Cover-Up Alleged in Probe of USS Liberty

keith,

There - thats it.

All I have done is pointed out the numerous flaws, if not actual inventions, in your posts and thats the result, the last resort of someone who clearly cannot accept that the lies (which is what they are - an honest person would have admitted their mistake ages ago) they have posted have been found out.

Perhaps you could show me where on this thread I have been antisemitic?

Not that I'll hold my breath, because people who make those slanders dont have the ability or the character to answer that honestly.

a monumental system error on the part of the Israelis

Click to expand...

In my limited IDF experience, that is indeed possible. I continously wonder how the IDF continues doing so much blatantly dumb s and still winning conflicts.

Keith,

I agree about the fog of war. And I've read "On War."

I just don't think it's very applicable when you're shooting at an "enemy" that is not returning fire, is in visual range, you're doing it at close range over a period of hours, the target is broadcasting in a different language than the enemy, and you have pilots and others who understand both languages.

By the way, I supported Israel both then and now. I don't have an explanation for this event. But the Israelis' explanation doesn't hold water.
It would explain firing a ship killing missile. It doesn't explain an attack over this time frame.

I can understand screwing up by the numbers. I can't understand it under the circumstances that existed.

I just don't think it's very applicable when you're shooting at an "enemy" that is not returning fire, is in visual range, you're doing it at close range over a period of hours,

Click to expand...

I have no idea where you got the idea that the Liberty didn't return fire. They certainly did.
And there is no way to tell an American vessel from an Egyptian vessel other than by the flag. Of course, any vessel can raise any flag they wish - the signal locker is full of them even if you could identify it in the heat of battle. And of course, at some point (accounts vary) the flag was shot down anyway.

You're buying the tinfoil hat conspiracy instead looking into what actually happened.

Keith

All I have done is pointed out the numerous flaws, if not actual inventions, in your posts

Click to expand...

No, all you've done is post almost exactly what I said (in slightly different language), from other sources and then picked nits about the details between how I stated it and how they stated it.

You seem unable (or unwilling) to grasp the important facts here.

Perhaps you could show me where on this thread I have been antisemitic?

Click to expand...

Is this another attempt to change the subject? It won't work.

I'm still waiting for you to show evidence for several statements you've made. You need to show evidence that anti-ship missiles were fired from the aircraft and that the Israeli government plotted to attack the American navy other than to cover up their "Nazi-like atrocities" elsewhere.

Keith

I know! I know! The evil Israelis did it to cover up their Jenin massacre, 30+ years in the future!

It makes perfect sense. Israel attacked a ship belonging to one of its closest allies in order to ... well I'll think of something. It's gotta be a really, really cunning Jewish plot.

keith,

so when you said:

This is what I mean about your steadfast refusal to acknowledge any fact in the case that disproves your "cabal of evil Jews" theory.

Click to expand...

you werent making any accusations of antisemitism

All I have done is shown your statements are factually wrong, which they have been and continue to be, and remind you that you have corrected none of them.

Why would I have to demonstrate the presence of ASM? In any case, the Israelis already had weapons systems capable of sinking the Liberty - the torpedo-boats - within range (indeed they were the primary response to the Liberty), and they indeed would have sank her but for better marksmanship (they fired five torpedoes at her).

As I said before, the evidence in the public domain points to one of two conclusions - either a deliberate attack, or an immense failure at many levels of the Israeli military system. The survivors seem to believe that it was a deliberate attack, and there appears to have been no court-martial of those responsible for the system failure. Either way justice does not appear to have been done.

But I digress. Keith remains unwilling to debate at a rational level.

OK, the Liberty returned fire.

Tell me...what were the number of casualties on the Israeli side? How many aircraft and torpedo boats were damaged? How many destroyed?

Must have been a very large number to account for the way the fog of war kept the attack going for how many hours?

I'm SHOCKED! SHOCKED! I tell you;

that Agricola and I are on the same side of any question, but he does seem to support, and agree with, the unanimous opinions and accounts from Liberty's survivors, which I believe.

A personal sentiment: "Fog of War", "Realpolitik", and "Reasons of State" might be said by some to excuse most of the business, but shooting up the life-rafts, IMHO, definitely crossed the line separating all of us nice people from murder and piracy!

All I have done is shown your statements are factually wrong, which they have been and continue to be, and remind you that you have corrected none of them. ..Why would I have to demonstrate the presence of ASM?..

Click to expand...

Because that is the heart of what you claim is "factually wrong". If the initial attacks were not with Anti-Ship Missiles, then it was hardly a planned and deliberate attack.

As I said before, the evidence in the public domain points to one of two conclusions - either a deliberate attack, or an immense failure at many levels of the Israeli military system.

Click to expand...

I fail to see how any rational person could reach either conclusion. If it was a delibarate attack, they would have been armed with anti-ship missiles. If it was an "immense failure" then that would have revolved around someone knowing that the US would violate the 100 mile fire zone.
Did anyone inform the Israeli's we would violate the zone? No, there are no such claims... so, where is the failure?

Keith

Must have been a very large number to account for the way the fog of war kept the attack going for how many hours?

Click to expand...

Think about it. If it had been a planned and deliberate attack, don't you think they could have sunk that lightly armed vessel pretty quickly? The aircraft were not properly armed for such a mission - they kept diverting them from ground attacks to hit this vessel offshore...
Do you understand? A planned attack would have simply launched a couple of properly armed planes right off, and sunk the ship with one strike.

Keith

keith,

There was no internationally declared maritime exclusion zone as the evidence shows (and, as you have changed your previous statement, even you recognize this), the Liberty was known to be in the area by at least part of the Israeli Navy and was repeatedly identified before and during the engagement, and noone acted on this information.

Secondly an ASM is not required to "prove" a deliberate act (indeed, the random firing of one might well suggest an accident rather than a deliberate act). One might also point out that the Israeli Air Force may not have had a dedicated ASM at the time (the Gabriel missile was not used until 1973 and was just ship-to-ship at that time) that could be carried by the Mirage III and Super-Mystere aircraft used.

As Byron notes, there are mulitple points at which someone should have called this correctly, and yet they didnt. The only conclusions that are a large number of people / systems messed up big time, or that this was done deliberately. As I have said twice, the survivors seem to hold to the latter view. They were there, I wasnt and you werent.

There was no internationally declared maritime exclusion zone as the evidence shows

Click to expand...

Who cares? There was no "Internationally Declared Air Exclusion Zone" over Bosnia, but if a neutral nation would have flown a war plane into the war zone it would have been vaporized in short order. It's only Euro blissninnies that think wars need be approved by the UN.
The combatants declared it a war zone and that's all that matters.

Secondly an ASM is not required to "prove" a deliberate act

Click to expand...

Right, the cabal of evil generals plotted to sink an American ship and then sent planes armed with weapons incapable of sinking a ship... Try again.

As Byron notes, there are mulitple points at which someone should have called this correctly, and yet they didnt.

Click to expand...

Really? At what points? Did any US sources inform the Israel government that a US ship was violating the 100 mile free fire zone? That's the only thing that would have stopped the battle and since it didn't happen, there was no way for anyone to "call this correctly".

Keith

keith,

you keep citing this "100 mile free fire zone" and yet there doesnt seem to be any evidence for that. do you have any evidence?

also, the aircraft were assigned to slow the ship down so the torpedo boats could close and torpedo it - as is clear from th evidence shown.

stop the continual strawmanning please.

you keep citing this "100 mile free fire zone" and yet there doesnt seem to be any evidence for that. do you have any evidence?

Click to expand...

You've already posted that - go back and read your own notes.

also, the aircraft were assigned to slow the ship down so the torpedo boats could close and torpedo it - as is clear from th evidence shown.

Click to expand...

Right! The plan was for the aircraft to leave their bombs back at base, and simply strafe the ship, so some little boats could close in under fire and launch torpedoes...
And whose plan was that? The Three Stooges?

Keith

keith,

No - the Liberty was ordered to withdraw 100 miles by the JCS, not because of an exclusion-zone, as I and the evidence said.

Also, as you know and the evidence shows, the Mirage fighters did bomb the Liberty and did slow it down so the torpedo-boats could sink it. It wasnt that much of a three-stooges plan because it would worked if the torpedos had hit home.

this is becoming tiresome, especially now your trying to tell me what I have written. You have no evidence for your fibs at all, do you?

No - the Liberty was ordered to withdraw 100 miles by the JCS, not because of an exclusion-zone, as I and the evidence said.

Click to expand...

You posted the following:

"Yitzhak Rabin, informed the U.S. Naval Attaché in Tel Aviv, Cmdr. Ernest Carl Castle, that Israel would defend its coast with every means at its disposal. Unidentified vessels would be sunk, Rabin advised; the United States should either acknowledge its ships in the area or remove them.15 Nonetheless, the Americans provided Israel with no information on the Liberty."

You seem to be easily confused and lost in trivia. Whether the Israeli government used the term "exclusion zone" or not is hardly pertinent. YOU posted that Israel warned the US about the zone and the US failed to inform them they were sending a vessel in. It doesn't make any sense for you to deny posting this information when we can just go back and see what you posted - I can only conclude that this is mental confusion on your part rather than an attempt to deceive...

Keith

i dont see mention of 100 miles there keith......... try again.

also keith, the reason I posted that - which I agree with btw - was because you had made yet another factual error when you claimed:

Do you acknowledge that the US had assured the Israelis (and Egyptians) that no US vessels would enter the war zone?

Click to expand...

which is clearly, and demonstrably (since you now cite it as fact) wrong. The US told noone its business (as indeed as is its right, as it also is its right to sail wherever it pleases in international waters), and in any case the Israeli Navy had identified the Liberty correctly shortly afterwards. Rabin said "Unidentified vessels would be sunk", and since Libertywas identified the point is moot.

work beckons now, so my reply to your next post will be late. However for those who cannot wait Keith will almost certainly make another factual error, refuse to correct his statements and then make up something he thinks I am saying and then counter it. There is a 10% chance of implied antisemitism.

It gets tiresome re-posting your own stuff...

Perhaps you should have some coffee (or tea?) and go back and read your own notes and then start again fresh!

Keith

<returning from the nuker with a new bag of popcorn>

OK, guys, resume firing!

NO! Not at the liferafts!

Keith,

I don't think you are quite getting my point of view. I'm not necessarily saying it was a deliberate attack...they could have well screwed up by the numbers.


I am saying that the Israelis' explanation of how that accident did happen is pure, 100%, unadulterated bull.

byron,

Keith does realise that the official opinion is bull, which is why he has behaved as he has on this thread.

Consider the source for this piece, please:

http://www.commondreams.org/