USS Liberty

[kookbreaker]

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.

roundhead, I already posted earlier in the thread that this is simple untrue. There are articles mentioning how the crew were actively talking to the media about the events.

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.

I find it hard to beleive that jamming could have been done with the planes and boats on site. There was also the case where Ennes was just messed up about the radio.

 

[roundhead]

roundhead, I already posted earlier in the thread that this is simple untrue. There are articles mentioning how the crew were actively talking to the media about the events.



I find it hard to beleive that jamming could have been done with the planes and boats on site. There was also the case where Ennes was just messed up about the radio.

I dont care if you find the jamming hard to believe or not, they did it, i believe either the Saratoga or America picked it up as well..have to rewatch the film, but it was mentioned.


The crew was forbidden to talk publically about it....Heck only 14 were interviewed at the inquiry and 60 wanted to testify.......quite a disparity if getting to the truth was important. You better watch this film and see what crewmembers have to say about discussing the case.

Look, the counsel has stated it would take likely 6 months to get a proper investigation done. They were given 10 days from the actual event.

Counsel waNted to interview Israeli participants(McCain forbade it).

Family members recieved letters stating it was an accident BEFORE the enquiry even convened...What a friggin joke...

And you wrap yourself around this ..................

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I dont care if you find the jamming hard to believe or not, they did it,...

If it was really there and it iobviously didn't come from the Israeli planes or MTBs then why don't you tell us where it came from Mr. Electronic-Warfare Genius?

The crew was forbidden to talk publically about it...

Which is why one of them wrote and published a frigging book that resulted not in a court-martial for disobeying orders but a virtually unprecedented eighth investigation that he now lies about claiming it never happened.

 

[kookbreaker]

The crew was forbidden to talk publically about it....Heck only 14 were interviewed at the inquiry and 60 wanted to testify.......quite a disparity if getting to the truth was important. You better watch this film and see what crewmembers have to say about discussing the case.

Not getting to testify is not the same thing as being told to keep quiet!

So name me one person from the crew who was court martialed or imprisoned for talking, but it sure seems they are talking today! Several were interviewed for newspapers in '67!

Read the Naval Security file on the Liberty incident. At the end it lists a whole series of articles and interviews.

 

[quicknthedead]

Bull-effing-crapola.

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

If it was as fully and judiciously investigated as purported, there should be no trouble in locating substantiation of findings explaining the US pre-intelligence that showed Israel was going to attack USS Liberty if it was not moved.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3845299#post3845299

What investigation dealt with this specific pre-intelligence?

Where are the findings?

On the contrary, to this day there are no findings on this, which indicates there has never been a full and rigorous investigation.

This is what needs to be brought to the light of day. This is what should have been investigated...and this is what still needs to be investigated and answered.

This is the heart of the matter, that there was US pre-intelligence that clearly revealed the attack on USS Liberty was deliberate and not an accident.

 

[SDC]

If it was as fully and judiciously investigated as purported, there should be no trouble in locating substantiation of findings explaining the US pre-intelligence that showed Israel was going to attack USS Liberty if it was not moved.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3845299#post3845299

What investigation dealt with this specific pre-intelligence?

Where are the findings?

On the contrary, to this day there are no findings on this, which indicates there has never been a full and rigorous investigation.

This is what needs to be brought to the light of day. This is what should have been investigated...and this is what still needs to be investigated and answered.

This is the heart of the matter, that there was US pre-intelligence that clearly revealed the attack on USS Liberty was deliberate and not an accident.

My bolding. I thought the heart of the matter was THE BELIEF that there was such intelligence. If this is known and documented already, what is the need for further investigation? Just publish the stuff!

 

[roundhead]

Not getting to testify is not the same thing as being told to keep quiet!

So name me one person from the crew who was court martialed or imprisoned for talking, but it sure seems they are talking today! Several were interviewed for newspapers in '67!

Read the Naval Security file on the Liberty incident. At the end it lists a whole series of articles and interviews.

Sure they are talking today. They arent in the service anymore.Even Ennes's book came out YEARS after the incident.

That film interviews several sailors who state exactly what happened when the investigative officer came on board. And the threats that were leveled.

 

[roundhead]

The administration moved at once to isolate the men and to control news stories about the attack through CHINFO (Chief Information Office) and its PAs (public affairs officers).

1. News was coordinated and centralized in the Pentagon.

2. The LIBERTY crewmen were forbidden to talk to reporters except under conditions arranged by the PA officers. Control of the men came in two phases. From June 8 to 28, when the summary of the Naval Court was completed, the men were told that they could not speak at all. After June 2l they were told that they could speak only by repeating the exact words of the Summary.

3. The crewmen were forbidden to speak of the matter even to members of their families. There were threats of demotion, dishonorable discharge loss of pensions and even possible imprisonment for those who might disobey.

4. The crewmen were kept from the press by every possible means. Armed guards were stationed near the wounded men in the hospitals on the carriers, in Naples, and in Landshut, Germany. The crewmen on shore in Malta were under constant watch and were given daily orders to avoid the press.

5. Only one newsman, Irving R. Levine of NBC News, tried to break through this wall of isolation. He came from Rome to interview Captain McGonagle but instead was given an interview with Admiral Kidd.

6. The men were not allowed to merely remain silent. On the carrier AMERICA, in Malta, and later in Norfolk, they were ordered to take part in press conferences and told what to say. PA officers rehearsed the men and were present during the interviews.

7. The Departments of State and Defense kept a close watch to see how "favorable" and "unfavorable" stories were reported.

8. The crewmen were desperate to break out of their isolation and tell their story to the world. In the single case where a crewman managed to speak to a reporter (Lt. Golden's interview with APs Colin Frost, which will be described) the PA apparatus immediately put out a "counter story" through Reuters.

 

[kookbreaker]

Sure they are talking today. They arent in the service anymore.Even Ennes's book came out YEARS after the incident.

They were talking back then. Look at the list of articles. They were talking. Stop repeating this lie.

That film interviews several sailors who state exactly what happened when the investigative officer came on board. And the threats that were leveled.

This is further indication that they are not telling the truth, because they sure as heck were talking!

Produce evidence of this gag order, or admit that these folks just made it up or exagerrated the situation.

 

[kookbreaker]

The administration moved at once to isolate the men and to control news stories about the attack through CHINFO (Chief Information Office) and its PAs (public affairs officers).

1. News was coordinated and centralized in the Pentagon.

2. The LIBERTY crewmen were forbidden to talk to reporters except under conditions arranged by the PA officers. Control of the men came in two phases. From June 8 to 28, when the summary of the Naval Court was completed, the men were told that they could not speak at all. After June 2l they were told that they could speak only by repeating the exact words of the Summary.

3. The crewmen were forbidden to speak of the matter even to members of their families. There were threats of demotion, dishonorable discharge loss of pensions and even possible imprisonment for those who might disobey.

4. The crewmen were kept from the press by every possible means. Armed guards were stationed near the wounded men in the hospitals on the carriers, in Naples, and in Landshut, Germany. The crewmen on shore in Malta were under constant watch and were given daily orders to avoid the press.

5. Only one newsman, Irving R. Levine of NBC News, tried to break through this wall of isolation. He came from Rome to interview Captain McGonagle but instead was given an interview with Admiral Kidd.

6. The men were not allowed to merely remain silent. On the carrier AMERICA, in Malta, and later in Norfolk, they were ordered to take part in press conferences and told what to say. PA officers rehearsed the men and were present during the interviews.

7. The Departments of State and Defense kept a close watch to see how "favorable" and "unfavorable" stories were reported.

8. The crewmen were desperate to break out of their isolation and tell their story to the world. In the single case where a crewman managed to speak to a reporter (Lt. Golden's interview with APs Colin Frost, which will be described) the PA apparatus immediately put out a "counter story" through Reuters.

Horse crap.

http://www.libertyincident.com/docs/GagOrdersDebunked.pdf

The last 4 pages of that document is a huge list of mainstream articles about the incident that obviously came from crew interviews. Particularly telling articles show up on June 16th that show that the crew was talking to the press.

 

[roundhead]

Horse crap.

http://www.libertyincident.com/docs/GagOrdersDebunked.pdf

The last 4 pages of that document is a huge list of mainstream articles about the incident that obviously came from crew interviews. Particularly telling articles show up on June 16th that show that the crew was talking to the press.

You better reread what you linked to........In no uncertain terms it lays out exactly what can be discussed, and if anything more is asked to reference the Naval authorities in charge.

In short, say exactly what we tell you to. Its extremely clear

 

[roundhead]

From Paul Findley:




He identified George Golden, the Liberty'S engineering officer and acting commanding officer, as the source of the Associated Press story that charged that the attack was deliberate. Golden, who is Jewish, was so outraged at the prohibition against talking with reporters that he ignored it--risking his future career in the navy to rescue a vestige of his country's honor.


The Pentagon staved off reporters' inquiries with the promise of a "comprehensive statement" once the official inquiry, conducted by Admiral Isaac Kidd, was finished.(9) Arriving at Malta, Kidd gave explicit orders to the crew: "Answer no questions. If somehow you are backed into a corner, then you may say that it was an accident and that Israel has apologized. You may say nothing else." Crew members were assured they could talk freely to reporters once the summary of the Court of Inquiry was made public. This was later modified. They were then ordered not to provide information beyond the precise words of the published summary

 

[roundhead]

Horse crap.

http://www.libertyincident.com/docs/GagOrdersDebunked.pdf

The last 4 pages of that document is a huge list of mainstream articles about the incident that obviously came from crew interviews. Particularly telling articles show up on June 16th that show that the crew was talking to the press.

Read section 13 of 30 of that pdf file you linked. I am curious as to your assessment of it.




Your BLATANT LIE saying the crew were allowed to speak FREELY of the incident is in dispute with all the facts, and the statement of ADM KIDD.

 

[SDC]

This has become a "they said X/ those said Y" conversation.

Roundhead, please provide the citation for Findley's comment.

By the way, he definitely has a dog in the fight. He never saw an Israel he didn't want to smack. Try for a better source, one that might be trusted.

 

[roundhead]

This has become a "they said X/ those said Y" conversation.

Roundhead, please provide the citation for Findley's comment.

By the way, he definitely has a dog in the fight. He never saw an Israel he didn't want to smack. Try for a better source, one that might be trusted.

Frankly, the only thing newsworthy in the Findley article is the Adm Kidd quote. Anything else is just hearsay.. If you dont deny Kidd said that, and that the crew were under strict orders not to discuss the case publically, except in the context of what was allowed to be said, show me proof, otherwise, the instruction regarding this(which a number of crewmembers state)is irrefutable.


I still await an explanation regarding section 13 of the link one of you parrots linked to.



I would also like to be provided a link to ANY CREWMEMBER TESTIFING BEFORE CONGRESS regarding events of that day...




Regarding Israel, i personally think they are way more trouble that they are worth, and should deal with they're own problems and not involve the US in them.

Unlike some i make a distinction, i have a number of Jewish friends, and they are wonderful people.

The Isreali Govt, on the other hand, i could care less about. I like its neighbors equally as much, if not more.

I dont know what that makes me, but thats how i am..Antizionist, perhaps, not not anti Jew.

A number of Jewish friend i have distance themselves from the Israeli govt..the ONLY thing they have in common is religious beliefs. Period.

 

[Darth Rotor]

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

Iraqi Mirage shoots missile that hits USS Stark, American sailors die. Saddam fesses up, and makes the mea culpa. Reagan accepts it was a screw up.

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

Killed, yes, murder is still a thorny, open question due to less than transparent info availability from the Israeli side.

As to "we should right this wrong" what course of action are you advocating? The Israeli government mea culpa'ed and paid reparations. Conspiracy or no, it was their fault.

While I am not convinced of the sincerity of the Israeli response, on the details, there is no question that at the political level their government did own up to the attack.

What more do you want? Please state clearly what would satisfy you.

How the American government handled it, internally, is also worth significant scrutiny. Again, the account I read over twenty years ago of the Attack on the Liberty pointed clearly to significant errors and dropped balls at the Command and Control end.

I have noted a few more posters who cannot seem to stop insinuating that those Liberty crewmen who are not satisfied with how their attack was treated as anti-semites. You are no better that the garden variety anti-semite and CT woo fish.

DR

 

[Darth Rotor]

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

So you've convinced yourself. You might be interested in a book by another man badly used by his government. It is called Scapegoats of the Empire. http://www.amazon.com/Scapegoats-Empire-Breaker-Bushveldt-Carbineers/dp/0207146667

It informed the screenplay of Breaker Morant. You might find that any number of servicemen who feel abused by their governments have similar reactions.

Why?

Governments lie and their comrades die. It pisses them off. They lived in the context.

Did you?

 

[SDC]

Crikey. Someone else who has both read "Scapegoats" and seen "Breaker Morant."
There can't be many of us.

 

[Tbone]

I would also like to be provided a link to ANY CREWMEMBER TESTIFING BEFORE CONGRESS regarding events of that day...

So when you said you wanted the attack to be "investigated" by Congress, this is what you meant. Why can't you just say these things right at the start so we don't have to debate what constitutes an investigationor not by the US government?

 

[quicknthedead]

If it was as fully and judiciously investigated as purported, there should be no trouble in locating substantiation of findings explaining the US pre-intelligence that showed Israel was going to attack USS Liberty if it was not moved.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.p...99#post3845299

My bolding. I thought the heart of the matter was THE BELIEF that there was such intelligence. If this is known and documented already, what is the need for further investigation? Just publish the stuff!

Read the link. The documented testimonies are based on pre-intelligence of the attack, and presumably this information can only be obtained from the government. I certainly don't have it. However, a congressional investigation with a few pointed questions might be able to obtain this.

AFAIK there never was any congressional action that attempted to obtain this specific pre-intelligence mentioned by Tate and Stenbit.

Why was this never attempted?

Does government coverup come to mind?