The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Boon Mee · 07-10-2007, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Chuchok

Quote:

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...

Ivor Biggun · 08-10-2007, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by floorpotato

Quote:

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.

sabang · 08-10-2007, 08:50 AM

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.

Ivor Biggun · 08-10-2007, 01:45 PM

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.

Ivor Biggun · 08-10-2007, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milkman

Quote:

Originally Posted by BKKBoet

Quote:

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.

You have a fair point, Poet.

Apparently the "communications" reports are not available. I'm not sure.

From excerpt above:

Quote:

communications, according to those who remember seeing them, that showed the Israelis knew they were attacking an American naval vessel.

The radio communications were permanently recorded by Israel.

attaboy · 08-10-2007, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabang

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.

What would that be and how would it be kept quiet? The US did not want to escalate an incident and have that incident further escalated in the media. It would show weakness in unity, something the Soviets and their allies might try to exploit. It appears the US went well out of its way not to raise a stink about friendly fire.

Quote:

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

I'm still not sure what you mean. They really couldn't stop it from sinking. There was nothing close enough to stop the Israelis and no one had any idea the Israelis were going to attack.

keda · 08-10-2007, 05:54 PM

Officially it wasn't anywhere near where it was, and the bigger question is not why the Israelis attacked it but why it was there in the first place.

Ivor Biggun · 08-10-2007, 06:08 PM

The USS Liberty was never sunk, or is that another cover up ? It actually made it to Malta under it's own steam. Just shows you that when someone writes a book in the US, conspiricey theories jump to the fore making it an automatic best seller.

keda · 08-10-2007, 07:26 PM

Could be the IDF just wanted to seriously distract the crew from whatever info they were transmitting or gathering. If they wanted it sunk it wouldn't have reached Malta.

sabang · 08-10-2007, 10:05 PM

It's true that the Liberty was not sunk, it made it to port and was scrapped.
Really though, why would the Secretary of Defence specifically turn back a rescue mission.
Why would the Secretary of Defence even know?

attaboy · 09-10-2007, 12:39 AM

I don't know what the rescue mission was made up of.

sabang · 09-10-2007, 07:50 AM

In the first instance, jets were scrambled. It all goes hazy after that- it appears the Liberty limped to port alone, but not sure. Surely the dead and wounded were evacuated?

sabang · 09-10-2007, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keda

Officially it wasn't anywhere near where it was, and the bigger question is not why the Israelis attacked it but why it was there in the first place.

Indeed. Accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist, but I believe the attack was deliberate. For whatever reason, the NSA sent the ship where the Defence people & top politicians absolutely did not want it to go, namely off Sinai (international waters notwithstanding).
It will remain theory- stuff at this level does not get released, and information that is released will only tell you what they will let you know.

Ivor Biggun · 09-10-2007, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabang

It's true that the Liberty was not sunk, it made it to port and was scrapped.
Really though, why would the Secretary of Defence specifically turn back a rescue mission.
Why would the Secretary of Defence even know?

Perhaps to save face. Or because America believed whole heartedly that they had no ships within 350 miles of the battle and the ship under attack wasn't theirs. Looks as if one department wasn't playing by the rules and letting other departments know what they were upto. The USS liberty wasn't under the control of the Navy so the original statement "the US has no ships within 350 miles of the battle" was true. But the ship was under the command of The National Security Agencey and therefore didn't form part of the said statement. There's your fuck up.

machangezi · 09-10-2007, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milkman

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

Quote:

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

Milky USS Liberty's one of the so many screw ups.

Does anyone remember or ever heard about Lavon affair where Israeli agents planted bombs, 1954, in American library and some other spots where the chances of Western casualty was high? The aim was to paint Egyptians as terrorists and to fock up the Egyptian relations with the West. The Israelies never denied this!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair

http://www.mideastweb.org/lavon.htm

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/lavon.html

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/lavon.html

Also in early 50s the Israelies played another dirty game when they targeted their own Jews in Iraq in order to get their arse to newly occupied Israel.
http://www.bintjbeil.com/E/occupation/ameu_iraqjews.html

The list goes on! I can't be arsed to search info on this matter.

But hey Israelies can't kill anyone.

08-10-2007, 08:50 AM	#23 (permalink)
sabang Go ask Alice Last Online: Today 01:27 PM Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: where the streets have no name Posts: 12,560	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. __________________ Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-10-2007, 01:45 PM	#24 (permalink)
Ivor Biggun Elite Member Last Online: 09-05-2009 08:56 PM Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Buriram Province out in the sticks Posts: 1,913	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.

08-10-2007, 05:54 PM	#27 (permalink)
keda Thailand Travel Forum Last Online: 19-01-2010 11:41 AM Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 8,381	Officially it wasn't anywhere near where it was, and the bigger question is not why the Israelis attacked it but why it was there in the first place.

08-10-2007, 06:08 PM	#28 (permalink)
Ivor Biggun Elite Member Last Online: 09-05-2009 08:56 PM Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Buriram Province out in the sticks Posts: 1,913	The USS Liberty was never sunk, or is that another cover up ? It actually made it to Malta under it's own steam. Just shows you that when someone writes a book in the US, conspiricey theories jump to the fore making it an automatic best seller.

08-10-2007, 07:26 PM	#29 (permalink)
keda Thailand Travel Forum Last Online: 19-01-2010 11:41 AM Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 8,381	Could be the IDF just wanted to seriously distract the crew from whatever info they were transmitting or gathering. If they wanted it sunk it wouldn't have reached Malta.

08-10-2007, 10:05 PM	#30 (permalink)
sabang Go ask Alice Last Online: Today 01:27 PM Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: where the streets have no name Posts: 12,560	It's true that the Liberty was not sunk, it made it to port and was scrapped. Really though, why would the Secretary of Defence specifically turn back a rescue mission. Why would the Secretary of Defence even know?

09-10-2007, 12:39 AM	#31 (permalink)
attaboy Elite Member Last Online: 13-03-2010 06:38 AM Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,142	I don't know what the rescue mission was made up of.

09-10-2007, 07:50 AM	#32 (permalink)
sabang Go ask Alice Last Online: Today 01:27 PM Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: where the streets have no name Posts: 12,560	In the first instance, jets were scrambled. It all goes hazy after that- it appears the Liberty limped to port alone, but not sure. Surely the dead and wounded were evacuated?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)