Return to the USS Liberty

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The best theory I have read is:

The United States was leaning heavily on Israel to stop the war after having humiliated Egypt and crushed Jordan. In the UN, the US was preparing a SC resolution to demand a cease fire.

Israel attacked the Liberty in order to take out its electronic listening capabilities to keep the U.S. from knowing that Israel was about to attack Syria in order to keep the US from rushing the SC resolution through.

I do think that Israeli units could have utilzed code words and other strategies to make it unclear what their intentions were. The order over the radio could justify troop movements into the proper position as defensive preperations for a possible attack by Syria. If its simply a matter of temperarily confusing the US, the Israelis could just arrange for a bunch of bogus radio communications suggesting that they were not about to attack Syria.

If the idea was to confuse the issue over the long term, there were ways to do it effectively without risking something as blatant as an attack on the Liberty. You'd think the must better strategy would be for Israeli communications to loudly talk in radio communications about a sudden unprovoked Syrian attack and their attempts to defend against it. The Liberty would have no way to tell that the radio interceptions were a deception. Israel could give certain Israeli military units instructions in person to talk about how they were attacked first once the attack began. Intercepted Syria communications expressing surprise at an attack wouldn't even seem that surprising since Syria could have only informed a few select units of their attack before it began.

You'd also think that after Israel attacks a US ship and caused casualties, the US would be more inclined to quickly call for a cease fire and limit Israel's territorial gains. I don't see how pissing off the US creates a situation where Israel can grab more territory at the end of the war.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The best theory I have read is:

The United States was leaning heavily on Israel to stop the war after having humiliated Egypt and crushed Jordan. In the UN, the US was preparing a SC resolution to demand a cease fire.

Israel attacked the Liberty in order to take out its electronic listening capabilities to keep the U.S. from knowing that Israel was about to attack Syria in order to keep the US from rushing the SC resolution through. It should be noted that the Israel attack paid particular attention to the EL section of the ship, an area on the Egyptian horse carrier would not have been important.

As for why the U.S. didn't push the issue: it realized after the 6-Day War that Israel would be far too important an ally to let the Liberty get in the way. Plus, the U.S. public strongly identified with the plucky little state and saw the 6DW as a redemption for the Holocaust and it would have been politically problematic to punish Israel over the Liberty.

The best theory is that the Liberty was attacked for the same reason the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was attacked, for the same reason Canadians in afghanistan were killed by Americans, for the same reason there were lots of americans killed by american fire in GW1, etc, etc. Accident, fog of war, and sometimes incompetence.

[chequita guevara]

The Chinese embassy was attacked deliberately because it was relaying Serbian military signals through its antennae.

[Dis]

so what happened to the ship after it sailed away?

any pictures of the damaged ship? I only heard about this from the history channel. But I didn't realize the ship was napalmed.

[Dis]

this is the pre-flight reconnaissance that Israel said didn't happen (according to the website which is bound to be biased)



dead EO and XO





the ship the Israelis thought they were attacking


compare

[Dis]

one more picture showing the ship with its flag.

Though this was later when arriving in Malta.



more damage pictures





picture of ship with normal steaming colors (flag)

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Mordoch
There does appear to be a fair amount of room for doubt on whether the attack was due to a misidentification or not.

Here's some passages from an article in another forum rebutting most of the physical evidence pointing to an attack.

http://pub82.ezboard.com/fhistorypoliticsandcurrentaffairs68862frm2.showMessage?topicID=47.topic

Recently released intercepts from the NSA support the details about the helicopter and provide evidence that the attack was accidental. The linked to article also links directly to the NSA official site with this info.


http://pub82.ezboard.com/fhistorypol...picID=47.topic

Murdoch, the Flag in Question was a Garrision flag...there was no way in Hell for the Israelis to be able to miss it.

There's been some statements that the Israelis thought it was an Egyptian the Al Qusair(sic). The physical resemblance begins and ends in that the both have a mast fore and aft.

The Mirages in questions were unmarked. In an amazing coincidence, Egypt had Mirages too. Why would a type of plane used by both sides be unmarked? One possible answer; to confuse a third party.

It was at this junction that one Israeli pilot finally recognized Latin, not Arabic, letters on the hull. He made a desperate emergency call to the Israeli air controllers causing them to call off the action immediately. Now we have glitch ten. The Israeli communications system in 1967 was basically WW2 equipment that had been overhauled and modernized. It was already overloaded with running a fast-moving mobile war and , thanks to a breakdown in that communications system, the message to the Navy was caught in a backlog of calls waiting to go out. Classic case of too much flow down too small a pipeline. As a result, the order was very long delayed in reaching the navy; it finally made it to the FACs just after 4:00 pm. ref e

Unfortunately, this tape has yet to surface. If it did, it would (probably) end the controversy once and for all.

It is at this point that we have a minor mystery. One of the major claims is that the Israelies were jamming US radio frequencies in order to prevent calls from help getting out. If true, this would be powerful evidence to suggest that the attackw as deliberate. There are, however, serious problems with this assertion. Firstly, the Liberty was a specialist electronic warfare ship and carried advanced ECCM equipment; it is hard to see how she could have been closed down so comprehensively. Secondly, the Israeli capability in EW at this time was virtually non-existant; neither aircraft nor the torpedo boats carried any ECM equipment. Thirdly, the communications equipment on the Liberty was such that jamming equipment would have to be placed within a series of carefully-defined positions relative to the ship and fourthly, any jamming capable of taking down US Navy communications so comprehensively would have affected a wide area. No such jamming was reported anywhere else by anybody. This leaves only three possible explanations for the alleged jamming (1) The crewmen on Liberty who reported such jamming are lying, (2) the reports that crewmen made such claims are fabricated or (3) whatever happened wasn't jamming. If we discount (1) we are left with either fabrication or something else. The accusations made against the Israelies feature extensive fabrication so (2) is certainly possible but the most likely explanation is that the Liberty had already been strafed and napalmed with over 800 holes in her. The entire superstructure of the ship, from the main deck to the bridge, was aflame.The "jamming" was probably simply battle damage that had knocked out the ships wave guides and antennas.

The Liberty was an intelligence gathering ship, not an electronic warfare vessel. It had no such capacity to jam other signels (why would it? It wasn't a combat ship, and it was intended to operate in international waters).

Two Israeli Helicopters reached the Liberty and offered assistance. Erell, shouting through a bullhorn, also tried to communicate with the ship but Captain McGonagle refused to respond. Realizing, finally, that his assailants had been Israeli, he flagged the torpedo boats away and made a gesture that the Israelies describe as "obscene, but under the circumstances, understandable". By 5:05 p.m., the Israelis had broken off contact, and the Liberty, navigating virtually without systems, with 34 dead and 171 wounded aboard, staggered out to sea.

Uh, that's a negative GhostRider. I've seen film from one of Liberty's cameras of *a* Helicopter hovering around and doing...nothing. There was a dude with a Machine gun hanging out, but that was it. The sole Sailor on the Deck was hiding...and I would be doing the same in his position. There's no mention of a "Bullhorn", and it certainly doesn't look as if anyone is using one.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I'm talking to your squid ass.
And the thank you was a thank you for serving.

Jackass.

You'll have to sepcify....Dissident left the USN as a E-5 MM2 (Nuketype).

[Straybow]

If they really were attacking a horse carrier why call for help from the "ill-equipped" air force? I could see that if they reached the target, launched their outdated torpedos and used up their 40mm ammo.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Straybow
If they really were attacking a horse carrier why call for help from the "ill-equipped" air force? I could see that if they reached the target, launched their outdated torpedos and used up their 40mm ammo.

Here's a question for anyone that cares to answer: Why was it necessary to attack a nonthreatening ship on the high seas (assuming that we agree that the Israelis mistook the Liberty for the horse carrier El Quseir) before suface ships arrived to confirm the id?

[Edan]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Israel attacked the Liberty in order to take out its electronic listening capabilities to keep the U.S. from knowing that Israel was about to attack Syria in order to keep the US from rushing the SC resolution through. .[/i]

The flaw with that theory is that Israel had already informed the US that it was about to attack Syria (and the US had given it's nod of approval).

[Edan]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Here's a question for anyone that cares to answer: Why was it necessary to attack a nonthreatening ship on the high seas (assuming that we agree that the Israelis mistook the Liberty for the horse carrier El Quseir) before suface ships arrived to confirm the id?

The Israeli version is that they believed that it was an Egyptian ship that had been firing on Israeli positions - so they believed it threatening.

[Lonestar]

"fireing on Israeli positions"...with what, it's .50 cal?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Edan
The Israeli version is that they believed that it was an Egyptian ship that had been firing on Israeli positions - so they believed it threatening.

An Egyptian horse carrier was firing on Israeli positions? With what exactly?

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Lonestar
There's been some statements that the Israelis thought it was an Egyptian the Al Qusair(sic). The physical resemblance begins and ends in that the both have a mast fore and aft.

Here's a response

Its also pointed out (quite correctly) that the Israeli FAC had a copy of JFS on board. Consulting a copy of the relevent edition of that publication, it does indeed list both Liberty and El Quseir - but includes photographs of neither. Rather pathetically, those who dispute the identification point out that the El Quseir was painted silver rather than the Liberty's Haze Gray. In reality, under the circumstances prevailing, telling the difference between dirty silver and shiny gray is very hard - especially since both would have taken on a blue tinge by reflection from the surrounding sea and sky. However, all thats irrelevent since we now have Glitch 13 - he wasn't trying to find out "which ship is this" he was looking for "which Egyptian Ship looks most like the one in front of me"

http://pub82.ezboard.com/fhistorypoliticsandcurrentaffairs68862frm2.showMessage?topicID=47.topic

The Mirages in questions were unmarked. In an amazing coincidence, Egypt had Mirages too. Why would a type of plane used by both sides be unmarked? One possible answer; to confuse a third party.

I could have sworn that I remember reading testimony from USS Liberty crewmen that they saw Israeli markings, on at least some of the planes, I'll have to investigate this issue further.

[The Liberty was an intelligence gathering ship, not an electronic warfare vessel. It had no such capacity to jam other signels (why would it? It wasn't a combat ship, and it was intended to operate in international waters).

The point is not that the Liberty jammed enemy ships, but that it would have been extremely difficult to jam as testimony has suggested. It does seem logical that a ship with sophisticated radio receiving gear would also have sophisticated transmission gear. Damage to the communication equipment would also provide and explanation for trouble sucessfully transmitting other than jamming.