Another victory for the ZOG: doctored documents "prove" Liberty attack to be an error

[Edan]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
[Q]

Quote:

4 ) the liberty was warned,

No it wasn't.

They had been cabled to leave the area when it was discovered that they weren't where they were supposed to be (with the sixth fleet), but the cables arrived too late.

Quote:

...... wtf was it doing in a warzone,

It was in international waters

It was in waters that Egypt had declared off limits to neutral vessels - it was in the warzone.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Edan


Wait, so Israel attacked (but didn't sink)

It would have taken a lot more work and a lot more time to actually sink it. It would also have been a bit less possible to claim it was an accident, as well. If the mission had been to go after a warship, the aircraft used wouldn't have been armed up with ARM's and CBU's. Both of those are useless against an armored cruiser, and almost useless for sinking an Egyptian horse transporter, but real effective against microwave antennas and satellite dishes.

the American Intel ship (and risk antagonizing their major ally)

The risk is only if our bought off politicians wouldn't accept the "Gee, it was an accident, again and again and again" story. The US government had (and has) it's nose so far up Israel's ass that all that was needed was a semi-plausible excuse.


in order to prevent the US from listening or interfering even though they knew that once they did so, it would cause the US to have "every US asset in the area" record "everything for future analysis"? Anyone else see the flaw in this argument?
[/quote]

Uhhhhhhhhh..... nice try, but standard radio receivers listening to ship to ship and air to ground voice traffic on nearby aircraft and patrol boats involved in the attack is a bit different from the antenna array on the Liberty, which basically had the capability of picking up all RF traffic within several hundred miles.

And just what were they worried the US would be litening in or interfering with?

I don't know - if one of your gunboats hadn't approached to very close range while the Liberty was only making about 2.5 knots headway and fired a torpedo directly into the compartment with the Arabic, Hebrew and Russian linguists from NSA, then we'd have recovered a lot of those recordings. Instead, what wasn't burned in the torpedo explosion ended up in the bottom of the Med, with several of our people who's bodies weren't recovered.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Edan
They had been cabled to leave the area when it was discovered that they weren't where they were supposed to be (with the sixth fleet), but the cables arrived too late.

How convenient. Sort of like the Japanese ambassador meeting with the Secretary of State on December 7. Or the warning cables that went to Pearl that morning by regular commercial route.

And "where they were supposed to be" according to whom? We don't take ****ing orders from your navy or anyone elses in international waters.

It was in waters that Egypt had declared off limits to neutral vessels - it was in the warzone.

Aaaah, so you use Egyptian declarations which have no basis in international or maritime law to determine if a ship is neutral or hostile?

Hey, the Libyans had the "line of death." Did you presume only Libyan ships transited those international waters?

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


How convenient. Sort of like the Japanese ambassador meeting with the Secretary of State on December 7. Or the warning cables that went to Pearl that morning by regular commercial route
And "where they were supposed to be" according to whom?

The Joint Chiefs of Staff - They're the one's that sent the cable on June 7th.

From Six Days of War
"The navy's overloaded, overly complex communication system had routed the orders as far east as the Philippines before relaying them back to the Liberty."

And the source for it is: "LBJ, National Security file, History of the Middle East Crisis, box 19: JCS to USCINCEUR, June 8, 1967; box 104, 107, The National Military Command Center: Attack on the USS Liberty, June 6, 1967; Department of Defense: USS Liberty Incident, June 15, 1967; USNA, Chairman Wheeler files, box 27: The Court of Inquiry Findings, June 22, 1967"

Aaaah, so you use Egyptian declarations which have no basis in international or maritime law to determine if a ship is neutral or hostile?

Well, I don't, since I'm not an army, a navy or an air force. And that certainly isn't the sole basis for determining whether the ship was neutral or hostile. But either way, the ship wasn't where it was supposed to be, back with the sixth fleet.Hey, the

Libyans had the "line of death." Did you presume only Libyan ships transited those international waters?

Does the US think only Iranian military planes fly over iranian territorial waters? :P

[Panag]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


How convenient. Sort of like the Japanese ambassador meeting with the Secretary of State on December 7. Or the warning cables that went to Pearl that morning by regular commercial route.

And "where they were supposed to be" according to whom? We don't take ****ing orders from your navy or anyone elses in international waters.



Aaaah, so you use Egyptian declarations which have no basis in international or maritime law to determine if a ship is neutral or hostile?

Hey, the Libyans had the "line of death." Did you presume only Libyan ships transited those international waters?

hi ,

actually they did , ........

at one point they sunk a maltese fishing boat and at one other time the shot an algerian coastal patrol that had nav problems to pieces , .....

have a nice day

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Edan

The Joint Chiefs of Staff - They're the one's that sent the cable on June 7th.

From Six Days of War
"The navy's overloaded, overly complex communication system had routed the orders as far east as the Philippines before relaying them back to the Liberty."

And the source for it is: "LBJ, National Security file, History of the Middle East Crisis, box 19: JCS to USCINCEUR, June 8, 1967; box 104, 107, The National Military Command Center: Attack on the USS Liberty, June 6, 1967; Department of Defense: USS Liberty Incident, June 15, 1967; USNA, Chairman Wheeler files, box 27: The Court of Inquiry Findings, June 22, 1967"

The Navy, did not control the ships' mission. They hosted it, and the JCS didn't have the need to know. Whether they were where the US JCS thought they ought to be is an after the fact obfuscation that does nothing to address the clearly identifiable nature of the ship, it's nationality, and the fact that it's presence (in international waters) was known substantially ahead of time, as it cruised at a whopping eight knots. The Israelis had every opportunity to identify it, and they did, hence the first aircraft to attack being outfitted with a wholly atypical ordnance package for an anti-ship strike mission.

It is well known in the US, and among the Liberty crew members involved in testifying before the court of inquiry, that it was a pro forma proceeding to officially bury the issue, but get the press of the government's ass.

Well, I don't, since I'm not an army, a navy or an air force. And that certainly isn't the sole basis for determining whether the ship was neutral or hostile. But either way, the ship wasn't where it was supposed to be, back with the sixth fleet.

Which I'm sure the US and every other non-hostile power is obligated to inform Israel of where their ships are "supposed to be"

[Az]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Az - pro motives: plenty. The Israelis had no reason to want anybody to listen in or potentially "interfere" even if it was a "neutral" country or an ally.

a) So they sank a sink of one of the strongest countries in the world, because of a minor risk of interference from the US? The risk/benefit analysis doesn't add up. even vaguely.

b) How would the US interfere, exactly?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by panag



hi ,

actually they did , ........

at one point they sunk a maltese fishing boat and at one other time the shot an algerian coastal patrol that had nav problems to pieces , .....

have a nice day

Yeah, and we stuck a carrier battle group in there, and told Qaddafi "Go ahead, make my day" And he tried, and we spanked him.

The US has never recognized extralegal maritime restrictions, and anyone else who cares generally doesn't either. So the excuse (from the great grab bag) that "Gee, the Liberty was where the Egyptians said "stay out" so it obviously couldn't be neutral or US" is just one more example of the kind of absurd crap the Israelis dig for to justify their coverup and evasion of responsibility. Keep tryin', cuz we just ain't buyin'.

[Az]

Liberty was where the Egyptians said "stay out" so it obviously couldn't be neutral or US" is just one more example of the kind of absurd crap the Israelis dig for to justify their coverup and evasion of responsibility. Keep tryin', cuz we just ain't buyin'.

Is panag an agent of the Israeli government?

[Panag]

Originally posted by Azazel

Quote:

Liberty was where the Egyptians said "stay out" so it obviously couldn't be neutral or US" is just one more example of the kind of absurd crap the Israelis dig for to justify their coverup and evasion of responsibility. Keep tryin', cuz we just ain't buyin'.

Is panag an agent of the Israeli government?

hi ,

sure

dont worry , just last week we where all involved in a huge conspiracy theory against the free world , .....

all the israeli posters at poly that is , ......

have a nice day

[Panag]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Yeah, and we stuck a carrier battle group in there, and told Qaddafi "Go ahead, make my day" And he tried, and we spanked him.

The US has never recognized extralegal maritime restrictions, and anyone else who cares generally doesn't either. So the excuse (from the great grab bag) that "Gee, the Liberty was where the Egyptians said "stay out" so it obviously couldn't be neutral or US" is just one more example of the kind of absurd crap the Israelis dig for to justify their coverup and evasion of responsibility. Keep tryin', cuz we just ain't buyin'.

hi ,

sure , not to mention that all of a sudden they started to trow at random yet regular times grenades in the water at bengazi and some other ports , not a single ship of the lib navy sailed out , .....

and the loacl media was full of terror acts from us navy seals , .....

have a nice one

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Azazel

Quote:

Liberty was where the Egyptians said "stay out" so it obviously couldn't be neutral or US" is just one more example of the kind of absurd crap the Israelis dig for to justify their coverup and evasion of responsibility. Keep tryin', cuz we just ain't buyin'.

Is panag an agent of the Israeli government?

And the point would be?

If the official mantra keeps getting repeated, then it really doesn't matter if those repeating it are "official" apologists, or just doing it out of "we're never wrong, even when we make a 'mistake'" nationalism.

[Panag]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


And the point would be?

If the official mantra keeps getting repeated, then it really doesn't matter if those repeating it are "official" apologists, or just doing it out of "we're never wrong, even when we make a 'mistake'" nationalism.

hi ,

héy , look a bit up , .... at the huge post , that is a sign of getting at the truth

and btw , the Israeli governement is sorry for what has happend , they hold a special service each year to remember the 34 dead , and loads of lesson and safeguards are in order now to prevent it from happening again , ......

have a nice day

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Azazel

a) So they sank a sink of one of the strongest countries in the world, because of a minor risk of interference from the US? The risk/benefit analysis doesn't add up. even vaguely.

What risk? The Israelis have known for decades that the US government firmly has it's nose up your government's asses. Attack, disable, deny, then let the long-established PR machine go to work.

b) How would the US interfere, exactly?

If the Israelis were being naughty, and got caught, or if the Israeli version of who attacked who and when and where wasn't quite kosher, or if the Israelis were concerned about operational security. Better safe and pretending to be sorry, then really sorry you got burned.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by panag
and btw , the Israeli governement is sorry for what has happend , they hold a special service each year to remember the 34 dead , and loads of lesson and safeguards are in order now to prevent it from happening again , ......

have a nice day

So did they start that before the end of their more than decade long shuffle to avoid compensation to either the US government to the families, or after?

Not much worry of it happening again, since we can now get the same results without slow, vulnerable ships off of people's coasts.

[Panag]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


So did they start that before the end of their more than decade long shuffle to avoid compensation to either the US government to the families, or after?

Not much worry of it happening again, since we can now get the same results without slow, vulnerable ships off of people's coasts.

hi ,

, at least since 87 , ...... seen it since then ( dont know if it was since before ) , can ask around , .....

have a great day

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


It would have taken a lot more work and a lot more time to actually sink it. It would also have been a bit less possible to claim it was an accident, as well.

Depends. Lesss survivors means less witnessess

If the mission had been to go after a warship, the aircraft used wouldn't have been armed up with ARM's and CBU's. Both of those are useless against an armored cruiser, and almost useless for sinking an Egyptian horse transporter, but real effective against microwave antennas and satellite dishes.

They were armed for attacking infintry cause they had just been returning from a bombing run against Egyptian Infinitry.

And why torpedo the ship if you're only going for the antennas and satellite dishes?

The risk is only if our bought off politicians wouldn't accept the "Gee, it was an accident, again and again and again" story. The US government had (and has) it's nose so far up Israel's ass that all that was needed was a semi-plausible excuse.

Back in 1967? After 1967, that might fit, but not during or before 1967. The US was an important ally only because the French (and to some extent the british) had stopped being allies. It was only after the '67 war that the US stepped up to "have it's nose so far up Israel's ass". (No doubt because the US was fearful of yet another attack by those rutheless zionists.... )

Uhhhhhhhhh..... nice try, but standard radio receivers listening to ship to ship and air to ground voice traffic on nearby aircraft and patrol boats involved in the attack is a bit different from the antenna array on the Liberty, which basically had the capability of picking up all RF traffic within several hundred miles.

Even if that is the case, It still is remarkably stupid to draw attention to yourself like that, especially when it's easier to simply use methods of communication that aren't tapable.

]

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


So did they start that before the end of their more than decade long shuffle to avoid compensation to either the US government to the families, or after?

Within 48 hours, Israel already offered to pay compensation.

Not much worry of it happening again, since we can now get the same results without slow, vulnerable ships off of people's coasts

Nope, now we get it with slow, vulnerable Spy Airplanes off China's coast.

[Panag]

WWMCCS
Worldwide Military Command and Control System
The worldwide deployment of U.S. forces required extensive long-range communications systems that can maintain contact with all of those forces at all times. To enable national command authorities to exercise effective command and control of their widely dispersed forces, a communications system was established to enable those authorities to disseminate their decisions to all subordinate units, under any conditions, within minutes.

Such a command and control system, WWMCCS, was created by DOD Directive S-5100.30, titled "Concept of Operations of the Worldwide Military Command and Control System," which set the overall policies for the integration of the various command and control elements that were rapidly coming into being in the early 1960s.

As initially established, WWMCCS was an arrangement of personnel, equipment (including Automated Data Processing equipment and hardware), communications, facilities, and procedures employed in planning, directing, coordinating, and controlling the operational activities of U.S. military forces.

This system was intended to provide the president and the secretary of defense a means to receive warning and intelligence information, assign military missions, provide direction to the unified and specified commands, and support the Joint Chiefs of Staff in carrying out their responsibilities. The directive establishing the system stressed five essential system characteristics: survivability, flexibility, compatibility, standardization, and economy.

Despite the original intent, WWMCCS never realized the full potential that had been envisioned for the system. The services' approach to WWMCCS depended upon the availability of both technology and funding to meet individual requirements, so no truly integrated system emerged. Indeed, during the 1960s, WWMCCS consisted of a loosely knit federation of nearly 160 different computer systems, using 30 different general purpose software systems at 81 locations. One study claimed that WWMCCS was "more a federation of self-contained subsystems than an integrated set of capabilities."

The problems created by these diverse subsystems were apparently responsible for several well-publicized failures of command and control during the latter part of the 1960s.

During hostilities between Israel and Egypt in June 1967, the USS Liberty, a naval reconnaissance ship, was ordered by the JCS to move further away from the coastlines of the billigerents. Five high-priority messages to that effect were sent to the Liberty, but none arrived for more than 13 hours. By that time the ship had become the victim of an apparently mistaken attack by Israeli aircraft and patrol boats that killed 34 Americans.

A congressional committee investigating this incident concluded, "The circumstances surrounding the misrouting, loss and delays of those messages constitute one of the most incredible failures of communications in the history of the Department of Defense."

The result of these various failures was a growth in the centralized management of WWMCCS, occurring at about the same time that changing technology brought in computers and electronic displays.

For example, 27 command centers were equipped with standard Honeywell 6000 computers and common programs so there could be a rapid exchange of information among the command centers.

An assistant secretary of defense for Telecommunications was established, and a 1971 DOD directive gave that person the primary staff responsibility for all WWMCCS-related systems. That directive also designated the Chairman of the JCS as the official responsible for the operation of WWMCCS.

The World-Wide Military Command and Control System (WWMCCS) Intercomputer Network (WIN) was a centrally managed information processing and exchange network consisting of large-scale computer systems at geographically separate locations, interconnected by a dedicated wide-band, packet-switched communications subsystem. The architecture of the WIN consists of WWMCCS-standard AN/FYQ-65(V) host computers and their WIN-dedicated Honeywell 6661 Datanets and Datanet 8's connected through Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. (BBN) C/30 and C/30E packet switching computers called Packet Switching Nodes (PSNs) and wideband, encrypted, dedicated, data communications circuits.

By the early 1980s, it was time to modernize this system. The replacement, proposed by the deputy secretary of defense, was an evolutionary upgrade program known as the WWMCCS Information System [WIS], which provided a range of capabilities appropriate for the diverse needs of the WWMCCS sites.

During Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, WWMCCS performed flawlessly 24 hours a day, seven days a week; providing critical data to combat commanders worldwide in deploying, relocating and sustaining allied forces.

However, WWMCCS was dependent on a proprietary mainframe environment. Information cannot be easily entered or accessed by users, and the software cannot be quickly modified to accommodate changing mission requirements. Operational flexibility and adaptability are limited, since most of the information and software are stored on the mainframe. The system architecture is unresponsive, inflexible, and expensive to maintain.

This new WWMCCS Information System configuration continued to be refined until 1992 when the assistant secretary of defense for command, control, communications, and intelligence terminated this latest attempt to modernize the WWMCCS ADP equipment.

The continuing need to meet established requirements which couldn't be fulfilled, coupled with a growing dissatisfaction among users with the existing WWMCCS system, drove the conceptualizing of a new system, called GCCS.

On August 30, 1996, Lieutenant General Albert J. Edmonds, Director, Defense Information Systems Agency, officially deactivated the World Wide Military Command and Control System (WWMCCS) Intercomputer Network (WIN). Concurrently, the Joint Staff declared the Global Command and Control System (GCCS) as the joint command and control system of record.

[muxec]

People, friendly fire accidents always happen, and sometimes nobody knows who was guilty. I cant get the point... What are you discusing for a 100+ posts?

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
What risk? The Israelis have known for decades that the US government firmly has it's nose up your government's asses.

That certainly isn't true in 1967. And if it was, don't you think that the ZOG could have gotten some weapon sold to it from the US, apart from a few HAWK anti-aircraft missles? Especially with their main arms supplier - France - embargoing Israel?

If the Israelis were being naughty, and got caught, or if the Israeli version of who attacked who and when and where wasn't quite kosher, or if the Israelis were concerned about operational security. Better safe and pretending to be sorry, then really sorry you got burned.

But if the Israeli's had the US government firmly in it's grasp, why be worried about it?

[Panag]

Originally posted by Edan




Within 48 hours, Israel already offered to pay compensation.



Nope, now we get it with slow, vulnerable Spy Airplanes off China's coast.

hi ,

true , something like 6 millions or so was payed very fast , later there was again something like 6 million

have a nice day

[Edan]

Originally posted by muxec
People, friendly fire accidents always happen, and sometimes nobody knows who was guilty.

Well, IMNSHO, It was negligence on both sides coupled with bad luck, but no malice.

I cant get the point... What are you discusing for a 100+ posts?

Why make a point in 10 posts when you can make it in 100?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Edan


Depends. Lesss survivors means less witnessess

No survivors might well mean the US decides to cut you off, and not worry how well y'all can swim.

They were armed for attacking infintry cause they had just been returning from a bombing run against Egyptian Infinitry.

So they just happened to be loaded with enough ordnance to make multiple passes, after that bombing run? What, one plane dropped one bomb in the desert? Nice cover.

And why torpedo the ship if you're only going for the antennas and satellite dishes?

The antennas and satelite dishes are to (a) prevent distress calls, (b) prevent ongoing recording and eavesdropping.

That doesn't do you much good if you don't take out the compartment with all the crypto equipment, SIGINT processors and recorders, and also, incidentally, the majority of the NSA personnel who actually conducted the mission.

Back in 1967? After 1967, that might fit, but not during or before 1967. The US was an important ally only because the French (and to some extent the british) had stopped being allies. It was only after the '67 war that the US stepped up to "have it's nose so far up Israel's ass". (No doubt because the US was fearful of yet another attack by those rutheless zionists.... )

In 1967, the US was increasingly interested in Israel as a counter to local Soviet proxies, in the prevailing cold war view. The same reason that the US discovered a deep, abiding love for Turkey. The added twist is that Jewish vote in the US, which is real helpful for Presidential candidates to cultivate.

Since we didn't like y'all so much in '67 or prior, then I suppose those F-4's and A-4's you got were French or Brit made?

Or, we just had those lying around for another customer?

Even if that is the case, It still is remarkably stupid to draw attention to yourself like that, especially when it's easier to simply use methods of communication that aren't tapable.

Landlines are real inconvenient.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by panag



hi ,

true , something like 6 millions or so was payed very fast , later there was again something like 6 million

have a nice day

The ship cost over 200 million. In 1966. Compensation was finally settled, and paid, during the Carter administration.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Edan


Well, IMNSHO, It was negligence on both sides coupled with bad luck, but no malice.

How mother****ing negligent to be operating a ship in international waters with the US flag and US identifying markings on it.

And no, there was no malice, the continued strafing and small caliber shellfire when the ship was on fire and virtually immobile was really an effort to communicate. All just a cultural misunderstanding.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Edan


That certainly isn't true in 1967. And if it was, don't you think that the ZOG could have gotten some weapon sold to it from the US, apart from a few HAWK anti-aircraft missles? Especially with their main arms supplier - France - embargoing Israel?

The US was fairly busy a few thousand miles to the east. Not to mention this little thing called a "cold war"

But if the Israeli's had the US government firmly in it's grasp, why be worried about it?

A friendly little message to "**** off, this is our business" a la all those rather well publicized little "incidents" between the US and USSR (Elint flight shootdowns, airspace incursions, etc.) that never led to war.

Perhaps the operative authorities decided that maybe the US professional intelligence committee might not be so enamored, or might not have it's own agenda separate from those elected officials the Israelis lobbied. You'd have to ask the Israeli officials actually responsible for the decision making process.

My guess is more that they didn't like the intrusion, and wanted to send a plausibly deniable message to that effect. The North Koreans did it, in a somewhat less subtle fashion, the following year, and got away with it, despite us having no love for them.

[Panag]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


The ship cost over 200 million. In 1966. Compensation was finally settled, and paid, during the Carter administration.

hi ,

, it was for the spouses and such , those amounts , .....

have a nice day

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


No survivors might well mean the US decides to cut you off, and not worry how well y'all can swim.



So they just happened to be loaded with enough ordnance to make multiple passes, after that bombing run? What, one plane dropped one bomb in the desert? Nice cover.

The antennas and satelite dishes are to (a) prevent distress calls,

Except a distress call was made.. That was incompetent, wasn't it?

Since we didn't like y'all so much in '67 or prior, then I suppose those F-4's and A-4's you got were French or Brit made?

You mean the A-4's that were scheduled for arrival in December 1967 (and were matched with arm sales to Jordan?) - albeit via Germany, who succumbed to Arab pressure not to sell arms to Israel ? I couldn't find any mention of F-4's. I take your point that LBJ did offer to sell the planes before the war, but they were far from Israel's main supplier. Most of Israel's air force were French Mirages.

Or, we just had those lying around for another customer?

Umm, yeah. The rest of the Middle East?

"While American arm sales to the Middle East multiplied during the Johnson Administration, from $44.2 to $995.3 million, Israel's share was negligable. " Six Days of War p 16.

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


How mother****ing negligent to be operating a ship in international waters with the US flag and US identifying markings on it.

When it was supposed to be a couple of hundred miles that-a-way because Johson didn't want to risk any involvement in the war?

And no, there was no malice, the continued strafing and small caliber shellfire when the ship was on fire

And firing back with it's machine guns....

But, well, malice against the Egyptians, sure.