Former Chief Navy Counsel Alleges Cover-Up by LBJ of 1967 Israeli Attack on U.S. Ship

AP ^

[TheOtherOne]

Not that I like reading about the Liberty incident on FR, but this was news on the topic.

[MEG33]

Ping

[Thud]

ping

[Elkhound4]

this needs to be independently investigated by someone without a political agenda.

[marktwain]

One of the most shameful incidents in this country's history. But, what the heck, GI's were cheap in those days, why would LBJ care about 34 more dead after squandering thousands in Viet Nam?

Some people have asserted that he had a lot of practice in covering things up from the Kennedy assassination.

[okiedog]

Yesterday an army general was criticised for speaking honestly about his faith. Tomorrow this Navy Captain will be criticised for speaking honestly about his work. Thank God for Free Republic where honest comments can at least be heard and even appreciated.

[rmlew]

Well of course it was a cover up, or at least a dowplaying.
Otherwise they might have had to investigate why the NSA ordered a defenseless ship into a war zone after the US promised to withdraw all ships and after the administration refsued Israel's request of the Naval liason.

[TheOtherOne]

He said he felt compelled to "share the truth" following the publication of a recent book, "The Liberty Incident," which concluded the attack was unintentional.

After saying he kept quite do to his duty, this seems like a soft reason to speak now. It is not like the idea that the incident was unintentional was just brought forward now -so I am curious: why is he speaking now?

[nkycincinnatikid]

bump

[Pharmboy]

We need you folks to liven up this thread.

[okiedog]

Otherwise they might have had to investigate why the NSA ordered a defenseless ship into a war zone after the US promised to withdraw all ships and after the administration refsued Israel's request of the Naval liason.

Excuse me ? So this is reason for "our closest ally in the middle east" to attack Americans ? We should have counter- attacked the ungrateful bastards with our own air strike.

[dix]

This Liberty thing just won't quit stinking.

[Starwolf]

While not exactly independent, the book "Attack on the Liberty" was a very interesting read.

[zchip]

so I am curious: why is he speaking now?

Enough time has passed now and the Admiral is probably more comfortable in sharing his knowledge. As more time passes, and the people involved in the incident become deceased, we may even find out the real reason why Israel chose to try and sink The Liberty with all hands.

[Dr.Zoidberg]

No such animal.

[okiedog]

After saying he kept quite do to his duty, this seems like a soft reason to speak now. It is not like the idea that the incident was unintentional was just brought forward now -so I am curious: why is he speaking now?


Sometimes courage begets courage. And besides alot of Americans are getting fed up with Sharon and his party's arrogance toward the hand that feeds them.

[BrooklynGOP]

Investigations of the Liberty Tragedy

---

The tragic Israeli attack on the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967, has provoked a great deal of controversy and longstanding anger among surviving members of the crew. Though residual anger and suspicions remain, the incident was the subject of ten U.S. investigations and three more by Israel. In the American case, the full weight of the U.S. government was behind the investigations, which had access to all the relevant information. Though some accusations have been made suggesting the reports sough to hide facts or protect Israel, no credible evidence for these charges has been produced. Moreover, if the investigatory bodies had a bias, it was far more likely to be against Israel. Here is a summary of the investigations and their conclusions:

Investigation	Date	Conclusion
U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry	June 10-18, 1967	The attack was a case of mistaken identity. Calm conditions and slow ship speed may have made American flag difficult to identify. No indication the attack was intended against U.S. ship.
CIA Report	June 13, 1967	The attack was not made in malice and was a mistake.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Fact Finding Team (Russ Report)	June 9-20, 1967	Outlined "findings of fact," bud did not make any findings about the actual attack.
Clifford Report	July 18, 1967	No premeditation, but "inexcusable failures" by Israeli forces constituing "gross negligence."
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations	1967	Secretary of Defense McNamara testified he supported conclusion that the attack was not intentional.
Senate Armed Services Committee	Feb. 1, 1968	No conclusion. Secretary McNamara makes comparison of attack on Liberty to that on Pueblo with regard to uncertainty about what was happening at the time of the incident.
House Appropriations Committee	April-May 1968	Navy communications "foulup" and no conclusion regarding Israeli actions. Much of report remains classified.
House Armed Services Committee	May 10, 1971	Critical of Navy communications, no conclusion regarding Israeli actions.
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence	1979	Responding to critical book by Liberty crewman James Ennes, Senate investigation found no merit to his claim attack was intentional.
National Security Agency	1981	Liberty was mistaken for an Egyptian ship as a result of miscalculations and egregious errors.
House Armed Services Committee	June 1991	Responding to request from Liberty Veterans Association, Subcommitte on Investigations launched probe that concluded there was no evidence to support allegations made by the Association and no reason for further investigation.

Israeli Investigations

Investigation	Date	Conclusion
Ram Ron Commission	June 12, 1967	The attack was made "neither maliciously nor in gross negligence, but as the result of a bona fide mistake. Also notes that the Liberty made a mistake as well by carelessly approaching a war area.
Preliminary Inquiry	July 1967	There was no malicious intent and no deviation from the standard of reasonable conduct that would justify a court-martial.
IDF History	1982	The attack was a result of an "innocent error."

 

---

Source: A.J. Cristol, "The Liberty Incident," Ph.D. dissertation, University of Miami, 1997, pp. 86-113.

[rmlew]

Excuse me ? So this is reason for "our closest ally in the middle east" to attack Americans ? We should have counter- attacked the ungrateful bastards with our own air strike.
Why should the Israelis have thought it to be an American ship?
The ship was hailed but refused to identify itself. It was patrolling a warzone, near Soviet spy ships?
Why didn't our administration, Navy, or State Department inform Israel that there would be American ships covertly operating in a region we had promised Israel we would not be?
Why didn't we provide a Naval liason?

Either the we were spying on Israel, or this was a huge SNAFU.

[rmlew]

Sink it with all hands?
They Napalmed the ship. They did not lanch a full air strike. Israel could easily have sunk it and killed everyone. Instead they tried to render assistance once teh US informed them of teh ship.
Personally, I want the idiot at the NSA shot.