Dead in the Water

[mysterious]

Video Documentary - Watch all of it to get the record straight!

Dead in the Water - Part 1
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5073.htm

Part 2
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5074.htm

Overwhelming evidence of how Israel conspired and took out USS Liberty intentionally and later cried and whined that it was just a 'bad mistake' and a case of mistaken indentity. USS Liberty crew members speak out with interviews from President Lyndon Johnson's Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara and former head of the Israeli navy Admiral Shlomo Errell. Note how blatantly McNamara denies about having any knowledge of N-tipped bombers dispatched to lay Cairo to ashes and then recalling them. Note how former Israeli Navy service men and US intelligence guys admit that they (Israelis) had identified the ship as "American" but still they were to attack and sink it. For those who live in a dellusional world of their own thinking that the USS Liberty case was a 'mistaken identity' scenario, a good reality check would do just fine! If America can make Libyans and others pay as well hold accountable for their intentional attacks on US targets, why not ask the Israelis to do the same for what they did to the USS Liberty? Hypocrisy just never ends and is the name of the game, I'd say. :cop

[tatra]

Assuming for the moment that it was no accident, why was the USS Liberty attacked?

[mysterious]

As far as my understanding goes, it was done so that the US would think that Egypt did it (which the US did think) and would react against Egypt; but instead of a normal response the US had dispatched nuclear armed bombers to lay Cairo to waste which obviously would've in turn effected Israel severly along with Egypt and so Israel who wasn't expecting such a retaliatory action, changed its mind and stopped the US onslaught before it even began by letting the Americans know that it was Israel's fault of mistaken identity (which meant Egypt was out of the scene) and so the bombers were called off. :smokingc:

[The Watcher]

it was the oly "intelligence" ship around at that time when israel attacked eqypt. yes, ISRAEL attacked eqypt not egypt attack israel.

[tatra]

it was the oly "intelligence" ship around at that time when israel attacked eqypt. yes, ISRAEL attacked eqypt not egypt attack israel.

C'mon Watcher, as if that is not in every history book....

On May 15, Egyptian president Nasser had ordered United Nations peacekeeping troops out of the Sinai Peninsula. By May 31, Egypt had moved 100,000 troops, 1,000 tanks, and 500 heavy guns into the Sinai. Soon after the UN departure, Nasser ordered a blockade of the Strait of Tiran. President Aref of Iraq on May 31, 1967 said "The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy, which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear—to wipe Israel off the map". By the time Israel launched its strike in June 1967, its neighbors had massed three times the number of israeli troops on israel's border.

If somebody wants to read about why Israel attacked, see the backgrounds to the conflict e.g. on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

[tatra]

As far as my understanding goes, it was done so that the US would think that Egypt did it (which the US did think) and would react against Egypt; but instead of a normal response the US had dispatched nuclear armed bombers to lay Cairo to waste which obviously would've in turn effected Israel severly along with Egypt and so Israel who wasn't expecting such a retaliatory action, changed its mind and stopped the US onslaught before it even began by letting the Americans know that it was Israel's fault of mistaken identity (which meant Egypt was out of the scene) and so the bombers were called off. :smokingc:

What was the USS Liberty doing there that was so important to warrent such a response by the US to what they initially perceived as an egyptian strike?

[mysterious]

You're asking the 'wrong' questions. The thread is about discussing the extent of deliberation in the Israeli attack on USS Liberty, not what the USS Liberty was doing or not doing there. It was a recon ship gathering intelligence and I can bet something pissed the Israelis off! As for your reply to Watcher's post, doesn't matter who amassed how many troops and what was said, in the end Israel was the one who attacked first (becoming the aggressor). In 2002, Pakistani and Indian troops were facing off at their border which was thought to become a major war-zone but the political sides kept their heads cool and acted maturely which led to the diffusion of the situation. Israel however did not act that maturely at that time I would say.

[tatra]

You're asking the 'wrong' questions. The thread is about discussing the extent of deliberation in the Israeli attack on USS Liberty, not what the USS Liberty was doing or not doing there. It was a recon ship gathering intelligence and I can bet something pissed the Israelis off! As for your reply to Watcher's post, doesn't matter who amassed how many troops and what was said, in the end Israel was the one who attacked first (becoming the aggressor). In 2002, Pakistani and Indian troops were facing off at their border which was thought to become a major war-zone but the political sides kept their heads cool and acted maturely which led to the diffusion of the situation. Israel however did not act that maturely at that time I would say.

Uhm, there are no 'wrong' questions. I asked why the Israeli's attacked and the answer was "to get US forces to strike Egypt" (and not "something pissed the Israelis off"). Now, the US almost did attack Cairo, but ... with nukes!?!? That's not a "normal" response. Hence my question what Liberty was doing.

Essentially you are saying that context doesn't matter. Any reasonably intelligent person knows that it does (this goes to the "why" type of question).

Your comparison with Pak/India is very poor. For one, both Pak and India had nuclear weapons available to them, which made both sides more hesitant to enter conflict. Another difference is that Pak v. India is one-on-one, not a bunch of countries v. one country. Also, neither Pak nor India threatened to whipe the other country of the face of the earth. Finally, both Pak and India have far greater strategic depth than Israel to absorb a strike by the other. And, not inimportant, no more cold war going on.

[highsea]

As far as my understanding goes, it was done so that the US would think that Egypt did it (which the US did think) and would react against Egypt; but instead of a normal response the US had dispatched nuclear armed bombers to lay Cairo to waste which obviously would've in turn effected Israel severly along with Egypt and so Israel who wasn't expecting such a retaliatory action, changed its mind and stopped the US onslaught before it even began by letting the Americans know that it was Israel's fault of mistaken identity (which meant Egypt was out of the scene) and so the bombers were called off. :smokingc:I cannot find anything that supports this. What is your source?

Looking at the radio and communication logs, intercepts, etc., the only thing I see was planes launched from the Saratoga and America to defend the Liberty. These were recalled when the US contacted Israel during the atack, and Israel called off the strike. The whole incident apparently took about 75 minutes, and the US was aware that it was Israel attacking within 10 minutes of the Liberty's first call for help. As far as I can tell, it was the US who contacted Israel, not the other way around, but this is unclear. For sure, when Israel realized they were busted, they called off the strike and offered helo support to rescue survivors and salvage the ship.

As far as the US response, the instructions to the carriers was to not allow the A/C within 12 miles of the Egyptian coast. Since the Liberty was only 13 miles off, this meant that the planes could not get between the ship and the coast. This is confirmed by the radio logs and ROE's transmitted to the carriers.

Nowhere do I see evidence that the US launched a bomber strike on Cairo, let alone a nuclear one. This seems unlikely to me, considering that the US knew almost immediately that it was Israel attacking.

Sources:
http://www.usslibertyinquiry.com/evidence.html
http://www.ussliberty.org/

-CM

[highsea]

If America can make Libyans and others pay as well hold accountable for their intentional attacks on US targets, why not ask the Israelis to do the same for what they did to the USS Liberty? Hypocrisy just never ends and is the name of the game, I'd say. :copWe did, and they did. Israel paid 13 Million in reparations to the families and survivors of the attack.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/liberty.html

-CM

[highsea]

What was the USS Liberty doing there that was so important to warrent such a response by the US to what they initially perceived as an egyptian strike?tatra, the Liberty was monitoring the conflict. I have seen no evidence that the US ever thought is was an Egyptian attack, or that the US was even close to striking Egypt. Johnson would never have approved of an attack on Cairo, because he was afraid of dragging Russia into the conflict.

The ship had Egyptian and Russian linguists aboard. IIRC, One of their missions was to determine if Russian pilots were flying the TU-95 bombers for the Egyptian Air Force. The UN and the US was trying to impose a cease fire, and the IDF had plans to attack the Golan Heights. These plans were delayed until the Liberty was put out of commission. Israel wanted to get the Golan before the cease fire was officially imposed. The Liberty was intercepting Israeli communications about the upcoming offensive on the Golan, so Israel apparently attacked the ship to prevent their plans from being discovered.

[tatra]

The UN and the US was trying to impose a cease fire, and the IDF had plans to attack the Golan Heights. These plans were delayed until the Liberty was put out of commission. Israel wanted to get the Golan before the cease fire was officially imposed. The Liberty was intercepting Israeli communications about the upcoming offensive on the Golan, so Israel apparently attacked the ship to prevent their plans from being discovered.

Discussion of motives for the attack: http://usslibertyinquiry.com/forums/archive/index.php/f-36.html

Discussion on authorization of the attack: http://usslibertyinquiry.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-160.html

[mysterious]

As far as my understanding goes, it was done so that the US would think that Egypt did it (which the US did think) and would react against Egypt; but instead of a normal response the US had dispatched nuclear armed bombers to lay Cairo to waste which obviously would've in turn effected Israel severly along with Egypt and so Israel who wasn't expecting such a retaliatory action, changed its mind and stopped the US onslaught before it even began by letting the Americans know that it was Israel's fault of mistaken identity (which meant Egypt was out of the scene) and so the bombers were called off. :smokingc:I cannot find anything that supports this. What is your source?

Looking at the radio and communication logs, intercepts, etc., the only thing I see was planes launched from the Saratoga and America to defend the Liberty. These were recalled when the US contacted Israel during the atack, and Israel called off the strike. The whole incident apparently took about 75 minutes, and the US was aware that it was Israel attacking within 10 minutes of the Liberty's first call for help. As far as I can tell, it was the US who contacted Israel, not the other way around, but this is unclear. For sure, when Israel realized they were busted, they called off the strike and offered helo support to rescue survivors and salvage the ship.

As far as the US response, the instructions to the carriers was to not allow the A/C within 12 miles of the Egyptian coast. Since the Liberty was only 13 miles off, this meant that the planes could not get between the ship and the coast. This is confirmed by the radio logs and ROE's transmitted to the carriers.

Nowhere do I see evidence that the US launched a bomber strike on Cairo, let alone a nuclear one. This seems unlikely to me, considering that the US knew almost immediately that it was Israel attacking.

Sources:
http://www.usslibertyinquiry.com/evidence.html
http://www.ussliberty.org/

-CM

Firstly, my comment was my estimation of what might've been the case, I didnt say its a hard written fact somewhere; I was drawing conclusions from the video documentary which I suppose you haven't watched (in it, they tell you that the bombers scrambled after the attack on USS Liberty were armed with nukes). Anywayz, the point of opening this thread was to get people to agree that it was a deliberate attack by Israel on USS Liberty and not a case of mistaken identity. You both agree it was a deliberate attack and so I find it tiresome to keep on arguing on issues that this thread is not meant to highlighten or solve. Still when I get more time, I shall revert back to see if I can reply specifically to all the points made. :smokingc:

[mysterious]

If America can make Libyans and others pay as well hold accountable for their intentional attacks on US targets, why not ask the Israelis to do the same for what they did to the USS Liberty? Hypocrisy just never ends and is the name of the game, I'd say. :copWe did, and they did. Israel paid 13 Million in reparations to the families and survivors of the attack.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/liberty.html

-CM

$13m each or the total was $13m ?? My appologies I made that comment though as I came across the payment part after I posted the thread.

[tatra]

Anywayz, the point of opening this thread was to get people to agree that it was a deliberate attack by Israel on USS Liberty and not a case of mistaken identity. You both agree it was a deliberate attack and so I find it tiresome to keep on arguing on issues that this thread is not meant to highlighten or solve.

I started by saying "assuming for the moment that it was no accident", which means I am willing to entertain and explore the possibility that it was a deliberate attack, not that I already accepted this to be the truth. But let's say I did, for the sake of argument, then that still leaves the question as to what your point and purpose is in getting people to agree to that?

[Awang se]

Assumption as usual. Nothing definite when it came to war and politics. everythings is a potential cover ups.

[tatra]

Assumption as usual. Nothing definite when it came to war and politics. everythings is a potential cover ups.

All is fair in love and war :D:

[highsea]

Firstly, my comment was my estimation of what might've been the case,...so I find it tiresome to keep on arguing on issues that this thread is not meant to highlighten or solve. Still when I get more time, I shall revert back to see if I can reply specifically to all the points made. :smokingc: Well, I don't really care what you call tiresome or not, Myst. Just can it with the BS nonsense about the US sending Nuke bombers off to Cairo, you know? Let's try to keep the discussion factual.

Peace
-CM

[highsea]

Anywayz, the point of opening this thread was to get people to agree that it was a deliberate attack Well, we both know why you started this thread. I agree, it was a deliberate attack. And the US Gov't covered it up. And it was settled in the back room.

What I didn't like about your post was the claim that the US was on the brink of a nuclear launch on Egypt. Or even any kind of move against Egypt. The implication is that the US is somehow managed by Israel. You started with the facts, and then you went on a boar hunt.

Why is the burden placed on the US or President Bush to come up with a peace settlement that is acceptable to the people who were dancing in the streets and handing out candy when Mohammed Atta crashed a plane full of US citizens into the World Trade Center?

From the peace treaty with Egypt to the Oslo Accords, the US has consistently tried to broker a peace between Israel and the Arabs. Everytime, Yasser Arafat has vetoed the deal. The onus should be placed squarely on the Arabs to propose a mutually agreeable solution to the conflict.

-CM

[WebMaster]

US nuclear launch on Eygpt? I have read about USS Liberty but no where (not even from those who claim that US gov. covered it up) claim that US was going to launch Nuke strike on Egypt. Its just plain BS and not true.

[mysterious]

I think I made a point earlier that the nuke armed bombers scrambled was something that this documentary talks about for about ten minutes so I put that in my post. Seems like no one has watched this documentary and it is being assumed that I somehow made this all up by myself. Gimme a break! :smokingc:

[gf0012-aust]

I actually studied this incident as part of a analysis of the effects and outcomes of the 6 day war.

One of the things that is conveniently omitted and has been clarified in official Russian Govt releases, is that the US and Russia kept in close contact as the war was escalating.

Egypt tried to draw the Russians into the conflict by saying that there was no way that Israel could sortie its aircraft at that rate and therefore the US was repainting USN and USMC aircraft in IAF colours, and launching concurrent strikes.

The Russians were able to categorically state that this was not the case as they were tagging the US 6th Fleet with their intel skimmers and subs.

The notion of the Liberty being attacked was first written by a sailor who was an anti-jewish supremacist - and I am surprised that after all the counter claims and release of records, that some still try to use this as wedge discussion issues.

I do have copies of the Congressional papers, the responses and counterclaims that showed that the documentary was fundamentally flawed in a lot of its assumptions. It's terribly bad journalism that continues to have currency with those of vested interests.

It fails miserably when the US and Russian papers (released in 1989) are read.

Now, unless the Russians are also part of a US-Jewish conspiracy, then the 3rd leg of evidence seems to indicate that the claimed motives and results are dubious. (Lets bear in mind that both the US and the USSR were about 6 minutes away from all out war, and Russia was decidedly anti-israeli from a political influence perspective - so anything that would seal the fate of Israeli participation would have been generously promoted. The younger posters on this forum should also appreciate the fact that the USSR originally attempted to form an alliance with Israel, but decided on issues of encapsdulation that they could manage the Arabs easier as a way of isolating the French, British and to a lesser extent (then) the US. Therefore, anything that would incriminate Israel and contribute to it's demise in region would have been gladly embraced. Zhukov in his memoirs is quite pointed in establishing this.