USS Liberty Remembered At Navy Memorial

[georgephillip]

You make it up as you go along?
Got it.

No, and you have already revealed yourself as bigot:

USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interesting Wikipedia article, makes it clear that target misidentification at the time of the torpedo attack would have been impossible......unless you believe Israeli naval personnel are completely incompetent.

Israel made several recon flights during the morning before the attack.
In one instance, Liberty crew members waved to the Israeli pilot.
Liberty survivors report IDF helicopters with commandos aboard hovered above the ship after the Sixth Fleet radioed IN THE CLEAR that help was on the way.
Initially, LBJ didn't care if Liberty sank with the loss of all aboard.
He may have had his mind changed by his Joint Chiefs.
It would make a good movie.

 

[georgephillip]

No, and you have already revealed yourself as bigot:

USS Liberty incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interesting Wikipedia article, makes it clear that target misidentification at the time of the torpedo attack would have been impossible......unless you believe Israeli naval personnel are completely incompetent.

I do not read it that way, Israel had warned of danger for 100 miles out, the Liberty was within 15-18 miles. A tragic error, Israel hand -0- to gain, and a lot to lose from this.

What makes you think Jews are special enough to warn a US Naval vessel in international waters to move farther away from shore? Liberty intercepted an Israeli decision to invade Syria AFTER Syria had withdrawn from the conflict. That is why Israel murdered 34 Americans that day. Why do you insist on apologizing for them?

 

[Discombobulated]

I do not read it that way, Israel had warned of danger for 100 miles out, the Liberty was within 15-18 miles. A tragic error, Israel hand -0- to gain, and a lot to lose from this.

That doesn't really explain attacking at close range with torpedoes, cannon and machine guns without recognizing an American naval intelligence vessel. The large communications gathering equipment on huge lattice structures is kind of a dead give away. The USS Liberty looked nothing like any Egyptian ships.

Here are the US errors:

With the outbreak of war, Captain William L. McGonagle of the Liberty immediately asked Vice Admiral William I. Martin at the United States Sixth Fleet headquarters to send a destroyer to accompany the Liberty and serve as its armed escort and as an auxiliary communications center. The following day, 6 June, 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."[16]
U.S. Ambassador Arthur Goldberg said to the Security Council that aircraft of the Sixth Fleet were several hundred miles from the conflict,[12] indicating that elements of the Sixth Fleet itself were far from the conflict. When the statement was made this was the case, since Liberty, now assigned to the Sixth Fleet, was in the central Mediterranean Sea, passing between Libya and Crete;[17] but she would ultimately steam to about 13 nmi (15 mi; 24 km) north of the Sinai Peninsula.[18] According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)

Israeli errors:
As Commander Oren headed toward Arish, he was informed by Naval Operations of the reported shelling of Arish and told that IAF aircraft would be dispatched to the area after the target had been detected.[29]

Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin was concerned that the supposed Egyptian shelling was the prelude to an amphibious landing that could outflank Israeli forces. Rabin reiterated the standing order to sink any unidentified ships in the area, but advised caution, as Soviet vessels were reportedly operating nearby.[23]

At 1:41 pm, the torpedo boats detected an unknown vessel 20 miles northwest of Arish and 14 miles off the coast of Bardawil.[1][31] The ship's speed was estimated on their radars.[31] The Combat Information Center officer on T-204, Ensign Aharon Yifrah, reported to the boat's captain, Commander Moshe Oren, that the target had been detected at a range of 22 miles, that her speed had been tracked for a few minutes, after which he had determined that the target was moving westward at a speed of 30 knots. These data were forwarded to the Fleet Operations Control Center.[31]

The speed of the target was significant because it indicated that the target was a combat vessel.[31] Moreover, Israeli forces had standing orders to fire on any unknown vessels sailing in the area at over 20 knots, a speed which, at the time, could only be attained by warships. The Chief of Naval Operations asked the torpedo boats to double-check their calculations. Yifrah twice recalculated and confirmed his assessment.[23][31] A few minutes later, Commander Oren reported that the target, now 17 miles from his position, was moving at a speed of 28 knots on a different heading.[32] Bamford, however, points out that the Liberty's top speed was far below 28 knots. His sources say that at the time of the attack the Liberty was following its signal-intercept mission course along the northern Sinai coast, at about 5 knots speed.[30]
The data on the ship's speed, together with its direction, indicated that it was an Egyptian destroyer fleeing toward port after shelling Arish. The torpedo boats gave chase, but did not expect to overtake their target before it reached Egypt. Commander Oren requested that the Israeli Air Force dispatch aircraft to intercept.[23][31] At 1:48 pm, the Chief of Naval Operations requested dispatch of fighter aircraft to the ship's location.[33]

Hunt-class destroyer HMS Blean. The Egyptian Navy had Hunt-class destroyers in 1967
The IAF dispatched two Mirage III fighter jets that arrived at Liberty at about 2:00 pm.[34] The formation leader, Captain Iftach Spector, attempted to identify the ship.[34] He communicated via radio to one of the torpedo boats his observation that the ship appeared like a military ship with one smokestack and one mast.[35] Also, he communicated, in effect, that the ship appeared to him like a destroyer or another type of small ship.[35] In a post-attack statement, the pilots said they saw no distinguishable markings or flag on the ship.[35]


Still waiting for any reason Israel would intentionally attack a US Ship.

I repeat, the USS Liberty looked nothing like any Egyptian ship, and absolutely nothing like an old British destroyer. There could have been no mistaking the distinctive profile.

 

[Discombobulated]

I do not read it that way, Israel had warned of danger for 100 miles out, the Liberty was within 15-18 miles. A tragic error, Israel hand -0- to gain, and a lot to lose from this.

That doesn't really explain attacking at close range with torpedoes, cannon and machine guns without recognizing an American naval intelligence vessel. The large communications gathering equipment on huge lattice structures is kind of a dead give away. The USS Liberty looked nothing like any Egyptian ships.

Here are the US errors:

With the outbreak of war, Captain William L. McGonagle of the Liberty immediately asked Vice Admiral William I. Martin at the United States Sixth Fleet headquarters to send a destroyer to accompany the Liberty and serve as its armed escort and as an auxiliary communications center. The following day, 6 June, 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."[16]
U.S. Ambassador Arthur Goldberg said to the Security Council that aircraft of the Sixth Fleet were several hundred miles from the conflict,[12] indicating that elements of the Sixth Fleet itself were far from the conflict. When the statement was made this was the case, since Liberty, now assigned to the Sixth Fleet, was in the central Mediterranean Sea, passing between Libya and Crete;[17] but she would ultimately steam to about 13 nmi (15 mi; 24 km) north of the Sinai Peninsula.[18] According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)

Israeli errors:
As Commander Oren headed toward Arish, he was informed by Naval Operations of the reported shelling of Arish and told that IAF aircraft would be dispatched to the area after the target had been detected.[29]

Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin was concerned that the supposed Egyptian shelling was the prelude to an amphibious landing that could outflank Israeli forces. Rabin reiterated the standing order to sink any unidentified ships in the area, but advised caution, as Soviet vessels were reportedly operating nearby.[23]

At 1:41 pm, the torpedo boats detected an unknown vessel 20 miles northwest of Arish and 14 miles off the coast of Bardawil.[1][31] The ship's speed was estimated on their radars.[31] The Combat Information Center officer on T-204, Ensign Aharon Yifrah, reported to the boat's captain, Commander Moshe Oren, that the target had been detected at a range of 22 miles, that her speed had been tracked for a few minutes, after which he had determined that the target was moving westward at a speed of 30 knots. These data were forwarded to the Fleet Operations Control Center.[31]

The speed of the target was significant because it indicated that the target was a combat vessel.[31] Moreover, Israeli forces had standing orders to fire on any unknown vessels sailing in the area at over 20 knots, a speed which, at the time, could only be attained by warships. The Chief of Naval Operations asked the torpedo boats to double-check their calculations. Yifrah twice recalculated and confirmed his assessment.[23][31] A few minutes later, Commander Oren reported that the target, now 17 miles from his position, was moving at a speed of 28 knots on a different heading.[32] Bamford, however, points out that the Liberty's top speed was far below 28 knots. His sources say that at the time of the attack the Liberty was following its signal-intercept mission course along the northern Sinai coast, at about 5 knots speed.[30]
The data on the ship's speed, together with its direction, indicated that it was an Egyptian destroyer fleeing toward port after shelling Arish. The torpedo boats gave chase, but did not expect to overtake their target before it reached Egypt. Commander Oren requested that the Israeli Air Force dispatch aircraft to intercept.[23][31] At 1:48 pm, the Chief of Naval Operations requested dispatch of fighter aircraft to the ship's location.[33]

Hunt-class destroyer HMS Blean. The Egyptian Navy had Hunt-class destroyers in 1967
The IAF dispatched two Mirage III fighter jets that arrived at Liberty at about 2:00 pm.[34] The formation leader, Captain Iftach Spector, attempted to identify the ship.[34] He communicated via radio to one of the torpedo boats his observation that the ship appeared like a military ship with one smokestack and one mast.[35] Also, he communicated, in effect, that the ship appeared to him like a destroyer or another type of small ship.[35] In a post-attack statement, the pilots said they saw no distinguishable markings or flag on the ship.[35]


Still waiting for any reason Israel would intentionally attack a US Ship. And looking at a ship from shore, or a photo thereof, is much different than when at sea...or so my father said, and he had 28-29 years at sea.

I'll just deal with the actual facts thank you, I'll leave all the speculation as to why up to you.

 

[Peach]

That doesn't really explain attacking at close range with torpedoes, cannon and machine guns without recognizing an American naval intelligence vessel. The large communications gathering equipment on huge lattice structures is kind of a dead give away. The USS Liberty looked nothing like any Egyptian ships.

Here are the US errors:

With the outbreak of war, Captain William L. McGonagle of the Liberty immediately asked Vice Admiral William I. Martin at the United States Sixth Fleet headquarters to send a destroyer to accompany the Liberty and serve as its armed escort and as an auxiliary communications center. The following day, 6 June, 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."[16]
U.S. Ambassador Arthur Goldberg said to the Security Council that aircraft of the Sixth Fleet were several hundred miles from the conflict,[12] indicating that elements of the Sixth Fleet itself were far from the conflict. When the statement was made this was the case, since Liberty, now assigned to the Sixth Fleet, was in the central Mediterranean Sea, passing between Libya and Crete;[17] but she would ultimately steam to about 13 nmi (15 mi; 24 km) north of the Sinai Peninsula.[18] According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)

Israeli errors:
As Commander Oren headed toward Arish, he was informed by Naval Operations of the reported shelling of Arish and told that IAF aircraft would be dispatched to the area after the target had been detected.[29]

Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin was concerned that the supposed Egyptian shelling was the prelude to an amphibious landing that could outflank Israeli forces. Rabin reiterated the standing order to sink any unidentified ships in the area, but advised caution, as Soviet vessels were reportedly operating nearby.[23]

At 1:41 pm, the torpedo boats detected an unknown vessel 20 miles northwest of Arish and 14 miles off the coast of Bardawil.[1][31] The ship's speed was estimated on their radars.[31] The Combat Information Center officer on T-204, Ensign Aharon Yifrah, reported to the boat's captain, Commander Moshe Oren, that the target had been detected at a range of 22 miles, that her speed had been tracked for a few minutes, after which he had determined that the target was moving westward at a speed of 30 knots. These data were forwarded to the Fleet Operations Control Center.[31]

The speed of the target was significant because it indicated that the target was a combat vessel.[31] Moreover, Israeli forces had standing orders to fire on any unknown vessels sailing in the area at over 20 knots, a speed which, at the time, could only be attained by warships. The Chief of Naval Operations asked the torpedo boats to double-check their calculations. Yifrah twice recalculated and confirmed his assessment.[23][31] A few minutes later, Commander Oren reported that the target, now 17 miles from his position, was moving at a speed of 28 knots on a different heading.[32] Bamford, however, points out that the Liberty's top speed was far below 28 knots. His sources say that at the time of the attack the Liberty was following its signal-intercept mission course along the northern Sinai coast, at about 5 knots speed.[30]
The data on the ship's speed, together with its direction, indicated that it was an Egyptian destroyer fleeing toward port after shelling Arish. The torpedo boats gave chase, but did not expect to overtake their target before it reached Egypt. Commander Oren requested that the Israeli Air Force dispatch aircraft to intercept.[23][31] At 1:48 pm, the Chief of Naval Operations requested dispatch of fighter aircraft to the ship's location.[33]

Hunt-class destroyer HMS Blean. The Egyptian Navy had Hunt-class destroyers in 1967
The IAF dispatched two Mirage III fighter jets that arrived at Liberty at about 2:00 pm.[34] The formation leader, Captain Iftach Spector, attempted to identify the ship.[34] He communicated via radio to one of the torpedo boats his observation that the ship appeared like a military ship with one smokestack and one mast.[35] Also, he communicated, in effect, that the ship appeared to him like a destroyer or another type of small ship.[35] In a post-attack statement, the pilots said they saw no distinguishable markings or flag on the ship.[35]


Still waiting for any reason Israel would intentionally attack a US Ship. And looking at a ship from shore, or a photo thereof, is much different than when at sea...or so my father said, and he had 28-29 years at sea.

I'll just deal with the actual facts thank you, I'll leave all the speculation as to why up to you.

'Lewrockwell' states "false flag", for Israel to attack a US ship there must have been reason. the two ships look nothing alike, in still photos.......at sea............there is conflicting evidence.

 

[Bush92]

USS Liberty Remembered at Navy Memorial | Military.com
R.I.P. to the brave American soldiers who were so cowardly attacked.

Several U.S. Navy veterans who survived the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 assembled Sunday at the U.S. Navy Memorial to mark the 47th anniversary of the event. The vets also called on Congress to investigate the assault that left 34 men dead and 174 wounded.
A Naval Court of Inquiry was the sole investigation done on the incident. Its conclusion that the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was accidental was disputed by former Navy lawyers responsible for advising the court and reviewing its work.
"While the survivors and their families are aware of the heroic efforts to complete their mission ... the cover-up that ensued soon afterwards and the event's notoriety [prevented the recognition] they justly deserved," Liberty Veterans Association President Ernie Gallo said.
The annual commemoration of the attack previously has been held at Arlington National Cemetery, where the remains of 14 crewmembers were buried together.
Survivors and their supporters have long claimed that Israel deliberately attacked the Liberty with the intention of sinking it and then blaming the attack on Egypt.
But when the ship survived the attack, the Israelis claimed it was a case of mistaken identity, an explanation that President Lyndon Johnson did not publicly challenge in order to retain the support of the influential Israel lobby, according to survivors and backers.
The U.S. State Department never accepted the Israeli explanation.
During the daylight attack, the ship was hit with napalm, strafed by Israeli fighters and struck by torpedoes. Some survivors also have what's left of the life rafts they used that were shot up by the Israelis.

Hey, there's this 9-11 Memorial in NYC. check it out sometime.

 

[dilloduck]

Here are the US errors:

With the outbreak of war, Captain William L. McGonagle of the Liberty immediately asked Vice Admiral William I. Martin at the United States Sixth Fleet headquarters to send a destroyer to accompany the Liberty and serve as its armed escort and as an auxiliary communications center. The following day, 6 June, 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."[16]
U.S. Ambassador Arthur Goldberg said to the Security Council that aircraft of the Sixth Fleet were several hundred miles from the conflict,[12] indicating that elements of the Sixth Fleet itself were far from the conflict. When the statement was made this was the case, since Liberty, now assigned to the Sixth Fleet, was in the central Mediterranean Sea, passing between Libya and Crete;[17] but she would ultimately steam to about 13 nmi (15 mi; 24 km) north of the Sinai Peninsula.[18] According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)

Israeli errors:
As Commander Oren headed toward Arish, he was informed by Naval Operations of the reported shelling of Arish and told that IAF aircraft would be dispatched to the area after the target had been detected.[29]

Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin was concerned that the supposed Egyptian shelling was the prelude to an amphibious landing that could outflank Israeli forces. Rabin reiterated the standing order to sink any unidentified ships in the area, but advised caution, as Soviet vessels were reportedly operating nearby.[23]

At 1:41 pm, the torpedo boats detected an unknown vessel 20 miles northwest of Arish and 14 miles off the coast of Bardawil.[1][31] The ship's speed was estimated on their radars.[31] The Combat Information Center officer on T-204, Ensign Aharon Yifrah, reported to the boat's captain, Commander Moshe Oren, that the target had been detected at a range of 22 miles, that her speed had been tracked for a few minutes, after which he had determined that the target was moving westward at a speed of 30 knots. These data were forwarded to the Fleet Operations Control Center.[31]

The speed of the target was significant because it indicated that the target was a combat vessel.[31] Moreover, Israeli forces had standing orders to fire on any unknown vessels sailing in the area at over 20 knots, a speed which, at the time, could only be attained by warships. The Chief of Naval Operations asked the torpedo boats to double-check their calculations. Yifrah twice recalculated and confirmed his assessment.[23][31] A few minutes later, Commander Oren reported that the target, now 17 miles from his position, was moving at a speed of 28 knots on a different heading.[32] Bamford, however, points out that the Liberty's top speed was far below 28 knots. His sources say that at the time of the attack the Liberty was following its signal-intercept mission course along the northern Sinai coast, at about 5 knots speed.[30]
The data on the ship's speed, together with its direction, indicated that it was an Egyptian destroyer fleeing toward port after shelling Arish. The torpedo boats gave chase, but did not expect to overtake their target before it reached Egypt. Commander Oren requested that the Israeli Air Force dispatch aircraft to intercept.[23][31] At 1:48 pm, the Chief of Naval Operations requested dispatch of fighter aircraft to the ship's location.[33]

Hunt-class destroyer HMS Blean. The Egyptian Navy had Hunt-class destroyers in 1967
The IAF dispatched two Mirage III fighter jets that arrived at Liberty at about 2:00 pm.[34] The formation leader, Captain Iftach Spector, attempted to identify the ship.[34] He communicated via radio to one of the torpedo boats his observation that the ship appeared like a military ship with one smokestack and one mast.[35] Also, he communicated, in effect, that the ship appeared to him like a destroyer or another type of small ship.[35] In a post-attack statement, the pilots said they saw no distinguishable markings or flag on the ship.[35]


Still waiting for any reason Israel would intentionally attack a US Ship. And looking at a ship from shore, or a photo thereof, is much different than when at sea...or so my father said, and he had 28-29 years at sea.

I'll just deal with the actual facts thank you, I'll leave all the speculation as to why up to you.

'Lewrockwell' states "false flag", for Israel to attack a US ship there must have been reason. the two ships look nothing alike, in still photos.......at sea............there is conflicting evidence.

The reason has been posted over and over----are you fact blind ?

 

[Peach]

There is so much controversy surrounding the attack on the Liberty that saying what really happened depends on who you believe.
__________________

You wrote THIS yesterday, guess YOU forgot. False flag is the only nefarious motive that does not involve a US/Israel conspiracy.

 

[Kondor3]

Interesting Wikipedia article, makes it clear that target misidentification at the time of the torpedo attack would have been impossible......unless you believe Israeli naval personnel are completely incompetent.

I do not read it that way, Israel had warned of danger for 100 miles out, the Liberty was within 15-18 miles. A tragic error, Israel hand -0- to gain, and a lot to lose from this.

What makes you think Jews are special enough to warn a US Naval vessel in international waters to move farther away from shore?...

US Sixth Fleet Headquarters had warned the Liberty to move further away, but the Liberty never got the message, apparently, yes?

...Liberty intercepted an Israeli decision to invade Syria AFTER Syria had withdrawn from the conflict. That is why Israel murdered 34 Americans that day...

So, the US would have known that the Israelis were going to go into the Golan, after the Syrians had withdrawn (by the way, the Syrians did not accept the ceasefire until June 9, the day after the Liberty incident)...so what?

Why would the Israelis risk pissing off the biggest superpower on the face of the planet and one of its few friends and its best chance for replenishing expended munitions in a hurry, simply over knowledge that the Americans knew about one of their upcoming operations.

Was such a signal ever sent over the airwaves?

Did the Liberty intercept such a signal?

Did the Israelis know at the time, that the Liberty had intercepted such a signal?

Why would they commit an act of war against a monster like the US over information that was already leaked - why would they attack The Giant over spilt milk?

It doesn't make any sense.

That doesn't mean that it might not have happened.

It just means that by not making any sense, credulity is an issue.

...Why do you insist on apologizing for them?

Is Peach apologizing for them, or insisting upon proof of allegations and theories, both plausible and wild-and-hairy, before accepting such claims?

 

[Discombobulated]

Here are the US errors:

With the outbreak of war, Captain William L. McGonagle of the Liberty immediately asked Vice Admiral William I. Martin at the United States Sixth Fleet headquarters to send a destroyer to accompany the Liberty and serve as its armed escort and as an auxiliary communications center. The following day, 6 June, 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."[16]
U.S. Ambassador Arthur Goldberg said to the Security Council that aircraft of the Sixth Fleet were several hundred miles from the conflict,[12] indicating that elements of the Sixth Fleet itself were far from the conflict. When the statement was made this was the case, since Liberty, now assigned to the Sixth Fleet, was in the central Mediterranean Sea, passing between Libya and Crete;[17] but she would ultimately steam to about 13 nmi (15 mi; 24 km) north of the Sinai Peninsula.[18] According to the Naval Court of Inquiry[20] (p. 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history,[21] the order to withdraw was not sent on the radio frequency that USS Liberty monitored for her orders until 15:25 Zulu, several hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and message routing problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, were being handled at the time; and that this combined with a shortage of qualified Radiomen contributed to delayed sending of the withdrawal message.[20] (p. 111 ff)

Israeli errors:
As Commander Oren headed toward Arish, he was informed by Naval Operations of the reported shelling of Arish and told that IAF aircraft would be dispatched to the area after the target had been detected.[29]

Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin was concerned that the supposed Egyptian shelling was the prelude to an amphibious landing that could outflank Israeli forces. Rabin reiterated the standing order to sink any unidentified ships in the area, but advised caution, as Soviet vessels were reportedly operating nearby.[23]

At 1:41 pm, the torpedo boats detected an unknown vessel 20 miles northwest of Arish and 14 miles off the coast of Bardawil.[1][31] The ship's speed was estimated on their radars.[31] The Combat Information Center officer on T-204, Ensign Aharon Yifrah, reported to the boat's captain, Commander Moshe Oren, that the target had been detected at a range of 22 miles, that her speed had been tracked for a few minutes, after which he had determined that the target was moving westward at a speed of 30 knots. These data were forwarded to the Fleet Operations Control Center.[31]

The speed of the target was significant because it indicated that the target was a combat vessel.[31] Moreover, Israeli forces had standing orders to fire on any unknown vessels sailing in the area at over 20 knots, a speed which, at the time, could only be attained by warships. The Chief of Naval Operations asked the torpedo boats to double-check their calculations. Yifrah twice recalculated and confirmed his assessment.[23][31] A few minutes later, Commander Oren reported that the target, now 17 miles from his position, was moving at a speed of 28 knots on a different heading.[32] Bamford, however, points out that the Liberty's top speed was far below 28 knots. His sources say that at the time of the attack the Liberty was following its signal-intercept mission course along the northern Sinai coast, at about 5 knots speed.[30]
The data on the ship's speed, together with its direction, indicated that it was an Egyptian destroyer fleeing toward port after shelling Arish. The torpedo boats gave chase, but did not expect to overtake their target before it reached Egypt. Commander Oren requested that the Israeli Air Force dispatch aircraft to intercept.[23][31] At 1:48 pm, the Chief of Naval Operations requested dispatch of fighter aircraft to the ship's location.[33]

Hunt-class destroyer HMS Blean. The Egyptian Navy had Hunt-class destroyers in 1967
The IAF dispatched two Mirage III fighter jets that arrived at Liberty at about 2:00 pm.[34] The formation leader, Captain Iftach Spector, attempted to identify the ship.[34] He communicated via radio to one of the torpedo boats his observation that the ship appeared like a military ship with one smokestack and one mast.[35] Also, he communicated, in effect, that the ship appeared to him like a destroyer or another type of small ship.[35] In a post-attack statement, the pilots said they saw no distinguishable markings or flag on the ship.[35]


Still waiting for any reason Israel would intentionally attack a US Ship. And looking at a ship from shore, or a photo thereof, is much different than when at sea...or so my father said, and he had 28-29 years at sea.

I'll just deal with the actual facts thank you, I'll leave all the speculation as to why up to you.

'Lewrockwell' states "false flag", for Israel to attack a US ship there must have been reason. the two ships look nothing alike, in still photos.......at sea............there is conflicting evidence.

There is no conflicting evidence, only conflicting statements.

 

[Peach]

What 'sane reason(s)' for an intentional attack come to mind?

The two most likely reasons for a deliberate attack involve intercepts the Liberty made regarding the possible murder of hundreds of Egyptian POWs by the IDF in the Sinai, and, more likely, Liberty intercepted Israel's decision to invade and occupy the Golan Heights AFTER Syria announced it was withdrawing from the conflict. Motive is one more good reason for a full public investigation before all the principals die of old age.

1. were such signals about such sensitive matters actually transmitted over the airwaves rather than by courier or land-line telephone?

2. did the Israelis have reason to believe that the Liberty had intercepted them?

3. did the Liberty relay these up the chain of command?

4. did the Israelis have reason to believe that the Liberty had already transmitted same?

5. did the Israelis break our codes?

6. did Israeli leadership really believe that it was worth risking its relationship with the United States over such transitory matters?

7. did the survivors indicate that such transmissions were, indeed, intercepted and/or relayed?

Israel was willing to attack an American ship to prevent intercepts of Israel war plans; yet Israel had the power to stop LBJ from demanding answers. It was no secret in '67 what nation the US favored of course. And ELEVEN Congressional investigations are not enough. Note, the "full Congress" never investigates any event, committees are chosen, then there is review.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

I have been in war and I have had people shooting at me and I shooting at them. All I remember about it is that I was scared, that I wanted to kill the bastards who were shooting at me, and that I wanted to be HOME.

I do not believe the Israeli's intentionally sought out and attacked a ship of the United States Navy with an intention of sinking it. Let's remember that everyday the Israeli's are fighting for their survival with a bunch of people who use women and children as bomb delivery vehicles. They use schools, mosques and hospitals as launching pads for their 'space program.' Israeli's enemy believes a viable target is a group of school children in a school bus. No, they see something unusual and they shoot first and ask questions later.

A very sad occurrence. Conspiracy or intentional hostile act? No...

 

[Peach]

I do not read it that way, Israel had warned of danger for 100 miles out, the Liberty was within 15-18 miles. A tragic error, Israel hand -0- to gain, and a lot to lose from this.

What makes you think Jews are special enough to warn a US Naval vessel in international waters to move farther away from shore?...

US Sixth Fleet Headquarters had warned the Liberty to move further away, but the Liberty never got the message, apparently, yes?

...Liberty intercepted an Israeli decision to invade Syria AFTER Syria had withdrawn from the conflict. That is why Israel murdered 34 Americans that day...

So, the US would have known that the Israelis were going to go into the Golan, after the Syrians had withdrawn (by the way, the Syrians did not accept the ceasefire until June 9, the day after the Liberty incident)...so what?

Why would the Israelis risk pissing off the biggest superpower on the face of the planet and one of its few friends and its best chance for replenishing expended munitions in a hurry, simply over knowledge that the Americans knew about one of their upcoming operations.

Was such a signal ever sent over the airwaves?

Did the Liberty intercept such a signal?

Did the Israelis know at the time, that the Liberty had intercepted such a signal?

Why would they commit an act of war against a monster like the US over information that was already leaked - why would they attack The Giant over spilt milk?

It doesn't make any sense.

That doesn't mean that it might not have happened.

It just means that by not making any sense, credulity is an issue.

...Why do you insist on apologizing for them?

Is Peach apologizing for them, or insisting upon proof of allegations and theories, both plausible and wild-and-hairy, before accepting such claims?

I bolded my thoughts. Conspiracy is the only off the wall theory that fits any of the varying "facts"; the US covering up the fact Israel attacked does not, unless the US was "in on" the attack. Israel attacking a US vessel, when the US was its PRIMARY supporter, to prevent intercepts, AND having the power to keep LBJ in line, does not.

 

[Discombobulated]

The USS Liberty was not mistaken for an Egyptian destroyer. This ship would be easily identified from the air and from surface vessels.

 

[Discombobulated]

Hunt Class Destroyer.

 

[Peach]

The USS Liberty was not mistaken for an Egyptian destroyer. This ship would be easily identified from the air and from surface vessels.

Accepting the premise the attack was deliberate: FALSE FLAG gone wrong, or CONSPIRACY, gone wrong?

 

[Kondor3]

Yes. You have said this before. Is this all you've got? If so, that's pretty damned thin.

The USS Liberty was not mistaken for an Egyptian destroyer. This ship would be easily identified from the air and from surface vessels.

 

[Kondor3]

To be a False Flag Operation...

1. were the Israelis using aircraft of a kind ordinarily used by another local power?

2. were the Israelis using boats and ships of a kind ordinarily used by another local power?

3. were the Israeli aircraft and watercraft marked with the national markings of another local power?

If not, I don't see how this can be a False Flag operation.

 

[Kondor3]

As far as a 'conspiracy' between Israel and the United States is concerned...

Between which parties?

And why?

 

[Kondor3]

The "Israel did this on purpose" crowed is really big on claims and repetition.

But they're a little weak on facts and evidence and logical explanations about motives and reasons.

In the absence of such, folks are obliged to subscribe to the Accident, Fog of War rationale.