The U.S.S. Liberty for One Last Time was a mistake!

Jewish Virtual Library ^ | 4-15-02

[Poohbah]

If such messages were broadcast by the Egyptians, surely the Israelis monitored them.

Sure. Doesn't mean that they broke them out into clear text, though.

[Poohbah]

Ever see the movie Das Boot? Because the allies obviously knew where German submarines were sailing, the Germans became convinced French spies in their home baxes like La Rochelle were tipping the allies off.

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.

[Ten Megaton Solution]

I don't care if the USS Nimitz was in the area, it was a non-combatant vessel. A vessel from a neutral nation with proper flagging in international waters can only be considered a combatant if it is taking hostile action. Duh.

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.

[jo6pac]

I have no idea if oaths were broken. A congressional investigation would discover whether this had occurred, though.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Fancy meeting you here. I'm a little late to this party, but I feel like I have to jump in here.

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.

[LarryLied]

The arrogance of the denials is what rubs me wrong. This isn't the only case either. I've read Israeli sites which give the "history" of the Lavon Affair and do not even mention that U.S. facilities were the target.