was believed that those initially reported
as missing are entrapped in compartments in the forward part
of the ship as a result of the torpedo explosion and
resultant flooding.  As of 1900,

[44]

11 June, two of the persons previously reported missing,
have been recovered.  One by removing him directly from the
space on board ship. The other was recovered by the PAPAGO,
a Fleet tug steaming approximately six miles astern of the
ship on the morning of 11 June.  It is not known at this
time whether any of the other individuals reported missing
have drifted free of the space through the torpedo hole and
vanished from the area.  It will not be possible to
determine until the ship has been drydocked and the
compartment dewatered and remains recovered.  Preparation of
casualty messages were completed as expeditiously as
possible upon the completion of the musters, and necessary
message notifications sent. The ship rendezvoused with the
two destroyers on the morning of 9 June. Commander Destroyer
Squadron Twelve reported on board to inspect damage and
confer with the Commanding Officer.  Personnel from the USS
DAVIS immediately boarded the ship to render assistance with
damage control and treatment of injured personnel.  I have
no complaint to lodge against any officer, or man on board
USS LIBERTY for any acts of commission or omission during
the attack and post attack phase.  I have nothing but the
greatest admiration for their courage, their devotion to
duty, and their efforts to save the ship.  As the result of
my personal knowledge of the manner in which the following
personnel performed their duties during the attack and post
attack phases, I intend to commend Ensign LUCAS; Signalman
DAVIS; Quartermaster Third BROWN;  Lieutenant George GOLDEN,
Engineering Officer; and Ensign SCOTT, Damage Control
Assistant.  I have requested the officers and the petty
officers of the ship to advise me of any other individuals,
who, to their personal knowledge, performed in such a manner
as to warrant special recognition.  I also intend to address
a letter of appreciation to Lieutenant Commander Bill
PETTYJOHN, Chief Staff Officer, COMDESRON TWELVE, for the
outstanding manner in which he has assumed the
responsibilities of assisting the Commanding Officer in
sailing the ship from point of rendezvous to destination of
Malta.  A message of condolence from the ship has been sent
to BUPERS with the request that it

[45]

be delivered to the next of kin at the funeral or memorial
services conducted for the deceased and those missing in
action.  A personal letter from the Commanding Officer to
the next at kin will be prepared and sent at the earliest
possible time.  Dr. KEEFER, and the two pharmacist mates
will also be awarded letters of commendation from the
Commanding Officer.  It is not known at this time the extent
of probable compromise of classified material.  Destruction
of superseded RPS- distributed material was conducted
immediately prior to the attack. Lieutenant PIERCE,
Communication Officer and RPS-Custodian discussed the matter
with the Commanding Officer on the morning of 8 June, and it
was decided at that time that we would make the June burn
before the scheduled 15 June date, in view of the location
at the ship, and we intended to burn superseded key cards on
a daily bases as they were superseded.  A report to this
effect was released by the Commanding Officer.  It is not
known, however, whether this message was transmitted or not.


The court recessed at 1620 hours, 14 June 1967

The court opened at 1645 hours, 14 June 1967.  All persons
connected with the inquiry who were present when the court
recessed are again present in court.  Commander William
McGonagle, U.S Navy, resumed his position on the stand as a
witness.

                 DIRECT EXAMINATION

Questions by counsel for the court:

Q.  Captain, will you please continue with your description
of the incident.

A.  I would like to relate some additional information which
may be of some help to the court.  USS LIBERTY departed
Norfolk, Virginia 2 May 1967 in accordance with COMSERVRON
EIGHT message dtg 281502Z April 1967. This was to be the
fifth deployment of the LIBERTY to foreign station since its
conversion and commissioning as a technical research ship in
Seattle,

[46]

Washington 30 December 1964.   The deployment initially
commenced under the operational control of COMSERVRON EIGHT.
The first  port of call was Abidjan, Ivory Coast with a
scheduled arrival of 22 May 1967.  LIBERTY arrived at
Abidjan, Ivory Coast on the scheduled date.  LIBERTY was
scheduled to spend four days in Abidjan, Ivory Coast to
depart on 26 May 1967. The operation order was similar to
that under which the LIBERTY had deployed on four previous
occasions.  On the morning of 24 May, approximately 0345Z, a
message was received from COMSERVRON EIGHT with a dtg of
240020Z, May 67 in effect directing that LIBERTY get
underway immediately and proceed to Rota, Spain for further
operations in the Eastern Mediterranean. Immediately upon
receipt of this message, LIBERTY commenced preparations for
getting underway.  It was not possible to get underway,
however, until about 0730 on the morning of 24 May 1967.
The delay was due to awaiting for pilot, tug, and proper
tide conditions for transit of the Vridi Canal. USS LIBERTY
cleared the Vridi Canal approximately 0745, 24 May 1967, and
set course via coastal route direct to Rota, Spain at best
speed.  An average of about 15 knots was maintained during
the transit.  During the transit from Abidjan, Ivory Coast
to Rota, Spain, operational control of LIBERTY was changed
from COMSERVRON EIGHT to USCINCEUR.  The reference for this
operational control change is COMSERVRON EIGHT 300202Z May
1967. This reference is not immediately available to me.
Operational control of LIBERTY was again shifted from
USCINCEUR to CINCUSNAVEUR in accordance with USCINCEUR
300932Z May 1967.  This change of operational control
occurred as LIBERTY arrived at the sea buoy off the port of
Rota, Spain at about 0930 local time, 1 June 1967.  After
completion of fueling, load- ing provisions, and
accomplishing repairs to the special communications relay
system (TRSSCOMM) the ship was RFS at about 1330, 2 June,
and at that time got underway in accordance with
CINCUSNAVEUR move order 7-67, dtg of this move order was
CINCUSNAVEUR dtg 311750Z May 67 modified by CINCUSNAVEUR dtg
011305Z June 1967.  JCS message dtg 011545Z June 1967 is
considered pertinent in LIBERTY'S schedule from the period
02 June until the time of the incident.  This message gives
departure date from Rota, route to

[47]

follow, point to proceed to, and the operating area of
Liberty during the period of 9 to 30 June 1967.  Paragraph
1C of this message is par- ticularly pertinent.  At 070001Z
June 1967, operational control of Liberty again changed from
CINCUSNAVEUR to COMSIXTHFLT in accordance with CINCUSNAVEUR
dtg 061357Z June 1967.  This change of operational control
was made by message in which Liberty indicated to
COMSIXTHFLT that Liberty was reporting to COMSIXTHFLT in
accordance with the CINCUSNAVEUR message 061357Z.  This
message also included Liberty endurance and provisions, dry,
frozen, and chill.  It indicated that the ship had on board
approx- imately 85% fuel and utilized approximately 1% fuel
per day while on station.  The message also indicated that
Liberty self-defense capability was limited to four 50
caliber machine guns.  The dtg of this message is 062036Z
June 67.  USS Liberty was operating under the operational
control of COMSIXTHFLT at the time of the incident.  No
additional messages were in hand onboard Liberty concerning
area of operation or other guidance for the performance of
our mission than previously mentioned in the JCS message of
011545Z June 1967.  COMSIXTHFLT message dtg 080917Z June
1967, which directed Liberty to proceed and operate within a
25 mile radius of 33.40 North, 32.30 East until further
notice was not received until delivered by hand on 10 June
1967.   Had this message been received anytime prior to the
attack, Liberty would have attempted to open the range on
the coast of the countries indicated in the message to at
least be 100 miles specified.  The existence of this message
was not known by the Commanding Officer of the Liberty at
the time of the incident and no action was taken to comply
with it.  During the four previous deployments of USS
Liberty, the ship aroused unusual curiosity only during the
first and second deployments.  The configuration of the ship
with unusual mast antennae arrangements and deckhouse
structures caused, so I understand stand inasmuch as I was
not on board as Commanding Officer at the time, some
surveillance, primarily surface, from the Southwest African
countries during its first two deployments.  Lieutenant
GOLDEN, who was aboard at the time, my be

[48]

able to provide the Board with additional details in this
area. 

...Lieutenant Junior Grade Lloyd C. PAINTER, United States
Naval Reserve, took the stand as a witness, was duly sworn,
advised of his rights under Article 31, Uniform Code of
Military Justice and examined as follows:

                 DIRECT EXAMINATION

Questions by Counsel for the Court:

Q.  State your name, rank and organization? 

A.  Lloyd C. PAINTER, Lieutenant (jg), USNR.

Q.  On 8 June 1967, at about 1400 hours, an incident
occurred aboard USS LIBERTY in which the vessel was
attacked.  Would you please relate to this Court of Inquiry
what you recall concerning that incident?

A. Yes sir.  I was at this time, the officer of the deck.  I
had the 12 to 1600 watch that afternoon, and we had had a
practice general quarters drill at 1300 and secured from
that at approximately 1345, 1350.  And during general
quarters I left the bridge and went to my general quarters
station, which is repair three, located on the mess docks.
After this drill was over, I went back up to the bridge to
relieve the watch, and when I came up to the bridge, I was

Q.  What time was that?

A.  Sir, I think It was 1350, thereabouts.  I came back up
to the bridge and relieved Mr. O'CONNOR who was the general
quarters OOD, and assumed the watch.  The first thing I was
concerned with was getting a fix, and I remember distinctly
checking the radar, and the nearest point of land on the
radar at approximately 1355 was 17.5 miles.  And I remember
distinctly asking the Captain if I could come back to our
base course, which I believe was set at about 14 and a half
miles.  We were about three miles outside of base course.
About this time, it was around 1400, the Captain was on the
starboard wing. He was watching some jet aircraft.  The
Captain was on the starboard wing, and he was looking up in
the air at a couple of jet aircraft.  He called me out there
and said, "you'd better call the forward gun mounts."  He
said "I think they're going to attack," or words to that
effect.  So, I ran into the bridge area and tried to call
the port and starboard gun mounts forward. I couldn't get
them; I called them about three times, and about the third

                        [55]

time I said, "bridge, gun mounts 51 and 52."  They were hit.
I can't testify exactly which one was hit first, port or
starboard; they were both hit so fast.  I believe the
starboard one was hit first.  At this time, I still had the
phone in my hand, I was looking through the porthole at the
gun mounts. I was looking through the porthole when I was
trying to contact these two kids, and I saw them both; well,
I didn't exactly see them as such.  They were blown apart,
but I saw the whole area go up in smoke and scattered metal.
And, at about the same time the aircraft strafed the bridge
area itself. The quartermaster, quartermaster third class
POLLARD was standing right next to me, and he was hit,
evidently with flying glass from the porthole. I don't know
why I came out without a scratch.  I was standing, as I
said, right next to him.  Finally, about this time they
started strafing and we both hit the deck, as well as Mr.
O'MALLEY,  who was my JOOD at the time. As soon as the first
strafing raid had been made, we sounded general quarters
alarm.  The Captain was on the bridge, He was in the pilot
house at this time.  I don't know whether he was hit then or
not, I can't remember. It was so smokey.  I took off for my
general quarters station, which, as I said before, was
repair three on the mess decks.  On the way down I was
running as fast as I could.  By the time I got to the
Chief's Lounge, the entrance through the lounge to the mess
docks, I saw SPICER, our postal clerk, lying there cut in
half with strafing and the hospital corpsman was applying
mouth to mouth resuscitation.  This I later found out
failed. He died right there. Well, anyway, I got down to the
mess decks and all my men were assembling there as fast as
possible.  They went to full battle dress, and so did I.  I
can't recall exactly how long we were waiting for the
strafing raids to be over, but I believe it was
approximately 20 minutes.  At this time someone, I believe
it was one of the quartermasters, came down and called me to
the bridge.  He said, "the Captain's hurt and the operations
officer was dead, and the executive officer was mortally
wounded."  I ran up to the bridge.  And when I got up there,
the Captain was laying on the stretcher up there while
trying to get underway.  He thought for a while I think, I'm
not sure, that he would pass out, and he wanted somebody up
there to take over.  He wanted somebody up there in case

                       [56]

he did.  I'm not sure, but I think that is why he had called
me up there. I don't know whether he called me up there, or
the quartermaster just took it on his own to get me up
there.  I never found out.  So, I was up there for a few
minutes and it looked like the strafing raids were over, and
some of the people were coming out and looking around and my
repair chief had come out to assess some of the damage.
When I saw him an the 01 level aft, I told him to take over
Repair Three as I would be on the bridge.  Well, by this
times, the Captain had regained consciousness and told me
that I would best be needed in Repair Three.

Q. Was that the Captain?

A. Yes sir. So I left and went back to Repair Three, and, I
don't know how long, time was slipping by so fast at this
time, after that we had our first torpedo attack.  It came
over, well the 1MC was out, it came over the sound powered
phones, "prepare for torpedo attack starboard side." So, we
prepared for a torpedo attack starboard side, which we
received in midships.  I can't say exactly what time it was,
maybe 1435. Well, the ship at this time as soon as the
torpedo hit midships, we began to develop a starboard list
very quickly.  So quickly that I felt as though we were
probably going to lose it.  At this time, the DC central
passed the word to prepare to abandon ship.  We then filed
out to our life rafts which were no longer with us because
they had been strafed and most of them were burned, so we
knocked most of them over the side.  At this time the
torpedo boats, three of them, that had torpedoed us, were
laying off, waiting for us to sink, I believe.  Anyway, they
didn't come near us at this time. However, we were able to
maintain the ship and stabilize it.  It didn't sink. So the
Captain said that everyone could go back to general quarters
stations.  At this time I went back to Repair Three on the
mess decks along with the rest of my repair party.  All
during this time in Repair Three, my men were fighting fires
and knocking burning liferafts, etc.  So we were kept fairly
busy down in Repair Three the whole time.  Also they were
checking bulkheads and shoring where needed.  After I went
back there, after the torpedo attack, we waited for what
seemed like many, many hours but I

                       [57]

imagine it was only 20 or 30 minutes; and in that time we
were checking out the torpedo hit midships and doing what
was necessary to prevent further flooding.  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.  At this time we were dead
in the water with no steerage.  However, we were able to
regain our steerage by manual means and able to make
approximately five to six knots. The pit log was out, we
were just guessing by the number of turns that were being
made.  We tried to maintain a course, this time, I'm not
really sure, it was either 300 or 320 to take us out of
there.  After we had gotten underway, an Israeli helicopter
came out and asked us if we wanted aid; well, they didn't
ask us, they just came along side and acted like they wanted
to help, but we waved them off.  We maintained this course
as best we could throughout the night.  I was up on the
bridge most of the night with the Captain, up until the
destroyer, DAVIS, I believe it was, came alongside the next
morning.  Repair Three on the mess decks was designated a
casualty station because the wardroom, which was the normal
casualty station, was so badly strafed that we couldn't keep
them up there.  The mess deck was a bloody mess that night.
People were dying.  It was a ghastly sight. That's about all
I have to say.

Counsel for the Court: Did you have occasion to see the
national ensign flying?

A.  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? 

A.  I saw it earlier that morning when I came up, I don't
know when it was.

                       [58]

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?

A.  Yes, before and after the torpedo attack.

Q.  Do you know whether or not it was the same flag?

A.  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.

A.  Earlier in your testimony you mentioned that the LIBERTY
was 17.5 miles from nearest point of land.  How did you
arrive at this?

A.  By radar navigation.

Q.  Did you take a fathometer check?

A.  Fathometer checked, yes sir.  Either 33 or 31 fathoms
under the keel at this time.

Counsel for the Court: Does any other member of this Court
have questions of this witness?

President: No further questions.

The witness was duly warned and withdrew.

Ensign John D. SCOTT, U. S. Naval Reserve, took the stand as
a witness, was duly sworn, advised of his rights under
Article 31, Uniform Code of Military Justice and examined as
follows:

                 DIRECT EXAMINATION

Questions by Counsel for the Court:

Q.  State your full name, rank, and organization.

A.  John D. SCOTT, Ensign, USNR.

Q.  Mr.  SCOTT, you know that this Court of Inquiry is
interested in the incident involving USS LIBERTY on 8 June
1967. Would you please tell the Court what you recall of
that incident?

                       [59]

A.  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?

A.  About 0515, 1 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.

President:  That was local time, Mr. SCOTT?

A.  Yes sir. The plane circled around several times then
took off in a true direction towards Tel Aviv.  About 30
minutes later I got a call from coordination, sir, and Chief
CT SMITH was on the phone; wanted to know if I had an air
contact that was fairly close in the last half hour.  I told
him I did and he wanted to know which direction it went
after it left the vicinity of the ship.  I told him, "Tel
Aviv."  He said, "Fine, that's all I want to know."  I did
manage to take four pictures of the aircraft with the camera
on the bridge.  I didn't know what type it was.  It was a
double fuselage, twin-engine type.  It looked somewhat like
an old P-38 or a small flying boxcar.  That's about the only
significant thing that happened on the 4 to 8.

Q.  Do you recall the flag or the national ensign flying?

A.  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.
That's about all I have to say about the 4 to 8.

Q.  Continue on during the day?

A.  I wasn't aware of any aircraft overhead.  I did notice
that at about the noon hour there was smoke on the horizon.
Could see results of bombing on the horizon.  I had gone out
and taken a picture.  I wasn't aware of aircraft.  After we
secured from general quarters,  I came in to

                       [60]

the wardroom and I just left when I heard the first hit.
With that, I took off running to DC central.  I did not come
topside again until about 0500 the following day.

 Counsel for the Court:  I have no further questions of this
 witness. Does any member of the Court?

Presidents:  Tell us a little bit about your damage control
measures when the ship was hit from starboard.

A. Yes sir. When we were first hit, the first orders we got
were, "two fires, one port side in the vicinity of the gas
drums, one starboard side vicinity of the motor whaleboat."
I ordered fire fighting parties out. Next we were ordered to
pick up the wounded.  We had a number of calls, repeated
calls to pick up the wounded.  I called back and said that
every available stretcher was in use.  They were using
blankets and mattresses to haul the people back.  After the
fires were out, they burned for quite awhile before we got
them under control.   The next thing, we were told by the
bridge to stand by for torpedo attack starboard side.  The
torpedo hit at approximately, somewhere between 1425 and
1445.  As soon as the torpedo hit, I called main control.  I
don't keep a damage control log as such, my repair parties
do.  They log messages they receive in a book. Neither one
of them, as soon as the attack started, kept a log.  I kept
message blanks coming into repair parties, but they were not
timed.  I had about ten or twelve message blanks prior to
the torpedo hitting.  I had the main damage, I had the large
hole in the back berthing compartment, I had the hold in the
diagnostic room, I had the two fires, the fires under
control and one of them logged as out.  But when the torpedo
hit, the logroom in damage control central was in a
shambles, the safe door blew open, logs went flying off the
shelves, we were knocked on the deck, and shortly thereafter
the order was passed down to set the destruction bill. And
with that, we didn't bother to write down our messages
anymore.  Myself, my 1JV talker, and my 2JV talker commenced
burning all confidential messages and pubs in DC central.

Q.  That's fine. Tell me a little about your shoring.

                       [61]

A.  It was necessary, after we investigated the diagnostic
room, which is directly above the vicinity which the torpedo
hit, I went in, it was next to DC central, I went in with
the DC investigator from repair two.  We saw the level of
the water rising.  I stuck my hand in the hole.  It came out
with black, black oil.  With that I said, "It's still
rising, we're going to have to shore-it."  We brought
shoring in and mattresses from the engineering berthing
compartment and commenced shoring.  We found another rupture
out in the passageway and it was bulged out, but we had that
area pretty well under control.

Q.  To establish the watertight boundary after the torpedo
attack, was there any question about anyone being left alive
in the spaces below?

A.  No sir.  When I saw the black oil coming up, I knew it
had ruptured the fuel tanks.  I went down to main control.
I called them first and told them I had ruptured tanks up
here, and told them not to take inspections from these
tanks.  Later on in the morning, I went down to main control
and told them to take inspections from starboard tanks but
not those two to correct the list.  We went over to twelve
degrees, and came back to ten. About 0500 in the morning we
were down to about a 6 degrees list.

Q.  Who was in charge of the forward repair parties at that
time?

A.  Ensign TAYLOR.  He was the Repair Officer.  He was hit
before he ever got to the repair locker.  He wandered off on
his own.  He came down the passageway, stuck his head in DC
central.  I could see he was hit very bad.  He said,
"Scottie, I've been hit."  I said, "I can't help you, go to
the mess decks. I'll call them and tell them you're coming."
I don't have a plotter or messenger, and there were just
three people in DC central, so none of us could leave.
Next, there was Chief THOMPSON, and I got the word that he
was hit, but not bad.  A little later the bridge called
wanting a signalman.  Both my signalmen had been hit, and I
called repair and asked them if they had any signalmen,
anybody, even enlisted men.  Chief THOMPSON volunteered and
went to the bridge.  Then DEMORI, shipfitter third, took
over.

President: This was Chief THOMPSON who volunteered, who was
already wounded?


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Once again the conclusion.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1.  Available evidence combines to indicate the attack on
   LIBERTY on 8 June was in fact a case of mistaken
   identity.

2. The calm conditions and slow ship speed may well  have
  made the American Flag difficult to identify.

3.  The ship's  westerly heading at the time of attack - in
   the general direction of Egyptian ports may have
   reinforced elements of doubt in the minds of the several
   Israeli pilots who looked the ship over in the forenoon.

4.  The colors were shot down early in the action and were
   replaced prior to the PT attack.

5.  The immediate confusion milling around astern followed
by peaceful

                       [161]

overtures by the attacking surface forces after launching
only two torpedoes of the six presumed available (two on
each PT boat), indicate these craft may well have identified
the colors for the first time when they got in close enough
to see clearly through the smoke and flames billowing, at
times above the mast head.

6.  There are no available indications that the attack was
intended against a U. S. Ship.

7.  LIBERTY'S position at the time of the attack has been
previously ordered changed farther to seaward by JCS;
however, the messages relating to these changes were not
known to the ship before the attack took place. The reasons
these messages were not known to the ship can be determined
in all instances except for one.  Since LIBERTY records and
knowledgeable personnel were lost in the action, it is
impossible to determine the disposition of the message.

8.  The communication delays and mis-routing errors which
caused these several non-deliveries combined with delays in
initiating follow-up actions on operational instructions
received, all contributed to the ship itself being unaware
of plans and decisions made for her repositioning.  A
detailed accounting of the five pertinent messages are
attached as appendices one through five.

9. The absence of any identifiable threat to the ship
apparently caused the foregoing referred to operational
actions to be taken and implemented in routine manner, i.e.,
without resorting to highest precedence (Flash) traffic.

10. USS LIBERTY  was assigned technical research tasks to be
performed in the eastern Mediterranean by the Joint Chiefs
of Staff.  LIBERTY first became aware of this new tasking
when she received sailing orders from Abidjan on the Ivory
Coast on the 24th day of May 1967.  The precise tasking by
which LIBERTY was ordered to depart Abidjan is significant.
In this tasking language, LIBERTY was directed to proceed to
her new operating area in the eastern Mediterranean via Rota
for pick-up of specifics at "best speed."

                       [162]

11.  LIBERTY received her basic operational and mission
guidance from the JCS through her new operational chain in
JCS 011545Z.  LIBERTY proceeded to comply.

12. The Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY conducted the
operations of his ship in accordance with the intent of
directives received by him. The operating area of LIBERTY on
8 June was in accordance with the announce- ments of
intended movement promulgated by the Commanding Officer USS
LIBERTY.  Such operating areas were normal to the
accomplishment of LIBERTY's mission.  These announcements
were addressed to, and presumably received, by all seniors
in the chain of LIBERTY's operational command. LIBERTY
received no directive, prior to the attack, that higher
authority desired that the ship operate at least 100 miles
from the coastline of the UAR.

13.  LIBERTY responded to her newly assigned mission by
 departing Abidjan promptly within some four hours from the
 time of receipt of her sailing orders.  LIBERTY experienced
 minor engineering difficulties enroute Rota which caused
 her arrival there somewhat later than originally planned.
 On departure Rota, LIBERTY filed her movement report and
 declared therein her intention to make best speed in
 compliance with the JCS detailed tasking assignments set
 forth in JCS message dtg 011545Z June 1967.  It is
 significant to note that in this JCS tasking, two time
 frames were identified, one covering the period between 1
 June through 8 June, the second covering the period 9 June
 to 30 June.  During the first period (1 through 8 June),
 LIBERTY's movements were prescribed by the JCS to cover her
 transit along the north African littoral; and therein were
 prescribed minimum closest points of approach allowed to
 national maritime boundaries.  The terminal point in this 1
 through 8 June time frame was to be a navigational position
 at latitude 32 North, longitude 33 East. The second time
 frame addressed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, assigned
 LIBERTY an operating area bounded  on the North by latitude
 32 North, the north African/Israeli littoral on the south
 and between longitudes 33 East and 34 East.  It might well
 occur to some that LIBERTY's attack occurred on 8 June,
 which would have placed her considerably farther to the
 North of the African coast, had she conformed explicitly
 with the aforementioned JCS directive.  However, as LIBERTY
 proceeded eastward through the Mediterranean from Rota, she
 filed three separate messages

                       [163]

reports of position and intent which advised superiors of
her plans to anticipate arrival on station - that is, to
arrive somewhat earlier than prescribed by the Joint Chiefs
of Staff.  Moreover, LIBERTY advised superiors of her
specific intentions to proceed to and operate in the closer
of the two areas to the north African coast - that is south
of latitude 32 north.  Finally in this regard, LIBERTY
reported her arrival at her final destination to appropriate
addressees.

14.  It is understood from representatives of the JCS Fact
Finding Group that it was receipt of LIBERTY's 7 June
SITREP/POSIT report which stated her final destination which
prompted concern in the JRC as to her proximity to the
African coast on the night of June 7th.  This concern by
responsible authorities, who initially has tasked LIBERTY,
resulted in follow-on actions and directives to the ship
which were either never received or were transmitted on the
fleet broadcast from NAVCOMMSTA Asmara after the attack has
taken place.

15.  Pertinent to the findings of fact is the matter of
communication conditions regarding USS LIBERTY during the
period of 1 and 8 June.  The ship is known not to have
received at least five messages sent prior to the attack,
each of which was not only important but, in that respect,
critical to the events which terminated in the aggravated
attack on this ship on June the 8th.

16.  Higher authority modified  LIBERTY's original
operational guidance between June first and the attack on
the eighth, which, if she had received it, would have
resulted in her being further off shore.

17.  Combination and compounding of many delayed
communication deliveries related to LIBERTY incident denied
the ship the benefit of command decisions actually made
prior to the attack which, among other things, would have
caused the ship, as a minimum, to be heading further
off-shore from her 081200Z actual position.

18.  Pre-attack overflights of LIBERTY: (First air attack
occurred at 1403 local) Unidentified aircraft circled
LIBERTY at:

                       [164]

0850 ( 5 hours 13 minutes prior to attack) (080742Z refers)
1056 ( 3 hours  7 minutes prior to attack) 1126 ( 2 hours 37
minutes prior to attack) 081022Z refers

Hull markings were clean and freshly painted - ensign was
flying from foremast halyard.

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.

20.  Motor Torpedo Boat attack on LIBERTY. Twenty minutes
following air attack, MTB's closed ship to a position 2000
yards on starboard quarter and signaled ship by flashing
light.  At this time ship had been making turns for FLANK
speed for 9 minutes (Estima- ted SOA 15-17 knots).  Holiday
ensign was flying from the starboard yardarm for at least
five minutes before torpedo attack was launched.  LIBERTY 50
cal. guns opened fire while the MTS was signaling.  The
torpedo attack was launched shortly after the MTBs were
fired upon, and MTB's strafed the ship with machine gun fire
as, at least, one MTB passed down the starboard side.

24. Offers of assistance. Post air attack signaling by MTB's
(before torpedo attack), may have been an offer of
assistance.

Thirty minutes after attacking LIBERTY the MTBs signaled in
 English, "Do you need help?"

Two hours and 10 minutes after torpedo attack (2 hours 40
minutes after air attack) an Israeli helo apparently offered
assistance.

Israeli defense forces reported they conducted air and
surface searches for survivors at the scene of the attack
responding to a U. S. request.

22.  Groups of up to two and three jet and propeller
aircraft begin coming

                     [165]

out from shore and circling ship at altitudes ranging from
500 up to several thousand feet at about eight hundred local
on day of attack.  Planes in question were otherwise active
over El Arish on Sinai north coast which was plainly visible
from the ship some sixteen miles off shore.

Ship's navigation was sound and practical, using bearings on
minaret in El Arish and radar range to beach at that point.

23. The ship had exercises at full G. Q. and secured only a
short time prior to the unprovoked attack.  After securing
from G. Q., the Commanding Officer had admonished all hands
over the PA system that large billowing clouds of black
smoke ashore were evidence of intense military activity,
therefore, crew should be "heads up ball players" as long as
she was in that close.

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.  Well directed initial air attacks
had wiped out the ability of the four 50 cal. machine guns
to be effective.

25.  PT attack first developed from starboard side and was
identified as a high speed run in.  Center and lead PT began
flashing signal light and very shortly thereafter the
Commanding Officer identified the Star of David flag on this
lead boat.  LIBERTY's signal light had been shot away
requiring dependence upon an Aldis lamp to try and penetrate
the smoke on the bearing of the PTs.

26.  The Commanding Officer had passed word to stand by for
torpedo attack and the forward starboard 50 cal. fired a
very short burst in the direction of the boats on the
gunner's own initiative.  Having seen Israeli flag on the
PT, the Commanding Officer waved to the forward gunner to
cease firing. 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.

27.  The reaction of all three PTs immediately after launch,
when they stopped and milled around close aboard LIBERTY and
then offered help by signal light, combine to indicate this
was the first time the U. S. large colors flying were
actually positively identified.  Not having signal lights
available, the Commanding Officer then made the
international flaghoist meaning, "Not Under Command."

28.  Flat, calm conditions and the slow five knot patrol
speed of LIBERTY in forenoon when she was being looked over
initially may well have produced insufficient wind for
steaming colors enough to be seen by pilots.

29.  USS LIBERTY had installed communications equipment
whose reliability and degree of sophistication produced a
feeling of maximum confidence in operators, the
Communications Officer, and the Commanding  Officer
regarding the reliability of reception on fleet broadcast
which minimized the number of missed numbers.

30.  In amplification of the proceeding statement, the
superior communi- cation capability inherent in LIBERTY's
embarked element for technical research purposes combined
with interests of economy in personnel have dictated that
during LIBERTY's operation in her present configuration she
used the best embarked equipments and personnel available to
serve both her technical research requirements as well as
operational and administrative requirements for the ship
itself.  The resulting consolidation of functions found
LIBERTY organized internally in a way such that, in the
person of a single officer we find both LIBERTY's
Communication Officer and the Assistant Director of
Technical Research. This system had well.  After the attack,
those LIBERTY personnel left alive who had been serving in
combined capacities of this sort reported their conviction
that such practices should continue.

                     [167]

31.  The aforementioned facts relative to communication
procedural peculiarities unique to ships of LIBERTY's
mission resulted in the ship transmitting under the
scheduling control of the research department. This practice
permitted optimum performance by the research department,
scheduling outgoing transmissions during lull periods of
research activities; furthermore, when available research
lull periods were short, the practice had grown up, quite
naturally, to combine into single transmission packages all
of the outgoing traffic which had accumulated. Such
procedures necessitated transmission of each ships
communication package under a classification applicable to
the highest classification of any single element within the
package itself.  Such transmission packages would frequently
contain research material, ship position reports, and,
periodically, requests for messages missed on the regular
ship broadcast schedule.  A built-in delay factor exists in
this procedure however, inasmuch as not all shore-based
terminals are equipped to accommodate research material.  In
the case of LIBERTY during the time period under
consideration, the closest available eligible terminal for
LIBERTY research material was NAVSECGRUDET Morocco, rather
than NAVCOMMSTA Asmara, which happened to be serving LIBERTY
as a subscriber at the time of the attack.   The above
conditions are detailed to point up occurrence of delays
which must be anticipated in any such system.  In summary,
if LIBERTY had a normal outgoing message requesting missing
sked numbers, it would first have to wait, under normal
circumstances, for transmission during a lull period.  It
would next, by virtue of leaving the ship as part of a
package containing research data, go to NAVSECGRU- DET
Morocco where the combined communication package would be
broken down in its component parts; thirdly, the element of
the package requesting retransmission of missed fleet
broadcast numbers would then have to be sent from NAVCOMMSTA
Morocco back to NAVCOMMSTA Asmara for action, Asmara being
the transmitting station serving LIBERTY at the time.

                     [168]

32.  Detailed questioning of available surviving
communication witnesses disclosed that LIBERTY had never
before found missing messages, subsequently requested and
received, to have been critical to ship's operational
commitments.

This fact was explained by ship's personnel as being due to
the very few messages ever missed.  This condition was
attributed to superior equipment in the ship coupled with
the fact that the ship operated independently as a regular
practice and had not found herself wanting at any time
previous.

33.  It is important to be aware at this point that there
are no logs and or records available in LIBERTY.  There are
no communication officers left alive with first hand
knowledge of the missed message backlog on 8 June.  It could
only be determined from testimony that the ship had been
copying transmissions from NAVCOMSTA Asmara with no apparent
difficulty from 70000lZ and the time of the attack.  One
witness who was on watch on the Asmara broadcast between the
hours of 0645 and 1615 on 7 June stated that he had logged
no missed message numbers during the period of his watch and
that the reception of the JRAIT broadcast was excellent.

34.  LIBERTY's technical mission was one that made it
necessary, in exercising the aforementioned close
cooperation, to use minimum electronic transmissions and
radiations on certain frequencies - radio transmissions
particularly.  LIBERTY was continually subjected to and used
to the prejudicial effects such transmissions  would on the
degree of efficiency of her primary functions.  In summary
on this point, ships of LIBERTY's configuration, like
submarines, are members a "silent service" all their own.

35.  It is found that it has been, and continues standard
practice, in ships of this type to cultivate great patience
with regards to desires to get electrical traffic off the
ship because of the prejudicial effect on the ship's
mission.

36.  It is evident that communications procedures for ships
of this type would be improved were they to be considered in
a communication category analogous to submarines.

                     [169]

37.  On the matter of operational control of LIBERTY vis a
vis the precise directives to the ship governing the
application of her embarked capabilities, it is important to
understand LIBERTY's situation as a mobile platform, under
naval command, transporting capabilities belonging to a
service or agency other than the Navy.  This condition and
situation, while not unique to naval platforms, requires a
complete awareness and understanding of the very close
coordination and cooperation between those responsible for
operation of and positioning of the platform itself in
relation to those responsible for the embarked capabilities.
Detailed testimony discloses that LIBERTY found absolutely
no difficulties accommodating to this conditions, unique
within the navy to ships off this particular type.

38.  The on-line crypto capability has engendered a
dangerous willingness to send more classified traffic than
in days of manual decoding without required proportionate
increase in experienced supervisory personnel to ride herd
on traffic quantum increases.  Conversely, we find often
very inexperienced personnel being the first to give
attention to misrouted messages such as those in question.

39.  Key messages critical to international relations were
not in this case, paralleled on other circuits.

40.  High precedence of operational messages is too often
not enough to overcome circuit choking resulting from large
volume of such as FBIS of the same precedence competing for
inexperienced operator attention at the same time.

41.  LIBERTY's embarked "warning" capabilities apparently
gave no indication of impending danger during the period
prior to the attack.

42.  LIBERTY had experienced periodic reconnaissance on this
and other operating stations which tended to create a
feeling of "acceptance without undue concern" conditions as
they were on 8 June 1967.

Reconnaissance experiences known to LIBERTY and other ships
of LIBERTY's class in other parts of the world minimized
concern by LIBERTY personnel

                     [170]

over recon efforts on 8 June.

43.   Commanding Officer LIBERTY appropriately reported
recon early on A.M. of 8 June through her "locating two".
This report was transmitted promptly by ship despite
temporary interruption of her mission, at the direction of
the Commanding Officer.

44.   Up to the time of the attack, testimony disclosed no
reasons to abort LIBERTY's mission in accordance with
paragraph 1A of Appendix B to SM 676-66 of 19 August 1966.

45.  The degrees of coordination and accuracy of the air and
surface attacks combined first to wipe out defense and
shipboard control capabilities, followed by the crippling
blow of a torpedo.

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.

47.  The heroism displayed by the Commanding Officer,
officers and men of the LIBERTY was exceptional.  The
Commanding Officer is being recommended for the
Congressional Medal, and the ship for an appropriate unit
citation.  These planned actions are fully supported by
testimony to the Court.

48.  LIBERTY apparently experienced a phenomenon identified
as electronic jamming of her voice radio just prior to and
during air attacks.  This jamming was described as a steady
carrier without modulation.

49.  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.

50.  Extent of Damage. The major material damage to LIBERTY
resulted from the torpedo explosion, as follows:

A.  SHELL DAMAGE:  Hole centered at FR 60 and extending 24
ft downward from just below second deck and longitudinally
from frame  53

                     [171]

to frame 66 (39 feet).  The hole was teardrop in shape,
larger at bottom.

B.  Interior structural damage:  Outboard 15 feet of first
platform and associated structure badly damaged.  Lesser
damage  to second platform deck (tank top).  Second deck and
frames buckled from frame 52 to frame 62 and extending
inboard 15 feet.

C.  Major damage to all interior joiner bulkheads below
second deck frame 52 to 78, entire width of ship.

In summary of above, the two research compartments, which
extend the entire width of the ship, suffered severe
structural damage and were flooded.  Installed equipment and
fittings were reduced to twisted wreckage.

Topside damage resulting from aircraft strafing and rocked
attacks and from MTB strafing  (ship was hit by more than
821 shells and rockets, many of them incendiary) summarized
as follows:

Pilot house and signal bridge forward deck house, all gun
tubs, many antennas including radar antenna, numerous
bulkheads and decks holed by explosive rockets.  Whale boat
destroyed in davits by incendiary rockets and many life
rafts holed or burned in their stowages. Flag bags burned
and numerous fires resulting from incendiary munitions.

The gyro compass, air conditioning plant and many minor
items of equipment, located in superstructure spaces, were
damaged or destroyed. Numerous living spaces and personnel
effects damaged by holing, shrapnel and wetting during
firefighting.

Cost estimated - Value of destroyed research equipment $6-8
million, 12 months lead time.  Structural repairs to ship
and ship's equipment $2-4 million, 3-4 months.

51. The Israeli government set forth 7 points of rationale
to explain their position relative to the attack on LIBERTY
in USDAO Tel Aviv message DTG 091520Z.  Legal opinion and
other comments on each is appended hereto (Appendix VI).

                     [172]

52.  That any killed or wounded personnel attached to the
USS  LIBERTY during the attack are eligible for the Purple
Heart under the provisions of SECNAVINST. P1650.1C Chapter
TWO SECTION THREE ARTICLE 231 PARA 12 b. sub-paras (4) and
(5).  The Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY is preparing a
listing of eligible personnel to be recommended.

                     [173]

                   [signature] Isaac C. KIDD, Jr.
                   Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy
                   President

                   [signature] Bernard J. LAUFF
                   Captain, U.S. Navy Member

                  [signature] Bert N. ATKINSON,
                  Jr. Captain, U.S. Navy Member

[signature] Isaac C. KIDD, Jr. Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy
President

[signature] Ward BOSTON, Jr. Captain, U.S. Navy Counsel for
the Court

                     [174]


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

"This time President Johnson ordered the recall with the comment that *he did not care if every man drowned and the ship sank, but he would not embarrass his allies."*

When the Commander in Chief sacrifices the lives of servicemen to avoid "embarrassing" Israel, is it likely the Commander's handmaidens won't LIE in the official record?

Maybe you should tell us how many more American lives should be sacrificed for the Jewish State of Israel?


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Link? Gotta love these quotes with no links lol
Context too.

My links have been to actual documents . 

Bs links are irrelevant.

P.S you are a moron.


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

JBeukema said:


> If it 'wasn't a mistake' what reason would they have to attack the nation that pretty much makes sure they exist



Relying on long term memory from way back when I read the Book, I believe responsibility rested on both sides. The USA made some major blunders, and so did Israel. All of which contributed to what I would plainly define as a clusterfuck. Both sides compounded the problem through incompetence and failed willingness to communicate. What's your take on the Reflecting data off of the moon spy-technology that the Liberty was incorporating at the time, and the impression it left????? Do you think the Joint-Chiefs had it together when it sent a rescue squadron in armed with nukes????? The recall, and the delay it caused, contribute to the loss of life????? Was the USS Liberty clearly Flagged and identifiable????? I Truly believe so. It was strafed and torpedoed with Israel knowing something was amiss with their assault. I believe an Israeli Pilot who refused to fire on the ship and returned to his base, was dealt with harshly by his command. How about card's on the table next time something sticky comes down, at least with allied players. 

http://www.usslibertyveterans.org/


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Amazing how some people ignore the concrete evidence that it was an accident.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Link? Gotta love these quotes with no links lol
> Context too.
> 
> My links have been to actual documents .
> ...


PS:

You're a brain dead slave.

My link to LBJ's quote can be found in a previous post.

Maybe you and yours would be happier in Jerusalem...


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Since you think all of the US government is corrupt why don't you formally join Al Qaida?


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Amazing how some people ignore the concrete evidence that it was an accident.



Read the Book.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Read the document of the transcript of the Israeli pilots as gotten by a US spy plane.

It shows that the Israelis thought it was an Egyptian ship.

That confirms beyond any doubt it was an accident.

I posted the link to the actual document several times here.

A US ship off the Egyptian coast in a hot war is not a safe place to be.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Amazing how some people ignore the concrete evidence that it was an accident.


All of the concrete evidence presently available, which is mainly the testimony of the survivors in Lt. Ennes' book, makes it clear that the attack was deliberate.  Aside from the vaguely stated opinion of a JAG officer there is absolutely nothing contained in the hearing minutes you've posted here that in any way suggests the attack was accidental.  The most relevent statement occurs at #57 (in part two of your message) in which it is determined that the ensign (American Flag) was flying prior to and after the attack.  The obvious question is whether or not the Israeli Defense Forces are issued binoculars.

You should know this incident is far from being lost in the fog of history.  The following is excerpted from a TruthOut article which refers to another recent attack by Israel on an unarmed vessel and indicates ongoing interest in pursuing the truth about what happened to the Liberty.


_In 2003, an independent commission of highly regarded experts was created to look into the matter. The Moorer Commission, named after its chairman, included Adm. Thomas H. Moorer, United States Navy (Ret.), former chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff and Gen. Raymond G. Davis, United States Marine Corps and former assistant commandant of the Marine Corps.

Findings of this commission included: "Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against USS Liberty ... Israeli torpedo boats later returned to machine-gun at close range three of the Liberty's life rafts that had been lowered into the water by survivors to rescue the most seriously wounded ... Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew."

Ray McGovern is a senior CIA analyst who served under seven presidents - from John Kennedy to George H. W. Bush.

McGovern is clear about why he believes the US government continues to refuse to launch an investigation. "For the same reason that President Johnson called back the fighter/bombers; i.e., so as not to embarrass our friend Israel," McGovern explained to Truthout, "It is my view that the killing of 34 USS Liberty crew and wounded more than 170 others and the fact that the US Navy, Congress, executive branch not only prohibited the survivors to speak about it, but also launched faux 'inquiries,' is the poster child for what is wrong with the US relationship with Israel, showing the penchant of senior US officials to sacrifice honesty, justice, and US servicemen on the sacral altar of "compassionate attachment" to Israel."_

t r u t h o u t | US Navy Veterans Continue to Seek Justice for Israeli Attack


----------



## eots (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Since you think all of the US government is corrupt why don't you formally join Al Qaida?



because that would be stupid and illogical to abandon ones country for government corruption in favor of a even more corrupt entity that was essintialy created by that very same corrupt government

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnV_pNe_BB0]YouTube - Al Qaeda Doesn't Exist (Documentary) - 2[/ame]


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

To the galactically stupid .

The Israeli pilots talking to each other and their command was caught by a US spy plane.

The transcript was declassified. I posted it.

It confirms that the pilots thought it was an egyptian ship.

This evidence is irrefutable.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Also your sources are extremely biased which means using them proves nothing.

There is no reason to believe any of the information is true.

Anyone can say anything on a web site, it doesn't mean it's true.


----------



## eots (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> To the galactically stupid .
> 
> The Israeli pilots talking to each other and their command was caught by a US spy plane.
> 
> ...



Yes and OJ is innocent.. I have the court transcript to prove it.. the evidence is irrefutable !!


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

eots said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > To the galactically stupid .
> ...



1) You are an idiot

2) It's a transcript of the Israeli pilots and their command as they were talking during the incident

3)


----------



## eots (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



Says who ? , the perpetrators ?...


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

The National Security Agency.

I also provided the link to the document.


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Read the document of the transcript of the Israeli pilots as gotten by a US spy plane.
> 
> It shows that the Israelis thought it was an Egyptian ship.
> 
> ...



Sorry Charlie, it was a clusterfuck that both Countries contributed to. There was confusion, distrust, and withheld information, which compounded a tragedy. Repeated strafing's, a torpedo strike, napalm. It was before the torpedo attack that the Israeli Pilots realized the Ship was not Arab. Was it an accident????? Yes. Did both sides contribute to the loss of life????? Yes. Thank God that no nukes were used that day.

USS Liberty: Israel Did Not Intend to Bomb the Ship


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> The National Security Agency.
> 
> I also provided the link to the document.



Don't you know that the NSA does not really exist Mike.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Cute editorial that has nothing to do with reality.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Intense said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > The National Security Agency.
> ...


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Cute editorial that has nothing to do with reality.



It actually supports most of what you claim. You just want to here what you want to hear. The point in question is when did the Israeli's find out that the ship was not Arab. Why were they even trying to communicate with the Liberty before the torpedo and napalm attacks????? Both sides fucked up. Why can't you just accept that? Where were the Joint Chief's through all of this????? Where was the rescue????? Why no intervention????? This encounter is loaded with coulda-woulda-shoulda's all the way through. Only a Government Bureaucrat would fail to see that.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Why don't you read the US naval court of testimony transcript and find out for yourself rather than rely on conspiracy theories?


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Also I am not making claims, I provided the facts.


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

You provide them and then ignore them.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Books are opinions.

I provided the proof from the NSA, US navy, joint chiefs, cia, and the senate intelligence committee.

I don't care about someone selling his book.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 21, 2010)

Letter to Israel from Secretary Of State Dean Rusk re: Attack on USS Liberty:


_35 Diplomatic Note From Secretary of State Rusk to the Israeli Ambassador, National Archives and Records Administration,
RG 59, Central Files 1967-69, POL 27 ARAB-ISR., Exhibit 20
&#8220;Washington, June 10, 1967.

The Secretary of State presents his compliments to His Excellency the Ambassador of Israel and has the honor to refer to the Ambassadors Note of June 10, 1967 concerning the attack by Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats on the United States naval vessel U.S.S. Liberty, which was carried out at 1605 and 1625 hours local time. Respectively, on June 8, 1967 while the U.S.S. Liberty was engaged in peaceful activities in international
waters.

*At the time of the attack, the U.S.S Liberty was flying the American flag and its identification was clearly indicated in large white letters and numerals on its hull. It was broad daylight and the weather conditions were excellent. Experience demonstrates that both the flag and the identification number of the vessel were readily visible from the air. At 1450 hours local time on June 8, 1967, two Israeli aircraft circled the U.S.S. Liberty three times, with the evident purpose of identifying the vessel. Accordingly there is every reason to believe that the U.S.S Liberty was identified, or at least her nationality determined, by Israeli aircraft approximately one hour before the attack. In these circumstances, the later military attack by Israeli aircraft on the U.S.S. Liberty is quite literally incomprehensible.* As a minimum, the attack must be condemned as an act of military recklessness reflecting wanton disregard for human life.

The subsequent attack by Israeli torpedo boats, substantially after the vessel was or should have been identified by Israeli military forces, manifests the same reckless disregard for human life. The silhouette and conduct of the U.S.S Liberty readily distinguished it from any vessel that could have been considered as hostile. 

The U.S.S. Liberty was peacefully engaged, posed no threat whatsoever to the torpedo boats, and obviously carried no armament affording it a combat capability. It could and should have been scrutinized visually at close range before torpedoes were fired.

While the Ambassador of Israel has informed Secretary of State that "the Government of Israel is prepared to make amends for the tragic loss of life and material damage," *the Secretary of State wishes to make clear that the United States Government expects the Government of Israel also to take the disciplinary measures which international law requires in the event of wrongful conduct by the military personnel of a State.* He wishes also to make clear that the United States Government expects the Government of Israel to issue instructions necessary to ensure that United States personnel and property will not again be endangered by the wrongful actions of Israeli military personnel.

The United States Government expects that the Government of Israel will provide compensation in accordance with international law to the extent that it is possible to compensate for the losses sustained in this tragic event. The Department of State will, in the near future, present to the Government of Israel a full monetary statement of its claim.&#8221;_

http://www.gtr5.com/evidence/warcrimes.pdf

==============================

The above letter makes it clear that even though the Secretary of State's immediate inquiry into the incident satisfied him that the attack was deliberate his tone is that of scolding a naughty child rather than addressing a protectorate which had just committed an egregious act of war against the United States by deliberately attacking a U.S. Naval vessel, callously murdering and injuring its sailors, and then pretending it was an accident.  This clearly reflects the disposition of the Johnson Administration toward Israel, the reason for which is utterly baffling to me and to every loyal American citizen I've discussed this issue with.  

The glaring question is why was Israel allowed to get away with this?


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Books are opinions.
> 
> I provided the proof from the NSA, US navy, joint chiefs, cia, and the senate intelligence committee.
> 
> I don't care about someone selling his book.



Right. You don't care about the Book, you don't care about the facts that disagree with your position, you don't care about the truth, which obviously has no or little relevance to your position. You have made that abundantly clear. It's official though. The Joint Chiefs really outdid themselves that day, and in the cover up. You wouldn't know about that though, not having even heard the other side of the argument. Did I tell you, I think you are perfectly suited for Government work.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)




----------



## amiam* (Sep 21, 2010)

I voted for a fuckup. I am of the opinion the right hand did not know what the left hand was doing. A massive failure to communicate.

I am suspicious of the nature of the USS Liberty's mission. I recall a similar communications ship was sunk at the Bay of Pigs with catastrophic results for the US sponsored invasion of Cuba.


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

amiam* said:


> I voted for a fuckup. I am of the opinion the right hand did not know what the left hand was doing. A massive failure to communicate.
> 
> I am suspicious of the nature of the USS Liberty's mission. I recall a similar communications ship was sunk at the Bay of Pigs with catastrophic results for the US sponsored invasion of Cuba.



It was an Intelligence Ship, Einstein. With a front row seat to the 6 Day War.


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


>



Don't worry, there is alway's treatment.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Intense said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



Then there may be hope for you.

How do you explain away the transcript of the Israeli pilots and command that was obtained from a NSA spy plane.

I posted the link to the declassified document of the transcript.

This should be good.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

MikeK said:


> Letter to Israel from Secretary Of State Dean Rusk re: Attack on USS Liberty:
> 
> 
> _35 Diplomatic Note From Secretary of State Rusk to the Israeli Ambassador, National Archives and Records Administration,
> ...



From the US Naval Court Of Inquiry

Once again the conclusion.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Available evidence combines to indicate the attack on
LIBERTY on 8 June was in fact a case of mistaken
identity.

2. The calm conditions and slow ship speed may well have
made the American Flag difficult to identify.

3. The ship's westerly heading at the time of attack - in
the general direction of Egyptian ports may have
reinforced elements of doubt in the minds of the several
Israeli pilots who looked the ship over in the forenoon.

4. The colors were shot down early in the action and were
replaced prior to the PT attack.

5. The immediate confusion milling around astern followed
by peaceful

[161]

overtures by the attacking surface forces after launching
only two torpedoes of the six presumed available (two on
each PT boat), indicate these craft may well have identified
the colors for the first time when they got in close enough
to see clearly through the smoke and flames billowing, at
times above the mast head.

6. There are no available indications that the attack was
intended against a U. S. Ship.

7. LIBERTY'S position at the time of the attack has been
previously ordered changed farther to seaward by JCS;
however, the messages relating to these changes were not
known to the ship before the attack took place. The reasons
these messages were not known to the ship can be determined
in all instances except for one. Since LIBERTY records and
knowledgeable personnel were lost in the action, it is
impossible to determine the disposition of the message.

8. The communication delays and mis-routing errors which
caused these several non-deliveries combined with delays in
initiating follow-up actions on operational instructions
received, all contributed to the ship itself being unaware
of plans and decisions made for her repositioning. A
detailed accounting of the five pertinent messages are
attached as appendices one through five.

9. The absence of any identifiable threat to the ship
apparently caused the foregoing referred to operational
actions to be taken and implemented in routine manner, i.e.,
without resorting to highest precedence (Flash) traffic.

10. USS LIBERTY was assigned technical research tasks to be
performed in the eastern Mediterranean by the Joint Chiefs
of Staff. LIBERTY first became aware of this new tasking
when she received sailing orders from Abidjan on the Ivory
Coast on the 24th day of May 1967. The precise tasking by
which LIBERTY was ordered to depart Abidjan is significant.
In this tasking language, LIBERTY was directed to proceed to
her new operating area in the eastern Mediterranean via Rota
for pick-up of specifics at "best speed."

[162]

11. LIBERTY received her basic operational and mission
guidance from the JCS through her new operational chain in
JCS 011545Z. LIBERTY proceeded to comply.

12. The Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY conducted the
operations of his ship in accordance with the intent of
directives received by him. The operating area of LIBERTY on
8 June was in accordance with the announce- ments of
intended movement promulgated by the Commanding Officer USS
LIBERTY. Such operating areas were normal to the
accomplishment of LIBERTY's mission. These announcements
were addressed to, and presumably received, by all seniors
in the chain of LIBERTY's operational command. LIBERTY
received no directive, prior to the attack, that higher
authority desired that the ship operate at least 100 miles
from the coastline of the UAR.

13. LIBERTY responded to her newly assigned mission by
departing Abidjan promptly within some four hours from the
time of receipt of her sailing orders. LIBERTY experienced
minor engineering difficulties enroute Rota which caused
her arrival there somewhat later than originally planned.
On departure Rota, LIBERTY filed her movement report and
declared therein her intention to make best speed in
compliance with the JCS detailed tasking assignments set
forth in JCS message dtg 011545Z June 1967. It is
significant to note that in this JCS tasking, two time
frames were identified, one covering the period between 1
June through 8 June, the second covering the period 9 June
to 30 June. During the first period (1 through 8 June),
LIBERTY's movements were prescribed by the JCS to cover her
transit along the north African littoral; and therein were
prescribed minimum closest points of approach allowed to
national maritime boundaries. The terminal point in this 1
through 8 June time frame was to be a navigational position
at latitude 32 North, longitude 33 East. The second time
frame addressed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, assigned
LIBERTY an operating area bounded on the North by latitude
32 North, the north African/Israeli littoral on the south
and between longitudes 33 East and 34 East. It might well
occur to some that LIBERTY's attack occurred on 8 June,
which would have placed her considerably farther to the
North of the African coast, had she conformed explicitly
with the aforementioned JCS directive. However, as LIBERTY
proceeded eastward through the Mediterranean from Rota, she
filed three separate messages

[163]

reports of position and intent which advised superiors of
her plans to anticipate arrival on station - that is, to
arrive somewhat earlier than prescribed by the Joint Chiefs
of Staff. Moreover, LIBERTY advised superiors of her
specific intentions to proceed to and operate in the closer
of the two areas to the north African coast - that is south
of latitude 32 north. Finally in this regard, LIBERTY
reported her arrival at her final destination to appropriate
addressees.

14. It is understood from representatives of the JCS Fact
Finding Group that it was receipt of LIBERTY's 7 June
SITREP/POSIT report which stated her final destination which
prompted concern in the JRC as to her proximity to the
African coast on the night of June 7th. This concern by
responsible authorities, who initially has tasked LIBERTY,
resulted in follow-on actions and directives to the ship
which were either never received or were transmitted on the
fleet broadcast from NAVCOMMSTA Asmara after the attack has
taken place.

15. Pertinent to the findings of fact is the matter of
communication conditions regarding USS LIBERTY during the
period of 1 and 8 June. The ship is known not to have
received at least five messages sent prior to the attack,
each of which was not only important but, in that respect,
critical to the events which terminated in the aggravated
attack on this ship on June the 8th.

16. Higher authority modified LIBERTY's original
operational guidance between June first and the attack on
the eighth, which, if she had received it, would have
resulted in her being further off shore.
17. Combination and compounding of many delayed
communication deliveries related to LIBERTY incident denied
the ship the benefit of command decisions actually made
prior to the attack which, among other things, would have
caused the ship, as a minimum, to be heading further
off-shore from her 081200Z actual position.

18. Pre-attack overflights of LIBERTY: (First air attack
occurred at 1403 local) Unidentified aircraft circled
LIBERTY at:

[164]

0850 ( 5 hours 13 minutes prior to attack) (080742Z refers)
1056 ( 3 hours 7 minutes prior to attack) 1126 ( 2 hours 37
minutes prior to attack) 081022Z refers

Hull markings were clean and freshly painted - ensign was
flying from foremast halyard.

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.

20. Motor Torpedo Boat attack on LIBERTY. Twenty minutes
following air attack, MTB's closed ship to a position 2000
yards on starboard quarter and signaled ship by flashing
light. At this time ship had been making turns for FLANK
speed for 9 minutes (Estima- ted SOA 15-17 knots). Holiday
ensign was flying from the starboard yardarm for at least
five minutes before torpedo attack was launched. LIBERTY 50
cal. guns opened fire while the MTS was signaling. The
torpedo attack was launched shortly after the MTBs were
fired upon, and MTB's strafed the ship with machine gun fire
as, at least, one MTB passed down the starboard side.

24. Offers of assistance. Post air attack signaling by MTB's
(before torpedo attack), may have been an offer of
assistance.

Thirty minutes after attacking LIBERTY the MTBs signaled in
English, "Do you need help?"

Two hours and 10 minutes after torpedo attack (2 hours 40
minutes after air attack) an Israeli helo apparently offered
assistance.

Israeli defense forces reported they conducted air and
surface searches for survivors at the scene of the attack
responding to a U. S. request.

22. Groups of up to two and three jet and propeller
aircraft begin coming

[165]

out from shore and circling ship at altitudes ranging from
500 up to several thousand feet at about eight hundred local
on day of attack. Planes in question were otherwise active
over El Arish on Sinai north coast which was plainly visible
from the ship some sixteen miles off shore.

Ship's navigation was sound and practical, using bearings on
minaret in El Arish and radar range to beach at that point.

23. The ship had exercises at full G. Q. and secured only a
short time prior to the unprovoked attack. After securing
from G. Q., the Commanding Officer had admonished all hands
over the PA system that large billowing clouds of black
smoke ashore were evidence of intense military activity,
therefore, crew should be "heads up ball players" as long as
she was in that close.

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. Well directed initial air attacks
had wiped out the ability of the four 50 cal. machine guns
to be effective.

25. PT attack first developed from starboard side and was
identified as a high speed run in. Center and lead PT began
flashing signal light and very shortly thereafter the
Commanding Officer identified the Star of David flag on this
lead boat. LIBERTY's signal light had been shot away
requiring dependence upon an Aldis lamp to try and penetrate
the smoke on the bearing of the PTs.

26. The Commanding Officer had passed word to stand by for
torpedo attack and the forward starboard 50 cal. fired a
very short burst in the direction of the boats on the
gunner's own initiative. Having seen Israeli flag on the
PT, the Commanding Officer waved to the forward gunner to
cease firing. 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.

*27. The reaction of all three PTs immediately after launch,
when they stopped and milled around close aboard LIBERTY and
then offered help by signal light, combine to indicate this
was the first time the U. S. large colors flying were
actually positively identified*. Not having signal lights
available, the Commanding Officer then made the
international flaghoist meaning, "Not Under Command."

28. Flat, calm conditions and the slow five knot patrol
speed of LIBERTY in forenoon when she was being looked over
initially may well have produced insufficient wind for
steaming colors enough to be seen by pilots.

29. USS LIBERTY had installed communications equipment
whose reliability and degree of sophistication produced a
feeling of maximum confidence in operators, the
Communications Officer, and the Commanding Officer
regarding the reliability of reception on fleet broadcast
which minimized the number of missed numbers.

30. In amplification of the proceeding statement, the
superior communi- cation capability inherent in LIBERTY's
embarked element for technical research purposes combined
with interests of economy in personnel have dictated that
during LIBERTY's operation in her present configuration she
used the best embarked equipments and personnel available to
serve both her technical research requirements as well as
operational and administrative requirements for the ship
itself. The resulting consolidation of functions found
LIBERTY organized internally in a way such that, in the
person of a single officer we find both LIBERTY's
Communication Officer and the Assistant Director of
Technical Research. This system had well. After the attack,
those LIBERTY personnel left alive who had been serving in
combined capacities of this sort reported their conviction
that such practices should continue.

[167]

31. The aforementioned facts relative to communication
procedural peculiarities unique to ships of LIBERTY's
mission resulted in the ship transmitting under the
scheduling control of the research department. This practice
permitted optimum performance by the research department,
scheduling outgoing transmissions during lull periods of
research activities; furthermore, when available research
lull periods were short, the practice had grown up, quite
naturally, to combine into single transmission packages all
of the outgoing traffic which had accumulated. Such
procedures necessitated transmission of each ships
communication package under a classification applicable to
the highest classification of any single element within the
package itself. Such transmission packages would frequently
contain research material, ship position reports, and,
periodically, requests for messages missed on the regular
ship broadcast schedule. A built-in delay factor exists in
this procedure however, inasmuch as not all shore-based
terminals are equipped to accommodate research material. In
the case of LIBERTY during the time period under
consideration, the closest available eligible terminal for
LIBERTY research material was NAVSECGRUDET Morocco, rather
than NAVCOMMSTA Asmara, which happened to be serving LIBERTY
as a subscriber at the time of the attack. The above
conditions are detailed to point up occurrence of delays
which must be anticipated in any such system. In summary,
if LIBERTY had a normal outgoing message requesting missing
sked numbers, it would first have to wait, under normal
circumstances, for transmission during a lull period. It
would next, by virtue of leaving the ship as part of a
package containing research data, go to NAVSECGRU- DET
Morocco where the combined communication package would be
broken down in its component parts; thirdly, the element of
the package requesting retransmission of missed fleet
broadcast numbers would then have to be sent from NAVCOMMSTA
Morocco back to NAVCOMMSTA Asmara for action, Asmara being
the transmitting station serving LIBERTY at the time.

[168]

32. Detailed questioning of available surviving
communication witnesses disclosed that LIBERTY had never
before found missing messages, subsequently requested and
received, to have been critical to ship's operational
commitments.

This fact was explained by ship's personnel as being due to
the very few messages ever missed. This condition was
attributed to superior equipment in the ship coupled with
the fact that the ship operated independently as a regular
practice and had not found herself wanting at any time
previous.

33. It is important to be aware at this point that there
are no logs and or records available in LIBERTY. There are
no communication officers left alive with first hand
knowledge of the missed message backlog on 8 June. It could
only be determined from testimony that the ship had been
copying transmissions from NAVCOMSTA Asmara with no apparent
difficulty from 70000lZ and the time of the attack. One
witness who was on watch on the Asmara broadcast between the
hours of 0645 and 1615 on 7 June stated that he had logged
no missed message numbers during the period of his watch and
that the reception of the JRAIT broadcast was excellent.

34. LIBERTY's technical mission was one that made it
necessary, in exercising the aforementioned close
cooperation, to use minimum electronic transmissions and
radiations on certain frequencies - radio transmissions
particularly. LIBERTY was continually subjected to and used
to the prejudicial effects such transmissions would on the
degree of efficiency of her primary functions. In summary
on this point, ships of LIBERTY's configuration, like
submarines, are members a "silent service" all their own.

35. It is found that it has been, and continues standard
practice, in ships of this type to cultivate great patience
with regards to desires to get electrical traffic off the
ship because of the prejudicial effect on the ship's
mission.

36. It is evident that communications procedures for ships
of this type would be improved were they to be considered in
a communication category analogous to submarines.

[169]

37. On the matter of operational control of LIBERTY vis a
vis the precise directives to the ship governing the
application of her embarked capabilities, it is important to
understand LIBERTY's situation as a mobile platform, under
naval command, transporting capabilities belonging to a
service or agency other than the Navy. This condition and
situation, while not unique to naval platforms, requires a
complete awareness and understanding of the very close
coordination and cooperation between those responsible for
operation of and positioning of the platform itself in
relation to those responsible for the embarked capabilities.
Detailed testimony discloses that LIBERTY found absolutely
no difficulties accommodating to this conditions, unique
within the navy to ships off this particular type.

38. The on-line crypto capability has engendered a
dangerous willingness to send more classified traffic than
in days of manual decoding without required proportionate
increase in experienced supervisory personnel to ride herd
on traffic quantum increases. Conversely, we find often
very inexperienced personnel being the first to give
attention to misrouted messages such as those in question.

39. Key messages critical to international relations were
not in this case, paralleled on other circuits.

40. High precedence of operational messages is too often
not enough to overcome circuit choking resulting from large
volume of such as FBIS of the same precedence competing for
inexperienced operator attention at the same time.

41. LIBERTY's embarked "warning" capabilities apparently
gave no indication of impending danger during the period
prior to the attack.

42. LIBERTY had experienced periodic reconnaissance on this
and other operating stations which tended to create a
feeling of "acceptance without undue concern" conditions as
they were on 8 June 1967.

Reconnaissance experiences known to LIBERTY and other ships
of LIBERTY's class in other parts of the world minimized
concern by LIBERTY personnel

[170]

over recon efforts on 8 June.

43. Commanding Officer LIBERTY appropriately reported
recon early on A.M. of 8 June through her "locating two".
This report was transmitted promptly by ship despite
temporary interruption of her mission, at the direction of
the Commanding Officer.

44. Up to the time of the attack, testimony disclosed no
reasons to abort LIBERTY's mission in accordance with
paragraph 1A of Appendix B to SM 676-66 of 19 August 1966.

45. The degrees of coordination and accuracy of the air and
surface attacks combined first to wipe out defense and
shipboard control capabilities, followed by the crippling
blow of a torpedo.

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.

47. The heroism displayed by the Commanding Officer,
officers and men of the LIBERTY was exceptional. The
Commanding Officer is being recommended for the
Congressional Medal, and the ship for an appropriate unit
citation. These planned actions are fully supported by
testimony to the Court.

48. LIBERTY apparently experienced a phenomenon identified
as electronic jamming of her voice radio just prior to and
during air attacks. This jamming was described as a steady
carrier without modulation.

49. 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.

50. Extent of Damage. The major material damage to LIBERTY
resulted from the torpedo explosion, as follows:

A. SHELL DAMAGE: Hole centered at FR 60 and extending 24
ft downward from just below second deck and longitudinally
from frame 53

[171]

to frame 66 (39 feet). The hole was teardrop in shape,
larger at bottom.

B. Interior structural damage: Outboard 15 feet of first
platform and associated structure badly damaged. Lesser
damage to second platform deck (tank top). Second deck and
frames buckled from frame 52 to frame 62 and extending
inboard 15 feet.

C. Major damage to all interior joiner bulkheads below
second deck frame 52 to 78, entire width of ship.

In summary of above, the two research compartments, which
extend the entire width of the ship, suffered severe
structural damage and were flooded. Installed equipment and
fittings were reduced to twisted wreckage.

Topside damage resulting from aircraft strafing and rocked
attacks and from MTB strafing (ship was hit by more than
821 shells and rockets, many of them incendiary) summarized
as follows:

Pilot house and signal bridge forward deck house, all gun
tubs, many antennas including radar antenna, numerous
bulkheads and decks holed by explosive rockets. Whale boat
destroyed in davits by incendiary rockets and many life
rafts holed or burned in their stowages. Flag bags burned
and numerous fires resulting from incendiary munitions.

The gyro compass, air conditioning plant and many minor
items of equipment, located in superstructure spaces, were
damaged or destroyed. Numerous living spaces and personnel
effects damaged by holing, shrapnel and wetting during
firefighting.

Cost estimated - Value of destroyed research equipment $6-8
million, 12 months lead time. Structural repairs to ship
and ship's equipment $2-4 million, 3-4 months.

51. The Israeli government set forth 7 points of rationale
to explain their position relative to the attack on LIBERTY
in USDAO Tel Aviv message DTG 091520Z. Legal opinion and
other comments on each is appended hereto (Appendix VI).

[172]

52. That any killed or wounded personnel attached to the
USS LIBERTY during the attack are eligible for the Purple
Heart under the provisions of SECNAVINST. P1650.1C Chapter
TWO SECTION THREE ARTICLE 231 PARA 12 b. sub-paras (4) and
(5). The Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY is preparing a
listing of eligible personnel to be recommended.

[173]

[signature] Isaac C. KIDD, Jr.
Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy
President

[signature] Bernard J. LAUFF
Captain, U.S. Navy Member

[signature] Bert N. ATKINSON,
Jr. Captain, U.S. Navy Member

[signature] Isaac C. KIDD, Jr. Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy
President

[signature] Ward BOSTON, Jr. Captain, U.S. Navy Counsel for
the Court


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

MikeK said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Amazing how some people ignore the concrete evidence that it was an accident.
> ...



No it didn't. The actual sworn testimony of the crew members showed that it was accident.

The testimony shows that:

1) The calm waters and slow speed made it difficult to see the flag.

2) The flag was shot down early on

3) The first people to help the crew members came from Israel helos

4) The Liberty wasn't where it was supposed to be due to communication errors.

It was a friendly fire incident, the US has had many of them where they have fired on itself and coalition forces.

You guys try are


----------



## Kalam (Sep 21, 2010)

How much is the Hasbara Committee paying you to be here, CMike?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

Kalam said:


> How much is the Hasbara Committee paying you to be here, CMike?


how much is hamas paying you?


----------



## The Rabbi (Sep 21, 2010)

Kalam said:


> How much is the Hasbara Committee paying you to be here, CMike?



Dont you have something better to do like practicing with your explosive belt?


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > How much is the Hasbara Committee paying you to be here, CMike?
> ...



About at much as Al Qaida is paying you


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



You have yet to explain why the Air Attack ceased when it did, and why. You have yet to explain how the Naval Attack was delayed, and why, or even why the Israel Navy attempted to signal the Liberty, before the Napalm canisters or torpedo were fired. 

Why did the NSA step up to the plate when it mattered, which was during the attack. Why were the Interceptor's, the first response, turned back??? Why was the Liberty ordered so close to shore??? Why in Hell was the Liberty un-escorted in the first place, or was it? What reports do you have of a US Sub witnessing the whole attack???


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...


i think you quoted the WRONG post on that one, mike


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



Well I for one half agree with you.


----------



## Kalam (Sep 21, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > How much is the Hasbara Committee paying you to be here, CMike?
> ...



Nothing. Unlike Israel, Hamas doesn't have enough money at its disposal to support extensive overseas propaganda efforts. You may have noticed that most of the Gaza Strip relies on foreign aid thanks to the crippling Zionist blockade. 

See for yourself:
Hasbara Fellowships - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Intense said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Intense said:
> ...



It was explained in the transcripts. The Israelis finally identified it as an american ship. They were the first to send the rescuers.

I am still waiting for you to answer the questions. You have the document of the NSA that has the transcript of the Israeli pilots and command. It proves that the Israeli pilots thought it was an Egyptian ship.

Explanation? Let me guess? It's part of the vast conspiracy of almost all of the US government agencies that deal with the US navy to protect Israel. They all forged sworn testimony and evidence . 

Pretty close?


----------



## Kalam (Sep 21, 2010)

The Rabbi said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > How much is the Hasbara Committee paying you to be here, CMike?
> ...



What's wrong, Herr Rabbi? Don't like people talking about your employer?


----------



## The Rabbi (Sep 21, 2010)

Kalam said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...



I think with medication you could appear almost normal.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

Kalam said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...


yeah, how evil of them to try to counter the lies of the antisemites


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Kalam said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...



Does Al Qaida mind you doing it?


----------



## Kalam (Sep 21, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



Right. I see it's worked well on you.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

I posted the actual document before...

The USS Liberty

_A U.S. spy plane was sent to the area as soon as the NSA learned of the attack on the Liberty and recorded the conversations of two Israeli Air Force helicopter pilots, which took place between 2:30 and 3:37 p.m. on June 8. The orders radioed to the pilots by their supervisor at the Hatzor base instructing them to search for Egyptian survivors from the Egyptian warship that had just been bombed were also recorded by the NSA. Pay attention. The ship is now identified as Egyptian, the pilots were informed. Nine minutes later, Hatzor told the pilots the ship was believed to be an Egyptian cargo ship. At 3:07, the pilots were first told the ship might not be Egyptian and were instructed to search for survivors and inform the base immediately the nationality of the first person they rescued. It was not until 3:12 that one of the pilots reported that he saw an American flag flying over the ship at which point he was instructed to verify if it was indeed a U.S. vessel.6_


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



First it was Identified as Non-Arab, that was before the main attack. That is the point you repeatedly trip over. I believe the report went in 12 minutes into the Air Attack. I don't need to look past that to see there was a big problem. I'm not just blaming Israel Mike. I view it as an accident, compounded by poor Command Level Decisions on both sides, and covered up by Bureaucrat's, all the way up to the top. You are not going to effect change in my opinion with a white washed report. We are just going to have to agree to disagree. In all fairness, you are doing yourself a disservice by not reading the book. It's not about trying to convince you one way or the other, but to provoke thought and introduce a different perspective.  I'm sure that there are details in the book beyond dispute, that will fill in the blanks, at least some. For the record, My conclusions are more forgiving than the Author of the Book.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

Kalam said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...


and so has al qaeeda and hamas on you


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Memos show Liberty attack was an error - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

_After the Liberty was bombed by both the Israel Air Force and the Israel Navy, the two helicopter pilots were summoned from their base to assess the damage and evaluate the possibility of rescuing the surviving crew members. An American spy plane, which had been sent to the area as soon as the NSA learned of the attack, recorded their conversations, which took place between 2:30 and 3:37 P.M. on June 8, the third day of the war. 

The spy plane also recorded the orders radioed to the pilots by their supervisor at Hatzor Base, which instructed them to search for Egyptian survivors from the "Egyptian warship" that had just been bombed - thus supporting Israel's claim that it had believed the ship was Egyptian when it ordered it attacked. "Pay attention. The ship is now identified as Egyptian," the pilots were told. 

Nine minutes later, Hatzor informed the pilots that it was not an Egyptian warship, but an Egyptian cargo ship. Only at 3:07 were the pilots first informed that the ship might not have been Egyptian at all: Hatzor told them that if they found Arabic-speaking survivors, they should be taken to El-Arish, but if they found English-speaking survivors, they should be taken to Lod. "Clarify by the first man that you bring up, what nationality he is, and report to me immediately," the supervisor instructed, according to the transcript. "It's important to know." 

Then, at 3:12, one of the pilots informed Hatzor that he saw an American flag flying over the wounded ship. He was asked to investigate and determine whether it was really an American ship. 


This is not the first time such transcripts have been made public: Israel gave its own recordings of the pilots' conversations to the British television station Thames in 1987. But conspiracy theorists charged that Israel had doctored the tapes before handing them over to the station in order to hide the fact that it struck at the Liberty intentionally. No such imputation can be made about these new transcripts, as they were never in Israeli hands. _


----------



## Kalam (Sep 21, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



Only a Zionist would be foolish enough to think that Hamas (Muslim Brotherhood) would affiliate with al-Qa'idah.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Same shit.


----------



## Kalam (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Same shit.



Don't you pay attention to your own propaganda rags? 

Hamas crushes 'al-Qaeda uprising' - Israel News, Ynetnews


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

Kalam said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Same shit.
> ...


only when their own power is challenged
but i have no doubts they would both support the same people


----------



## Kalam (Sep 21, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> Kalam said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



Ikhwanweb :: The Muslim Brotherhood Official English Website


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

OBL has taken up the Palestinian cause.

They are allies.


----------



## Kalam (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> OBL has taken up the Palestinian cause.
> 
> They are allies.


Your Zionism clouds your reasoning. That doesn't make them allies any more than taking up the Iraqi cause makes the Islamic Army in Iraq and the Islamic State of Iraq allies.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

Kalam said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > Kalam said:
> ...


again, someone opposed to Israel would have support from BOTH groups
that doesnt mean either group would support the other


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

Some survivors, in addition to some U.S. diplomats and intelligence officials involved in the incident continue to dispute these official findings, saying the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was not a mistake,[6]  and it remains *'the only maritime incident in U.S. history where [U.S.] military forces were killed that was never investigated by the [U.S.] Congress.'"*

USS Liberty


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

It was investigated by two congressional committees , senate intelligence and house armed services- moron.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Since you think all of the US government is corrupt why don't you formally join Al Qaida?


With friends like Israel...

In October of 2003 a new report issued by former officials from the highest level of the American military and government revealed that Israel "committed acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States" when it deliberately attacked the USS Liberty in 1967.

Israel had alleged that the* two-hour attack* with napalm, missiles, and torpedoes was a mistake.

"Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and four-star Admiral Thomas Moorer is outraged at the cover-up of the attack and the fact that this is the only attack on a US ship that has never been investigated by Congress."

"Members of the Independent Commission of Inquiry have now been joined by the Chief Attorney in the Navy's original 1967 Court of Inquiry into the case. 

"After remaining silent for more than three decades, Captain Ward Boston describes in a sworn affidavit how he and many others were ordered to never speak about the attack on the USS Liberty."

"I know from personal conversations I had with Admiral Kidd [president of the Court of Inquiry] *that President Lyndon Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara ordered him to conclude that the attack was a case of 'mistaken identity' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary,' *states the 
affidavit."

The Jewish State of Israel is swirling the same drain apartheid South Africa disappeared into.

It couldn't happen to a more deserving collection of slaves.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

Bullshit sources.

Since you think the american government, including it's navy,  is so corrupt why don't you leave?


----------



## MikeK (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> [...]
> 
> I am still waiting for you to answer the questions. You have the document of the NSA that has the transcript of the Israeli pilots and command. It proves that the Israeli pilots thought it was an Egyptian ship.


And I'm still waiting for you to explain why you think the survivors insist the attack was deliberate.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> It was investigated by two congressional committees , senate intelligence and house armed services- moron.



There have been hearings.  Inquiries.  There has not been a formal investigation.  

Do you know the difference(s) between the two proceedings?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> It was investigated by two congressional committees , senate intelligence and house armed services- moron.


Got a link for that Senate Intelligence Committee, Chomsky?

"The Senate Foreign Relations Committee Testimony contains, as an aside matter during hearings concerning a foreign aid authorization bill, questions and statements from several senators and responses from then Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, about the Liberty attack. 

"For the most part, the senators were dismayed about the attack, as expressed by Senator Bourke B. Hickenlooper: "From what I have read I can't tolerate for 1 minute that this [attack] was an accident.' Also, there was concern about obtaining more information about the attack, as expressed by Committee Chairman J. William Fulbright: 'We asked for [the attack investigation report] about 2 weeks ago and have not received it yet from Secretary Rusk. ... By the time we get to it we will be on some other subject.'

"Secretary McNamara promised fast delivery of the investigation report ("... you will have it in 4 hours."), and concluded his remarks by saying: 'I simply want to emphasize that the investigative report does not show any evidence of a conscious intent to attack a U.S. vessel.' 

*"Since the hearings concerned a foreign aid bill, the committee's report omitted any mention of the Liberty incident."*

"The House Armed Services Committee Investigation report is entitled, 'Review of Department of Defense Worldwide Communications'. 

*It was not an investigation focused on the Liberty attack*; although, the committee's report contains a section that describes communications flow involved with the Liberty incident."

How many more Americans do you expect to die for Israel?

Moron.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

"The Liberty Veterans Association (composed of veterans from the ship) states that U.S. congressional investigations and other U.S. investigations were not actually investigations into the attack; but, rather, reports using evidence only from the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, or investigations unrelated to culpability that involved issues such as communications. 

"In their view, the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry is the only actual investigation on the incident to date. They claim it was hastily conducted, in only 10 days, even though the courts president, Rear Admiral Isaac Kidd, said that it would take 6 months to conduct properly. 

"*The inquiry's terms of reference  were limited to whether any shortcomings on the part of the Liberty's crew had contributed to the injuries and deaths that resulted from the attack.*[45]  

"According to the Navy Court of Inquiry's record of proceedings, four days were spent hearing testimony: two days for fourteen survivors of the attack and several U.S. Navy expert witnesses, and two partial days for two expert U.S. Navy witnesses. No testimony was heard from Israeli personnel involved."

Who do you believe?
Liberty survivors?
Or LBJ and Robert McNamara?
(And John McCain's dad)

Here's the same link again


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

"The U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry record contains testimony by fourteen Liberty  crew members and five subject matter experts; exhibits of attack damage photographs, various messages and memorandums; and findings of fact. The testimony record reveals "a shallow investigation, plagued by myriad disagreements between the captain and his crew."[44] 

"As to culpability, 'It was not the responsibility of the court to rule on the culpability of the attackers, and no evidence was heard from the attacking nation', the court concluded that "available evidence combines to indicate ... (that the attack was) a case of mistaken identity." Additionally, the Court found that 'heroism displayed by the Commanding Officer, officers and men of the Liberty was exceptional."'

While the US Naval Court of Inquire didn't consider culpability one of its responsibilities, the Clark Clifford Report did.

"The Clark Clifford  Report consists of a review of "all available information on the subject" and "deals with the question of Israeli culpability", according to its transmittal memorandum. 

"The report concludes: 'The unprovoked attack on the Liberty constitutes a flagrant act of gross negligence for which the Israeli Government should be held completely responsible, and the Israeli military personnel involved should be punished."'

USS Liberty...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> Books are opinions.
> 
> I provided the proof from the NSA, US navy, joint chiefs, cia, and the senate intelligence committee.
> 
> I don't care about someone selling his book.



Now THERE is an honest lot.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

MikeK said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > [...]
> ...


explain how someone under attack knows if it was intentional or not?


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

They can't


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

Maybe when the Israeli attack boats strafed the Liberty's life rafts with machine gun fire.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Maybe when the Israeli attack boats strafed the Liberty's life rafts with machine gun fire.


nope
that doesnt show it


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe when the Israeli attack boats strafed the Liberty's life rafts with machine gun fire.
> ...


Strafing life rafts is a war crime.

Are you under the impression some war crimes are accidental?


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Your idiotic posts should be a war crime.


----------



## Intense (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> It was investigated by two congressional committees , senate intelligence and house armed services- moron.



Either that or Oxymoron.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



All war crimes

Friendly fire incidents and accidents - War on Iraq - smh.com.au

_
FRIENDLY FIRE INCIDENTS: 

March 22: A British Royal Air Force (RAF) Tornado jet is accidentally shot down by a US Patriot missile. The Tornado's two crew are killed. 

March 24: Two British soldiers are killed when their tank is mistakenly targeted by another British tank in southern Iraq. 

March 27: 37 US Marines are injured when US troops mistakenly fire at each other near the southern city of Nasiriyah. 

March 28: A British soldier is killed and four others are injured in the region of Basra when a US A-10 ground attack aircraft fires on them. 

April 2: An F-18 US fighter jet is downed, probably by a US Patriot missile. The pilot is reported missing. 

April 3: A US serviceman mistaken for an Iraqi soldier is shot dead by his own troops in central Iraq. 

April 6: 18 Kurdish fighters are killed and 45 wounded near Arbil in northern Iraq when US aircraft mistakenly bomb a joint US-Kurdish convoy. 

According to the website of the American War Library, just over half of the coalition troops killed or injured during the 1991 Gulf War were victims of friendly fire incidents. 

Of those, about 165 US casualties were due to "friendly fire" out of a total of 367 Americans who lost their lives, it said. 

OTHER INCIDENTS: 

March 22: A US soldier at a camp in Kuwait lobs grenades into the tents of fellow soldiers, killing two and wounding 11 others. 

March 30: 15 American soldiers are injured at a military camp in northern Kuwait when a disgruntled Egyptian employee rams a truck into the group. The truck driver sustained two gunshot wounds. 

AFP _


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Maybe when the Israeli attack boats strafed the Liberty's life rafts with machine gun fire.



They didn't. They were the first ones to send rescue helicopters.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "The U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry record contains testimony by fourteen Liberty  crew members and five subject matter experts; exhibits of attack damage photographs, various messages and memorandums; and findings of fact. The testimony record reveals "a shallow investigation, plagued by myriad disagreements between the captain and his crew."[44]
> 
> "As to culpability, 'It was not the responsibility of the court to rule on the culpability of the attackers, and no evidence was heard from the attacking nation', the court concluded that "available evidence combines to indicate ... (that the attack was) a case of mistaken identity." Additionally, the Court found that 'heroism displayed by the Commanding Officer, officers and men of the Liberty was exceptional."'
> 
> ...



More from your bullshit website that only gives opinion.

Any person can write anything in a web site or book. They have no accountability.

That is why government investigations where witnesses are under oath, and people sign it, do have accountability.


----------



## MikeK (Sep 21, 2010)

At this point I realize the futility in attempting to conduct a productive and civil discussion with a typical Israel supporter (or agent) because they all share a common characteristic, which is to deny the obvious and resort to personal insults when confronted with facts.  So for the benefit of those who might be swayed by such tactics, the official government report, which has been declassified from Top Secret, should be useful in reaching a conclusion about where the truth lies:

The Liberty Incident: Clark Clifford Report


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

MikeK said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > It was investigated by two congressional committees , senate intelligence and house armed services- moron.
> ...



Yup you defined it:

You "... formal investigation in which witnesses are summoned and cross-examined. That is how facts are determined." 

That is what happened in the US Navy Court of Inquiry.

I even posted some of the direct examination and cross examination.

The Q stands for question and the A stands for answer.

You really shoved your foot in your mouth.  Thank you for the amusement.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe when the Israeli attack boats strafed the Liberty's life rafts with machine gun fire.
> ...



Also never assume their premise is correct. Usually it's wrong.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

MikeK said:


> At this point I realize the futility in attempting to conduct a productive and civil discussion with a typical Israel supporter (or agent) because they all share a common characteristic, which is to deny the obvious and resort to personal insults when confronted with facts.  So for the benefit of those who might be swayed by such tactics, the official government report, which has been declassified from Top Secret, should be useful in reaching a conclusion about where the truth lies:
> 
> The Liberty Incident: Clark Clifford Report



Thanks for the amusement.

You said that what determined the facts is witnesses being about to be examined and cross examined under oath. That is EXACTLY what happened in the US Naval Court of Inquiry that you dismiss.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe when the Israeli attack boats strafed the Liberty's life rafts with machine gun fire.
> ...


After Terry Halbardier earned his Silver Star by repairing a damaged antenna and calling the Sixth Fleet.

The Liberty's distress call was picked up by heroic Jews who suddenly decided to offer "help."

Do you know what the Liberty's response to the offer was?

"Fuck You."


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > At this point I realize the futility in attempting to conduct a productive and civil discussion with a typical Israel supporter (or agent) because they all share a common characteristic, which is to deny the obvious and resort to personal insults when confronted with facts.  So for the benefit of those who might be swayed by such tactics, the official government report, which has been declassified from Top Secret, should be useful in reaching a conclusion about where the truth lies:
> ...


How  many more Americans should die for apartheid Israel?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


again, if that had been an Egyptian ship they were spies
spies can be shot on sight


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > "The U.S. Naval Court of Inquiry record contains testimony by fourteen Liberty  crew members and five subject matter experts; exhibits of attack damage photographs, various messages and memorandums; and findings of fact. The testimony record reveals "a shallow investigation, plagued by myriad disagreements between the captain and his crew."[44]
> ...


Now Wiki is a bullshit source?

Maybe you should try clicking on links before commenting?

I know reading is way beyond your pay grade.


----------



## CMike (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...



How many more Americans should read your moronic posts?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 21, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


The Egyptian ship in question, a supply vessel the El Quseir had one-fourth Liberty's displacement, roughly half the beam, was 180 feet shorter and was very differently configured.

Liberty's unusual antenna array and hull markings should have been visible to low flying aircraft and torpedo boats. In the heat of battle the Liberty was able to identify one of the attacking torpedo boats as Israeli and to ascertain its hull number.

In the same circumstances, trained Israeli naval personnel should have been able easily to see and identify the larger hull marking on the Liberty.

The Liberty Incident: Clark Clifford Report


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 21, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


woulda shoulda coulda


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 22, 2010)

"The 1981 book Weapons by Russell Warren Howe asserts that Liberty was accompanied by the Polaris armed Lafayette-class submarine USS Andrew Jackson, which filmed the entire episode through its periscope but was unable to provide assistance. 

"According to Howe: 'Two hundred feet below the ship, on a parallel course, was its "shadow"the Polaris strategic submarine Andrew Jackson, whose job was to take out all the Israeli long-range missile sites in the Negev if Tel Aviv decided to attack Cairo, Damascus or Baghdad. 

*"This was in order that Moscow would not have to perform this task itself and thus trigger World War Three."'*

How many American lives would that have cost?

USS Liberty


----------



## MikeK (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "The 1981 book Weapons by Russell Warren Howe asserts that Liberty was accompanied by the Polaris armed Lafayette-class submarine USS Andrew Jackson, which filmed the entire episode through its periscope but was unable to provide assistance.
> 
> "According to Howe: 'Two hundred feet below the ship, on a parallel course, was its "shadow"the Polaris strategic submarine Andrew Jackson, whose job was to take out all the Israeli long-range missile sites in the Negev if Tel Aviv decided to attack Cairo, Damascus or Baghdad.
> 
> ...


I'm sure there is some arcane political intrigue lurking behind the Liberty incident because there is no way the attack was "accidental" or a case of "friendly fire" and our government's passive response to it is absolutely bizarre.  

I personally believe the attack was deliberate and purposeful but I doubt that it was sanctioned by Israel's highest political authority.  I believe someone in the military ranks decided to do it and claim it was accidental and the fact that Israel has refused to conduct or cooperate in a formal investigation of the incident is the source of my resentment of and enmity toward Israel and why I question our government's continued support of that troublesome little nation.  The only reason I can think of is bribery of our congress by AIPAC, which is the second most powerful lobbying organization in Washington and it represents a foreign government.


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



No one mentioned a ship in question.

Israeli first thought it was an Egyptian warship, then an Egyptian cargo ship.

Being in the middle of a war, on the Egyptian coast, is not a safe place to be.


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

MikeK said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > "The 1981 book Weapons by Russell Warren Howe asserts that Liberty was accompanied by the Polaris armed Lafayette-class submarine USS Andrew Jackson, which filmed the entire episode through its periscope but was unable to provide assistance.
> ...




You certainly are entitled to your opinion, no matter how uninformed and stupid it may be.

It's really simple.

I posted the declassified transcript of the Israeli pilots and their command, during the incident, as gotten by a NSA spy plane.

Case closed.


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "The 1981 book Weapons by Russell Warren Howe asserts that Liberty was accompanied by the Polaris armed Lafayette-class submarine USS Andrew Jackson, which filmed the entire episode through its periscope but was unable to provide assistance.
> 
> "According to Howe: 'Two hundred feet below the ship, on a parallel course, was its "shadow"the Polaris strategic submarine Andrew Jackson, whose job was to take out all the Israeli long-range missile sites in the Negev if Tel Aviv decided to attack Cairo, Damascus or Baghdad.
> 
> ...




Another conspiracy book 

Amazing how weak minded and gullible some people are.


----------



## Intense (Sep 22, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > "The 1981 book Weapons by Russell Warren Howe asserts that Liberty was accompanied by the Polaris armed Lafayette-class submarine USS Andrew Jackson, which filmed the entire episode through its periscope but was unable to provide assistance.
> ...



Why don't you just say what you really mean Mike???? 

Mirror, Mirror, on the wall.... 

Why can't I make them believe in the cover up at all?????


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 22, 2010)

Intense said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


um, WHAT????


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

They are talking in  and


----------



## Intense (Sep 22, 2010)

Shit, if it was in the Report it must be true.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> If you HONESTLY research the attack there is NO other explanation for using UNMARKED WAR PLANES then to hide their identity as Israeli. It was either a "false flag" operation or an attack to SINK a US warship.



Sooo, the Israelis intentionally committed an act of war against the US?

Even a peabrain like yourself can't possibly be so stupid.


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

Intense said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



You are extremely confused.

I believe the transcript of the Israeli pilots talking to each other as obtained by a US spy plane, the US Navy, NSA, CIA, Senate Intelligence Committee, etc.

You and your ilk on the other hand seem to believe that they forged and doctered everything and believe the fictious and amusing conspiracy books and cooky web sites about the incident.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

MikeK said:


> The only reason I can think of is bribery of our congress by AIPAC, which is the second most powerful lobbying organization in Washington and it represents a foreign government.



You have proof the Congress is bribed by AIPAC?

Of course, not.  You're a delusional whackjob.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

> Quote: Originally Posted by MikeK
> The only reason I can think of is bribery of our congress by AIPAC, which is the second most powerful lobbying organization in Washington and it represents a foreign government.



AIPAC more powerful than the Goldman Sachs lobby?  Noooo

AIPAC more powerful than the Saudi lobby?  Noooooo

AIPAC more powerful than the teachers' lobby?  Nooooo

AIPAC more powerful than the gun lobby?  Nooooo

AIPAC more powerful than the drug lobby?  Noooooo

AIPAC more powerful than SEIU?  Noooooo

AIPAC more powerful than AARP?  Noooooo

AIPAC more powerful than the Teamsters?  Noooooo

AIPAC more powerful than the autoworkers union?  Noooooo

In other words, you really don't know what the fuck you're talking about


----------



## Intense (Sep 22, 2010)

CMike said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



I'll stick with the Eye Witness accounts. You stick with the cover up.  Stay in your fantasy where everyone that doesn't drink the Kool-Aid is a nut case. I'd agree to respectfully disagree with you, I already have, but you are not capable of reason on this subject Mike. I hope your official Report keeps you safe and secure. For me, it is kindling.


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

Intense said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Intense said:
> ...



All the witnesses can say is that they were attacked, and I agree with that.

They had no way of knowing of the intention of the people attacking them.

This is just like when the Brits were attacked by american missiles. All they can witness is that they were attacked by a missile, not why.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 22, 2010)

MikeK said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > "The 1981 book Weapons by Russell Warren Howe asserts that Liberty was accompanied by the Polaris armed Lafayette-class submarine USS Andrew Jackson, which filmed the entire episode through its periscope but was unable to provide assistance.
> ...


Almost 15 years ago I first opened a book written by Noam Chomsky and quickly obtained a different insight into "that troublesome little nation." 

I'm paraphrasing but reasonably sure I remember Noam's intent when he argued that Israel came into existence as a Jewish state to purchase large quantities of US made arms that were largely paid for by US taxpayers.

Israel used the superior firepower to wage war on its neighbors, thereby distracting the "Arab street" from the endemic corruption of their elites and focusing Muslim rage on plucky little Israel.

This made it relatively easy for Christian, Jewish, and Muslim elites to divert the profits from Arab oil to banks in London and New York.

Arm sales and oil sales are the leading source of global profits, and Israel plays a key role in sustaining both, largely through AIPAC's influence on the US Congress and American Zionism.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Almost 15 years ago I first opened a book written by Noam Chomsky and quickly obtained a different insight into "that troublesome little nation."



Chomsky is just a linguistics teacher.  His expertise is not in international affairs.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> I personally believe the attack was deliberate and purposeful but I doubt that it was sanctioned by Israel's highest political authority.



You think Israel intentionally picked a fight with the US, dummy?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Israel used the superior firepower to wage war on its neighbors, thereby distracting the "Arab street" from the endemic corruption of their elites and focusing Muslim rage on plucky little Israel.



Er, the Arabs were the aggressors, dummy.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Arm sales and oil sales are the leading source of global profits, and Israel plays a key role in sustaining both, largely through AIPAC's influence on the US Congress and American Zionism.



AIPAc's influence derives from the threat of no bagels to Congress if they don't vote their way.

George, you're a dummy.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 22, 2010)

Intense said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Intense said:
> ...


an eye witness can only tell you what happened from THEIR perspective
they can NOT tell you the motive behind what they see


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

Seems very logical to me.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 22, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...


During the morning of the attack, Liberty was overflown by Israeli aircraft eight times, sometimes at range close enough for Liberty crewmen and Israeli pilots to exchange waves.

"At about 5:45 a.m. Sinai time (GMT +2), reports were first received at Israeli Central Coastal Command (CCC) about the Liberty, identified by pilots as a destroyer  and the vessel was placed on the plot board using a red marker, indicating an unknown vessel. 

At 6:03 a.m. that morning, the Nord (one of the planes that overflew Liberty) identified the ship as a U.S. supply ship, though the marker was only changed from the red 'unknown ship' to a green 'neutral ship' at 9 a.m., when CCC was ordered to do so after naval command inquired as to the marker's status..."

"When the Nord landed and its naval observer was debriefed, the ship was further *identified as the USS Liberty based on its 'GTR-5 markings*

Your thought about the middle of a war zone not being a safe place also occurred to Captain William L. McGonagle, skipper of the Liberty, who requested a destroyer escort from Vice Admiral William I. Martin.

"The following day, June 6, Admiral Martin replied: 'Liberty is a clearly marked United States ship in *international waters*, not a participant in the conflict and not a reasonable subject for attack by any nation. Request denied.'  

"He promised, however, that in the unlikely event of an inadvertent attack, jet fighters from the Sixth Fleet could be overhead in ten minutes."

USS Liberty


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

And your bs web site has relevance because?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Dimwit, you think Israel intentionally committed an act of war against the US?

Unfortunately, for you, the US govt does not agree.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 22, 2010)

And the US government NEVER lies.


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> And the US government NEVER lies.



If you want to prove your mass government conspiracy theory go ahead 

Also if you hate the US government so much why are you here?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 22, 2010)

CMike said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


Maybe you should get around to posting the transcripts of the missing tapes.

"On July 2, 2003, the National Security Agency released copies of the recordings made by the EC-121 and the resultant translations and summaries... 

"Two linguists who were aboard the EC-121 when the recordings were made, however, have claimed separately that at least two additional tapes were made that have been excluded from the NSA releases up to and including a June 8, 2007, release."

This case is closed only for those who put Israel first.

Same Wiki bs link


----------



## CMike (Sep 22, 2010)

What were the linguists names?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 22, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...



the case is closed by the US govt, shithead.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 22, 2010)

"A little after seven in the morning on June 8, Ennes entered the bridge of the Liberty to take the morning watch. Ennes was told that an hour earlier a "flying boxcar" (later identified as a twin-engine Nord 2501 Noratlas) had flown over the ship at a low level.

"Ennes says he noticed that the ship's American flag had become stained with soot and ordered a new flag run up the mast. The morning was clear and calm, with a light breeze.

"At 9 am, Ennes spotted another reconnaissance plane, which circled the Liberty. An hour later two Israeli fighter jets buzzed the ship. Over the next four hours, Israeli planes flew over the Liberty five more times.

'When the first fighter jet struck, a little before two in the afternoon, Ennes was scanning the skies from the starboard side of the bridge, binoculars in his hands. A rocket hit the ship just below where Ennes was standing, the fragments shredded the men closest to him.

"After the explosion, Ennes noticed that he was the only man left standing. But he also had been hit by more than 20 shards of shrapnel and the force of the blast had shattered his left leg. As he crawled into the pilothouse, a second fighter jet streaked above them and unleashed its payload on the hobbled Liberty.

"At that point, Ennes says the crew of the Liberty had no idea who was attacking them or why. For a few moments, they suspected it might be the Soviets, after an officer mistakenly identified the fighters as MIG-15s.

"They knew that the Egyptian air force already had been decimated by the Israelis. The idea that the Israelis might be attacking them didn't occur to them until one of the crew spotted a Star of David on the wing of one of the French-built Mystere jets.

Ennes was finally taken below deck to a makeshift dressing station, with other wounded men. It was hardly a safe harbor. As Ennes worried that his fractured leg might slice through his femoral artery leaving him to bleed to death, the Liberty was pummeled by rockets, machine-gun fire and an Italian-made torpedo packed with 1,000-pounds of explosive.

"After the attack ended, Ennes was approached by his friend Pat O'Malley, a junior officer, who had just sent a list of killed and wounded to the Bureau of Naval Personnel. 

"He got an immediate message back. 'They said, 'Wounded in what action? Killed in what action?'," O'Malley told Ennes. 'They said it wasn't an "action," it was an accident. I'd like for them to come out here and see the difference between an action and an accident. Stupid bastards.'

The cover-up had begun."

*And stupid bastards like you perpetuate the cover-up*.

Congratulations.

Jeffrey St. Clair: When Israel Attacked the USS Liberty
Israel's Attack on Liberty


----------



## MikeK (Sep 22, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> > Quote: Originally Posted by MikeK
> > The only reason I can think of is bribery of our congress by AIPAC, which is the second most powerful lobbying organization in Washington and it represents a foreign government.
> 
> 
> ...


(Another one.  They're like cockroaches.)


_The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC; pronounced /'e?pæk/, ay-pak) is a lobbying group that advocates for pro-Israel policies to the Congress and Executive Branch of the United States. The current President of the AIPAC is Lee Rosenberg, from Chicago, Illinois.[1] As an independent, not-for-profit entity, AIPAC is funded entirely through contributions from its members.

Describing itself as "America's Pro-Israel Lobby,"[2] AIPAC is a mass-membership organization whose members include Democrats, Republicans, and independents. The New York Times calls it "the most important organization affecting America's relationship with Israel."[3] It has been described as one of the most powerful lobbying groups in Washington, DC, and its critics have stated it acts as an agent of the Israeli government with a "stranglehold" on the US Congress.[4]

In 2005, a Pentagon analyst pled guilty to charges of passing US government secrets to two AIPAC staffers in what is known as the AIPAC espionage scandal. Both staffers were later fired.[5]

In 1984 the FBI investigated after Israeli Minister of Economics Dan Halpern passed stolen classified US government documents to AIPAC outlining trade secrets of major US industries lobbying against the US-Israel Free Trade Area._


Link to the full article, in which AIPAC is identified as the second most powerful lobby in Washington:
American Israel Public Affairs Committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


(Expect more denial, more hissing, spitting and name-calling now.)


----------



## R.C. Christian (Sep 22, 2010)

GHook93 said:


> My Uncle Himmie, along with my Uncle Morty, Uncle Shlmo and Uncle Weiss love the taste of American Gentile blood. They were flying the Israeli planes and by the wheel of the attack boats. They couldn't help themselves when they smell fresh American Gentile blood. It makes them go absolutely insane. So they attacked hoping to grab the remains for the big victory feast they were having soon to celebrate the royal ass-kicking during the 6 day war, hoping no one would notice!
> 
> Can you blame them gentile blood tastes the absolute BEST with matzo and greplock? Everyone knows Jews can't eat food not mixed with gentile blood!
> 
> Oh yea, they wanted to make sure they didn't have a shortage of organs. I mean there was a war taking place. That was motivation also!




Are you mentally ill?


----------



## MikeK (Sep 22, 2010)

AIPAC listed 2nd most powerful group on Fortune list
DANIEL KURTZMAN
Jewish Telegraphic Agency

A forthcoming edition of Fortune magazine ranks the American Israel Public Affairs Committee as the second most powerful interest group in Washington.

The magazine, which based its findings on a survey of Washington political players, said AIPAC - along with the Association of Trial Lawyers and the American Medical Association -owes its high ranking in part to its "substantial campaign contributions." But, it said, interest groups are valued more for "the votes they can deliver."

AIPAC listed 2nd most powerful group on Fortune list


----------



## R.C. Christian (Sep 23, 2010)

Israel is parasite clinging to the U.S.


----------



## eots (Sep 23, 2010)

R.C. Christian said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> > My Uncle Himmie, along with my Uncle Morty, Uncle Shlmo and Uncle Weiss love the taste of American Gentile blood. They were flying the Israeli planes and by the wheel of the attack boats. They couldn't help themselves when they smell fresh American Gentile blood. It makes them go absolutely insane. So they attacked hoping to grab the remains for the big victory feast they were having soon to celebrate the royal ass-kicking during the 6 day war, hoping no one would notice!
> ...



Yes, he was quite _mad_...


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

R.C. Christian said:


> Israel is parasite clinging to the U.S.



Warren Buffett knows better, you moron...


> "Israel is now a major factor in commerce and in the world, and, is a smaller replica of what has been accomplished in the US and I think Americans admire that.  They feel good about a society that is on the move


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaN_2nFqFtI]YouTube - Warren Buffet Supports the U.S.-Israel Relationship[/ame]


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

MikeK said:


> AIPAC listed 2nd most powerful group on Fortune list
> DANIEL KURTZMAN
> Jewish Telegraphic Agency
> 
> ...



Former Secretary of State George Schultz, "Turmoil and Triumph"...


> The US supports Israel not out of favoritism based on political pressure or influence, but because both political parties, and virtually all our national leaders, agree with the American people's view that supporting Israel is politically sound and morally just.
> 
> Those who blame Israel and its Jewish supporters for US policies they do not support are wrong. They are wrong because support for Israel is in our best interests. They are wrong because Israel and its supporters have the right to try to influence US policy. And they are wrong because the US government is responsible for the policies it adopts, not any other state or any myriad lobbyists and groups that battle daily, sometimes with lies,  to win American support.


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Turmoil-Triumph-George-Shultz-Years/dp/B003VPASX0/ref=sr_1_2?s=gateway&ie=UTF8&qid=1285242747&sr=8-2]Amazon.com: Turmoil & Triumph: The George Shultz Years: Gateway[/ame]


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> *And stupid bastards like you perpetuate the cover-up*.



And, stupid bastards like you try to make a buck off of the Liberty conspiracy theory, long debunked.

George, the moron.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

MikeK said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > > Quote: Originally Posted by MikeK
> ...



Wikipedia?  Are you mentally retarded?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> R.C. Christian said:
> 
> 
> > Israel is parasite clinging to the U.S.
> ...


Do you and Warren notice the moral equivalence between the US purging of Native Americans and the Jewish State of Israel's administrative ethnic cleansing of Palestinians?

Do you personally think either crime would occur if parasites like Warren didn't profit from the killing other people's children?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > R.C. Christian said:
> ...



George, you're a moron.   The Palestinian populaton has grown from 500,000 in 1947 to 5,000,000 today.  

The only purging is by other Arab countries, like Kuwait, which purged 400,000 Pallies during the Gulf War and Jordan and Lebanon that are purging Pallies of their citizenship.

George, you know less than nothing about the Middle East.  You enjoy making a fool of yourself, fool?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > *And stupid bastards like you perpetuate the cover-up*.
> ...


Explain how I'm making a buck off of Liberty?

Then see if you can answer a question I posed to one of your fellow travelers, namely, how many more American lives do you intend to sacrifice for the *Jewish* State of Israel?

Marc, the war whore.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Shithead, the US govt determined the Liberty incident a mistake.

Your Hezballah friends, however, murdered 300 Marines in Beirut intentionally.

Please provide links of you calling for Lebanon to bring Hezballah to justice, motherfucker.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

George, still waiting for those links of you calling for Lebanon to bring Hezballah to justice for the murder of 300 Marines in Beirut.

Where did you disappear to, asshole?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...


Do you ever get anything right?

*"By 1948, there were approximately 1.35 million Arabs and 650,000  Jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean*, more Arabs than had ever lived in Palestine before, and more Jews than had lived there since Roman times.

"Analysis of population by sub-districts shows that Arab population tended to increase the most between 1931 and 1948 in the same areas where there were large proportions of Jews. 

"Therefore, Zionist immigration did not displace Arabs. For a detailed discussion that focuses on this myth, please refer to Zionism and its Impact."

Since you know so much about the Middle East, tell me how much land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River the current Jewish State of Israel is entitled to?

MidEast Web...


----------



## CMike (Sep 23, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


Prove that the NSA made up documents.


Georgie

Prove that the US navy doctored testimony of the crew members that was under oath.

Since you think the US is so corrupt why not do Americans a favor and leave?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



George, you're a moron.  The UN registered approx. 500,000 Pallie refugees in 1948.

Today, the Pallie population is 5 million+

In 1970, the Arab population was 90 million.  Today, it's approaching 400 million.

You enjoy being made a fool of, fool?

Still waiting for your posts calling for Lebanon to bring Hezballah to justice for the murder of 300 Marines, motherfucker.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

CMike said:


> Then see if you can answer a question I posed to one of your fellow travelers, namely, how many more American lives do you intend to sacrifice for the *Jewish* State of Israel?



george, you're a moron.

Israel saves American lives.

Navy Admiral Mike Mullen...


> The Israelis, of course, remain a vital ally and a cornerstone of our regional security commitments.


Defense.gov News Article: Mullen?s Blog: Observations From Middle East Trip

I own you, motherfucker.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

george, you moron, your own link says Jews did not displace Arabs.  LOL

Dumb motherfucker doesn't even read his own posts.  LOL 



> Therefore, Zionist immigration did not displace Arabs.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > Then see if you can answer a question I posed to one of your fellow travelers, namely, how many more American lives do you intend to sacrifice for the *Jewish* State of Israel?
> ...


How much money is Admiral Mike earning swearing allegiance to the US Empire?

Who owns Admiral Mike?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...



George, still waiting for links to your posts calling for Lebanon to bring Hezballah to justice for the murder of 300 Marines in Beirut.

Whatcha got for us, anti-American motherfucker?


----------



## MikeK (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> Shithead, the US govt determined the Liberty incident a mistake.


And the U.S. Government fraudulently initiated the invasion and occupation of a non-threatening nation.  The U.S. Government notoriously lies to the American people.



> Your Hezballah friends, however, murdered 300 Marines in Beirut intentionally.


The circumstances in which 248 Marines were killed in the barracks bombing in Lebanon in no way compare with the attack on the USS Liberty.  And in the final analysis the fault for that tragedy can be laid at Ronald Reagan's feet.

Ronald Reagan was a move actor, not a military tactician.  His direct order to dispatch a battallion of Marine infantry to operate as police in a hostile region was a theatrical show of force that stupidly placed those Marines in harm's way.  The purpose for sending American forces to suppress the Hezbollah dissidents called for a battallion of Army Military Police, not Marine grunts.  The MPs would not have left their barracks undefended against exactly what happened.  

You don't send Marine grunts to do an MP's job and you don't send MPs to do what Marines do best.  But Ronald Reagan did.  And what happened does not compare with a non-aggressive, unarmed U.S. Naval vessel sailing in international waters being attacked by a U.S. protectorate.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



And they also say that Israel is a state.


----------



## CMike (Sep 23, 2010)

marc39 said:


> cmike said:
> 
> 
> > then see if you can answer a question i posed to one of your fellow travelers, namely, how many more american lives do you intend to sacrifice for the *jewish* state of israel?
> ...


+1


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

MikeK said:


> The circumstances in which 248 Marines were killed in the barracks bombing in Lebanon in no way compare with the attack on the USS Liberty.  And in the final analysis the fault for that tragedy can be laid at Ronald Reagan's feet.



Can you provide links to your posts calling for Lebanon, a US ally receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign aid, to bring to justice Hezballah who murdered 300 Marines in Beirut, motherfucker?


----------



## MikeK (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > The circumstances in which 248 Marines were killed in the barracks bombing in Lebanon in no way compare with the attack on the USS Liberty.  And in the final analysis the fault for that tragedy can be laid at Ronald Reagan's feet.
> ...


I recognize that your use of such obscene terms as "motherfucker" is a genetic impulse common to rodents like you when you are cornered, but your instinctual compulsion to hiss, spit and show your yellowed teeth overlooks the fact that I never made any such reference.  

I simply explained that the situation in Beirut at that time called for a battallion of Army MPs, who are trained to handle such situations.  Not a battallion of Marines -- which is an amphibious strike force, not a desert police force.  To do so is analogous to sending sailors where paratroopers are needed, and vice versa.  

So I anticipate whatever filthy response will issue from your vile mind before I add you to my Ignore list and make you as insignificant as a discarded condom.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

MikeK said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...



Ugly face, where are the links to your posts urging Lebanon to bring Hizballah who murdered 300 Marines in Beirut to justice?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...


Ronald Reagan, who didn't care about the US enough to fight in World War II, sent a special payback to Hezbollah in 1985.

Ten years later a truck bomb in Oklahoma City reminded many in the US media of Beirut. It was left to Noam Chomsky to point out the emperor's missing clothes.

"I didnt see anybody point out that Beirut also looks like Beirut, and part of the reason is that the Reagan Administration had set off a terrorist bombing there in 1985 that was very much like Oklahoma City, a truck bombing outside a mosque timed to kill the maximum number of people as they left. 

"It killed eighty and wounded two hundred, aimed at a Muslim cleric whom they didnt like and whom they missed. 

*"It was not very secret*. 

"I dont know what name you give to the attack thats killed maybe a million civilians in Iraq and maybe a half a million children, which is the price the Secretary of State says were willing to pay."

Hezbollah killed those Marines in defense of their civilians.

Shitheads like Reagan and Sharon kill for money.

The United States is


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



What the hell were Marines doing in Beirut?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> The United States is



george, still waiting for the links to your posts demanding that Lebanon bring Hizballah who murdered 300 Marines to justice.

Where are they, you ugly, anti American motherfucker?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 23, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...



Trying to quell the Lebanese Civil War, moron.

Open a history book, asshole.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



Why would we be involved in their civil war?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 23, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


wasnt it a UN ordered thing?
and we werent the only other country there


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



I guess when you stick your nose in someone else's business you get what you get.

It was a stupid move. What were we expecting to get?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 23, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


it was supposed to be a buffer zone
but because it was a bad time and the feeling in this country was to "get the hell out" thats what happened
what SHOULD have happened was to go in in force and kick some ass
but congress was voting to cut the funding for it


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



A buffer zone for what? Why does a civil war need a buffer zone?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 23, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


it wasnt a civil war at that time
that came later
you seem to not know a damned thing about it

gotta ask you how old you are at this point
i'm 51 so its not like i'm trying to find out private info


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



So we went there to quell a civil war that had not started yet. Where does the buffer zone come in?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 23, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


WOW
you dont even have a fucking clue


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



I admit I have not spent a lot of time studying Lebanon. You don't have to be juvenile about it.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 23, 2010)

i wont vouch for everything here as i didnt read ALL of it

Lebanese Civil War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

but if you look at what happened in the 3rd and 4th phases, you MIGHT begin to have a clue


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 23, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


well its pretty clear you dont know very much about what was going on back in the 80's


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



That is true. I bought a house in '79 and had 4 kid by '85. spent weekends camping with the family. I did not have much concern at the time.


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 23, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


there was a civil war that was kind of a side fact to why the UN(and the US) was there
it was to be a buffer zone between the PLO (Arafat) and the Israelis


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 23, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



Why would that be a problem in Lebanon? What would that have to do with a civil war?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 24, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


it DIDNT
sorry, i don't really have the patience to educate someone on this on a message board


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 24, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



OK, fair enough. Thanks.


----------



## US1945 (Sep 24, 2010)

just FF


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 24, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


As usual Wiki represents a good starting point:

"The establishment of the state of Israel and the displacement of a hundred thousand Palestinian refugees to Lebanon (around 10% of the total population of the country) changed the demographics of Lebanon and provided a foundation for the long-term involvement of Lebanon in regional conflicts."

Israel Invades:

"Israel launched Operation Peace for Galilee on 6 June 1982, attacking PLO bases in Lebanon. Israeli forces quickly drove 25 miles (40 km) into Lebanon, moving into East Beirut with the tacit support of Maronite leaders and militia. When the Israeli cabinet convened to authorize the invasion, Sharon described it as a plan to advance 40 kilometers into Lebanon, demolish PLO strongholds, and establish an expanded security zone that would put northern Israel out of range of PLO rockets. 

"In fact, Israeli chief of staff Rafael Eitan  and Sharon had already ordered the invading forces to head straight for Beirut, in accord with Sharon's blueprint dating to September 1981. 

"After the invasion had begun, the UN Security Council passed a further resolution on 6 June 1982, Resolution 509, which reaffirms UNSCR 508 and "demands that Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon".[16]  

"Thus far the US had not used its veto.

"However, on 8 June 1982, the US vetoed a proposed resolution that 'reiterates [the] demand that Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon',[17] thereby giving implicit assent to the Israeli invasion."

Chomsky is much less charitable:

"Excuses and explanations were discarded almost as quickly as they were produced: the Argov assassination attempt, defense of the border settlements, a 25-mile limit. In fact, the army headed straight for Beirut and the Beirut-Damascus highway, in accordance with plans that had long been prepared and that were known in advance to the Labor opposition (see section 6.3). 

"Former chief of military intelligence Aharon Yariv of the Labor Party stated: 'I know in fact that going to Beirut was included in the original military plan,' despite the pretense to the contrary, dutifully repeated by the U.S. government, which could hardly have been in much doubt about the facts if U.S. intelligence was not on vacation."

Had we been asking the question "how many more Americans deserve to die for Israel" on 6 June 1982, the 241 American servicemen who died in Beirut on 23 October 1983 might still be alive.

And voting Republican.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > DiveCon said:
> ...



George, you were supposed to provide links to your posts urging Lebanon to bring to justice the Hezballah who murdered 300 Marines in Beirut. 

Where are they, bitch?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Here's one, slut.

"5.1 Extermination of the Two-Legged Beasts

"The first target was the Palestinian camp of Rashidiyeh south of Tyre, much of which, by the second day of the invasion, "had become a field of rubble.' There was ineffectual resistance, but as an officer of the UN peace-keeping force swept aside in the Israeli invasion later remarked:

"'It was like shooting sparrdws with cannon." The 9000 residents of the camp-which had been regularly bombed and shelled for years from land, sea and air-either fled, or were herded to the beach where they could watch the destruction of much of what remained by the Israeli forces. All teen-age and adult males were blindfolded and bound, and taken to camps, where little has been heard about them since.

"This is typical of what happened throughout southern Lebanon. The Palestinian camps were demolished, largely bulldozed to the ground if not destroyed by bombardment; and the population was dispersed or (in the case of the male population) imprisoned. 

"Reporters were generally not allowed in the Palestinian camps, where the destruction was worst, to keep them from witnessing what had happened and was being done. There were occasional reports. David Shipler described how after the camps were captured the army proceeded to destroy what was left. 

"An army officer, 'when asked why bulldozers were knocking down houses in which women and children were living,' responded by saying: 'they are all terrorists.'96 His statement accurately summarizes Israel's strategy and the assumptions that underlie it, over many years."

'Still haven't told us how much money the Jewish State of Israel would have to pay you to piss on the graves of your children...


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



George, where are the links to your posts demanding Lebanon bring to justice Hezballah who murdered 300 Marines in Beirut?

Still waiting, anti-American bitch.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



Foreign troops are legitimate targets. There was no crime committed.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Hezballah is a terrorist organization occupying Lebanon, a violation of international law.  

Hezballah fighting out of uniform and not carrying arms in full view are violations of international law.

Crimes committed, dunce.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



All citizens have the right to defend their country. Why do you think we have the 2nd amendment?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



I recognize you're not very bright, but, try to wrap your feeble mind around the fact that Hezballah is not Lebanon's standing military.   Hezballah is a terrorist faction that has invaded Lebanon.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



I think there are some people here who have that same thought about armed groups.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...


Got any proof?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Did Hezballah win in the last Lebanese elections, moron?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...


Once again...it's the (illegal) occupations, stupid.

"Hezbollah first emerged in 1982 as a militia in response to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, also known as Operation Peace for Galilee, set on resisting the Israeli occupation of Lebanon during the Lebanese civil war. 

"Its leaders were inspired by Ayatollah Khomeini, and its forces were trained and organized by a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards. 

"Hezbollah's 1985 manifesto listed its four main goals as 'Israel's final departure from Lebanon as a prelude to its final obliteration,' ending 'any imperialist power in Lebanon,' submission of the Phalangists to 'just rule' and bringing them to trial for their crimes, and giving the people the chance to choose 'with full freedom the system of government they want,' while we not hide our commitment to the rule of Islam.'  

"Hezbollah leaders have also made numerous statements calling for the destruction of Israel, which they refer to as a "Zionist entity... built on lands wrested from their owners."

Hezbollah - Wiki


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Once again...it's the (illegal) occupations, stupid.



Once, again, George gets bitch slapped.  Syria and Hezballah are occupying Lebanon.  Hezballah is not the Lebanese armed forces, you clueless dumbass.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Once again...it's the (illegal) occupations, stupid.
> ...


Hezbollah is Lebanese and would never have come into existence had not the Jewish State of Israel invaded their country and murdered thousands of their fellow citizens.

BTW, Marc, how many Arab children have you *personally* murdered?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


which wouldnt have happened had Lebanon not allowed the PLO free access to their country to attack Israel from


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Hezbollah is Lebanese and would never have come into existence had not the Jewish State of Israel invaded their country and murdered thousands of their fellow citizens.
> 
> BTW, Marc, how many Arab children have you *personally* murdered?



Israel "invaded" Lebanon because Lebanon provided safe haven to the PLO who were attacking Israel.  Israel responded in compliance with the law of armed conflict.

If al Qaeda attacked Florida from Cuba, the US would flatten Cuba.

Hezballah is not part of the Lebanese armed forces, you clueless fool.. 

George the moron gets bitched slapped, again.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

George, where are those links to your posts demanding Lebanon bring to justice the Hezballah who murdered 300 Marinesin Beirut?

Still waiting, you ugly ****.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> BTW, Marc, how many Arab children have you *personally* murdered?



How many Arab children have the sand rats murdered?
"We Desire Death Like You Desire Life"
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO81aO7QxbM]YouTube - Hamas we desire death human shields of civilians[/ame]


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Hezbollah is Lebanese and would never have come into existence had not the Jewish State of Israel invaded their country and murdered thousands of their fellow citizens.
> ...


Can you name another time in the 6000 years prior to the creation of the Jewish State of Israel that Arab and Jew murdered each other on the scale we see today?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> BTW, Marc, how many Arab children have you *personally* murdered?



Democracies don't murder children, Georgie boy.  

Bill Clinton...


> American and Israel share a special bond. Our relationship is unique among all nations. Like America, Israel is a strong democracy, a symbol of freedom, and an oasis of liberty, a home to the oppressed and persecuted.


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Israel-History-Martin-Gilbert/dp/0688123635/ref=sr_1_1?s=gateway&ie=UTF8&qid=1285380340&sr=8-1]Amazon.com: Israel: A History (9780688123635): Martin Gilbert: Gateway[/ame]


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



George, you're a moron.  Muslims have slaughtered tens of millions of Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus and Buddhists for 1400 years.

You're way out of your depth.  Go play in the sandbox, you mental midget.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 24, 2010)

DiveCon said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...


"The establishment of the state of Israel and the displacement of a hundred thousand Palestinian refugees to Lebanon *(around 10% of the total population of the country)* changed the demographics of Lebanon and provided a foundation for the long-term involvement of Lebanon in regional conflicts."

Imagine the self-defense forces that would spring up in this country if *30 million Mexicans* were displaced from their homes in the span of a few months and found themselves living in refugee camps in Texas.

The current problems in the Middle East began with the Jewish State of Israel in 1948.

Lebanese Civil War - Wiki


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



George, one million Muslims and Arabs were killed in the Iran Iraq war, alone.

Today, 4 million Christians and Muslims have been killed in Darfur and southern Sudan by Muslims.

George, the clueless clown


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > BTW, Marc, how many Arab children have you *personally* murdered?
> ...


You ducked my question.

Too personal.

Or maybe sand rats don't have any children?

Slave.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "The establishment of the state of Israel and the displacement of a hundred thousand Palestinian refugees to Lebanon



That would be a direct consequence of Pallies launching a war against Israel, in violation of international law.

You see, Georgie boy, wars inevitably displace populations, which is why the Pallies should have thought better about going to war.

Georgie gets smacked down, again.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Georgie, have the nurse put you to bed and go to sleep.  You made a fool of yourself all day


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 24, 2010)

Georgie, where are the links to the posts of you demanding that Lebanon bring Hezballah to justice for the murder of 300 MArines?

Still waiting, you ugly ****.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 24, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > "The establishment of the state of Israel and the displacement of a hundred thousand Palestinian refugees to Lebanon
> ...



Yeah, like those Palestinian farmers in Najd who attacked those Israeli soldiers who came into their town to run them out.

How dare those farmers start a war with Israel!


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 25, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Open a history book, dumb boy


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 25, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...


You finally got one right, Marc.

How about Chomsky's _Fateful Triangle_?

"Israel's strategy was to drive the Palestinians to largely-Muslim West Beirut (apart from those who were killed, dispersed or imprisoned), then to besiege the city, cutting off water, food, medical supplies and electricity, and to subject it to increasingly heavy bombardment. 

"Naturally, the native Lebanese population was also severely battered. These measures had little impact on the PLO guerrilla fighters in Beirut, but civilians suffered increasingly brutal punishment. 

"The correct calculation was that by this device, the PLO would be compelled to leave West Beirut to save it from total annihilation.97 It was assumed, also correctly, that American intellectuals could be found to carry out the task of showing that this too was a remarkable exercise in humanity and a historically unique display of 'purity of arms,' even having the audacity to claim that it was the PLO, not the Israeli attackers, who were 'holding the city and its population hostage'-a charge duly intoned by New York Times editors and many others. (See section 8.2.3.)

"Dan Connell, a journalist with wartime experience and Lebanon project officer for Oxfam, describes Israel's strategy as follows:

"The Israeli strategy was obvious. They were hitting a broad belt, and they kept moving the belt up toward the populated area and pushing the people in front of it. The Israelis forced an increasing concentration of people into a smaller space, so that the casualties increased geometrically with every single shell or bomb that landed."

*Ready for the good part?*

"The attackers used highly sophisticated U.S. weapons, including 'shells and bombs designed to penetrate through the buildings before they explode,' collapsing buildings inwards, and phosphorus bombs to set fires and cause untreatable burns.

*"Hospitals were closed down or destroyed.* 

"Much of the Am el-H ilweh refugee camp near Sidon was 'flat as a parking lot' when Connell saw it, though 7-8000 Palestinians had drifted back-mostly women and children, since the men were 'either fighting or arrested or dead.' 

"The Israelis bulldozed the mosque at the edge of the camp searching for arms, but 'found 90 or 100 bodies under it instead, completely rotted away.' Writing before the Beirut massacres but after the PLO had departed, he notes that 'there could be a bloodbath in west Beirut' if no protection is given to the remnants of the population."

War is Peace

Now convince us you're smarter than Chomksy.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 25, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> How about Chomsky's _Fateful Triangle_?



Georgie, in the one in a trillion chance you even come close to debating me, we'll have a big celebration.  Sound good?

Last time I checked, Chomsky was a linguistics teacher, not an authority in international affairs.

Never in his life has Chomsky ever been consulted by the govt or the media for his self-proclaimed expertise.  He's a crackpot.

This is why you're so ill-informed.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 25, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Georgie, the Palestinians attacked the Jews.  They suffered the consequences of their own dumbass choices in life.

Pallies are trash


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 25, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > How about Chomsky's _Fateful Triangle_?
> ...


Aside from a committed baby killer, what are you?

How many books have you published (or read)?

Chomsky's willingness to speak truth to power explains why he's not consulted by the sort of corporate whores you seem to follow.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 25, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Georgie boy, who are the baby killers?

"We Desire Death Like You Desire Life"
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO81aO7QxbM]YouTube - Hamas we desire death human shields of civilians[/ame]


You like when I smack you down like a gnat?


----------



## Douger (Sep 25, 2010)

GOYIM/ No importahhhhhhhhhhhhhh


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 25, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



PMW and MEMRI are Israeli propaganda sites.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 25, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



PMW and MEMRI provide expert Arabic translation, dummy.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 27, 2010)

"Whats the difference between murder and massacre?

The answer is Terry Halbardier, whose bravery and ingenuity as a 23-year-old Navy seaman spelled the difference between the murder of 34 of the USS Liberty crew and the intended massacre of all 294.

The date was June 8, 1967; and for the families of the 34 murdered and for the Libertys survivors and their families, it is a date which will live in infamy  like the date of an earlier surprise attack on the U.S. Navy."

Ray McGovern

Choke  on it, Princess.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 27, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "Whats the difference between murder and massacre?



No difference to you, jihadist
"We Desire Death Like You Desire Life"
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO81aO7QxbM]YouTube - Hamas we desire death human shields of civilians[/ame]


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 27, 2010)

How many more Americans should die for Israel?

Why don't you go next?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 27, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> How many more Americans should die for Israel?
> 
> Why don't you go next?



Israel saves American lives.  You save coupons, loser.

Barack Obama...


> Many of the same forces that threaten Israel also threaten the United States and our efforts to secure peace and stability in the Middle East. Our alliance with Israel serves our national security interests.


4/10, White House news conference


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 27, 2010)

What makes you think Obama is worth wasting piss on?

Oh wait...Ivy League

Why don't you both follow Pat Tillman's lead?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 27, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> What makes you think Obama is worth wasting piss on?
> 
> Oh wait...Ivy League
> 
> Why don't you both follow Pat Tillman's lead?



Poor, uneducated, unsuccessful, uneducated, lonely Georgie has low self esteem.  I can't imagine why!  LOL


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 27, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > How many more Americans should die for Israel?
> ...



So now you are pimping Obama?

How low can you go?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 27, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Go to sleep, boy.  You add nothing but space between your ears.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 28, 2010)

On the evening of September 26, 2006 Ray McGovern was giving a talk on Iraq to a crowd of about 400 in Springfield, Missouri. Ray, a 30-year veteran of Army intelligence and the CIA mentioned the Liberty in passing and received almost 400 blank stares in response.

One audience member whose stare was anything but blank held up his hand when Ray asked how many in the crowd had ever heard of the attack on Liberty. 

Ray called on him:

"Ramrod straight he stood:

"'Sir, Sergeant Bryce Lockwood, United States Marine Corps, retired. I am a member of the USS Liberty crew, Sir.'

"Catching my breath, I asked him if he would be willing to tell us what happened.

"'Sir, I have not been able to do that. It is hard. But it has been almost 40 years, and I would like to try this evening, Sir.'

"You could hear a pin drop for the next 15 minutes, as Lockwood gave us his personal account of what happened to him, his colleagues, and his ship on the afternoon of June 8, 1967. 

"He was a linguist assigned to collect communications intelligence from the USS Liberty, which was among the ugliest-and most easily identifiable-ships in the fleet with antennae springing out in all directions.

"Lockwood told of the events of that fateful day, beginning with the six-hour naval and air surveillance of the Liberty by the Israeli navy and air force on the morning of June 8. 

"After the air attacks including thousand-pound bombs and napalm, three sixty-ton torpedo boats lined up like a firing squad, pointing their torpedo tubes at the Liberty's starboard hull. 

"Lockwood had been ordered to throw the extremely sensitive cryptological equipment overboard and had just walked beyond the bulwark separating the NSA intelligence unit from the rest of the ship when, he recalled, he sensed a large black object, a tremendous explosion, and sheet of flame. 

"The torpedo had struck dead center in the NSA space."

"The cold, oily water brought Lockwood back to consciousness. Around him were 25 dead colleagues; but he heard moaning. Three were still alive; one of Lockwood's shipmates dragged one survivor up the hatch. 

"Lockwood was able to lift the two others, one-by-one, onto his shoulder and carry them up through the hatch. 

"This meant alternatively banging on the hatch for someone to open it and swimming back to fish his shipmate out of the water lest he float out to sea through the 39-foot hole made by the torpedo.

"At that Lockwood stopped speaking. It was enough. Hard, very hard-even after almost 40 years."

Not as hard as understanding why any more Americans should die for the Jewish State of Israel.

Ray McGovern


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 28, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> On the evening of September 26, 2006 Ray McGovern was giving a talk on Iraq to a crowd of about 400 in Springfield, Missouri. Ray, a 30-year veteran of Army intelligence and the CIA mentioned the Liberty in passing and received almost 400 blank stares in response.



The US govt closed the book on the Liberty a long time ago.
Time for you to do the same, Nazi Georgie.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 28, 2010)

When you take your "two beautiful children" on a walking tour of Rafah, Pricess.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 28, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> When you take your "two beautiful children" on a walking tour of Rafah, Pricess.



Rafah, where they boast of killing their own children.

"We Desire Death Like You Desire Life."
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9B4fFyZ_1sQ]YouTube - Hamas boast of using civilians as human shields[/ame]


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 28, 2010)

"Virtually everyone: Republican, Democrat-Conservative, Liberal. The fear factor is non-partisan, you might say, and palpable. 

"The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) brags that it is the most influential foreign policy lobbying organization on Capitol Hill, and has demonstrated that time and again-and not only on Capitol Hill.

"Seldom has the Lobby's power been as clearly demonstrated as in its ability to suppress the awful truth that on June 8, 1967, during the Six Day War:

" Israel deliberately attacked the intelligence collection ship USS Liberty, in full awareness it was a U.S. Navy ship, and did its best to sink it and leave no survivors;

o "The Israelis would have succeeded had they not broken off the attack upon learning, from an intercepted message, that the commander of the U.S. 6th Fleet had launched carrier fighters to the scene; and

o "By that time 34 of the Liberty's crew had been killed and over 170 wounded."

AIPAC or USA

Who's First?

Ray McGovern


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 28, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "Virtually everyone: Republican, Democrat-Conservative, Liberal. The fear factor is non-partisan, you might say, and palpable.
> 
> "The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) brags that it is the most influential foreign policy lobbying organization on Capitol Hill, and has demonstrated that time and again-and not only on Capitol Hill.



Former Reagan Secretary of State George Schultz...


> The US supports Israel not out of favoritism based on political pressure or influence, but because both political parties, and virtually all our national leaders, agree with the American people's view that supporting Israel is politically sound and morally just." Those who blame Israel and its Jewish supporters for US policies they do not support are wrong. They are wrong because support for Israel is in our best interests. They are wrong because Israel and its supporters have the right to try to influence US policy. And they are wrong because the US government is responsible for the policies it adopts, not any other state or any myriad lobbyists and groups that battle daily, sometimes with lies , to win American support.


[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Turmoil-Triumph-Diplomacy-Victory-American/dp/0684803321/ref=sr_1_1?s=gateway&ie=UTF8&qid=1285721273&sr=8-1]Amazon.com: Turmoil and Triumph: Diplomacy, Power, and the Victory of the American Ideal (9780684803326): George Shultz: Gateway[/ame]



The clueless Georgie gets smacked down, again.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 28, 2010)

How much money has George Schultz made from the sale of US arms to Israel.

You might as well quote Henry Kissinger.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 28, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> How much money has George Schultz made from the sale of US arms to Israel.
> 
> You might as well quote Henry Kissinger.



You ran out of gas, already, clueless one?


----------



## DiveCon (Sep 28, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > How much money has George Schultz made from the sale of US arms to Israel.
> ...


he started out clueless


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 28, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> How much money has George Schultz made from the sale of US arms to Israel.
> 
> You might as well quote Henry Kissinger.



Sorry to injure your low self-esteem, again, Georgie, but, when you receive the awards given to former Secretary of State George Schultz, below, you won't be such a worthless pustule...

2007  Truman Medal for Economic Policy. 
2007  Emma Lazarus Statue of Liberty Award. 
2006  National World War II Museum, American Spirit Award. 
2005  Lead21 Lifetime Achievement Award. 
2002  Reagan Distinguished American Award. 
2002  Ralph Bunche Award 
 American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 
American Philosophical Society 
James H. Doolittle Award. 
Elliot Richardson Prize. 
John Witherspoon Medal. 


2001  Eisenhower Medal for Leadership. 
2000  Woodrow Wilson Award for Public Service . 
1996  Koret Prize. 
1992  Seoul Peace Prize (Korea). 
1992  United States Military Academy, Sylvanus Thayer Award. 
1989  Presidential Medal of Freedom. 
1989  Order of the Rising Sun with Paulownia Flowers, Grand Cordon (Japan). 
1989  Jefferson Award. 
1986  Freedoms Foundation, George Washington Medal.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 29, 2010)

Only devout baby killers/fuckers believe George Schultz is anything except Bechtel's bitch.

Which explains your support.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Only devout baby killers/fuckers believe George Schultz is anything except Bechtel's bitch.
> 
> Which explains your support.



Your self esteem is about rock bottom, eh, loser?

Still no condemnations from you over the Muslim genocide of children, men and women in Darfur and Sudan.

You're a loser and a fraud, Georgie


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 29, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Only devout baby killers/fuckers believe George Schultz is anything except Bechtel's bitch.
> ...



What does that have to do with Israel's attack on the USS Liberty?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



The imaginary attack the US govt determined never happened.

Go back to playing with yourself, your only skill.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 29, 2010)

*"Getting Away With Murder*

"The fatal incident off the Gaza coast was not the first time Israel had used lethal force against a nearly defenseless ship at sea. The attack on the 'Freedom Flotilla' was reminiscent of the attack on the USS Liberty during Israels Six-Day War against three of its Arab neighbors.

The war started on June 5, 1967, when Israel carried out an unprovoked Blitzkrieg attack. 

*"What is my source for 'unprovoked?' Former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, who 15 years later admitted publicly:*

    'In June 1967, we had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that [Egyptian President] Nasser was really about to attack us. 

*"'We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.'*

"Three days into the war, Israeli aircraft and torpedo boats turned their firepower on the intelligence collection ship USS Liberty in international waters after the Israelis had identified it as a U.S. Navy ship.

The Israelis later insisted that the strafing and torpedo attacks were accidents in the fog of war. However, U.S. intelligence intercepted Israeli conversations at the time showing the attacks were deliberate, and their nature and persistence showed clear intent to sink the Liberty and leave no survivors."

"Israeli commandos clad in black were about to land from helicopters and finish off what remained of the Liberty crew when Seaman Terry Halbardier (later awarded the Silver Star) slid over the Libertys napalm-greased deck to jury-rig an antenna and get an SOS off to the Sixth Fleet. 

"Israeli forces intercepted the SOS and quickly broke off the attack. But 34 of the Liberty crew were killed and over 170 wounded."

All imaginary of course to those who profit from Israeli and US war crimes.

Ray McGovern


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> *"Getting Away With Murder*
> 
> "The fatal incident off the Gaza coast was not the first time Israel had used lethal force against a nearly defenseless ship at sea.



Israel was entirely compliant with international law in intercepting a hostile vessel intent on violating Israel's lawful blockade of a terrorist base in Gaza.

Your law lesson for the day, low self esteem Georgie.


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> *"Getting Away With Murder*
> 
> The attack on the 'Freedom Flotilla' was reminiscent of the attack on the USS Liberty during Israels Six-Day War against three of its Arab neighbors.



The US govt determined the Liberty incident was an accident, low self esteem Georgie.

No posts from you on North Korea shooting a South Korean ship out of the water, killing dozens?

Tsk tsk, low self esteem Georgie.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 29, 2010)

Still no posts from Marc the self-absorbed snob telling us how many "sand rats" he has personally murdered.

What's the matter, rich bitch?

All talk and zero walk?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Still no posts from Marc the self-absorbed snob telling us how many "sand rats" he has personally murdered.
> 
> What's the matter, rich bitch?
> 
> All talk and zero walk?



Still, no condemnation from low self esteem Georgie directed to his Muslim jihadists slaughtering millions of children, men and women in Darfur and southern.

Georgie, the fraud.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 29, 2010)

I don't profit from Muslim hired killers.

Unlike arrogant bitch shit shills like you.

How much are you making from investing in apartheid?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> I don't profit from Muslim hired killers.
> 
> Unlike arrogant bitch shit shills like you.
> 
> How much are you making from investing in apartheid?



Testy testy, low self esteem Georgie.  Must be difficult going through life as such a total loser, eh, bud?

How much are you making from investing in apartheid Arab Muslim countries that discriminate by religion, gender and sexual orientation, Georgie?


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 29, 2010)

"Forty years ago this week, I was asked to investigate the heaviest attack on an American ship since World War II. 

"As senior legal counsel to the Navy Court of Inquiry it was my job to help uncover the truth regarding Israel's June 8th 1967 bombing of the USS Liberty.

On that sunny, clear day 40 years ago, Israel's combined air and naval forces attacked our American intelligence-gathering ship for two hours, inflicting 70 percent casualties. 

"Thirty four American sailors died and 172 were injured. The USS Liberty remained afloat only by the crew's heroic efforts.

"Israel claimed it was an accident. Yet I know from personal conversations with the late Admiral Isaac C. Kidd -- president of the Court of Inquiry -- that President Johnson and Secretary of Defense McNamara ordered him to conclude that the attack was a case of 'mistaken identity"'. 

Ward Boston


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "Forty years ago this week, I was asked to investigate the heaviest attack on an American ship since World War II.
> 
> "As senior legal counsel to the Navy Court of Inquiry it was my job to help uncover the truth regarding Israel's June 8th 1967 bombing of the USS Liberty.



Oh, Georgie, the US govt determined the Liberty incident was an accident.

Yet, you're silent on your cohorts in Hezballah murdering 300 Marines in Beirut.

Georgie the fraud.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 29, 2010)

Am I supposed to believe a snide parasite like you or patriots like Ward Boston and Ray McGovern?

Who's first on your loyalty list?

Israel or the US?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Am I supposed to believe a snide parasite like you or patriots like Ward Boston and Ray McGovern?
> 
> Who's first on your loyalty list?
> 
> Israel or the US?



I never heard of these crackpots, Georgie.  I'm a Princeton grad and consult far more scholarly sources.

Georgie, still, not a peep out of you about Muslims slaughtering millions in Darfur and southern Sudan.

Georgie, the fraud.


----------



## georgephillip (Sep 29, 2010)

"On June 8th, survivors of Israel's cruel attack will gather in Washington, DC to honor their dead shipmates as well as the mothers, sisters, widows and children they left behind. 

*"They will continue to ask for a fair and impartial congressional inquiry that, for the first time, would allow the survivors themselves to testify publicly.*

"For decades, I have remained silent. I am a military man and when orders come in from the Secretary of Defense and President of the United States, I follow them. However, attempts to rewrite history and concern for my country compel me to share the truth."

How much are your investments in apartheid Israel paying you to rewrite history?

Don't you find that sort of work a little elitist?

Ward Boston


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 29, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > Am I supposed to believe a snide parasite like you or patriots like Ward Boston and Ray McGovern?
> ...



Is that why you don't know Jack?


----------



## Marc39 (Sep 29, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Coming from you?  LOL
Polishing your knob is your only expertise.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Sep 29, 2010)

Marc39 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Marc39 said:
> ...



Two degrees from Princeton and this is the best you can do?

Sad.


----------



## georgephillip (Oct 2, 2010)

"I propose that 91 year old Robert McNamara be arrested. No, I'm not suggesting he be tried for his role in planning the fire bombings of Japanese cities during World War II, or for being LBJ's Defense Secretary and architect of the war of aggression against Vietnam. 

"Jail him for one much smaller act, the betrayal of sailors aboard the USS Liberty. While the Liberty was under a massive attack, *Robert McNamara twice recalled the airplanes that a navy commander had sent out to defend them.*"

Arrest Robert McNamara

After the second recall ordered by McNamara, Lyndon Johnson chimed in: "this time President Johnson ordered the recall with the comment that *he did not care if every man drowned and the ship sank, but that he would not embarrass his allies."* 

USS Liberty - Wiki


----------



## Marc39 (Oct 4, 2010)

P F Tinmore said:


> Marc39 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



You deserve nothing more, slug.


----------



## CMike (Oct 4, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "On June 8th, survivors of Israel's cruel attack will gather in Washington, DC to honor their dead shipmates as well as the mothers, sisters, widows and children they left behind.
> 
> *"They will continue to ask for a fair and impartial congressional inquiry that, for the first time, would allow the survivors themselves to testify publicly.*
> 
> ...


They did testify publically moron.

It was at the US Navy Court Of Inquiry.


----------



## Marc39 (Oct 4, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "I propose that 91 year old Robert McNamara be arrested. No, I'm not suggesting he be tried for his role in planning the fire bombings of Japanese cities during World War II, or for being LBJ's Defense Secretary and architect of the war of aggression against Vietnam.
> 
> "Jail him for one much smaller act, the betrayal of sailors aboard the USS Liberty. While the Liberty was under a massive attack, *Robert McNamara twice recalled the airplanes that a navy commander had sent out to defend them.*"
> 
> ...



Poor Georgie, relying on Wikipedia for his historical scholarship.  Too bad you dropped out of high school, eh, Georgie?


----------



## georgephillip (Oct 5, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > "On June 8th, survivors of Israel's cruel attack will gather in Washington, DC to honor their dead shipmates as well as the mothers, sisters, widows and children they left behind.
> ...


The attack on Liberty is the only assault on a US ship of its kind NEVER publicly investigated by the full US Congress.

Thanks primarily to "Israel Firsters" like you, bitch.

Maybe you should change that avatar to a Star of David?

And move to Jerusalem.


----------



## Marc39 (Oct 5, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> The attack on Liberty is the only assault on a US ship of its kind NEVER publicly investigated by the full US Congress.
> 
> Thanks primarily to "Israel Firsters" like you, bitch.
> 
> ...



Georgie, the US govt determined there was no attack.

Georgie, not a peep from you on your pals in Hezballah who murdered 300 Marines and your buds in Sudan massacring millions in Darfur and southern Sudan.

Georgie, the total fraud.


----------



## georgephillip (Oct 5, 2010)

"Can this nation's major newspapers and television networks sedulously refuse to discuss assertions that US servicemen were abandoned by their government? The answer is yes. 

*"An example: On October 22, 2003 the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967, resulting in the deaths of 34 US crew members and the wounding of 173, issued its report on Capitol Hill. Among its findings*:

     '"There is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew; evidence of such intent is supported by statements from Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Undersecretary of State George Ball, former CIA director Richard Helms, former NSA directors Lieutenant General William Odom, USA (Ret), Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, USN (Ret).'" 

"The crew, the report said, were 'abandoned by their own government... fearing conflict with Israel, the White House deliberately prevented the US Navy from coming to the defense of USS Liberty... due to the influence of Israel's powerful supporters in the United States, *the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack from the American people... there has been an official cover-up without precedent in American naval history.'"*

"Signing these emphatic conclusions were some of Americas best known military men: Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Gen Raymond G. Davis, former assistant commandant of the Marine Corps; Rear Admiral Merlin Staring, former Judge Advocate General of the Navy, and Ambassador James Akins (Ret), former United States Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. 

"And how were these categorical conclusions dealt with in the press? Reviewing the record four years later, Alison Weir, executive director of If Americans Knew, reported here  on the CounterPunch website that a review of the hundreds of newspapers indexed by Lexis-Nexis 'does not turn up a single US newspaper that mentioned this commission, a single US television station, a single US radio station, a single US magazine.

"'While it was mentioned in an Associated Press report focusing on one of the commission's most dramatic revelations, Lexis reveals only a sprinkling of news media printed information from this AP report, and those few that did failed to mention this commission itself, its extremely star-studded composition, and the entirety of its findings.'

"And who, in the case of the Liberty, conducted the initial, cursory Navy Court of Inquiry in the immediate aftermath of the attack? 

*"None other than Admiral John S. McCain, father of Arizona's senior US senator,  preparing the hasty cover-up under the supervision of Johnson's White House and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara."* 

Alexander Cockburn..


----------



## Marc39 (Oct 5, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "Can this nation's major newspapers and television networks sedulously refuse to discuss assertions that US servicemen were abandoned by their government? The answer is yes.
> 
> *"An example: On October 22, 2003 the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967, resulting in the deaths of 34 US crew members and the wounding of 173, issued its report on Capitol Hill. Among its findings*:
> 
> '"There is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew; evidence of such intent is supported by statements from Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Undersecretary of State George Ball, former CIA director Richard Helms, former NSA directors Lieutenant General William Odom, USA (Ret), Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, USN (Ret).'"



Georgie, the US govt determined the Liberty incident not even worth investigating because 10 US commisisons determined it was an accident.

Georgie, not a peep from you on your pals in Hezballah murdering 300 Marines in Beirut and your Muslim cohorts' genocide of millions in Darfur and southern Sudan.

Georgie, you're a total fraud and a loser.


----------



## georgephillip (Oct 6, 2010)

*"The Myth of the "11 Investigations*

"If USA Today had investigated this claim, continually put forward by Israel partisans, its editors would have discovered that in 2006 the reference librarian at the Library of Congress had investigated this allegation and found it to be false: 

"After checking numerous resources, including the CIS (Congressional Information Service) Indexes to Congressional Hearings (both published and unpublished), and the Public Documents Masterfile, I could find no evidence that the Congress ever held hearings or launched an investigation into the June 8, 1967 incident with the USS Liberty." 

Try again..

Poseur.

Alison Weir


----------



## Sallow (Oct 6, 2010)

JBeukema said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > JBeukema said:
> ...



LOL..good one.


----------



## Marc39 (Oct 6, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> *"The Myth of the "11 Investigations*
> 
> "If USA Today had investigated this claim, continually put forward by Israel partisans, its editors would have discovered that in 2006 the reference librarian at the Library of Congress had investigated this allegation and found it to be false:
> 
> ...



Bogus website, Georgie, illustrating how uneducated you are.

The US govt chose not to investigate the Liberty incident because 10 US commisisons determined it an accident.

Georgie, not a peep from you about your pals in Hezballah murdering 300 Marines in Beirut or your Muslim cohorts in Sudan slaughtering millions in Darfur and southern Sudan.

Georgie the fraud gets bitch slapped, again.


----------



## CMike (Oct 6, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> *"The Myth of the "11 Investigations*
> 
> "If USA Today had investigated this claim, continually put forward by Israel partisans, its editors would have discovered that in 2006 the reference librarian at the Library of Congress had investigated this allegation and found it to be false:
> 
> ...




1) You are a douche bag

2) I never said 11 investigations.

The investigations were:

The US Navy Court of Inquiry

The Joint Chiefs

The CIA

The Senate Intelligence Committee

The House Armed Services Committee

3) The transcripts of the Israeli pilots as gotten by a US spy plane confirms that it was an accident

4) You are still a douche bag


----------



## CMike (Oct 6, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> CMike said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...



Maybe you should join Al Qaida.


Arab terrorist firster...it was a friendly fire incident. No friendly fire incident received as much investigation that this one did.


These are some that were in Iraq, with US forces attacking US forces and British forces.

Friendly fire incidents and accidents - War on Iraq - smh.com.au

FRIENDLY FIRE INCIDENTS: 

March 22: A British Royal Air Force (RAF) Tornado jet is accidentally shot down by a US Patriot missile. The Tornado's two crew are killed. 

March 24: Two British soldiers are killed when their tank is mistakenly targeted by another British tank in southern Iraq. 

March 27: 37 US Marines are injured when US troops mistakenly fire at each other near the southern city of Nasiriyah. 

March 28: A British soldier is killed and four others are injured in the region of Basra when a US A-10 ground attack aircraft fires on them. 

April 2: An F-18 US fighter jet is downed, probably by a US Patriot missile. The pilot is reported missing. 

April 3: A US serviceman mistaken for an Iraqi soldier is shot dead by his own troops in central Iraq. 

April 6: 18 Kurdish fighters are killed and 45 wounded near Arbil in northern Iraq when US aircraft mistakenly bomb a joint US-Kurdish convoy. 

According to the website of the American War Library, just over half of the coalition troops killed or injured during the 1991 Gulf War were victims of friendly fire incidents. 

Of those, about 165 US casualties were due to "friendly fire" out of a total of 367 Americans who lost their lives, it said. 

OTHER INCIDENTS: 

March 22: A US soldier at a camp in Kuwait lobs grenades into the tents of fellow soldiers, killing two and wounding 11 others. 

March 30: 15 American soldiers are injured at a military camp in northern Kuwait when a disgruntled Egyptian employee rams a truck into the group. The truck driver sustained two gunshot wounds. 

AFP


----------



## CMike (Oct 6, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> "Forty years ago this week, I was asked to investigate the heaviest attack on an American ship since World War II.
> 
> "As senior legal counsel to the Navy Court of Inquiry it was my job to help uncover the truth regarding Israel's June 8th 1967 bombing of the USS Liberty.
> 
> ...



Hearsy and bullshit.

The US Navy Court Of Inquiry concluded it was an accident too 

The judges are under oath too. 

Wow since you hate America and think it's all corrupt why don't you leave. The door is this way ------------------------------------------->


----------



## georgephillip (Oct 7, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > CMike said:
> ...


How many Silver Stars and Congressional Medals of Honor have been awarded in FRIENDLY FIRE incidents?


----------



## georgephillip (Oct 7, 2010)

CMike said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > *"The Myth of the "11 Investigations*
> ...


"The U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry: The court concluded that "available evidence combines to indicate...[that the attack was] a case of mistaken identity."
According to Captain Ward Boston, chief legal counsel to the Court of Inquiry, the court found that the attack was deliberate, but reported falsely that it was not, because they were directed by the president of the United States and the secretary of defense to report falsely. So the findings are fraudulent. Yet these fraudulent findings were the basis for several other reports that followed.

2. The Joint Chiefs of Staff Report of June 1967: This was an inquiry into the mishandling of several messages intended for the ship. It was not an investigation into the attack. It did not exonerate Israel, because it did not in any way consider the question of culpability.

3. CIA report of June 13, 1967: This interim report, completed five days after the attack, reported "our best judgment [is] that the attack...was a mistake." No investigation was conducted, and no first-hand evidence was collected. Then-CIA Director Richard Helms concluded and later reported in his autobiography that the attack was planned and deliberate.

 Clark Clifford report of July 18, 1967: Clark Clifford was directed by Lyndon Johnson to review the Court of Inquiry report and the interim CIA report and "not to make an independent inquiry." His was merely a summary of other fallacious reports, not an "investigation"... The report reached no conclusions and did not exonerate Israel... On the contrary, Clifford wrote later that he regarded the attack as deliberate.

5. and 6. Two Senate meetings: The Committee on Foreign Relations meeting of 1967 and Senate Armed Services Committee meeting of 1968 were hearings on unrelated matters which clearly skeptical members used to castigate representatives of the administration under oath before them. Typical questions were, "Why can't we get the truth about this?" They were not "investigations" at all, but budget hearings, and reported no conclusions concerning the attack. They did not exonerate Israel.

7. House Appropriations Committee meeting of April and May 1968: This was a budget committee meeting which explored the issue of lost messages intended for the ship. It was not an investigation and reported no conclusions concerning the attack.

8. House Armed Services Committee Review of Communications, May 1971: Liberty communications were discussed along with other communications failures. The committee reported no conclusions concerning the attack.

9. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 1979/1981: [Miami bankruptcy judge A. Jay Cristol, author of a book exonerating Israel] claims that the committee investigated the attack and exonerated Israel, yet he has been unable to provide minutes, a report or other evidence of such an investigation. Rules of the select committee require that any committee investigation be followed by a report. There is no report of such an investigation; ergo, there was no such investigation.

10. National Security Agency Report, 1981: Upon the publication in 1980 of "Assault on the Liberty" by James Ennes, the National Security Agency completed a detailed account of the attack. The report drew no conclusions, although its authors did note that the deputy director dismissed the Israeli excuse (the Yerushalmi report) as 'a nice whitewash.' The report did not exonerate Israel.

11. House Armed Services Committee meeting of 1991/1992: Though cited by Mr. Cristol as an investigation which exonerates Israel, the U.S. government reports no record of such an investigation. Cristol claims that the investigation resulted from a letter to Rep. Nicholas Mavroules from Joe Meadors, then-president of the USS Liberty Veterans Association, seeking Mavroules' support. Instead of responding to Liberty veterans, however, Congressman Mavroules referred the matter to Mr. Cristol for advice. Survivors heard nothing further. Meadors' letter was never answered. The U.S. government reports that there has been no such investigation."

Looks like your choice is between douche bag and traitor.

Alison Weir: USA Today...


----------



## Cold Fusion38 (Nov 12, 2010)

How can an attack that occured over TWO HOURS on a ship flying an AMERICAN FLAG that looked NOTHING LIKE the Egyptian trawler Israel claimed it thought it was attacking be an ACCIDENT? Just use a LITTLE common sense and ask yourself HOW could such an event have been an ACCIDENT?


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 12, 2010)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> How can an attack that occured over TWO HOURS on a ship flying an AMERICAN FLAG that looked NOTHING LIKE the Egyptian trawler Israel claimed it thought it was attacking be an ACCIDENT? Just use a LITTLE common sense and ask yourself HOW could such an event have been an ACCIDENT?[/i]


Blah-blah-blah. For all of you, Liberty-The-Pirates-Of-The-Carribean-Flying-Duthcman-Dumbass bunch, from 0330 till 0415 the United States Coast Guard Cutter Point Welcome was twice under a coordinated attack first by a B-57, that shot 800 20mm rounds at it, and then bombed by a pair of F-4Cs. Well, I suppose, the cutter didn't look like the gook junk either, flying the colors and all that, meh? By the way, iranians aren't buying the story that, their airbus was shot down, because the USS Vincennes mistook it for an Independence Day illegal alien ship, either. Get lost.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 12, 2010)

What does a "gook" junk look like?

Does it carry life rafts?

"In addition, the testimony of Lt. Lloyd Painter concerning the *deliberate machine-gunning of the life rafts* by the Israeli torpedo boat crews, which I distinctly recall being given at the Court of Inquiry and including in the original transcript, is now missing."

Ward Boston...

Get real.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 12, 2010)

Cold Fusion38 said:


> How can an attack that occured over TWO HOURS on a ship flying an AMERICAN FLAG that looked NOTHING LIKE the Egyptian trawler Israel claimed it thought it was attacking be an ACCIDENT? Just use a LITTLE common sense and ask yourself HOW could such an event have been an ACCIDENT?


Why would Israel deliberately attack a ship they knew was American?

Ray McGovern, a former Army intelligence officer and CIA analyst from 1963 to 1990, offers some possible answers:

"Why the Israelis decided to take the draconian measure of sinking a ship of the U.S. Navy is open to speculation. 

"One view is that the Israelis did not want the U.S. to find out *they were massing troops to seize the Golan Heights from Syria*, and wanted to deprive the U.S. of the opportunity to argue against such a move. 

"Another theory: James Bamford, in 'Body of Secrets,' adduces evidence, including reporting from an Israeli journalist eyewitness and an Israeli military historian, *of wholesale killing of Egyptian prisoners of war at the coastal town of El Arish in the Sinai.* 

"The Liberty was patrolling directly opposite El Arish in international waters but within easy range to pick up intelligence on what was going on there. And the Israelis were well aware."

Ray finishes his October 2007 column by quoting an e-mail he received from an associate of his who has followed Middle East affairs for almost 60 years.

The e-mail references additional US intercepts of conversations between Israeli pilots who attacked Liberty and their base:

"'The chief of the intelligence analysts studying the Arab/Israeli region at the time told me about the intercepted messages and said very flatly and firmly that the (Israeli) pilots reported seeing the *American flag* and repeated their requests for *confirmation of the attack order*. 

"'Whole platoons of Americans saw those intercepts.

"'If NSA now says they do not exist, then someone ordered them destroyed.'"

Ray McGovern...


----------



## CMike (Nov 12, 2010)

docmauser1 said:


> Cold Fusion38 said:
> 
> 
> > How can an attack that occured over TWO HOURS on a ship flying an AMERICAN FLAG that looked NOTHING LIKE the Egyptian trawler Israel claimed it thought it was attacking be an ACCIDENT? Just use a LITTLE common sense and ask yourself HOW could such an event have been an ACCIDENT?[/i]
> ...




You are absolutely right. 

Friendly fire incidents have occurred numerous times.

However, if it's Israel doing it, it's Israel deliberately attacking an American ship 

Bunch of fucking psychos.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 12, 2010)

Two quick questions:

1. Do they award the Congressional Medal Honor for "friendly fire" incidents?

"Bowing to intense pressure from the Navy, the White House agreed to award the Liberty's skipper, Captain William McGonagle, the Medal of Honor....but not at the White House, and not by the president (as is the custom). 

"Rather, the Secretary of the Navy gave the award at the Washington Navy Yard on the banks of the acrid Anacostia River. 

"A naval officer involved in the awards ceremony told one of the Liberty crew, 'The government is pretty jumpy about Israel...the State Department even asked the Israeli ambassador if his government had any objections to McGonagle getting the medal.'"

2. Do you object to McGonagle receiving the medal?

Ray McGovern


----------



## manu1959 (Nov 12, 2010)

so let me see if i have this right....if the israelis purpossly attacked a us ship then you want to use that to pull our support of israel....is that pretty much the point.....


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 12, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> _What does a "gook" junk look like?_


It looks like the craft the chief screwmate Rachel Corrie was driving.



georgephillip said:


> _Does it carry life rafts?_


That is what extreme sportin' is all about, of course.



georgephillip said:


> _"In addition, the testimony of Lt. Lloyd Painter concerning the deliberate machine-gunning of the life rafts by the Israeli torpedo boat crews, which I distinctly recall being given at the Court of Inquiry and including in the original transcript, is now missing."_


So, the crew was doing rafting and the jooz were sinking them. Was that Lloyd George smoking some potent stuff?



georgephillip said:


> _Ward Boston..._


Wards have bostons, indeed.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 12, 2010)

manu1959:

That's not what I'm saying.
That's a decision all US voters should have a say in.
After they know all the relevant information.

If Israel deliberately attacked a US vessel and got away with it, what other skeletons are  hiding in that closet?

How likely is it, for example, the terror attacks of 9/11/2001 would have occurred if Harry Truman had just said "No" to the suitcase with $2 million allegedly offered by an American Zionist in 1948?

There are some pretty strong economic reasons to roll back the US Empire and start investing in things like high-speed rail and universal fiber-optic internet in this country.

If that means pulling the plug on the occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gaza, so much the better. To my mind the $7 million per day Israel receives from the US taxpayer could be put to better use in this country.

That's a decision all Americans should vote on; however, finding enough elected Republicans or Democrats willing to raise the issue in DC will first require showing Americans all the skeletons in the Empire's closet.

Starting with the Jewish State of Israel's.


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 12, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> _Do they award the Congressional Medal Honor for "friendly fire" incidents?_


For hamas gang-rape victims, of course.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 13, 2010)

Did you "get" yours?


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 13, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> _Did you "get" yours?_


We have a promoter of gang-rape, wife-beating and child molestation on board.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 13, 2010)

docdrivel goes drama queen?

Scary.


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 13, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> docdrivel goes drama queen?.


"Or perhaps you were gang raped by Hamas? What's the matter? Don't they call?"


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 13, 2010)

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > _Did you "get" yours?_
> ...


Do you consider yourself a wife or a child?

Probably a good thing you weren't on Liberty.


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 13, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> docmauser1 said:
> 
> 
> > georgephillip said:
> ...


Oh, all "gang raped by hamas", of course.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 13, 2010)

While white-cap rafting as heroic Jews on Torpedo boats blazed away with .50 calibers?

Real shame you missed that extreme adventure...


----------



## CMike (Nov 13, 2010)




----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 13, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> _with .50 calibers?_


Must be the "gang rape by hamas" size.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 13, 2010)

Not even close.

"The Israeli torpedo boats attacked with cannon fire and launched five torpedoes at Liberty.[34] 

"One hit Liberty on the starboard side forward of the superstructure, creating a *40 ft (12 m) wide hole* in what had been a former cargo hold converted to the ship's research spaces and killing 25 servicemen.[35] 

"It has been said that the torpedo hit a major hull frame that absorbed much of the energy; *crew members reported that if the torpedo had missed the frame the Liberty would have split in two*.

"Russian linguist and *Marine Staff Sergeant Bryce Lockwood* later commented: 'I would never deny that it was God that kept the Liberty afloat!'.[6]

"*Most of the U.S. deaths and injuries in the incident were caused by the torpedo blast.* 

"According to some witnesses, the torpedo boats then approached Liberty and strafed crewmen (including damage control parties and sailors preparing life rafts for launch) on deck.

Holy forty-foot Shit!

Bet you're glad you missed that party.

USS Liberty - Wiki


----------



## mdn2000 (Nov 13, 2010)

Big deal, old news, means nothing today.

A ship sunk, tragic, in the big scheme of history it will be noted as nothing. 

There are bad people everywhere, hell, the universities have Chomsky, should we shut down the universities?


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 13, 2010)

If Chomsky is a bad guy what would you call LBJ?

"...These he launched to assist us and again notified Washington of his actions. 

"Again McNamara ordered the aircraft recalled. He requested confirmation of the order being unable to believe that Washington would let us sink. 

"*This time President Johnson ordered the recall with the comment that he did not care if every man drowned and the ship sank, but that he would not embarrass his allies.*

USS Liberty - Wiki


----------



## MikeK (Nov 13, 2010)

GHook93 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > GHook93 said:
> ...


----------



## mdn2000 (Nov 13, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> If Chomsky is a bad guy what would you call LBJ?
> 
> "...These he launched to assist us and again notified Washington of his actions.
> 
> ...



I would call LBJ, Chomsky. Is that right, it was a game, right, a linguistic trick, right. Did I win.


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 13, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> Blah-blah-blah-blah.


The SS Liberty sunk in a Gaza smuggling tunnel with a chief propshafted mate R. Corrie never to be seen again. Like in the X-Files.
Our judophobic merry go round: 
Blood libel, when crapped out
Rachel P. Corrie, when crapped out
Chomskin, when crapped out
USS Liberty, when crapped out 
UN resolutions. when crapped out 
US money/aid/help/taxes, when crapped out 
Start blood libel


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 14, 2010)

Were you born crapped out?


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 14, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> _Were you born crapped out?_


A day without skool-boy arguments and profanities is a day lost for my followers here, of course.


----------



## mdn2000 (Nov 14, 2010)

docmauser1 said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> > _Were you born crapped out?_
> ...



I would not call the hate and ignorance of liberal rants school boy arguments, many school kids are intelligent or have the potential for intelligence and learning.

Ann Coulter Quotes



> Political debate with liberals is basically impossible in America today because liberals are calling names while conservatives are trying to make arguments.
> Ann Coulter


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 14, 2010)

What does Ann have to say about the USS Liberty?


----------



## docmauser1 (Nov 14, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> _What does Ann have to say about the USS Liberty?_


It would be nice, if they clarified, what side the USS Liberty had been feeding, egyptians, or syrians. Otherwise, it's all Liberty Instant Soup marketing campaign.


----------



## georgephillip (Nov 14, 2010)

"McGonagle received the Medal of Honor, the highest U.S. medal, for his actions.[40][41] 

"The Medal of Honor is generally presented by the President of the United States in the White House,[41][42] but this time it was awarded at the Washington Navy Yard by the Secretary of the Navy in an unpublicized ceremony, breaking with established tradition."

Should the skipper of Liberty send his thanks to Egypt or Syria?

USS Liberty - Wiki


----------



## mdn2000 (Nov 16, 2010)

georgephillip said:


> What does Ann have to say about the USS Liberty?



How about what Chomsky says about the USS Cole.Don't you get tired of getting Chomsky's ass kicked on the boards.

Chomsky Watch...



> Most of this probably had to do with Israel&#8217;s plans to conquer the Golan Heights, which they did after the ceasefire. And they didn&#8217;t want the United States to know about it in advance because the U.S. would have stopped them, and probably that&#8217;s what lies behind most of this. Documents aren&#8217;t out, so we can only speculate, and they will probably never come out.
> Read that last line again "Documents aren&#8217;t out, so we can only speculate, and they will probably never come out." It's a lie and a shoddy one at that. Chomsky should know that Israel, America and most of the democratic countries in the world have a thirty-year declassification policy. In fact Chomky even makes the claim on his blog stating, "The scheduled release of declassified documents in the official State Department history is 30 years. In practice it is a bit longer, about 35 years or so usually." If Chomsky cared to check the archives, instead of invoking them in vein, he might have learned something, but all he can do is make statements that he knows might not be true and hope no one will notice



Chomsky lies, for money.


----------



## louie888 (Jul 17, 2017)

So many zionist lies about this incident and so little time. This event was a mass murder of Americans and no matter how many lies from israel's shills we have to correct, the truth is still the truth.

This is the NSA document that israel's shils kept going on about on the now locked thread. It COMPLETELY DEBUNKS THE IDIOTIC, ZIONIST LIE ABOUT HOW THEY DID NOT KNOW THEY WERE MURDERING AMERICANS... Page 41, left side...

*Though the pilots testified to the contrary, every official interview of numerous Liberty crewmen gave consistent evidence that indeed the Liberty was flying an American flag - and, further, the weather conditions were ideal to assure its easy observance and identification.*

*https://www.nsa.gov/news-features/d...ets/files/chronology-events/attack-sigint.pdf*


----------



## strollingbones (Jul 17, 2017)

the men of the uss liberty are dying off......the story cannot die with them......it is the most shameful non investigated ocean  event


----------



## louie888 (Jul 17, 2017)

strollingbones said:


> the men of the uss liberty are dying off......the story cannot die with them......it is the most shameful non investigated ocean  event


It has been investigated and everyone knows this was a planned mass murder of Americans by a nation we send jillions of US dollars to every year

But none dare call it a conspiracy.

LMAO


----------

