USS Liberty

[kookbreaker]

Perhaps the reason for this is because the investigations that are listed are not exclusively about the Liberty. For example the 1971 investigation also concerned the USS Pueblo and other incidents.

There's also some confusion regarding a hearing vs. an investigation:

http://www.libertyincident.com/house-investigation-1991.html

 

[roundhead]

I also find it deplorable that the skipper of the Liberty, who was awarded the Congesssional medal of honor, had it given to him in a Naval Yard, and not by the President, as is customary.
Additionally, when he did receive the medal , no photos were allowed. I find that inexcusable.

 

[Tbone]

Ennes...


"Survivors repeatedly have asked Cristol and others to provide copies or other evidence of these so-called “investigations.” None has done so. They cannot. There are no such investigations. Similarly, we have asked them to remove their false statements. They refuse. These lies serve their purpose.

In fact, when survivors have sought details of such investigations from their congressmen, from the Navy Judge Advocate General, from the Library of Congress, from the Congressional Research Service, or from any other government agency, we have repeatedly been advised that there has never been any congressional investigation of Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty.

Most recently, on July 25, 2006, in response to a query from Liberty survivors, the Librarian of Congress wrote:

“After checking numerous resources, including the CIS (Congressional Information Service) Indexes to Congressional Hearings (both published and unpublished), and the Public Documents Masterfile, I could find no evidence that the Congress ever held hearings or launched an investigation into the June 8, 1967 incident with the USS Liberty. LC Control Number: 98135843.”

That should settle the issue for all time and bring Cristol, Joffe, ADL and other myopic Israel-can-do-no-wrongers to cease their never-ending claim that Israel has been exonerated by numerous investigations. That simply is not true, never has been true and never will be true, despite their blind determination to deny reality.




Sorry, as a former sailor, i cant with an open heart call these fine men who served with patriotism and good conduct liars.

As an American, i find it deplorable that an overwhelming consensus of our men, who were there that day, wouldnt be taken at they're word regarding events that memorable day.


The other party(in this case Israel)makes no difference to me.Had it been Ivory Coast, Peru, Canada, it isnt the issue.

The issue is these men were murdered, and we as a country should right this wrong.

You really need to stop copy-pasting as if its an arguement or an answer to a question. You need to address the issue that there WERE investigations into the Liberty, just not full Congressional hearings. You need to dispute the findings of these investigations, not just point to the lack of the single investigation you personally want.

Also, I find it amusing, in a sad way, that you say you can't call someone like Ennes a liar, then go ahead and call everyone who disputes him a liar. If you come back with that they must be mistaken, then you have to admit that Ennes may be mistaken as well, and we are back to square one.

I also can't find any reference anywhere that the overwhelming majority of the entire crew think that Israel deliberatly attacked. If you can provide this in the form of clear and non-interpretative statements, please do.

 

[roundhead]

You really need to stop copy-pasting as if its an arguement or an answer to a question. You need to address the issue that there WERE investigations into the Liberty, just not full Congressional hearings. You need to dispute the findings of these investigations, not just point to the lack of the single investigation you personally want.

Also, I find it amusing, in a sad way, that you say you can't call someone like Ennes a liar, then go ahead and call everyone who disputes him a liar. If you come back with that they must be mistaken, then you have to admit that Ennes may be mistaken as well, and we are back to square one.

I also can't find any reference anywhere that the overwhelming majority of the entire crew think that Israel deliberatly attacked. If you can provide this in the form of clear and non-interpretative statements, please do.

I would suggest you read the original naval inquiry, and then read Captain Boston's(legal counsel of the courts) expert opinion on how the court was ran and exactly what was omitted.

Then Adm Staring, tasked with reviewing the court of inquiry, and who wouldnt sign off on it a week later.

Its notable that Staring, among other high ranking officers privvy to all the information, came to the same conclusion just several years ago during the Moorer commision.
These are extremely high ranking officers, privvy to all pertinent info, who state without equivication she was deliberately attacked, and all are signatories of the Moorer commision.

I choose to believe these officers, who are in a place to know better than anybody in this thread as to what transpired.

A CNO, a Judge advocate general of the Navy, An Asst commandant of the Marine Corp, pretty high ranking officers.

I believe them 100%..........

I just wish every crewmember could get called to the stand at a Congressional hearing, along with intelligence experts and others, and end the Liberty's tragedy.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Ennes is to Liberty as Rodriguez is to 911.

No.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Why do you not take the account of say... the Captain of the Liberty seriously?

Why should I weigh his word more heavily than any other survivor of the attack?

That the accounts of the folks who were there vary doesn't surprise me. That some are more upset about it than others doesn't either.

That hardly makes those who are upset with the US government's handling of the affair nuts.

It makes them human.

DR

 

[Tbone]

I would suggest you read the original naval inquiry, and then read Captain Boston's(legal counsel of the courts) expert opinion on how the court was ran and exactly what was omitted.

Then Adm Staring, tasked with reviewing the court of inquiry, and who wouldnt sign off on it a week later.

Its notable that Staring, among other high ranking officers privvy to all the information, came to the same conclusion just several years ago during the Moorer commision.
These are extremely high ranking officers, privvy to all pertinent info, who state without equivication she was deliberately attacked, and all are signatories of the Moorer commision.

I choose to believe these officers, who are in a place to know better than anybody in this thread as to what transpired.

A CNO, a Judge advocate general of the Navy, An Asst commandant of the Marine Corp, pretty high ranking officers.

I believe them 100%..........

I just wish every crewmember could get called to the stand at a Congressional hearing, along with intelligence experts and others, and end the Liberty's tragedy.

Do you have proof that a majority of the Liberty crew believe the attack was deliberate or not? You have posted the opinion of the above admirals several times. What you have said recently though is that the crew themselves believe it was. Please show this.

 

[SDC]

I have no alternative but to assume you didnt read my earlier post, so i will put it up again. It has no ambiguity.




Dear Patron:

Thank you for your query.

After checking numerous resources, including the CIS (Congressional Information Service) Indexes to Congressional Hearings (both published and unpublished), and the Public Documents Masterfile, I could find no evidence that the Congress ever held hearings or launched an investigation into the June 8, 1967 incident with the USS Liberty.

The Library of Congress does have the following titles concerning the USS Liberty in the Library's collections:

[Several references follow] I hope that this information is helpful.

ECH
Reference Librarian
Main Reading Room
Humanities & Social Sciences Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave., S.E.

It's ambiguous to me, a card-carrying librarian and published historian. What was the date on the letter? What exactly was the question that was asked? How where "investigations" defined in your question -- this answer from a librarian seems to contradict directly the references Sword of Truth posted. Could you explain that, please? Serious question. I don't imagine Sword is making up his information. Or do you think he is?

And surprise: when librarians sit around the darkened hotel bar, during conferences (and we librarians love to huddle together in the dark), among the favorite topics are misleading questions from readers and the bizarre ways in which they try to force us to provide answers that fit their own prejudices. Then we shake our heads and wonder what has happened to them and how they twisted further even the answers we managed to provide.

I'll add that this response reads like "go away and leave us alone." One tries not to write that, of course.

So, I regret to say that this response from a librarian at LC doesn't advance your argument. You have to do your own research. Please confirm that you have done this. I am not asking for chapter and verse, just please advise as to the congressional proceedings sources you have reviewed yourself. Or had some reliable colleague review. This letter is just not adequate.

I'll say again, that a historian who relies on eyewitness accounts by participants in instances like this, is incompetent. I should add that a historian who relies primarily or exclusively is. (I didn't add that phrase before.)

 

[SDC]

Let me repeat something I asked earlier. Which Israelis are accused of a deliberate attack? Is the idea that it was a national government action? Or the military high command? Or some local unit commanders?

I hope the response is not "that's why we need an investigation." I'm sure that, after 40 years of study, those who believe the attack was deliberate, in the sense that it was planned (again, practically any action taken by people can be defined as "deliberate"), have some likely culprits lined up.

 

[kookbreaker]

No.

Yes he is. His account has expanded with the telling.

 

[kookbreaker]

I also find it deplorable that the skipper of the Liberty, who was awarded the Congesssional medal of honor, had it given to him in a Naval Yard, and not by the President, as is customary.
Additionally, when he did receive the medal , no photos were allowed. I find that inexcusable.

He didn't seem to have a problem with it, once the explanations were made.

http://libertyincident.com/docs/McGonagle.pdf

Also, the president does not always present the medal himself. Marine Captain Barnum, for example, had his medal presented at the Marine Corp Barracks by the Naval Secretary in 1967. There are other examples from that era of similar things.

 

[gumboot]

I have no alternative but to assume you didnt read my earlier post, so i will put it up again. It has no ambiguity.

I read it. Your post is irrelevant.

Senate Armed Services Committee

Committee belonging to the United States Congress, yes or no?


House Appropriations Committee

Committee belonging to the United States Congress, yes or no?


House Armed Services Committee

Committee belonging to the United States Congress, yes or no?


Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

Committee belonging to the United States Congress, yes or no?


House Armed Services Committee

Committee belonging to the United States Congress, yes or no?


The above five bodies are all contained within the United States Congress. Fact.

The above five bodies investigated the USS Liberty incident. Fact.

By deduction; the United States Congress investigated the USS Liberty incident. Fact.

 

[gumboot]

I also find it deplorable that the skipper of the Liberty, who was awarded the Congesssional medal of honor, had it given to him in a Naval Yard, and not by the President, as is customary.
Additionally, when he did receive the medal , no photos were allowed. I find that inexcusable.

I find it more deplorable that the US Government values the Medal of Honor so little that they would use it as a political tool and a bribe. I cannot conceive of a Commonwealth State doing the same with a Victoria Cross.

I cannot see how what the captain of the USS Liberty did warranted a Medal of Honor.

I don't mean this as any sort of disrespect to the Captain, but the Medal of Honor is reserved for extreme acts of selfless courage above and beyond the call of duty.

People like Master Sergeant Gary Gordon and Sergeant First Class Randy Shughart who volunteered to be placed in the middle of a firefight alone to protect down pilots, knowing full well that it would mean their deaths.

I just see no evidence that anyone on the Liberty performed such an act. Sorry.

 

[quicknthedead]

I find it more deplorable that the US Government values the Medal of Honor so little that they would use it as a political tool and a bribe. I cannot conceive of a Commonwealth State doing the same with a Victoria Cross.

I cannot see how what the captain of the USS Liberty did warranted a Medal of Honor.

I don't mean this as any sort of disrespect to the Captain, but the Medal of Honor is reserved for extreme acts of selfless courage above and beyond the call of duty.

People like Master Sergeant Gary Gordon and Sergeant First Class Randy Shughart who volunteered to be placed in the middle of a firefight alone to protect down pilots, knowing full well that it would mean their deaths.

I just see no evidence that anyone on the Liberty performed such an act. Sorry.

To rise to the extraordinary level of self-sacrifice associated with the CMO, your point is correct and so is your last sentence.

 

[roundhead]

Do you have proof that a majority of the Liberty crew believe the attack was deliberate or not? You have posted the opinion of the above admirals several times. What you have said recently though is that the crew themselves believe it was. Please show this.

Spend the 51 minutes of this film listening to crew accounts, and tell me what you think the opinion of the crew is. I think it will clearly answer your query.



http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7267134620652018859

 

[Tbone]

Spend the 51 minutes of this film listening to crew accounts, and tell me what you think the opinion of the crew is. I think it will clearly answer your query.



http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7267134620652018859

Is the montage of the 11 crew members they do at the beginning an accurate representation of the number of crew they interview?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

“After checking numerous resources, including the CIS (Congressional Information Service) Indexes to Congressional Hearings (both published and unpublished), and the Public Documents Masterfile, I could find no evidence that the Congress ever held hearings or launched an investigation into the June 8, 1967 incident with the USS Liberty. LC Control Number: 98135843.”

Bull-effing-crapola.

It was investigated. Deal with it. Lying about it doesn't help your cause.

Sorry, as a former sailor, i cant with an open heart call these fine men who served with patriotism and good conduct liars.

Well if it's a "fraternity of sailors" thing, then I can lend you a hand here.

Meadors and Ennes lied.

They said a thing which it appears that they knew full well is not true. To be fair to Meadors and Ennes though, I see no reason yet to call them anti-semites when Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is just as likely an explanation for why they are behaving this way. Anti-semitisim remains, however, a likely explanation for people lying about the incident and its aftermath who were not on the Liberty that day.

At the end of the day, while I do see a mitigating circumstance in Meadors and Ennes lies, I am afraid they that have scuttled themselves as viable voices in the USS Liberty controversy and blown their own credibility out of the water.

The issue is these men were murdered, and we as a country should right this wrong.

Argument by repetition.

 

[roundhead]

What bothers me, and its evidenced by accounts in the film i linked to, is how testimony, logs and other significant information, was kept out of or removed from the Naval inquiry report.
Adm Staring, the reviewing officer, is interviewed in this film, his statements are interesting.

It seems a very common thread among crewmembers that they were ordered, and forced, to keep they're mouths shut regarding the incident, especially any revelent info that cast a bad light on Israel.

I found the account of a radioman from the ship interesting regarding the jamming of they're standard frequencies. Had Israel really believed it an Egyptian ship, i find it hard to believe they would have jammed American frequencies.

Btw, the Egyptian ship was at the time of the attack in drydock in Alexandria, and was painted white.

Capt Tully, CO of one of the Carriers is quoted in the film as well, regarding planes sent to help being recalled.

Some items in that film i wasnt aware of.

 

[SDC]

Roundhead, since you have already decided it was murder -- I think that was your word, I apologize if it was not -- why is there any need for any additional investigation? That would only be required if there were a need to learn anything useful further.

Just make your best case in the proverbial court of public opinion.

 

[roundhead]

Roundhead, since you have already decided it was murder -- I think that was your word, I apologize if it was not -- why is there any need for any additional investigation? That would only be required if there were a need to learn anything useful further.

Just make your best case in the proverbial court of public opinion.

I think our nation should learn a lesson. We should stand behind those in uniform, allow them to testify as to exactly what happened that day, and expose the coverup that went on regarding the incident.

I consider it a shamefull blemish that should be removed.