posted
Hm. Aparently, the "ignore" function doesn't work like it should. No matter.
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: Okay, Rob, why don't you start pointing to information that the attack was an accident? You CAN'T. You can't point to the board of inquiry because members of it are saying "Hey, it was rigged." You can point to Israel, but, hey, "can you say motivated self-interest?"
You have NOTHING to point to! All you can do is moan and bitch and whine about how mean I am, and about Omega's love for the Bible. Get a fucking grip, boy.
Jeffy, I gave you four disparate link cites wayyy back on page 1. You ignored all of them, with a response which amounted to "well, they're all liars, because Ennes says differently," which is hardly a valid debating tactic. (Not to mention being hypocritical.)
You want to try again? Let's consider the flags.
#1. The first flag was small enough that its identity was below the threshhold of visual acuity beyond 1400 feet, a distance the jets did not come within. It was shot off during the first attack, according to survivors' testimony.
#2. The 7x13 foot flag was then raised, but obscured by the huge amount of smoke billowing from the wreckage. This also according to eyewitness testimony.
#3. The first sighting of the US flag was made by an Israeli helicopter pilot 30 minutes after the attack was over. (Verifiable through the Israeli transcripts of the event.)
Now, can you actually debate those points, or not?
If you're going to claim that there were other tapes, and that they were destroyed by the Krazy Kabal Konspiracy, well, that falls under the pervue of "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:#1. The first flag was small enough that its identity was below the threshhold of visual acuity beyond 1400 feet, a distance the jets did not come within. It was shot off during the first attack, according to survivors' testimony.
Which is irrelevent. Israeli pilots had already identified the ship as American, and even if they hadn't, NO Arab ship came ANYWHERE close to even looking like the Liberty - this includes the US Navy markings on the hull and the VERY distinct "moon-bounce" and other unique equipment mounted on the vessel.
The day was clear and sunny. The Liberty was in INTERNATIONAL waters, and if it HAD been an Egyptian or other hostile ship, it is VERY unlikely that the Israelis would have left it alone for so long already after the beginning of the war. Even if we accept the excuse that they confused Liberty with El Quseir, keep in mind:
a) Liberty had four times the tonnage of El Quiseir, and was twice the length.
b) Liberty was painted grey, and flew American colors; El Quseir was SILVER and flew Egyptian colors.
c) As an enemy ship, El Queseir's silhouette was available and known to Israeli pilots. It is unlikely that they would have confused it with something else.
d) El Queseir had been OUT OF COMMISSION and waiting to be scrapped in Alexandria.
In an interview on February 18th of this year, NSA Director Olivery Kirby stated that it was unlikely that Israel would not have been aware of the above facts.
quote:#2. The 7x13 foot flag was then raised, but obscured by the huge amount of smoke billowing from the wreckage. This also according to eyewitness testimony.
The Liberty itself could’ve been painted red white and blue and Israel STILL would have attacked. They were well aware the ship was not Egyptian: they attacked it because for whatever reason, an American spy ship was a threat to them.
quote:#3. The first sighting of the US flag was made by an Israeli helicopter pilot 30 minutes after the attack was over. (Verifiable through the Israeli transcripts of the event.)
Assuming they hadn’t seen the flag before the attack, you still have to explain why Israeli pilots failed to identify the Liberty based on site on the ship’s size and shape and markings (remember: even Israel admits they identified the ship that morning, then “moved“ its marker off a plotting table); why Israel jammed AMERICAN radio frequencies during the attack (if they thought they were attacking an Egyptian ship, why not jam, I dunno, Egyptian frequencies?), and why Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned Liberty motor-boats as well as targeting crewmen on the ship. (Of course, here’s another problem: at the range the torpedo boats were, the ship’s markings could hardly be ignored. So why would the torpedo boat crews machine gun American servicemen? If the initial attack had been an accident, maybe they should’ve said “oh shit, sorry ’bout that!” and not “fire at will!”)
posted
See? That's more like it (although it rapidly became not about the single point of discussion I proposed - the flags... but I digress)
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: Which is irrelevent. Israeli pilots had already identified the ship as American,
A routine Israel Navy reconnaissance flight at dawn on June 8 sighted Liberty at about 6:00 A.M. steaming southeasterly and south more than 70 miles further west of El Arish. Positive identification was made and the information passed to Naval Intelligence Headquarters and the Liberty was marked on the battle control board at Naval Headquarters. Five hours later, the Liberty mark was considered old information and removed from the battle control board. At 11:00 A.M., shifts changed and the information about the Liberty was not known to the officer who assumed command. At about 1:00 P.M., when the presence of a ship steaming west, 14 miles off the coast of the Sinai and reported to be shelling Israel Army positions from the sea became a tactical issue, the Navy Officer in command did not know about the dawn sighting of Liberty many miles to the west.
There is no evidence or transcript extant that suggests that the pilots in the air at the time knew that their target was a US ship. The Israelis had already been informed that no US ship was within 100 miles of the coast. (Unfortunately, the Liberty never received any of the several orders to withdraw.)
quote: and even if they hadn't, NO Arab ship came ANYWHERE close to even looking like the Liberty - this includes the US Navy markings on the hull and the VERY distinct "moon-bounce" and other unique equipment mounted on the vessel.
The day was clear and sunny. The Liberty was in INTERNATIONAL waters, and if it HAD been an Egyptian or other hostile ship, it is VERY unlikely that the Israelis would have left it alone for so long already after the beginning of the war. Even if we accept the excuse that they confused Liberty with El Quseir, keep in mind:
a) Liberty had four times the tonnage of El Quiseir, and was twice the length.
b) Liberty was painted grey, and flew American colors; El Quseir was SILVER and flew Egyptian colors.
c) As an enemy ship, El Queseir's silhouette was available and known to Israeli pilots. It is unlikely that they would have confused it with something else.
d) El Queseir had been OUT OF COMMISSION and waiting to be scrapped in Alexandria.
In an interview on February 18th of this year, NSA Director Olivery Kirby stated that it was unlikely that Israel would not have been aware of the above facts.
Fair enough. However: "THE BOATS OF CHERBOURG (pg 68-69) 1988"
quote:"The son of Amiral Erell, Udi was an ensign aboard one of the torpedo boats. He could see the smoke from a long distance as the boats raced at top speed toward the scene. As the vessel came into view, Erell's skipper scanned an identification book containing pictures of the ships in the Arab fleets and consulted with the commanders on the other boats. The squadron commander concluded that the ship was the Egyptian supply vessel EL QUSEIR. Ensign Erell, looking over his skipper's shoulder at the picture and glancing up at the burning vessel, fully agreed, even though he would later recall that the mast in the picture was not positioned identically with the mast of the target vessel...." "Nevertheless, the squadron commander sought to confirm the vessel's identity before attacking. When the Israeli signalman flashed the message "What ship?" Udi Erell saw the response flickering through the smoke four miles away---"AAA", the signal meaning "Identify yourself first." The same signal had been flashed, the Israelis were aware, by the Egyptian destroyer challenged off Haifa during the Sinai Campaign in 1956. Americans on the bridge of the Liberty would later state that the signals flashed were the ship's name and its international call sign, not what the Israelis believed they saw. Even with binoculars, Erell could make out "no flag". The sqaudron commander ordered his boats to commence torpedo attacks. The vessels peeled off to make their runs and fired five torpedos. Only one hit home. The boats raked the burning ship, now dead in the water, with their guns."
"Fire was halted when one of the officers reported seeing the identification markings CTR-5 on the ship's hull, markings that were not those of an Arab vessel. Notified of this, Haifa ordered the sqaudron commander to pick up survivors and definitely establish the ship's identity......Drawing closer to the burning vessel, they were able to make out a flag. It was not opened by a breeze and could not immediately be identified, but it was clearly not Egyptian...."
"Udi saw a splash of red on the flag and heard a report being sent back to Haifa that the vessel might be Russian. The report caused shock and consternation when passed on to General Staff headquarters. The shock was not abated when the torpedo-spadron commander reported half an hour later that he had identified the vessel as American."
At worst, this sounds like a case of "Shoot first, answers aren't that important," and not a "calculated" attack. (You'll note that this, also, falls into the realm of "believing the people who were there.")
quote:The Liberty itself could’ve been painted red white and blue and Israel STILL would have attacked. They were well aware the ship was not Egyptian: they attacked it because for whatever reason, an American spy ship was a threat to them.
This is where that "extraordinary claim" bit comes in.
WHY would Israel attack its only ally?
I've seen two theories... but they've both been discredited:
#1 To prevent the US from knowing Israel was going to attack the Golan Heights.
Except that documents show that Israel had notified the US of this fact 8 hours before the Liberty was attacked. When theory #1 was found to be untrue, they turned to Theory #2...
#2 To prevent the discovery of an Israeli "massacre" of Egyptian soldiers.
A massacre which, much like the Jenin "massacre: of a couple years ago, was eventually investigated and turned out not to have happened.
quote:Assuming they hadn’t seen the flag before the attack, you still have to explain why Israeli pilots failed to identify the Liberty based on site on the ship’s size and shape and markings (remember: even Israel admits they identified the ship that morning, then “moved“ its marker off a plotting table);
see above
quote: why Israel jammed AMERICAN radio frequencies during the attack (if they thought they were attacking an Egyptian ship, why not jam, I dunno, Egyptian frequencies?),
There are a limited number of radio frequencies available, and jammer's aren't always selective (hence the phrase "They're jamming all frequencies!") What are Egypts? What are the US's? I don't know. (And if all frequencies were jammed, how did the Liberty manage to call for help? It's a matter of record that two carriers launched planes in response to a Liberty SOS)
quote: and why Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned Liberty motor-boats as well as targeting crewmen on the ship. (Of course, here’s another problem: at the range the torpedo boats were, the ship’s markings could hardly be ignored. So why would the torpedo boat crews machine gun American servicemen? If the initial attack had been an accident, maybe they should’ve said “oh shit, sorry ’bout that!” and not “fire at will!”)
The name Liberty on the curved stern of the ship was not larger than 18 inches and because of the curvature of the stern, was extremely difficult to read under any circumstances. The ships identifier, "GTR-5" was painted on both sides of the ship near the bow and near the stern but only the number "5" was ten feet tall. The "GTR" was substantially smaller. It was the sighting of these markings by the second wave of aircraft that identified the ship as not an Arab ship and resulted in immediate termination of the air attack.
You'l notice this pic was taken at a much closer range than any aircraft before the helicopters approached.
I don't know the range of the torpedo boats at the time they launched. What was it?
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Forgive me for the paraphrasing ... US Secretary of State Dean Rusk said after the attack, that an accident might occur for a few minutes, but there was no way that the very distinctive looking USS Liberty could be fired on for over an hour at close range without being identified as American.
quote:. Five hours later, the Liberty mark was considered old information and removed from the battle control board. At 11:00 A.M., shifts changed and the information about the Liberty was not known to the officer who assumed command. At about 1:00 P.M., when the presence of a ship steaming west, 14 miles off the coast of the Sinai and reported to be shelling Israel Army positions from the sea became a tactical issue, the Navy Officer in command did not know about the dawn sighting of Liberty many miles to the west.
Gosh, I guess it wasn’t “old information”, was it? And since the Liberty had NO GUNS capable of bombarding ANYTHING, (and instead had big antennas), then one wonders what all those recon flights were about. Oh, wait, don’t forget: crewmen onboard Liberty heard the pilots saying it was an American ship (directly prior to the assault). This of course, despite the TWELVE over-flights between 5:30am and 2pm.
quote:There is no evidence or transcript extant that suggests that the pilots in the air at the time knew that their target was a US ship. The Israelis had already been informed that no US ship was within 100 miles of the coast. (Unfortunately, the Liberty never received any of the several orders to withdraw.)
There is evidence, the testimony of survivors of the USS Liberty. What you forget to mention is that of all the boards of inquiry, only FOURTEEN Liberty crewmen testified, and allegations have been made that certain testimony was NOT PERMITTED. Given, of course, that the outcome of the Boards of Inquiry had been ordered by Washington, it’s a wonder that anyone testified at all. BTW - as much as Rob would like to dismiss this, the Board of Inquiry’s own legal counsel, Captain Ward Boston, has recently come forward with this information. In other words, the Board of Inquiry was a sham to preserve the US/Israeli alliance.
quote:The squadron commander concluded that the ship was the Egyptian supply vessel EL QUSEIR. Ensign Erell, looking over his skipper's shoulder at the picture and glancing up at the burning vessel, fully agreed, even though he would later recall that the mast in the picture was not positioned identically with the mast of the target vessel...."
Well, it’s nice to know that the Israeli Navy has such INCOMPETENT officers.
THIS is a comparrison of the silhouttes of the Liberty and the El Quseir. As you can see, they look NOTHING alike, especially not in shape and SIZE. Where El Quiseir has GUNS, all the Liberty has are BIG COMMUNICATIONS GEAR. Please forgive me for making one of two assumptions: a) Ensign Erell and his Squadron Commander are dip-shits incapable of floating a boat in a bathtub, b) the posted commentary is altered to reflect the “fog of war” excuse.
quote:The sqaudron commander ordered his boats to commence torpedo attacks. The vessels peeled off to make their runs and fired five torpedos. Only one hit home. The boats raked the burning ship, now dead in the water, with their guns
They also targeted Liberty crewmen on the deck, including fire-control teams and medical support teams. They also opened fire on assorted life-craft tossed into the water.
quote:At worst, this sounds like a case of "Shoot first, answers aren't that important," and not a "calculated" attack. (You'll note that this, also, falls into the realm of "believing the people who were there.")
I don’t believe the Israelis who were there. Why? Motivated self-interest. If you’d attacked an ally ship with the hope of sending a message or what have you, and the attack had failed, would YOU want your most powerful supporter coming down on you with a volley of nukes? Probably not.
In other words: Israel’s motivated self-interest was to keep the alliance with the USA. The US’s motivated self-interest was to keep the peace with Israel, at the time certainly its strongest ally in the region. What motivated self interest does the crew of the Liberty have? None, except to see the truth told.
quote:There are a limited number of radio frequencies available, and jammer's aren't always selective (hence the phrase "They're jamming all frequencies!")
What are Egypts? What are the US's? I don't know. (And if all frequencies were jammed, how did the Liberty manage to call for help? It's a matter of record that two carriers launched planes in response to a Liberty SOS)[/quote]
Yes, once Liberty radiomen were able to find an un-jammed radio frequency.
In an interview, Jim Ennes said: “Long after the attack I was contacted by an Israeli pilot who told me that on his first flight over the ship he saw our American flag and informed his headquarters that we were American but was told to ignore the flag and attack anyway. He refused to do so and returned to base where he was arrested. I was told by an Israeli in the war room that they knew we were American. I have been told by several American intelligence analysts who read or in some cases heard the messages between the pilots and their headquarters that these messages make it very clear that the pilots and their headquarters knew we were American.”
quote:I don't know the range of the torpedo boats at the time they launched. What was it?
Assuming the attack was deliberate, (misstatement, of COURSE it was deliberate, they were obviously trying to attack the ship.)
Assuming they KNEW it was a US ship from the get-go, WHY did the Israelis attack the Liberty?
Because you're right, everything that's been mentioned so far could be deliberate, or it COULD be chalked up to reprehensible incompetence (not entirely implausible.)
Therefore, motive is key.
quote:What motivated self interest does the crew of the Liberty have? None, except to see the truth told.
Revenge? Hatred?
quote: "Gradually they learned that the new leaders were actually the worst kind of self- centered, amoralistic murderers - worse than the people they sought to flee from." Ennes, on the Israeli leadership
Worse than the Nazis? That's pretty extreme. More than simple bitterness over the attack.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
While second-hand information can be fun, I'd be more interested in seeing a direct quote from, say, the Israeli pilot that was supposedly arrested, as opposed to one from a guy who claimed he'd met him. Anyway, assuming everything stated is true as stated, there are three major possibilities: the Liberty survivers are lying, they're mistaken, or the Israeli and US governments are lying. Yes, I have trouble thinking of a simple reason for the Liberty survivors to lie, but I similarly have trouble thinking of a reason for Israel to have knowingly attacked one of our ships. Seeing, as Rob pointed out, that the two major explinations proposed don't seem to hold water, what others would you propose, Jeff?
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Assuming they KNEW it was a US ship from the get-go, WHY did the Israelis attack the Liberty?
Maybe they just wanted to send a message: don't fuck with us.
quote:Because you're right, everything that's been mentioned so far could be deliberate, or it COULD be chalked up to reprehensible incompetence (not entirely implausible.)
VERY implausible. The Israeli military is at the top of its game - has to be for Israeli survival. The chances of this attack happening for such a length of time being committed by Israel is *VERY* small and, honestly, not very likely. When you look at some of the people who have come forward regarding the Board of Inquiry, and other circumstances (Rusk, Adlai Stephenson, etc), it certainly lends more creedence to "this was deliberate."
quote:Therefore, motive is key.
But understanding the motive isn't always key to understanding "hey, they did this on purpose."
quote:Revenge? Hatred?
Perhaps indeed anger - anger that they were attacked, left to die by their nation, and that the attack was covered up by Washington (as evidenced by the falsifying of the Board of Inquiry).
quote:Worse than the Nazis? That's pretty extreme. More than simple bitterness over the attack.
I was going to say something, then I remembered that the Nazis have a history of attacking their allies, too.
quote:Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: Maybe they just wanted to send a message: don't fuck with us.
Unlikely, since the US was Israel's primary ally and had demonstrated no intention of fucking with them. Indeed, if the coverup were true, it would PROVE the US had no intention of fucking with Israel. No, that's not a reasonable reason. That'd be like punching out your best friend in order to make sure he stayed your best friend.
quote:VERY implausible. The Israeli military is at the top of its game - has to be for Israeli survival. The chances of this attack happening for such a length of time being committed by Israel is *VERY* small and, honestly, not very likely.
You are aware, that during this same war, Israel attacked one of its own tank columns? Even "top of its game" militaries have friendly fire incidents.
quote:But understanding the motive isn't always key to understanding "hey, they did this on purpose."
Oh, it most certainly is. One of the things police look at when they're determining the level of crime committed (1st degree, 2nd degree, 3rd degree, manslaughter, etc.)
quote:I was going to say something, then I remembered that the Nazis have a history of attacking their allies, too.
Given that criteria, every army on earth ever is worse than the Nazis.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
OK. Operating on the assumptions that 1) Liberty had intercepted some... ultra-sensitive intel, and that 2) the ship was attacked to keep a lid on that data, AND that 3) the Israelis were aware of the US flag it flew, WHY did Washington order the reports falsified? Liberty wasn't in those waters for a pleasure cruise. It was spying on an ALLY during a time when support for Israel was at an all-time high. If things were already heated up enough for Washington to warrant THAT (I'm pretty sure active espionage qualifies as an act of war, though the legal definition is open to debate), I don't think alienating Israel was a prime concern of anyone.
OTOH, why the Israelis would value the protection of that intel more than the BILLIONS of dollars of US subsidy they put on the line... it must have been VERY fucking compromising.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote: I similarly have trouble thinking of a reason for Israel to have knowingly attacked one of our ships
How about to get the US to declare war on Egypt and the Arab nations? After the attack on the Liberty a US aircraft carrier in the region did launch nuclear equipped aircraft with provisional targeting orders for Egypt which were, fortunately, called back. There was a documentary on a few weeks ago about this; the survivors seemed convinced that they had been deliberately attacked by the Israelis. The Israelis were equally adamant they did not.
You might find this interesting.
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
