Posted on 04/15/2002 12:23:49 PM PDT by Republican_Strategist
The Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was a grievous error, largely attributable to the fact that it occurred in the midst of the confusion of a full-scale war in 1967. Ten official United States investigations and three official Israeli inquiries have all conclusively established the attack was a tragic mistake.
Investigation - Date - Conclusion
1)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.
2)CIA Report June 13, 1967 The attack was not made in malice and was a mistake.
3)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.
4)Clifford Report July 18, 1967 No premeditation, but "inexcusable failures" by Israeli forces constituing "gross negligence."
5)Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 1967 Secretary of Defense McNamara testified he supported conclusion that the attack was not intentional.
6)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.
7)House Appropriations Committee April-May 1968 Navy communications "foulup" and no conclusion regarding Israeli actions. Much of report remains classified.
8)House Armed Services Committee May 10, 1971 Critical of Navy communications, no conclusion regarding Israeli actions.
9)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.
10)National Security Agency 1981 Liberty was mistaken for an Egyptian ship as a result of miscalculations and egregious errors.
11)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
1)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.
2)Preliminary Inquiry July 1967 There was no malicious intent and no deviation from the standard of reasonable conduct that would justify a court-martial.
3)IDF History 1982 The attack was a result of an "innocent error."
On June 8, 1967, the fourth day of the Six-Day War, the Israeli high command received reports that Israeli troops in El Arish were being fired upon from the sea, presumably by an Egyptian vessel, as they had a day before. The United States had announced that it had no Naval forces within hundreds of miles of the battle front on the floor of the United Nations a few days earlier; however, the USS Liberty, an American intelligence ship assigned to monitor the fighting, arrived in the area, 14 miles off the Sinai coast, as a result of a series of United States communication failures, whereby messages directing the ship not to approach within 100 miles were not received by the Liberty. The Israelis mistakenly thought this was the ship doing the shelling and war planes and torpedo boats attacked, killing 34 members of the Liberty's crew and wounding 171.
Numerous mistakes were made by both the United States and Israel. For example, the Liberty was first reported — incorrectly, as it turned out — to be cruising at 30 knots (it was later recalculated to be 28 knots). Under Israeli (and U.S.) naval doctrine at the time, a ship proceeding at that speed was presumed to be a warship. The day fighting began, Israel had asked that American ships be removed from its coast or that it be notified of the precise location of U.S. vessels. The Sixth Fleet was moved because President Johnson feared being drawn into a confrontation with the Soviet Union. He also ordered that no aircraft be sent near Sinai.
According to Israeli Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin's memoirs, there were standing orders to attack any unidentified vessel near the shore. The sea was calm and the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry found that the Liberty's flag was very likely drooped and not discernible; moreover, members of the crew, including the Captain, Commander William McGonagle, testified that the flag was knocked down after the first or second assault.
A CIA report on the incident issued June 13, 1967, also found that an overzealous pilot could mistake the Liberty for an Egyptian ship, the El Quseir. After the air raid, Israeli torpedo boats identified the Liberty as an Egyptian naval vessel. When the Liberty began shooting at the Israelis, they responded with the torpedo attack, which killed 28 of the sailors.
The argument that the attack was a tragic mistake is further reinforced by a new biography of Yitzhak Rabin (Dan Kurzman, Soldier of Peace: The Life of Yitzhak Rabin. NY: HarperCollins, 1998), who was Israel's Chief of Staff during the war, which says the Israelis initially were terrified that they had attacked a Soviet ship and might have provoked the Soviets to join the fighting. The Israelis were relieved when they learned it was an American ship, though Rabin remained concerned the mistake might jeopardize American support for Israel.
Once the Israelis were sure what had happened, they reported the incident to the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv and offered to provide a helicopter for the Americans to fly out to the ship and any help they required to evacuate the injured and salvage the ship. The offer was accepted and a U.S. naval attaché was flown to the Liberty.
Many of the survivors of the Liberty remain bitter, and are convinced the attack was deliberate as they make clear on their web site. In 1991, columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak trumpeted their discovery of an American who said he had been in the Israeli war room when the decision was made to knowingly attack the American ship. In fact, that individual, Seth Mintz, wrote a letter to the Washington Post on November 9, 1991, in which he said he was misquoted by Evans and Novak and that the attack, was, in fact, a "case of mistaken identity." Moreover, the man who Mintz originally said had been with him, a Gen. Benni Matti, does not exist.
Also, contrary to claims that an Israeli pilot identified the ship as American on a radio tape, no one has ever produced this tape. In fact, the only tape in existence is the official Israeli Air Force tape, which clearly established that no such identification of the ship was made by the Israeli pilots prior to the attack. It also indicates that once the pilots became concerned about the identity of the ship, by virtue of reading its hull number, they terminated the attack. The tapes do not contain any statement suggesting the pilots saw a U.S. flag before the attack.
None of Israel's accusers can explain why Israel would deliberately attack an American ship at a time when the United States was Israel's only friend and supporter in the world. Confusion in a long line of communications, which occurred in a tense atmosphere on both the American and Israeli sides (five messages from the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the ship to remain at least 25 miles — the last four said 100 miles — off the Egyptian coast arrived after the attack was over) is a more probable explanation.
Accidents caused by “friendly fire” are common in wartime. In 1988, the U.S. Navy mistakenly downed an Iranian passenger plane, killing 290 civilians. During the Gulf War, 35 of the 148 Americans who died in battle were killed by “friendly fire.” In April 1994, two U.S. Black Hawk helicopters with large U.S. flags painted on each side were shot down by U.S. Air Force F-15s on a clear day in the “no fly” zone of Iraq, killing 26 people. In fact, the day before the Liberty was attacked, Israeli pilots accidentally bombed one of their own armored columns south of Jenin on the West Bank.
Retired Admiral, Shlomo Erell, who was Chief of the Navy in Israel in June 1967, told the Associated Press (June 5, 1977): “No one would ever have dreamt that an American ship would be there. Even the United States didn't know where its ship was. We were advised by the proper authorities that there was no American ship within 100 miles.”
Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara told Congress on July 26, 1967: “It was the conclusion of the investigatory body, headed by an admiral of the Navy in whom we have great confidence, that the attack was not intentional.”
In 1987, McNamara repeated his belief that the attack was a mistake, telling a caller on the “Larry King Show” that he had seen nothing in the 20 years since to change his mind that there had been no “coverup.”
Israel apologized for the tragedy and paid nearly $13 million in humanitarian reparations to the United States and to the families of the victims in amounts established by the U.S. State Department. The matter was officially closed between the two governments by an exchange of diplomatic notes on December 17, 1987.
Sure. Doesn't mean that they broke them out into clear text, though.
True enough. But see my next comment.
They never even considered the real explanation, that their cypher had been broken. Wouldn't surprise me if the Gestapo roughed up a lot of French civilians in those harbor towns. They were acting on the basis of speculation about the source of knowledge of enemy forces.
However, Allied operations research specialists ALWAYS figured out that we were breaking the U-Boat traffic--because our time/position data were far too precise (and could be demonstrated to be so using some fairly simple mathematics) to be the mere product of spies or HF/DF--obviously, we were reading the Germans' own daily position reports.
And a similar analysis would be made. For real-time intel on a fast-moving situation in 1967, your enemy's source must be COMINT--and the only noteworthy COMINT platform was the Liberty.
You've only given the same sort of speculation here.
The final piece of the puzzle: the Egyptians threw in the towel immediately after the attack was announced to the world.
In the hypothetical example I gave, if the Mexican forces in your AOR surrendered immediately after you attacked the Israeli AGI, would you then conclude that you were probably correct in doing so?
If the NSA had come up with a slightly more plausible cover story, or the crew of the Liberty less eager to drink the NSA's cover-up Kool-Aid, I'd be less inclined to speculate about the NSA's motives and far more inclined to believe that it was merely the dastardly Israelis.
As for tenders and other "non-combatant" ships, in times of war they're better targets than the warships. About the only thing protected by international law between warring parties is hospital ships.
I just saw a History Channel documentary on the U.S.S. Liberty, and I have to say, being the daughter of a Navy man (PhM2c) my heart goes out to our very credible sailors who were under attack that day.
Not only was our flag flying, but our guys tried to signal they were Americans - only to endure an attack from the air, followed by torpedos, punctuated by the Israelis machine-gunning their life boats. The Americans waited for air support, but it was called off by Washington.
I can't imagine the horror. Thank God the ship did not sink.
If you're ever curious and you want to know more, the survivors have a website here.
I'm pro-Israel, but I do believe our guys, and it makes me sick that this incident has never properly been addressed. After hearing what those Americans present had to say, it's very difficult to believe this was any kind of accident.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.