Israel blamed for USS Liberty attack

Washington Times ^ | 1/13/04 | Nicholas Kralev

[kattracks]

The U.S. government has not reached a definitive conclusion on whether Israel deliberately attacked the USS Liberty in 1967, but it appears that the Jewish state is guilty of "gross negligence," a State Department official said yesterday.

The United States was negligent, too, the official noted, for failing to inform Israel that the Navy spy ship was in international waters off the Egyptian coast and for keeping the vessel in the region, even though the six-day Arab-Israeli war had just broken out.

[freedom44]

It's been 25 years.. let it go..

[freedom44]

37 years.. even worse.. ;)

[GunRunner]

Somebody call Charley Reese and A+Bert.

[risk]

Why is the Washington Times bringing this up again now? Is it too hard to imagine that with Egyptian shelling from the sea in days before, slack winds hiding the ship's flag, and Washington refusing to acknowledge the ship's presence that a blue on blue attack couldn't have happend?

[GunRunner]

Not to mention the lack of a motive for the Israelis to attack an American ship.

[suekas]

Israel purposely attacked the liberty, because, the Liberty was monitoring the Israelly radio. Israel pretentened to be vulnerable, and loosing, so Jordan and Syria would attack. They could then prerform a land grab (west bank and gaza strip). The US was witness to their communications, therefore, had to be destroyed.

[risk]

Anti-semitic conspiracy theorists have no lack of motives to proffer.

[GunRunner]

That's great and all, but you still didn't suggest a motive.

[DeuceTraveler]

I'm not for letting anything go until a certain level of justice is reached. The whole incident just seems incredibly suspicious and the men on that ship believe they were attacked on purpose.

[DeuceTraveler]

"You make it sound like you think people will die unless the truth comes out."

No, but those that died are owed more than a shrug on both sides and a few million dollars changing hands.

[leadpenny]

Coming up at 5:01 Eastern from yesterday on C-SPAN2:

C-SPAN Schedule

Forum

1967 Arab-Israeli War
Department of State
Washington, District of Columbia (United States)
ID: 179892 - 01/12/2004 - 2:55 - $90.00

Satterfield, David, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Department of State, Near Eastern Affairs

A day-long conference on the 1967 Arab-Israeli War will feature panels on “War, Intelligence, and the USS Liberty,” “Origins of the War: The International Perspective,” and “Johnson’s Foreign Policy and the Middle East Crisis.”

[risk]

Israel pretentened to be vulnerable, and loosing, so Jordan and Syria would attack.

As if they weren't planning to attack all along? As if it weren't coordinated in advance? I don't believe that. Prove your insinuation with facts. History doesn't support your assertions.

CNN article.

Some more likely reasons for asserting Israel's attack are suggested by the ADL.

[leadpenny]

Sorry, I can't get the Forum link to work now but if you click on that item in the schedule, it is what you should get.

[The Westerner]

lol

[KC_Conspirator]

Hey look, there are some that are anti-semitic that love to point out the deliberate attack on the Liberty. However, most of the Liberty crew, including Jews, want an explanation why an ally attacked our ship and killed our sailors - ally or not. There are people like me who think its long overdue and I am about a big a Zionist as it gets on this board.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I believe they're bringing it up so that it can be put to rest once and for all. I myself, believe it was a mere error in judgement, considering Israel was threatened from all sides at that time, and in some ways, still are.

[risk]

The U.S.-Israel alliance (the one where they get all the benefits and we get all the bills and the enmity of Al-Qaeda) didn't really become an ironclad entity until Nixon's assistance to Israel during the Yom Kippur War of 1973...

And how do you know this?

[KC_Conspirator]

Good find man! I bet that the State Department is trying to sew the seeds of argument because they just hate our relationship with Isreal.

[risk]

I'm not saying more information won't be forthcoming in the future or that we shouldn't ever ask for it again. It's how this story is being used on indymedia.org and elsewhere that matters.

[GunRunner]

The assertion that the Liberty was attacked for being a listening post was based on the assumption that the Israelis were planning a "land grab" by luring Jordan into the war with the facade that the Arabs were winning. This totally discounts the fact that Eshkol sent word to King Hussein that Israel would not attack Jordan unless they Jordan struck first.

It also doesn't seem likely that the Israelis would attack the number one enemy of the Soviets, who supplied the Arab armies with their weaponery.

[GunRunner]

And I'm sure our support of Israel has nothing to do with their system of government vs. the Arab authoritarians. </sarcasm>

[BigSkyFreeper]

Absolutely, they were disposing of the evidence. /sarcasm

[risk]

...putting an end to a despicable cover-up OR Israeli government propaganda. Take your pick. I'm going with the former.

False dichotomy: you are offering and either-or scenario when other reasonable explanations have been offered and accepted by both sides.

[GunRunner]

I guess he forgot that the ship wasn't sunk, but coasted on fumes to Malta.

[risk]

Perhaps I'm just not sufficiently well-versed in the Six Days War

So we are to simply accept your expertise in the matter without any proof? With America's involvement in the establishment of Israel, you really have not given us any support for your opinion.

you'll have to forgive me for regarding them as a less than entirely credible source....

Take the arguments one at a time and dismiss them on their own merit. Arguments stand on their own. You're arguing that Israel attacked the USS Liberty with intended malice, but you haven't even begun to prove it.

[rmlew]

Are you suggesting that the Israelis chose to attack an American ship in a haphazard manner, ensuring that it not only survived but passed on news of the attack?

The IDF air force had just destroyed the UAR's air force. They were more than competent enopugh to hit a ship with armor-peircing weapons to sink it. They did not do so, because jets were diverted from land attack missions.
Everyone screwed up here, including the NSA which put a ship into a war zone, after we promised to withdraw all ships. The Johnson administration screwed up by refusing na Israeli request for a naval liason. (You know, the person who could have prevented the attack?!)
The IDF screwed up by lossing track of a neutral ship and then freaking out when an unidentified ship was found.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I'm not aware if the Israelis ever apologized for this or not, but my gut instinct tells me that it was merely an error in judgement. Like I said before, and looking at the map, that whole region has been a tenuous situation for decades, no matter how much the conspiracy theorists or anti-semites try to spin it. If the Israelis have apologized for it, personally I'm satisfied to that end. It just seems that every message board I go to, the anti-semites seem to use this incident as a means to justify our involvement and friendly relations with Israel in that region of the world.

[rmlew]

Hi Newbie. i hope you care about other issues.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I'm in no means minimizing our losses. Errors happen during conflicts.

[rmlew]

Sorry, but the Muslim Brotherhood hated the US as far back as 1956. Look up Said Qutb.

The Islamists are open about their goals, just as Hitler was.

[rmlew]

Are you suggesting that the US did not purposely kill some Canadian troops in Afghanistan? /sarcasm
Some people refuse to admit that Blue on Blue and Blue on green attacks happen in war. The newbie (who will no doubt say something overtly anti-Semitic if pressed), should look up the concept of "fog of war."

[Cronos]

Oh, I'm not going to repeat just post a link
more moonloon talk

[BigSkyFreeper]

Or the definition of "friendly fire"

[risk]

The Stalinoids and assorted members of the Pan-Sexual Peace Party over at Indymedia are hardly relevant to anything.

Except that they are saying exactly the same thing: because Isreal supposedly knowingly attacked the USS Liberty with malice and aforethought for (random reasons, all unprovable and conspiratorial) we shouldn't trust Israel as an ally.

If you don't want to allign yourself with the Stalinists, why don't you discuss our present day interests and how they might differ or remain in common with Israel?

If we didn't have a strategic and ideological commonality with Israel we would neither have helped to reestablish it as a state nor would we have offered it our support over the decades since its establishment as a modern state.

So what is your agenda besides tearing down an alliance because it happens to be with Jews?