The Truth about the USS Liberty

In response to the presentation on Tuesday October 30th 2002 of the documentary “The Loss of Liberty” by the Council for the National Interest Connecticut, it is my duty to present the real facts concerning the Liberty incident.

The first question one should ask is who exactly are these documentary sponsors? Well after researching the organization on their website (http://www.cnionline.org/) I concluded that the Council for the National Interest is nothing more than an anti-Israeli organization which also shows tendencies of being anti-Semitic. Here are some excerpts from different Middle East articles, written by them, on their website:

1) "The State of Israel was founded 54 years ago to provide a "home" for a people who had been rejected, uprooted, tortured, maimed and expelled by Europe. Did any of us living then think that the Jews would do the same to their hosts in the "homeland," and reject, uproot, torture, maim and expel their Palestinian neighbors? Whole Palestinian villages have been destroyed without a trace -- so that those villagers who left them in 1948 would never have a village to return to at a later date. Why does this sound familiar? Victims have become victimizers?" http://rescuemideastpolicy.com/ads/ad_1.html

2) "ISRAEL AND PALESTINE: WHOSE EXISTENCE IS REALLY IN DANGER?" http://rescuemideastpolicy.com/ads/ad_2.html

3) "The State of Israel was founded 54 years ago to provide a “home” for a people who had been rejected, uprooted, tortured, maimed and expelled by Europe. Did anyone think that Jews would do the same to the Palestinian people who were already living there?" "From 1947-1949, Israel rejected, uprooted, tortured, maimed and expelled the Palestinian population. Israel destroyed over 415 Palestinian villages, along with their churches and mosques, so that the Palestinian villagers could not return. Once Jews were victims of these atrocities, but it is clear that the Jewish victims in Israel have become victimizers of the Palestinians." "In 1967, Israel invaded the rest of historical Palestine: the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. The UN has repeatedly voted that Israel leave the Palestinian land and let the Palestinian people be free. Israel has refused, constantly violating international" "Discrimination and apartheid in Israel are striking. Christians and Muslims are not allowed to rent, buy or lease in 92% of Israel. Israel prohibits Palestinian Christians and Muslims from living in Jewish-only colonies." http://rescuemideastpolicy.com/ads/ad_3.html

4) "We the people of the United States challenge our Congress to confront Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his apartheid policy in the occupied Palestinian territories" http://rescuemideastpolicy.com/ads/ad_4.html Everyone already knows my views concerning Israel so there is really no need for me to bring up counter-points to combat these lies above.

But wait a minute, their website states that their organization is “striving for a balanced Middle East Policy.” Do the excerpts above show this?

As you can see, a biased and anti-Israeli organization presented this video. It was no surprise that an anti-Israeli documentary regarding the USS Liberty was aired, subsequently.

…dramatically proves, beyond any doubt, that the attack by Israel on June 8, 1967 against the U.S. naval intelligence gathering ship USS Liberty, in which 34 Americans were killed and 171 wounded, was deliberate…

… “Loss of Liberty” makes clear that then-President Lyndon Johnson conspired with Israel and its Israel-First supporters inside the U.S. government to support the “tragic accident” scheme.

In order to understand this issue one must understand the background information regarding this incident. In June 1967, a United States Ship, the Liberty, came too close to the coast of Israel. During those days Israel was in a state of war, warding off attacks of surrounding Arab states who were trying to destroy it. The US ambassador declared in the United Nations that no American ships were in the range of 400 miles from Israel. The National Security Agency, part of the ship’s command, was supposed to give timely orders to the USS Liberty to leave, however, these orders arrived days after the attack.

Eight days later, Israeli Air Force planes and boats attacked the ship, killing 34 and wounding 177. The ship did not sink, and slowly moved crippled to a nearby port. After the incident voices were heard: “Did Israel deliberately attack the USS Liberty?”

Here are the facts: Israel’s understanding was that there were no American ships less than 400 miles off its coast, and as she was at war with Egypt, enemy warships were the only ones thought to be off the coast of Israel. At the time the USS Liberty was bombed, there were explosions on the coast and Israeli command thought it was a naval bombardment from Egypt. It was then that Israel moved to attack what they believed to be an Egyptian ship.

In a bid to attack the ship, Israeli jets were scrambled to the area. The Israeli jets that attacked the Liberty were diverted from other targets, and consequently were armed with napalm rather than iron bombs. In a premeditated and deliberate attack meant to sink a ship, no aviator in the world would choose napalm over iron bombs. In the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor, for example, iron bombs sunk US battleships in minutes, and the Liberty, a converted freighter, was no battleship.

There were ten official US investigations (including five congressional investigations) that concluded there was never any evidence that the attack was made with knowledge that the target was a US ship. Furthermore they concluded that there was substantial evidence the attack was a tragic mistake caused by blunders of both the US and Israel. Seven US presidents, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton, have each accepted the conclusion that the attack was a tragic case of mistaken identity. Since the incident the haters of Israel have tried to use this event to try to pull America and Israel apart. This is nonetheless what this Council for the National Interest has tried to do with this presentation. Fortunately this conspiracy theory that this documentary presented on Tuesday at Cummings Center had few takers.

As you can see this documentary didn’t bring forward (1) the fact Israel mistakenly saw this ship as enemy, due to the state of war it was in and bombs shot out from the same area, (2) the US, days earlier, stated there were no ships within 400-miles radius which the Liberty was in, (3) the type of weapon Israel used to attack the ship was napalm, the wrong kind of weapon to use if one wanted to sink the ship(4) there were 10, including 5 congressional investigations, into the incident all concluding that the attack on the USS Liberty by Israel was a tragic mistake.

This incident should serve as a lesson to the Connecticut College administration and related offices in that it should be more vigilant in who it allows to rent its rooms. Making money is ok, but making money off these kinds of organizations is wrong. What’s next? A National Alliance meeting?

OK, so why the attack? You yourself said that the armament on the aircraft was wrong for the mission. So why did they use it? If this was a case of Israel mistaking the Liberty for some Egyptian horse freighter then why the need to napalm all the horsies? Was Israel afraid that the Egyptian cavalry was going to land behind their lines and charge the armored columns?

Your claim makes no sense. No ship, other than the Liberty, could have justified that snap decision to attack. An attack so spur of the moment that it was done with any available resource. Nothing Egypt had afloat could have posed such a threat as to justify such an immediate response. I'm sorry but Israel knews what she was attacking. She had to know, the IDF isn't stupid. I have no idea what Israel was afraid of and I doubt we ever will really know. But stop with the fairy tales.

Ok. There were explosions on the coast of Israel on the border with Egypt. Israel thought it was Egypt bombarding them and its troops. Its troops were at danger. So they diverted whatever forces they could to get rid of the enemy, even if it included napalm. They didn't know what the ship was carrying. All it knew was that it was in the tragectory of the bombs launched to where their troops were. So they sent whatever was in the area to go get it.

Please, I have over 20 years in the military here. I'm not naive. You're suggesting that Israel would pull close support aircraft off of strikes in support of their armored advance in order to fry a cattle barge. We're also talking two days into the war, here. What troops were left on the Israel-Egypt border for the ship to bombard? By this time they were half way to the Suez. Nothing the Egyptian navy could have done at this stage posed enough of a risk to the IDF to justify this kind of response. Any threat posed could have been dealt with solely by the Israeli Navy. Something about the situation demanded immediate response. What else could it have been if not the fear of what Liberty could uncover?

I'll be the first to admit that Liberty had no business being where she was. This was 1967 and United States support for Israel was not as clear and unconditional as it has since become. Israel had no idea what the U.S. was going to do with the intelligence it collected, for all they knew we would turn it over to Egypt. So they made their decision and followed up on it. So be it. But don't expect us to believe it was all an innocent mistake.

They say doesn't mean it happened. Being there doesn't mean anything. They were attacked right...but by being there one cannot prove that the attack was on purpose. The fact they say it was on purpose is just as trustful as someone saying that who was not on the ship in the first place.

Ennis has an anti-Israel agenda. You must remember that when you listen to him. Many of his points on Israel (not on the Liberty Incident) are basically the repeat of Arab propaganda.

There were troops on the Egyptian border, fighting off enemy troops and scouting the area, comeon. Not all aircraft were on bombing runs at the time. Some were just in the air, defending Israeli sky. "Halfway to suez" ? No wise military just blindly marches forward without leaving soldiers behind.

The threat was partially dealt with the Israeli Navy. I can find many instances the US military, in its fights against ships in times of war etc. , used the airforce to neutralize an enemy ship.

Not all aircraft were on bombing runs at the time. Some were just in the air, defending Israeli sky.

Any aircraft tasked with defending Israeli sky wouldn't be packing napalm, would they?

Your own words descrbe this as an emergency. An air strike that had to happen now, not an hour in the future. No time to wait on the Navy or to plan a strike with aircraft that could be loaded for the mission. It had to be made with whatever was available at that moment. Bombing an Egyptian auxiliary doesn't qualify for that kind of emergency. A couple of shells from a warship wouldn't qualify, either. In either of those cases there would be time to plan it properly and dispatch aircraft armed with missiles and bombs. Whatever the Israeli brass was worried about it had to be taken care of at that moment. And whatever it was, it was big. Bigger than these stories of executed POWs. So big it could justify the risks of striking and hopefully sinking an American ship. I have no idea what that was, and I doubt we'll ever know for sure.

I don’t have any great desire to reassess the USS Liberty in detail since it’s been done on FR once or twice already, and IMO in the end it’s a matter of whether one accepts Israel’s position. A couple of comments though.

Any aircraft tasked with defending Israeli sky wouldn't be packing napalm, would they?

The second flight of two Super-Mysteres (which carried napalm) were diverted while from the Mitla pass, air ground missions.

At the time of the air attacks (yes, according to Israel) the USS Liberty was mis-identified as an Egyptian destroyer which had shelled El-Arish, possibly in advance of an Egyptian landing. It was later re-mis-identified as a possible freighter or troop transport by the torpedo boats when they arrived on the scene.

We could argue forever whether they couda-shoulda made a proper id. But at the time Israel’s standing orders were to sink unidentified craft operating at 20 knots (2 knots beyond the Liberty’s max).

As an aside, the Israeli Navy at the time consisted of a couple of WWII destroyers, a couple of subs, and a handful of smaller craft. They were badly outclassed at sea by the Egyptians, who made no use of their advantage. Any threat from the sea would logically be met by the IAF, as it was in the few confrontations that occured in the Red Sea.

Yet the Israeli navy had no qualms about dispatching a couple of those smaller craft to torpedo Liberty. The Israeli Navy may have been the neglected stepchild of the IDF but it was far from being without resources.

Their first response was to send to torpedo boats, they simply arrived late. I was simply pointing out that given the seaborne mismatch, diversion of the IAF would be a logical response. Given the fact that Israel had upwards of 99% of their attack aircraft airborne simultaneously just a few days before, I’ve no doubt they would have sent everything they had against a known superior force at the time. And it’s significant in assessing the risk of an amphibious landing at the IDF’s flank at El-Arish while they were essentially mopping up at the canal and redeploying to Jordan. It would have been a brilliant move if Egypt could have brought it off, and while it may sound ridiculous to expect it of the Egyptians from today’s perspective, the IDF’s reputation was in the process of being made at the time.

None of which, of course, addresses the misidentifications, which is the crux of the problem. Either you believe the misidentification or you don’t.

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.