Thread: Israeli Attack on USS Liberty

Some released documents not only indicate the Israelis knew they were attacking an American ship, and the U.S. government covered it up.

New revelations in attack on American spy ship

Veterans, documents suggest U.S., Israel didn't tell full story of deadly '67 incident

By John Crewdson |Tribune senior correspondent October 2, 2007 Article tools

Bryce Lockwood, Marine staff sergeant, Russian-language expert, recipient of the Silver Star for heroism, ordained Baptist minister, is shouting into the phone.

"I'm angry! I'm seething with anger! Forty years, and I'm seething with anger!"

Lockwood was aboard the USS Liberty, a super-secret spy ship on station in the eastern Mediterranean, when four Israeli fighter jets flew out of the afternoon sun to strafe and bomb the virtually defenseless vessel on June 8, 1967, the fourth day of what would become known as the Six-Day War.


Related links

• Congressional inquiries got nowhere
• USS Liberty Photos
• How the Israeli attack unfolded Graphic

For Lockwood and many other survivors, the anger is mixed with incredulity: that Israel would attack an important ally, then attribute the attack to a case of mistaken identity by Israeli pilots who had confused the U.S. Navy's most distinctive ship with an Egyptian horse-cavalry transport that was half its size and had a dissimilar profile. And they're also incredulous that, for years, their own government would reject their calls for a thorough investigation.

"They tried to lie their way out of it!" Lockwood shouts. "I don't believe that for a minute! You just don't shoot at a ship at sea without identifying it, making sure of your target!"

Four decades later, many of the more than two dozen Liberty survivors located and interviewed by the Tribune cannot talk about the attack without shouting or weeping.

Their anger has been stoked by the declassification of government documents and the recollections of former military personnel, including some quoted in this article for the first time, which strengthen doubts about the U.S. National Security Agency's position that it never intercepted the communications of the attacking Israeli pilots -- communications, according to those who remember seeing them, that showed the Israelis knew they were attacking an American naval vessel.

....The documents also suggest that the U.S. government, anxious to spare Israel's reputation and preserve its alliance with the U.S., closed the case with what even some of its participants now say was a hasty and seriously flawed investigation.

Link: New revelations in attack on American spy ship -- baltimoresun.com

And your point is? It's called 'co-lateral damage', the US does it all the time - just ask the Brits!

Originally Posted by BKKBoet

And your point is? It's called 'co-lateral damage', the US does it all the time - just ask the Brits!

The point is about the U.S. government covering it up, mostly.

And also the fact that the U.S. MSM doesn't even cover it.

I don't care about the 'co-lateral damage.'

I am not focusing on Britain, either. Why did you mention Britain?

I mention Britain because in both Gulf Wars they have been victims on numerous occasions of friendly fire incidents from the Americans. it is just that in the heat of battle these things can and do happen.

Originally Posted by BKKBoet

I mention Britain because in both Gulf Wars they have been victims on numerous occasions of friendly fire incidents from the Americans. it is just that in the heat of battle these things can and do happen.

I don't believe the attack by the Israelis were friendly fire - I believe it was intentional.

There is a lot of evidence that points in the direction of an intentional attack on a known U.S. vessel.

Originally Posted by Milkman

I don't believe the attack by the Israelis were friendly fire - I believe it was intentional.

There is a lot of evidence that points in the direction of an intentional attack on a known U.S. vessel.

If there is 'lots' of evidence it would be nice to see. I think the only thing that could point to it being intentional or not would be direct evidence from the Israeli's.

Yeah, the communication reports would provide the key.

Originally Posted by BKKBoet

I mention Britain because in both Gulf Wars they have been victims on numerous occasions of friendly fire incidents from the Americans. it is just that in the heat of battle these things can and do happen.

Some forms of friendly fire simply should never happen...for example, the tech is available for planes to recognise friendly vehicles and simply refuse to fire at them without manual override...the same tech can be adapted to recognise non-vehicular batches of ground troops, and at greater development and expense, it could be fine tuned for individual troops.

Originally Posted by Milkman

Originally Posted by BKKBoet

I mention Britain because in both Gulf Wars they have been victims on numerous occasions of friendly fire incidents from the Americans. it is just that in the heat of battle these things can and do happen.

I don't believe the attack by the Israelis were friendly fire - I believe it was intentional.

There is a lot of evidence that points in the direction of an intentional attack on a known U.S. vessel.

Ditto...could have been that the Liberty (a high tech comms vessel) was sending out sensitive info, and it has even been proposed that it was too close to an alleged turkey shoot onshore, of a particularly nasty Egyptian unit/group that the Israelis tactically needed out of the equation.

For sure the pilots involved in the incident knew it was a friendly vessel, or at least belonging to the US.

Here are the transcripts of the helicopter communications. They were sent out to investigate what kind of vessel had been shot up. I read them a few years ago. I don't recall the transcripts mentioning an American flag.

U.S.S. Liberty - Audio Recordings & Transcripts

Originally Posted by keda

Some forms of friendly fire simply should never happen...for example, the tech is available for planes to recognise friendly vehicles and simply refuse to fire at them without manual override...

The fact is that even with modern IFF technology these things still do happen in the haze of battle, case in point being the A10 attack on British Warrior vehicles in 2003. In 1967 the technology would have been antiquated by comparison - assuming the US ship was carrying anything at all being a spy ship.

Originally Posted by attaboy

U.S.S. Liberty - Audio Recordings & Transcripts

Yeah, nothing in the transcript to show that the Israeli's knew. A case of shit happens. Anyway milkman, an interesting bit of history. If you uncover anything more let us know.

The Israeli's knew.

Yawn...really old news and...nobody cares at this point.
It's well and truly over...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Yawn...really old news and...nobody cares at this point.
It's well and truly over...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I bet some of the guys aboard that ship care bit.

Originally Posted by sabang

The Israeli's knew.

After reading a new article in Israeli newspaper Haaretz (similar to the original article starting this thread), I would have to agree with you. It's not real clear why Israel would want to do something like this, they don't seem to have a lot of friends to start with.
Israeli communications said to prove IAF knew Liberty was U.S. ship - Haaretz - Israel News

From your link above Fp, this is the real question:-

"The report also states that then U.S. defense secretary Robert McNamara ordered jets that had been dispatched to assist the Liberty turned around.

The Tribune quotes J.Q. "Tony" Hart, then a chief petty officer assigned to a U.S. Navy relay station in Morocco that handled communications between Washington and the 6th Fleet, as saying that he listened in as McNamara said, "President [Lyndon] Johnson is not going to go to war or embarrass an American ally over a few sailors."

Did some senior US politicians consent to the Liberty being sunk, and if so why?

Typical, okay for America to do friendly fire/neglegence and cover it up but when the boot's on the other foot...........

Originally Posted by Ivor Biggun

Typical, okay for America to do friendly fire/neglegence and cover it up but when the boot's on the other foot...........

You might want to study the incident before making this sort of statement. If it was friendly fire or negligence, I don't think Milkman would have started this thread. I wouldn't be too worked up about it either. From our prior posts, it's apparent that neither of us is a jingoist or hypocrite when it comes to US foreign policy. Friendly fire happens. But the real issue of the USS Liberty is that the attack appeared to be very much intentional and covered up. For those who still think that this was friendly fire or negligence, yet another article by an ex-intelligence guy: So Who's Afraid of the Israel Lobby? - by Ray McGovern

Originally Posted by Little Chuchok

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Yawn...really old news and...nobody cares at this point.
It's well and truly over...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I bet some of the guys aboard that ship care bit.

They're over it too.
Watched a special on the event few months ago where they interviewed the survivors and it's all water under the bridge at this point. Like the capture of the USS Pueblo...

Originally Posted by floorpotato

Originally Posted by Ivor Biggun

Typical, okay for America to do friendly fire/neglegence and cover it up but when the boot's on the other foot...........

You might want to study the incident before making this sort of statement. If it was friendly fire or negligence, I don't think Milkman would have started this thread. I wouldn't be too worked up about it either. From our prior posts, it's apparent that neither of us is a jingoist or hypocrite when it comes to US foreign policy. Friendly fire happens. But the real issue of the USS Liberty is that the attack appeared to be very much intentional and covered up. For those who still think that this was friendly fire or negligence, yet another article by an ex-intelligence guy: So Who's Afraid of the Israel Lobby? - by Ray McGovern

I don't have to study the incident. Reason is, I'll never find the truth. I see it as two countries at war and planes from one country mistakenly fire on a ship that later claimed to be neutral, even though it was a spy ship. Constantly people jump to the defence of US military, when neglegence is detected, and say "these things happen in war". Because it happened to America the rules have change and they want an enquirey. Okay have an enquirey, but where do we start ? How about the sinking of the Lusitania. A ship that was supposedly sacrificed to coherse America into joining in with the first world war.

Israeli airplanes first attacked the Liberty with missiles and cannons, disabling it. It was before this that communications were sent to Israeli command identifying the ship as US, but the attack was told to commence. Fifteen minutes later, Israeli navy arrived and finished the job. During this time, US warplanes were scrambled to assist the Liberty, and ordered back to base- that order emanating from the Secretary of Defence, McNamara.

The Liberty was a communications ship- a spy vessel. It was also very close to Egypt, and the scene of several Israeli actions there. To state the obvious, it would have sent several Maydays out while being attacked. Yet the order to specifically not assist it came fromk the Defence Department, and no action was taken to call off the attack from either Israel or the US- in fact the order was given for the attack to continue.

So they must have intercepted something real sensitive methinks, which senior US and Israeli defence, intelligence and government personnel absolutely did not want released. To the point the US was willing to let an ally sink one of it's ships, with corresponding loss of life. I doubt we will ever know what that information was.

The USS Liberty was a 'Navy Signals Intelligence Ship'. Full stop. A term used to mean spy ship. It was converted in 1965 to support The National Security Agency.
"The Israeli and American governments conducted multiple inquiries into the incident and issued reports concluding that the attack was the result of a mistake, caused by confusion among Israeli attackers about the precise identity of the USS Liberty and the fact that the US Ambassador to the United Nations had publically announced to the world at the UN that the US had no ships within 350 miles of Israel and the battle". That announcement, in my opinion, sealed the fate of the ship.
When I.A.F attacked the ship they noticed the ship to be identified with Latin letters and numbers and assumed it to be Russian, who at that time supported the Arabs. Plausable reason why the I.A.F continued to attack.
I can't understand why this story has reared it's head as compensation was paid by Israel. To the tune of $13 million and the case closed on December 17, 1978. End of saga.