I probably should have added that I don’t think the Liberty was feeding information to Egypt. They were gathering information and feeding it back to the U.S.
So if the information was then passed on to the other side, that would have been on LBJ’s orders. In other words, if that’s what happened—and it’s not really certain—then the ship was put into an untenable position by their Commander in Chief.
Which is essentially also what LBJ did in Vietnam—putting troops into harm’s way while he micro-mis-managed the war. And they would have won it anyway, given the chance.
I read an interesting book about this about fifteen years ago. One theory was that they were attacked because they were where they could intercept Israeli comms and realise that not just the Egyptians were on the menu as they’d told Uncle Sam.
“I probably should have added that I don’t think the Liberty was feeding information to Egypt.”
I think the best possibility for that comes from some of the Liberty guys’ own mouths. The “no-explanation for Israeli motive” position is only satisfactory for anti-semites. Either the Israelis did it by mistake, or they did it for a reason. When the Liberty guys touch on that they often bring up Syria, like “they thought we would find out about the attack on Syria and stop them”. The biggest problem about this explanation is that it works better as a deflection. The ship was not near Syria, it was off the coast of Egypt. The Syria explanation is baloney. The Egypt explanation is plausible.
A friend got my interest in this years ago. When I asked “Why did they do it” he was stumped for an answer. But I learned there was a third answer beyond mistake or reason. That answer is because they are Jews. The answer which the Liberty nuts feel, but won’t say aloud. That’s why thier comments are often so dense or insinuating rather than direct.