What's new

BBC Documentary on the Unprovoked Attack Against the USS Liberty by Israel

H2O3C4Nitrogen

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Dec 3, 2007
Messages
4,386
Reaction score
0
BBC Documentary on the Unprovoked Attack Against the USS Liberty by Israel

“During the Six-Day War, Israel attacked and nearly sank the USS Liberty. Thirty-four American servicemen were killed, and one hundred and seventy two were wounded in the 75-minute assault by Israeli warplanes and torpedo boats. Israel claimed that the whole affair had been a tragic accident based on mistaken identification of the ship. The American government accepted this explanation. For more than 30 years many people have disbelieved the official explanation but have been unable to rebut it convincingly. Now, Dead in the Water uses startling new evidence to reveal the truth behind the seemingly inexplicable attack. The film combines dramatic reconstruction of the events, with new access to former officers in the US and Israeli armed forces and intelligence services who have decided to give their own version of events. Interviews include President Lyndon Johnson’s Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara, former head of the Israeli navy Admiral Shlomo Errell and members of the USS Liberty crew”

Dead In The Water - The Sinking of the USS Liberty
 
We can fault the British for a lot of things but at least they can be a lot more honest than the Americans ever will be.
 
The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a U.S. Navy intelligence ship, USS Liberty, in international waters about 12.5 nautical miles (23 km) from the coast of the Sinai Peninsula, north of El Arish, by Israeli fighter planes and torpedo boats on June 8, 1967.

It occurred during the Six-Day War, a conflict between Israel and the Arab states of Egypt, Jordan and Syria. The Israeli attack killed 34 U.S. servicemen and wounded at least 173. The attack was the second deadliest against a U.S. Naval vessel since the end of World War II, surpassed only by the Iraqi Exocet missile attack on the USS Stark on May 17, 1987, and marked the single greatest loss of life by the U.S. Intelligence Community.


 
Last edited by a moderator:
While the liberty attack was vile, that video ^^ is propaganda, conjecture, and full of holes.

I'm amazed at all these false flag conspiracies. Instead of an elaborate hoax with Israeli units attacking the ship, how about planting a handful of placed charges in the hull of the ship, and sending it to the bottom, then "blaming" Egypt "so the U.S. could take over the Middle East."

I don't know why the Liberty event happened, but this is not the correct interpretation.
 
^^^

Would it help if the culprit was Taliban rather than Isreali ?
 
While the liberty attack was vile, that video ^^ is propaganda, conjecture, and full of holes.

I'm amazed at all these false flag conspiracies. Instead of an elaborate hoax with Israeli units attacking the ship, how about planting a handful of placed charges in the hull of the ship, and sending it to the bottom, then "blaming" Egypt "so the U.S. could take over the Middle East."

I don't know why the Liberty event happened, but this is not the correct interpretation.

You don't know about the event and calling the video a propaganda - how ironic. Why don't you say ''the US does not have the balls to stand Israel.''
 
& a related false-flag attempt was:-

-

-

-
 
Last edited by a moderator:
While the liberty attack was vile, that video ^^ is propaganda, conjecture, and full of holes.

I'm amazed at all these false flag conspiracies. Instead of an elaborate hoax with Israeli units attacking the ship, how about planting a handful of placed charges in the hull of the ship, and sending it to the bottom, then "blaming" Egypt "so the U.S. could take over the Middle East."

I don't know why the Liberty event happened, but this is not the correct interpretation.

Unless you can show their version of the events and the interviews with the crew to be false, I can't really see why we would take your incredulity over what was presented by the BBC.
 
The Liberty has been discussed ad nauseum, all over the web, and I contributed my share of it on Iran Defense. I'm not going to do it all over again.

I condemned it, by the way. Something stinks, but my gut says it was more of an Israeli effort to suck the U.S. in rather than an Israeli/U.S. conspiracy. Note how the attackers left when supposedly the Russian ship showed up.

I can't really see why we would take your incredulity over what was presented by the BBC.

Spend more time researching than one tired, one-sided video, and get back to me. It wasn't the BBC stamping this "APPROVED", it was the video producer. Note how news outlets always say "This does not represent the views of the BBC, blah blah etc." I suspect if you call the BBC and ask "Do you believe the content of this video is accurate?" they'd laugh at you.
 
The Liberty has been discussed ad nauseum, all over the web, and I contributed my share of it on Iran Defense. I'm not going to do it all over again.

I condemned it, by the way. Something stinks, but my gut says it was more of an Israeli effort to suck the U.S. in rather than an Israeli/U.S. conspiracy. Note how the attackers left when supposedly the Russian ship showed up.

From what I saw of the video, it detailed the attack from various personal points but was rather skimp on political speculations. I saw nothing out of bounds for that.

Spend more time researching than one tired, one-sided video, and get back to me.

The onus is on you to prove your point, if you don't feel like doing it, that's your responsibility.

It wasn't the BBC stamping this "APPROVED", it was the video producer. Note how news outlets always say "This does not represent the views of the BBC, blah blah etc." I suspect if you call the BBC and ask "Do you believe the content of this video is accurate?" they'd laugh at you.

What is the basis of this comment? Fact or that instinctual incredulity again? This sounds like you putting words into someone's else mouth.
 
While the liberty attack was vile, that video ^^ is propaganda, conjecture, and full of holes.

I'm amazed at all these false flag conspiracies. Instead of an elaborate hoax with Israeli units attacking the ship, how about planting a handful of placed charges in the hull of the ship, and sending it to the bottom, then "blaming" Egypt "so the U.S. could take over the Middle East."

I don't know why the Liberty event happened, but this is not the correct interpretation.

How much you people run from facts?????



"I knew that would get your attention," he said, grinning. "Shimon
activated Operation Trojan
in February of this year."
I nodded. I'd still been in the Mossad when that order was given,
and because of my naval background and acquaintance with most of
the commanders in the navy, I participated in the planning for the
operation as liaison with the navy.
A Trojan was a special communication device that could be
planted by naval commandos deep inside enemy territory. The device
would act as a relay station for misleading transmissions made by the
disinformation unit in the Mossad, called LAP,' and intended to be
received by American and British listening stations.
Originating from
an IDF navy ship out at sea, the prerecorded digital transmissions
could be ~icked up only by the Trojan. The device would then
rebroadcast the transmission on another frequency, one used for official
business in the enemy country, at which point the transmission
would finally be picked up by American ears in Britain.
The listeners would have no doubt they had intercepted a genuine
communication, hence the name Trojan, reminiscent of the mythical
Trojan horse. Further, the content of the messages, once deciphered,
would confirm information from other intelligence sources, namely
the Mossad.
The only catch was that the Trojan itself would have to
be located as close as possible to the normal origin of such transmissions,
because of the sophisticated methods of triangulation the Americans
and others would use to verify the source.
In the particular operation Ephraim was referring to, two elite
units in the military had been made responsible for the delivery of the
Trojan device to the proper location. One was the Matka12 reconnaissance
unit and the other was Flotilla 13, the naval commandos.
The
commandos were charged with the task of planting the Trojan device
in Tripoli, Libya.
On the night of February 17-18, two Israeli missile boats, the
SAAR 4-class Moledet, armed with Harpoon and Gabriel surface-tosurface
missiles, among other weaponry, and the Geula, a Hohit-class
missile boat with a helicopter pad and regular SAAR 4-class armament,
conducted what seemed like a routine patrol of the Mediterranean,
heading for the Sicilian channel and passing just outside the
territorial waters of Libya. Just north of Tripoli, the warships, which
were visible to radar both in Tripoli and on the Italian island of
Lampedusa, slowed down to about four knots-just long enough to
allow a team of twelve naval commandos in four wet submarines nicknamed
"pigs" and two low-profiled speedboats called "birds" to disembark.
The pigs could carry two commandos each and all their fighting
gear. The birds, equipped with an MG 7.62-caliber machine gun
mounted over the bow and an array of antitank shoulder-carried missiles,
could facilitate six commandos each, while towing the empty
pigs. The birds brought the pigs as close to the shore as possible, thus
cutting down the distance the pigs would have to travel on their own.
(The pigs were submersible and silent but relatively slow.)
Two miles off the Libyan coast, the lights of Tripoli could be seen
glistening in the southeast. Eight commandos slipped quietly into the
pigs and headed for shore. The birds stayed behind at the rendezvous
point, ready to take action should the situation arise. Once they
reached the beach, the commandos left their cigarlike transporters
submerged in the shallow water and headed inland, carrying a dark
green Trojan cylinder six feet long and seven inches in diameter. It
took two men to carry it.

A gray van was parked on the side of the road about one hundred
feet from the water, on the coastal highway leading from Sabratah to
Tripoli and on to Benghazi. There was hardly any traffic at that time
of night. The driver of the van seemed to be repairing a flat tire. He
stopped working as the team approached and opened the back doors
of the van. He was a Mossad combatant. Without a word said, four of
the men entered the van and headed for the city. The other four
returned to the water, where they took a defensive position by the submerged
pigs. Their job was to hold this position to ensure an escape
route for the team now headed for the citv.
At the same time, a squadron of Israeli fighters was refueling
south of Crete, ready to assist. They were capable of keeping any
ground forces away from the commandos, allowing them a not-soclean
getaway. At this point, the small commando unit was divided
into three details-its most vulnerable state. Were any of the details to
run into enemy forces, they were instructed to act with extreme prejudice
before the enemy turned hostile.
The van parked at the back of an apartment building on A1
Jamhuriyh Street in Tripoli, less than three blocks away from the Bab
a1 Azizia barracks that were known to house Qadhafi's headquarters
and residence. By then, the men in the van had changed into civilian
clothing. Two stayed with the van as lookouts and the other two
helped the Mossad combatant take the cylinder to the top floor of the
five-story building. The cylinder was wrapped in a carpet.
In the apartment, the top section of the cylinder was opened and a
small dishlike antenna was unfolded and placed in front of the window
facing north. The unit was activated, and the Trojan horse was in
place.

The Mossad combatant had rented the apartment for six months
and had paid the rent in advance.
There was no reason for anyone
except the combatant to enter the apartment. However, if someone
should decide to do so, the Trojan would self-destruct, taking with it
most of the upper part of the building. The three men headed back to
the van and to their rendezvous with their friends on the beach.
After dropping the commandos at the beach, the combatant
headed back for the city, where he would monitor the Trojan unit for
the next few weeks. The commandos wasted no time and headed out
to sea. They didn't want to be caught in Libyan waters at daybreak.
They reached the birds and headed at full speed to a prearranged
pickup coordinate, where they met with the missile boats that had
brought them in.
By the end of March, the Americans were already intercepting
messages broadcast by the Trojan,
which was only activated during
heavy communication traffic hours. Using the Trojan, the Mossad
tried to make it appear that a long series of terrorist orders were being
transmitted to various Libyan embassies around the world
(or, as they
were called by the Libyans, Peoples' Bureaus). As the Mossad had
hoped, the transmissions were deciphered by the Americans and construed
as ample proof that the Libyans were active sponsors of terrorism.

What's more, the Americans pointed out, Mossad reports confirmed
it.

The French and the Spanish, though, were not buying into the new
stream of information. To them, it seemed suspicious that suddenly,
out of the blue, the Libyans, who'd been extremely careful in the past,
would start advertising- their future actions. They also found it suspicious

that in several instances Mossad reports were worded similarly
to coded Libyan communications. They argued further that, had there
truly been after-the-fact Libyan communications regarding the attack,
then the terrorist attack on the La Belle discotheque3 in West Berlin on
April 5 could have been prevented, since surely there would have been
communications before, enabling intelligence agencies listening in to
prevent it. Since the attack wasn't prevented, they reasoned that it
must not be the Libyans who did it, and the "new communications"
must be bogus.
The French and the Spanish were right. The information was
bogus, and the Mossad didn't have a clue who planted the bomb that
killed one American serviceman and wounded several others.
But the
Mossad was tied in to many of the European terrorist organizations,
and it was convinced that in the volatile atmosphere that had engulfed
Europe, a bombing with an American victim was just a matter of time.
Heads of the Mossad were counting on the American promise to
retaliate with vengeance against any country that could be proven to
support terrorism. The Trojan gave the Americans the proof they
needed. The Mossad also plugged into the equation Qadhafi's lunatic
image and momentous declarations,
which were really only meant for
internal consumption. It must be remembered that Qadhafi had
marked a line in the water at that time, closing off the Gulf of Sidra as
Libyan territorial waters and calling the new maritime border the line
of death (an action that didn't exactly give him a moderate image).
Ultimately, the Americans fell for the Mossad ploy head over heels,
dragging the British and the Germans somewhat reluctantly in with
them.

Operation Trojan was one of the Mossad's greatest successes. It
brought about the air strike on Libya that President Reagan had
promised-a strike that had three important consequences. First, it
derailed a deal for the release of the American hostages in Lebanon,
thus preserving the Hizballah (Party of God) as the number one enemy
in the eyes of the West. Second, it sent a message to the entire Arab
world, telling them exactly where the United States stood regarding
the Arab-Israeli conflict. Third, it boosted the Mossad's image of itself,
since it was they who, by ingenious sleight of hand, had prodded the
United States to do what was right.

It was only the French who didn't buy into the Mossad trick and
were determined not to align themselves with the aggressive American
act. The French refused to allow the American bombers to fly over
their territory on their way to attack Libya.

On April 14, 1986, one hundred and sixty American aircraft
dropped over sixty tons of bombs on Libya. The attackers bombed
Tripoli international airport, Bab a1 Azizia barracks, Sidi Bilal naval
base, the city of Benghazi, and the Benine airfield outside Benghazi.
The strike force consisted of two main bodies, one originating in England
and the other from flattops in the Mediterranean. From England
came twenty-four F-111s from Lakenheath, five EF-111s from Upper
Heyford, and twenty-eight refueling tankers from Mildenhall and Fairford.
In the attack, the air force F-111s and the EF-111s were joined
by eighteen A-6 and A-7 strike and strike support aircraft, six FM-18
fighters, fourteen EA-6B electronic jammer planes, and other support
platforms. The navy planes were catapulted from the carriers Coral
Sea and America. On the Libyan side, there were approximately forty
civilian casualties, including Qadhafi's adopted daughter.
On the
American side, a pilot and his weapons officer were killed when their
F-1 11 exploded.

After the bombing, the Hizballah broke off negotiations regarding
the hostages they held in Beirut and executed three of them, including
one American named Peter Kilburn.
As for the French, they were
rewarded for their nonparticipation in the attack by the release at the
end of June of two French journalists held hostage in Beirut. (As it
happened, a stray bomb hit the French embassy in Tripoli during the
raid.)


Enjoy.
 
I believe it was a vile attack by Israel. I don't know the motivation. I do not believe there were higher-ups within the U.S. administration like McNamara or Johnson that were playing puppet master.

The onus is on you to prove your point, if you don't feel like doing it, that's your responsibility.
As if a bad video from YouTube is exhaustive research? So if I find a differing YouTube video and link it, does that "prove my point?" People need to stop relying on YouTube for anything more politically critical or intense than seeing a guy get whacked in the crotch by a golf ball.

How much you people run from facts?????

Amazing. I get the feeling people think I approve of this crime.
 
^ Yeah Johnson also had a role in the shady attack...They were trying to have another Gulf of Tonkin. The attack was suppose to be blamed on Egypt. So US had justification to attack Egypt and seize the Suez.
 
^ Yeah Johnson also had a role in the shady attack...They were trying to have another Gulf of Tonkin. The attack was suppose to be blamed on Egypt. So US had justification to attack Egypt and seize the Suez.

Hmm.

"General, we need a justification to attack Egypt, and take over all of the Middle East. Oh yeah, steal some oil too while we're there. Don't worry about the Soviets... remember, risking WW3, nuclear armageddon, and spending 3 trillion $$ to get 100 billion $$ in oil makes total sense."

"Mr. President, in that case, I recommend we scuttle the USS Liberty with charges strategically placed in the hull. We can claim we were torpedoed or hit an Egyptian mine."

"Naah. Let's get with the Israelis and have them strip insignia from fighter-bombers and torpedo boats, have them launch an attack that will take several hours, and have them sink the Liberty. Don't worry about the U.S. sixth fleet or those pesky Soviet intelligence ships. We'll make it work somehow."

"Mr. President, that is the dumbest ******* thing I've ever heard. For a Casus Belli, you need simplcity and deniability."

"General, I... AM... THE... PRESIDENT. You will do as ordered, despite the fact that thousands of onlookers will see exactly what's going on, and a plan this complicated doesn't have a chance in **** of working."

"Yessir!":usflag:

:lol::no:
 

Back
Top Bottom