I know you feel that way but there was considerable confusion and
missed and misinterpreted orders on both sides and the Liberty was
far off course and in a position which definitely could appear
to be threatening to Israel.

Our forces were there to assist Israel in their defense against
4 other armies. It makes no sense whatsoever that it would have
been intentional on Israel's part.

Both investigations found that it was friendly fire and Israel
apologized profusely and the US accepted the apology 45 years ago.

If you truly read the info cited in the Wiki then it easy to see
how and why it could have happened as a tragic accident between
close allies.

...no baby...... we didn't.

Why do you think wiki is the best authority when there are government reports that have recently been declassified that clearly show that Israelis knew they were attacking an American Ship?

***

"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."

The Wiki itself is no "authority". The Wiki is an edited and
regulated collection of encyclopedic information about the incident.
Since it allows free and open dissent and discussion of the subject
it is less biased and presents a variety of viewpoints.

That is why the Wiki article on the USS Liberty incident is
valuable. It has citations from numerous sources about many
aspects of the accident and inquiries rather than relying soley
on emotional testimony and opinions from one-sided sources.

The Wiki article on the USS Liberty incident presents a more
balanced perspective and contains references which have been
checked and vetted by numerous people. It also shows why the
official inquiries concluded that it was a tragic accident.

It is clearly ludicrous that Israel would intentionally
attack the only forces coming to their aid while they were under
attack from 4 other armies bent on Israel's destruction.

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

If Israel wants to claim incompetence and stupidity that is their choice. It was probably better than admitting the truth that they did it on purpose and for some justified reason. (Such as the spy ship may have seen or heard something they didn't want them to.)

So if they attacked "on accident" then why were they using unmarked airplanes? What kind of military black ops operation were they involved in?

Sorry, maybe they paid for the United States to accept their apology, but that was a bribe.

In order to be truly forgiven, one has to sincerely apologize for their actions and change their ways. I have the feeling they were only sorry they got caught.

This so-called acceptance of their apology..... purely political. I'm quit sure they didn't ask the American people for their opinions.

The USS Liberty was not "coming to their aid." They were spying. They very likely saw something that would be very bad for Israel if it got out.

The entire incident could have completely destroyed the alliance between America and Israel. It was an act of war. Spying and an attack on the spy ship.

Friends or not, countries still always spy on each other. Israel was probably engaged in a black ops operation that America was not aware of and were caught red handed. Otherwise why would they have attacked with unmarked airplanes?

Why would Israel even have a fleet of unmarked airplanes? What kind of military does that? Terrorists do.

Sure everyone is gathering intelligence.
The USS Liberty was going there to provide intelligence to Israel.
Apparently the planes were not so "umarked" as to prevent everyone
from readily identifying them as Israeli aircraft!



The following arguments, found in official reports or other sources, were published to support that the attack was due to mistaken identity:

Accidents do occur in wartime. According to journalist Ze'ev
Schiff, the day before the attack on the Liberty, Israeli aircraft
had bombed an Israeli armored column south of the West Bank town of
Jenin, demonstrating such mistakes do happen.[61]

The incident took place during the Six Day War when Israel was
engaged in battles with two Arab countries and preparing to attack
a third, creating an environment where mistakes and confusion were
prevalent. For example, at 11:45, a few hours before the attack,
there was a large explosion on the shores of El-Arish followed by
black smoke, probably caused by the destruction of an ammunition
dump by retreating Egyptian forces. The Israeli army thought the
area was being bombarded, and that an unidentified ship offshore
was responsible. (According to U.S. sources, Liberty was 14 nmi (16
mi; 26 km) from those shores at the time of the explosion.)

As the torpedo boats rapidly approached, Liberty opened fire on
them. This was after the aerial attacks. At the inquiry, Commander
McGonagle expressed that the torpedo boats appeared to be
approaching in an attack formation. Thus, he sent a person to the
forward machine gun to fire at them. After several shots were
fired, McGonagle ordered cease fire. Then a machine gun on 03 level
sounded like it was firing, but nobody was seen at the gun.
McGonagle said that he felt sure the torpedo boat captains believed
they were under fire from the Liberty. Ensign Lucas, the ship's
gunnery officer who left the bridge shortly after the beginning of
the air attack and then returned during the torpedo boat attack,
testified that he gave permission for manned firing of the 03 level
machine gun after the torpedo boats began firing at Liberty. Then,
later when the gun was unmanned, heat from a nearby fire apparently
caused machine gun rounds at the 03 level gun to explode.[17]

Admiral Shlomo Erell, former head of the Israeli Navy in 1967,
states that no successful argument of benefit has been presented
for Israel purposely attacking an American warship, especially
considering the high cost of predictable complications that would
follow after attacking a powerful ally, and the fact that Israel
notified the American embassy immediately after the attack.[62]

Well now how do you suppose that happens?

Oh yeh, unmarked planes, hard to identify spy ships, military with no identifying uniforms, unknown people just killing other unknown people.

If you are going to fight a war aren't you supposed to be in uniform?
How else will you keep from killing your own people?

Stupid stupid stupid.

You think they was NEKKID?!?!

Nope, I think they are terrorists.

If you are going around killing people and you don't have your uniforms on, then you are terrorists.

That's the new rule.

Israeli terrorists attacked the USS Liberty.

More from the Wiki article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

NSA tapes and recent developments

Within an hour of learning that the Liberty had been torpedoed the
director of NSA, LTG Marshall S. Carter, sent a message to all
intercept sites requesting a special search of all communications
that might reflect the attack or reaction. No communications were
available. However, one of the airborne platforms, a U.S. Navy
EC-121 aircraft that flew near the attacks from 2:30 p.m. to 3:27
p.m., Sinai time (1230 to 1327 Z), had collected voice
conversations between two Israeli helicopter pilots and the control
tower at Hazor Airfield following the attack on the Liberty.[76]

On July 2, 2003, the National Security Agency released copies of
the recordings made by the EC-121 and the resultant translations
and summaries.[77] These revelations were elicited as part of a
Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by Florida bankruptcy judge and
retired naval aviator Jay Cristol. Two linguists who were aboard
the EC-121 when the recordings were made, however, have claimed
separately that at least two additional tapes were made that have
been excluded from the NSA releases up to and including a June 8,
2007, release.[6]

English transcripts of the released tapes indicate that Israel
still believed it had hit an Egyptian supply ship even after the
attack had stopped.[78][79] After the attack, the rescue
helicopters are heard relaying several urgent requests that the
rescuers ask the first survivor pulled out of the water what his
nationality is, and discussing whether the survivors from the
attacked ship will speak Arabic.[80]

A summary report of the NSA-translated tapes[81] indicates that at
1234Z Hatzor air control began directing two Israeli Air Force
helicopters to an Egyptian warship, to rescue its crew: "This ship
has now been identified as Egyptian." The helicopters arrived near
the ship at about 1303Z: "I see a big vessel, near it are three
small vessels..." At 1308Z, Hatzor air control indicated concern
about the nationality of the ship's crew: "The first matter to
clarify is to find out what their nationality is." At 1310Z, one of
the helicopter pilots asked the nearby torpedo boats' Division
Commander about the meaning of the ship's hull number: "GTR5 is
written on it. Does this mean something?" The response was:
"Negative, it doesn't mean anything." At 1312Z, one of the
helicopter pilots was asked by air control: "Did you clearly
identify an American flag?" No answer appears in the transcript,
but the air controller then says: "We request that you make another
pass and check once more if this is really an American flag."
Again, no response appears in the transcript. At about 1314Z, the
helicopters were directed to return home.

Absence of evidence is not evidence. Right?

Absence of a "successful argument" of benefit is not absence of a benefit.

They must have had a benefit. Like um.... our spy ship spied them doing some kind of war crime in their unmarked planes and their non identifiable (terrorists) uniforms.

We are frequently asked, "Why did Israel attack?"

The motive is irrelevant. If motive were a factor, then Charles Manson should be released for lack of plausible motive.

But here are some of the "unsuccessful arguments" Admiral Shlomo Erell, former head of the Israeli Navy may have been talking about.

Intelligence analysts agree that they attacked because they feared we might learn something that they did not want the United States to know.

That could have been

1. The planned invasion of the Golan Heights which was set to start a few hours after Liberty's arrival in the area. When Liberty arrived, the invasion was postponed for 24 hours, Liberty was attacked, and the invasion took place the next day. Did they postpone the invasion until Liberty out of the way and unable to report on the war?

2. It is possible that they were afraid that Liberty might learn and report to the United States that Israeli forces were executing up to 1,000 Egyptian Prisoners of War at El Arish at the very moment that Liberty was just 13 miles off shore.

3. It is also possible that USS Liberty was attacked to prevent the ship from reporting a deliberate massacre of 14 Indian United Nations peacekeepers that took place in Gaza shortly before Israel's attack on USS Liberty.

Israeli apologists dismiss these stories as untrue or wildly speculative, despite the fact that they are well documented. Israeli apologist-historian Michael Oren in his book "Six Days of War" and in published articles dismisses the claim as untrue claiming that, if it were true, there would be mass graves, reports in the major media, and great outcries from Egypt for justice.

Behold! There are mass graves, major media reports and cries for justice.

According to the newly released NSA tapes cited above, the Israelis
did not even realize that the USS Liberty was a legitimate US vessel
even after the attack!

This from other NSA recorded intelligence!



So all the idiotic conspiratorial speculation is nonsense.



Aside from the fact that Israel had nothing to gain from the attack
on US sailors and much to lose by harming their friends and allies,
they did not even know it was a US ship even after the attack was
over!

Absence of a "successful argument" of benefit is not absence of a benefit.

The israelis had captured several hundred - perhaps as many as a thousand - Egyptian prisoners of war, who were being held near the town of Al Arish.
Now, we (the USS Liberty) passed twelve miles off the coast of Al Arish - I think around ten o'clock that morning - and little did we know but it happens that they were lining up these prisoners, requiring them to dig their own graves in the desert sand and then they'd jump in and they'd - the israelis would machine gun them and then the next few prisoners would fill the hole in and dig their own.

It's funny that some of the israelis claim that that never happened. If it happened it would have been all over the newspapers.

Well, it was in all the newspapers, or at least it was in Time magazine and in US News and World Report and that story has been verified by a number of senior israeli military officers and reporters.

Today, Israel has utterly destroyed its hitherto untouchable image before the world to such a degree that nothing it can do will save it. All that remains for Israel to do is start digging.


http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/806

Almost forty years ago, the world stood by as Israelis forced 1000 Egyptian POWs to dig their own graves in the Sinai desert and to jump into them before they machine-gunned them down.

Terrorists, mass murderers.

Do you really want to defend that?

One of the most bold theories was presented by Peter Hounam in his 2003 book “Operation Cyanide”. Hounam argues that the attack was probably planned a year earlier by U.S. and Israeli authorities.

“The attack on the Liberty was pre-planned, perhaps from at least a year beforehand,” Mr Hounam says. “The Liberty was sent into a very dangerous situation, where it was, in my view, placed in a position to be attacked”.

Mr Hounam believes that the motive was to sink the Liberty and kill everyone on board, but as the ship remained afloat the plan was cancelled and has been covered up ever since.

One of the most powerful assertions of a cover-up also came from retired U.S. Navy lawyer Capt Ward Boston, counsel to the Navy Court of Inquiry into the incident conducted just days after the attack. Capt. Boston asserts that the court’s original findings, which he signed, were changed afterwards by government lawyers. He also says that the president of the court, Rear Adm Isaac Kidd, told him he was ordered by U.S. President Lyndon Johnson and Defence Secretary Robert McNamara to conclude the attack was a case of mistaken identity.

With all the conflicting theories, the USS Liberty attack remains one of the most investigated yet unresolved cases in the history of wars. The families of the American servicemen killed in that attack may never know why their loved ones died!

My goodness...that is quite shocking.

First time reading about that....wow.


That is quite difficult to take in

I think I saw a movie once were the Nazis did the exact same thing.........