Remember the USS Liberty? The US and Israel wish you didn't

[Falcon29]

Its like the people who see UFO's and say they can't say anything because they face 10 years in prison and/or a fine. I'd like to see the law on the books that deals with UFO fines/charges.
I'd like to be a juror in that case. Like he would be found guilty.

I was speaking of my link.

You claimed they only knew it was American after the attack. The article proves otherwise.

From your link:



This would indicate continued confusion. The US had trouble with its own communications--is it possible the Israelis did as well?

I will admit that I am troubled by all of the claims made in that Chicago Tribune article. If true, they are disturbing, and it would be good to know what the purpose of such an attack was. That said, the tapes are missing, and mysteriously, so are the transcripts. The interviewees in this article are trying to recall events that happened 40 years prior. I'm not saying they are lying, but between the NSA, the CIA, and diplomatic cables, why hasn't any hard evidence come to light? From your article:



My inclination in all of these kinds of cases is to give the benefit of the doubt--i.e. believe that it was a mistake. Friendly fire happens often enough that it's difficult to dismiss this claim out of hand, and most friendly fire incidents are of an army firing on its own soldiers. For Israel to fire mistakenly on an undeclared third party (especially after that third party refused to declare its ships ahead of time) in the middle of war is certainly believable.

Without hard proof, it's hard for me to change my position on this. Think of it as the difference between "not guilty" and "innocent." At the moment, I think Israel was "not guilty," but hardly innocent.

By the way, good find with the article.

I'm not sure what you're confused about. This is proof, and the original link was in Hebrew. Friendly fire amongst ground troops is a whole other case that doesn't come close to raiding a naval ship in a sustained attack.

I believe the American people find it suspicious that no tapes preceding or during the attack were released.

......

Perhaps the most persuasive suggestion that such transcripts existed comes from the Israelis themselves, in a pair of diplomatic cables sent by the Israeli ambassador in Washington, Avraham Harman, to Foreign Minister Abba Eban in Tel Aviv.

............

What don't you get about this? Or what's not 'hard evidence' about it?

.............

Being yourself pro-Israel or Jewish doesn't mean you have to take the escape route for this incident.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

I was speaking of my link.



I'm not sure what you're confused about. This is proof, and the original link was in Hebrew. Friendly fire amongst ground troops is a whole other case that doesn't come close to raiding a naval ship in a sustained attack.

I believe the American people find it suspicious that no tapes preceding or during the attack were released.

......

Perhaps the most persuasive suggestion that such transcripts existed comes from the Israelis themselves, in a pair of diplomatic cables sent by the Israeli ambassador in Washington, Avraham Harman, to Foreign Minister Abba Eban in Tel Aviv.

............

What don't you get about this? Or what's not 'hard evidence' about it?

.............

Being yourself pro-Israel or Jewish doesn't mean you have to take the escape route for this incident.

Perhaps it comes from my years of dealing with lawyers, but I know this much: hearsay isn't proof. You have various intelligence analysts saying they remember reading a transcript of the attack, but no one can provide the transcript, or even the supposed training materials that quoted the transcript. The only documents that exist indicate that no such transcript existed on the US side. The only transcript and recording that existed was on the Israeli side, and it does not confirm the recollections of the American analysts.

As far as the quote about Avraham Harman, that's even worse: someone told "Hamlet," who told Harman. Where's the document? So many documents, recordings, cables, and not one can provide the actual transcript? Has there ever been a cover-up on this scale, and for such small stakes? That is where my skepticism comes from. It defies logic.

Memory is a tricky thing, and people sometimes conflate what they actually witnessed with what they were told about. Kitty Genovese is a good example of that. I have no doubt that the people in this article are sincere, but when people as high as up former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are unable to procure hard proof in the form of documents or recordings, it falls apart.

You ask, what's so hard for me to understand? What's hard for me to understand is why there is no proof, why secret documents internal to the US would be erased--documents that would never be revealed to the outside, anyway. Occam's Razor: the documents that support the conspiracy theory don't exist, and documents that refute the conspiracy theory do exist. Thus, it didn't happen the way they say it did.

 

[Archdemon]

Ex-Navy Official: 1967 Israeli Attack on U.S. Ship Was Deliberate | Fox News

In a signed affidavit released at a Capitol Hill news conference, retired Capt. Ward Boston (search) said Johnson and McNamara told those heading the Navy's inquiry to "conclude that the attack was a case of 'mistaken identity' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary."

Boston was senior legal counsel to the Navy's original 1967 review of the attack. He said in the sworn statement that he stayed silent for years because he's a military man, and "when orders come ... I follow them."

He said he felt compelled to "share the truth" following the publication of a recent book, "The Liberty Incident," which concluded the attack was unintentional.

........................



That's exactly what I'm implying.

What overwhelming evidence?

 

[Falcon29]

Perhaps it comes from my years of dealing with lawyers, but I know this much: hearsay isn't proof.

Cables aren't 'hearsay'.

You have various intelligence analysts saying they remember reading a transcript of the attack, but no one can provide the transcript, or even the supposed training materials that quoted the transcript.

They gave every detail

The only transcript and recording that existed was on the Israeli side, and it does not confirm the recollections of the American analysts.

And the Israeli one indicates it was a deliberate attack. Glad we agree.

As far as the quote about Avraham Harman, that's even worse: someone told "Hamlet," who told Harman. Where's the document? So many documents, recordings, cables, and not one can provide the actual transcript? Has there ever been a cover-up on this scale, and for such small stakes? That is where my skepticism comes from. It defies logic.

No, that was declassified cable.

Memory is a tricky thing, and people sometimes conflate what they actually witnessed with what they were told about. Kitty Genovese is a good example of that. I have no doubt that the people in this article are sincere, but when people as high as up former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are unable to procure hard proof in the form of documents or recordings, it falls apart.

So after given evidence, you focus on the survivors accounts. And let's just play along with you and act is if it wasn't noticeable at all that it was an American ship. Yet also you want us to assume all survivors were lying or just had bad memory.

You ask, what's so hard for me to understand? What's hard for me to understand is why there is no proof, why secret documents internal to the US would be erased--documents that would never be revealed to the outside, anyway.

Because it would go against the administrations account and harm Israel's image amongst Americans. Which is why on that day the Chicago Tribune published the article it was not mentioned anywhere on mainstream or Washington media.

You're a person that isn't looking for the truth as evident by your dismissal of all of evidence.

What overwhelming evidence?

Here's a start:

New revelations in attack on American spy ship - Page 5 - Chicago Tribune

Perhaps the most persuasive suggestion that such transcripts existed comes from the Israelis themselves, in a pair of diplomatic cables sent by the Israeli ambassador in Washington, Avraham Harman, to Foreign Minister Abba Eban in Tel Aviv.

Five days after the Liberty attack, Harman cabled Eban that a source the Israelis code-named "Hamlet" was reporting that the Americans had "clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."

Harman repeated the warning three days later, advising Eban, who is now dead, that the White House was "very angry," and that "the reason for this is that the Americans probably have findings showing that our pilots indeed knew that the ship was American."

According to a memoir by then-CIA director Richard Helms, President Johnson's personal anger was manifest when he discovered the story of the Liberty attack on an inside page of the next day's New York Times. Johnson barked that "it should have been on the front page!"

Israeli historian Tom Segev, who mentioned the cables in his recent book "1967," said other cables showed that Harman's source for the second cable was Arthur Goldberg, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

The cables, which have been declassified by the Israelis, were obtained from the Israeli State Archive and translated from Hebrew by the Tribune.

..................

Why doesn't the NSA gave us recordings preceding the attack?

On its Web site, the NSA has posted three recordings of Israeli communications made on June 8, 1967. But none of the recordings is of the attack itself.

Indeed, the declassified documents state that no recordings of the "actual attack" exist, raising questions about the source of the transcripts recalled by Forslund, Gotcher, Block, Porter, Lang and Kirby.

The three recordings reflect what the NSA describes as "the aftermath" of the attack -- Israeli communications with two Israeli helicopters dispatched to rescue any survivors who may have jumped into the water.

.................

^^^^

Same source from Chicago Tribune.

........
Israeli declassified transcripts:

That transcript, made by a Post reporter who was allowed to listen to what the Israeli Air Force said were tapes of the attacking pilots' communications, contained only two references to "American" or "Americans," one at the beginning and the other at the end of the attack.

The first reference occurred at 1:54 p.m. local time, two minutes before the Israeli jets began their first strafing run.

In the Post transcript, a weapons system officer on the ground suddenly blurted out, "What is this? Americans?"

"Where are Americans?" replied one of the air controllers.

The question went unanswered, and it was not asked again.

Twenty minutes later, after the Liberty had been hit repeatedly by machine guns, 30 mm cannon and napalm from the Israelis' French-built Mirage and Mystere fighter-bombers, the controller directing the attack asked his chief in Tel Aviv to which country the target vessel belonged.

"Apparently American," the chief controller replied.

Fourteen minutes later the Liberty was struck amidships by a torpedo from an Israeli boat, killing 26 of the 100 or so NSA technicians and specialists in Russian and Arabic who were working in restricted compartments below the ship's waterline.

.....................................

 

[Archdemon]

CNN.com - USS Liberty attack tapes released - Jul. 10, 2003

"Here the transcripts are saying, 'Well, you know, there may be people speaking English on this ship,'" Bamford said. "Why would you say that if it's an Egyptian ship, carrying horses?"

On the tape, after the rescue helicopter pilot tells ground control he sees an American flag on the ship, he receives an order in return.

"They request that you make another pass and check once again whether it is really an American flag," ground control says.

The order suggests the Israelis were surprised at word of a U.S. flag, but it also runs counter to what Israeli fighter pilots and torpedo boat crews have always insisted: That they could not see an American flag.

........................

I really would like to hear these communication which are on Hebrew.

 

[Falcon29]

I really would like to hear these communication which are on Hebrew.

We'd all like to, unfortunately such communications aren't made available to the public. Which is why we have written transcripts.

Unless the Israeli Supreme Court orders the Israeli military to release them.

How likely is that? I'm sure you know the answer.

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

Cables aren't 'hearsay'.



They gave every detail



And the Israeli one indicates it was a deliberate attack. Glad we agree.



No, that was declassified cable.



So after given evidence, you focus on the survivors accounts. And let's just play along with you and act is if it wasn't noticeable at all that it was an American ship. Yet also you want us to assume all survivors were lying or just had bad memory.



Because it would go against the administrations account and harm Israel's image amongst Americans. Which is why on that day the Chicago Tribune published the article it was not mentioned anywhere on mainstream or Washington media.

You're a person that isn't looking for the truth as evident by your dismissal of all of evidence.



Here's a start:

New revelations in attack on American spy ship - Page 5 - Chicago Tribune

Perhaps the most persuasive suggestion that such transcripts existed comes from the Israelis themselves, in a pair of diplomatic cables sent by the Israeli ambassador in Washington, Avraham Harman, to Foreign Minister Abba Eban in Tel Aviv.

Five days after the Liberty attack, Harman cabled Eban that a source the Israelis code-named "Hamlet" was reporting that the Americans had "clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."

Harman repeated the warning three days later, advising Eban, who is now dead, that the White House was "very angry," and that "the reason for this is that the Americans probably have findings showing that our pilots indeed knew that the ship was American."

According to a memoir by then-CIA director Richard Helms, President Johnson's personal anger was manifest when he discovered the story of the Liberty attack on an inside page of the next day's New York Times. Johnson barked that "it should have been on the front page!"

Israeli historian Tom Segev, who mentioned the cables in his recent book "1967," said other cables showed that Harman's source for the second cable was Arthur Goldberg, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

The cables, which have been declassified by the Israelis, were obtained from the Israeli State Archive and translated from Hebrew by the Tribune.

..................

Why doesn't the NSA gave us recordings preceding the attack?

On its Web site, the NSA has posted three recordings of Israeli communications made on June 8, 1967. But none of the recordings is of the attack itself.

Indeed, the declassified documents state that no recordings of the "actual attack" exist, raising questions about the source of the transcripts recalled by Forslund, Gotcher, Block, Porter, Lang and Kirby.

The three recordings reflect what the NSA describes as "the aftermath" of the attack -- Israeli communications with two Israeli helicopters dispatched to rescue any survivors who may have jumped into the water.

.................

^^^^

Same source from Chicago Tribune.

........
Israeli declassified transcripts:

That transcript, made by a Post reporter who was allowed to listen to what the Israeli Air Force said were tapes of the attacking pilots' communications, contained only two references to "American" or "Americans," one at the beginning and the other at the end of the attack.

The first reference occurred at 1:54 p.m. local time, two minutes before the Israeli jets began their first strafing run.

In the Post transcript, a weapons system officer on the ground suddenly blurted out, "What is this? Americans?"

"Where are Americans?" replied one of the air controllers.

The question went unanswered, and it was not asked again.

Twenty minutes later, after the Liberty had been hit repeatedly by machine guns, 30 mm cannon and napalm from the Israelis' French-built Mirage and Mystere fighter-bombers, the controller directing the attack asked his chief in Tel Aviv to which country the target vessel belonged.

"Apparently American," the chief controller replied.

Fourteen minutes later the Liberty was struck amidships by a torpedo from an Israeli boat, killing 26 of the 100 or so NSA technicians and specialists in Russian and Arabic who were working in restricted compartments below the ship's waterline.

.....................................

Summary
Pro-conspiracy:

1. Twenty minutes later, after the Liberty had been hit repeatedly by machine guns, 30 mm cannon and napalm from the Israelis' French-built Mirage and Mystere fighter-bombers, the controller directing the attack asked his chief in Tel Aviv to which country the target vessel belonged.
   
   "Apparently American," the chief controller replied.
   
   Fourteen minutes later the Liberty was struck amidships by a torpedo from an Israeli boat, killing 26 of the 100 or so NSA technicians and specialists in Russian and Arabic who were working in restricted compartments below the ship's waterline.
2. Five days after the Liberty attack, Harman cabled Eban that a source the Israelis code-named "Hamlet" was reporting that the Americans had "clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."
   
3. Testimony of various intelligence and military sources who were trying to recall an event that happened decades earlier.

Anti-conspiracy:

1. Pro-conspiracy bullet #1 and #2 refer to the same event, which would have been caused by mis-communication in the fog of war. This is compounded by the US refusal to identify its ships in the area, and its placement extremely close to the warzone near El-Arish.
2. Why doesn't the NSA gave us recordings preceding the attack?
   
   On its Web site, the NSA has posted three recordings of Israeli communications made on June 8, 1967. But none of the recordings is of the attack itself.
   
   Indeed, the declassified documents state that no recordings of the "actual attack" exist, raising questions about the source of the transcripts recalled by Forslund, Gotcher, Block, Porter, Lang and Kirby.
   
3. Lack of hard evidence (a recording, a transcript, a cable) showing the order to attack. You provided something that implies it in pro-conspiracy bullet #1, but that can be due to mis-communication, much as all friendly fire incidents happen. The chronology is attack, question what was being attacked, then attack again. What's missing was the order to the Israeli ships in the second attack to either proceed with the attack, or that the Israeli ships were ordered to stop the attack and ignored the order. Keep in mind that the US had its own mis-communication, as I pointed out previously, in trying to recall the USS Liberty, but having that message delayed until it was too late.
4. Lack of motive.

I don't find it unreasonable for people to believe either side, but I personally give the benefit of the doubt to the "mistake" crowd until definitive proof is furnished. Such proof has never been presented, and at this point, probably never will be. I know I won't dissuade you, and it's unlikely you'll convince me, so I'll leave it at that. Thank you for the serious debate with good sources.

 

[Falcon29]

Summary
Pro-conspiracy:

1. Twenty minutes later, after the Liberty had been hit repeatedly by machine guns, 30 mm cannon and napalm from the Israelis' French-built Mirage and Mystere fighter-bombers, the controller directing the attack asked his chief in Tel Aviv to which country the target vessel belonged.
   
   "Apparently American," the chief controller replied.
   
   Fourteen minutes later the Liberty was struck amidships by a torpedo from an Israeli boat, killing 26 of the 100 or so NSA technicians and specialists in Russian and Arabic who were working in restricted compartments below the ship's waterline.
2. Five days after the Liberty attack, Harman cabled Eban that a source the Israelis code-named "Hamlet" was reporting that the Americans had "clear proof that from a certain stage the pilot discovered the identity of the ship and continued the attack anyway."
   
3. Testimony of various intelligence and military sources who were trying to recall an event that happened decades earlier.

Anti-conspiracy:

1. Pro-conspiracy bullet #1 and #2 refer to the same event, which would have been caused by mis-communication in the fog of war. This is compounded by the US refusal to identify its ships in the area, and its placement extremely close to the warzone near El-Arish.
2. Why doesn't the NSA gave us recordings preceding the attack?
   
   On its Web site, the NSA has posted three recordings of Israeli communications made on June 8, 1967. But none of the recordings is of the attack itself.
   
   Indeed, the declassified documents state that no recordings of the "actual attack" exist, raising questions about the source of the transcripts recalled by Forslund, Gotcher, Block, Porter, Lang and Kirby.
   
3. Lack of hard evidence (a recording, a transcript, a cable) showing the order to attack. You provided something that implies it in pro-conspiracy bullet #1, but that can be due to mis-communication, much as all friendly fire incidents happen. The chronology is attack, question what was being attacked, then attack again. What's missing was the order to the Israeli ships in the second attack to either proceed with the attack, or that the Israeli ships were ordered to stop the attack and ignored the order. Keep in mind that the US had its own mis-communication, as I pointed out previously, in trying to recall the USS Liberty, but having that message delayed until it was too late.
4. Lack of motive.

I don't find it unreasonable for people to believe either side, but I personally give the benefit of the doubt to the "mistake" crowd until definitive proof is furnished. Such proof has never been presented, and at this point, probably never will be. I know I won't dissuade you, and it's unlikely you'll convince me, so I'll leave it at that. Thank you for the serious debate with good sources.

Pro-'Conspiracy':

-Eye witness accounts.
-Declassified cables.
-Statements from Secretary of State and Navy Chiefs.

Anti-'Conspiracy':

-It was a two hour long sustained attack mistake.
-'Friendly fire incident' .... ....(LOL WHAT)

I wasn't trying to convince a Jewish Pro-Israel American who probably supports Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories.

This is for the American people and people in general. They can make what they want out of it. Better to leave it at that.

 

[Ghareeb_Da_Baal]

read Body of Secrets by James Bamford. More shocking details.
V. James Bamford (born September 15, 1946) is an American bestselling author and journalist noted for his writing about United Statesintelligence agencies, especially the National Security Agency (NSA).[1] Bamford has taught at the University of California, Berkeley, as a distinguished visiting professor and has written for The New York Times Magazine, The Atlantic,Harper's, and many other publications. In 2006, he won the National Magazine Award for Reporting for his piece "The Man Who Sold The War," published inRolling Stone.

 

[Archdemon]

Pro-'Conspiracy':

-Eye witness accounts.
-Declassified cables.
-Statements from Secretary of State and Navy Chiefs.

Anti-'Conspiracy':

-It was a two hour long sustained attack mistake.
-'Friendly fire incident' .... ....(LOL WHAT)

I wasn't trying to convince a Jewish Pro-Israel American who probably supports Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories.

This is for the American people and people in general. They can make what they want out of it. Better to leave it at that.

Actually the attack lasted 34 minutes.

 

[Falcon29]

Actually the attack lasted 34 minutes.

What about the time preceding it?

 

[Archdemon]

What about the time preceding it?

What about? again, the attack lasted ~34 minutes, not two hours as you sarcastically implied .

 

[Falcon29]

What about? again, the attack lasted ~34 minutes, not two hours as you sarcastically implied .

The whole attack was about 45 minutes. Since it was identified and the torpedo that hit it. 45 minutes in total.

I made a mistake in my wording, there was a period before that and the period of the attack. This 45 minute estimate is an conservative IDF estimate.

Some put it at 1 hour and 15 minutes. Either way, it's still disturbing.

 

[Pak_Sher]

Israeli attack on a US ship will never be forgotten. Israel can never be trusted since they killed many Prophets including Jesus Christ and poisoning the food of Prophet Mohammed.

 

[Falcon29]

@Pak_Sher

Delete your comment mate.