EXCERPTS from Attack on the USS Liberty: A Stab at the Truth

[with my commentary in RED]

AUTHOR: Commander Mark A. Stroh

TITLE: Attack on the USS Liberty: A Stab at the Truth

FORMAT: Strategy Research Project

DATE: 10 April 2009

QUESTIONS EXAMINED

This paper will examine and give the best, most likely answers to many of the questions including:

• Why did Israel attack the Liberty?

• Was the attack deliberate or accidental, and could the attack have been a case of mistaken identity?

• If deliberate, who within the Israeli leadership ordered the attack, and why?

• Why was this U.S. unarmed and unescorted research ship so close to the shores of ongoing hostilities?

• Why has Israel continued to claim the attack was a case of mistaken identity?

• Why was the official inquiry micromanaged and rushed to an unsatisfactory completion in a mere eight days?

• Why has a full and open official inquiry on the attack never been conducted, and why will there probably never be one?

• Finally, why would the White House prevent the rescue of an American ship?

***

On May 26, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Abba Eban, met with President Johnson where President Johnson “urged restraint upon him in the strongest terms. LBJ also told him that Israel would not be alone unless it acted alone.” 6 To Israel’s dissatisfaction, Johnson was determined to have the U.S. remain neutral in thematter. President Johnson was optimistic for a settlement in the region. 7 Along with “intelligence about Israeli strength, LBJ was reluctant to send warships to the gulf.” 8Richard Helms, the former Director of the CIA stated at a “Tuesday” breakfast in the White House, “President Johnson had discussed the pressure he was under from Israel and the pro-Israel members of the U.S. government

***

Reconnaissance of the USS Liberty [Cogent Report Published in 1986]

Of all that has been written concerning the attack, one of the most cogent reports is that of Lieutenant Commander Walter L. Jacobsen, JA GC, USN, who conducted a legal examination and analysis of the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty that was published in the Naval Law Review in the winter of 1986.

His examination included significant and concise details of Israeli air and surface forces activity leading up to and executing the attack and is used extensively below in summarizing the event. It was the fourth day of the “Six Day War.”

In the early morning hours of June 8, 1967 Israel conducted aircraft surveillance on the USS Liberty, a 455-foot, 10,680-ton vessel.

The Liberty was painted with the distinctive U.S. Navy painting scheme, white numbering and lettering with a black shadow.

• The Liberty’s only weapons were defensive in nature: 

four fifty-caliber machine guns. These guns were mounted for an anti-boarder mission and not for shooting at aircraft.

• [Liberty flying GIANT HOLIDAY 5FT X 8FT  U.S. FLAG] At 7:20 a.m. Lieutenant James Ennes, the deck officer aboard the Liberty, checked the ship’s flag and felt the flag was not big enough for the current situation regarding the nearby conflict. 

He had a new flag hoisted on the ship’s tripod mainmast that measured five by eight feet.

• [ISRAELs saw GIANT HOLIDAY U.S. FLAG] At 9 a.m., when the Liberty was circled by a jet, the American flag was waving in the wind. 11 LT Ennes stated, “I checked the flag. It was standing out in eight knots of relative wind, clearly displayed for anyone who might look.”

• [UNMARKED ISRAEL FIGHTER JETS (so Russian) CIRCLED THREE TIMES, CLOSE ENCOUNTER] At 10 a.m., two Mystere jets circled the ship three times, close enough for the Liberty crew members to count the rockets and see the pilots, yet no national identification markings were yet no national identification markings were visible on the planes.  The flag was still blowing in a light breeze, clearly visible. LT Ennes continued to observe the planes and the pilots in his binoculars.

• [I COULD SEE PILOTS, THEREFORE THEY CAN SEE ME] “I decided that if I could see the pilots in their cockpits, the pilots could certainly see our flag and no doubt our ship’s name and number.”

• [THREE-TIMES TO SEE ME] The fighter aircraft conducted three complete orbits of the Liberty before disappearing from view. At 1245, the last reconnaissance mission on the Liberty was conducted by an Israeli French built Noratlas twin propeller engine aircraft often referred to as the “Flying Box Car.” 

• [ISRAELI PILOTS RADIOED CONFIRMATION OF IDENTITY OF U.S.VESSEL] “A Chief Petty Officer had come to the bridge to tell LT Ennes, ‘No sweat, Lieutenant, we can hear the pilots reporting by radio that we are American.”

However, based on the air reconnaissance, Israel had dispatched three Israeli motor torpedo boats (MTBs) from the port of Ashdod to intercept the Liberty forty- five minutes earlier.   

***

Attack on the USS Liberty

At 1:58 p.m., Israel commenced the attack on the Liberty from the air with a first wave of three jets.

• “The first two planes, which attacked with rockets, had no national markings. Soon, other jets joined the first group.

• The second group of jets was armed with napalm, and they proceeded to bomb the ship with jellied gasoline and with rockets.”  

One of the aircraft, “through extraordinary luck or fantastic marksmanship, disabled nearly every radio antenna on the ship,” temporarily causing a complete loss in shipboard communications and preventing any calls for help.

The crew had earlier intercepted Israeli communications indicating that the three MTBs were underway to intercept the Liberty. The intercepted conversations identified the Liberty as an “American Ship.”  

In a recent phone interview with LCDR James M. Ennes, Jr. (Retired), he described that day when, as a Lieutenant, he was assigned Signal Bridge watch located one level above the Bridge.

“I could see the jets flying around in a column and then coming right down the center line of the ship during the initial phases of the attack. After all the antennas were shot up, I remember ET3 James T. Halbardier fixing stringed cable to an antenna 20 to 24 feet above the deck down to the transmitting room.”

DISTRESS CALL SENT 12 MINUTES AFTER ISRAELI ATTACK BEGAN

It took twelve minutes to get the first message off notifying the fleet that the Liberty had been attacked.

SEVEN X THIRTEEN FEET FLAG HOISTED

Following the 25 to 30 minutes of an intense air attack by at least twelve sorties, Commander (CDR) William Loren McGonagle, the commanding officer of the USS Liberty “had ordered the holiday size American flag, measuring seven by thirteen feet, hoisted to replace the five by eight foot flag that had been shot down by the jets.” 24 “The Liberty had been hit repeatedly by machine guns, 30 mm cannon and napalm” from Mirage and Mystere fighter bombers. 25 At this point, the Liberty’s crew still had no idea who was behind the attack. As the jets departed, the MTBs were in visual range. 

SIGNALED REPEATEDLY TO ISRAELI WAR SHIPS--UNTIL ISRAELIS SHOT OUT HIS LAMP

The bridge area was so full of smoke, CDR McGonagle was unable to signal the approaching MTBs.  However, at another location on the ship, “a ship’s signalman also spotted the signaling by the MTBs and kept signaling back, ‘U.S. Ship,’ until his lamp was shot out, and he was wounded.”   

At 1427 [30 MINUTES UNDER ATTACK], the MTB’s commenced strafing the Liberty. 

“The MTBs fired five torpedoes. 

Four of the torpedoes completely missed the ship. 

The fifth hit the ship directly amidships, in the cryptologic spaces, leaving a forty-foot hole, killing twenty-five men, and trapping fifty more in the flooded compartment. 

After firing the torpedoes, the MTBs circled the ship at close range, machine-gunning anyone who came on deck.”  

• The MTBs final offensive act was to shoot the three remaining undamaged and unmanned rubber rafts. 

• The MTBs departed for homeport at approximately 1515. 

• The MTBs were followed by the Israeli Defense Force Aerospatiale SA321 Super Frelon (Hornet) helicopters that orbited the Liberty and then departed. The SA321’s were designed for heavy assault missions and were loaded with combat troops.

At 1600 [TWO HOURS FROM START OF ATTACK], a message was sent from the Liberty passing clarifying information on the attack, including identifying the patrol boats as Israeli. 

ISRAELI NAVY OFFERS ASSISTANCE, DECLINED AS IN NO FUCKING WAY YOU BASTARD MOTHERFUCKERS

• At 1632 the MTBs returned and offered assistance to the ship. They were given a negative response by CDR McGonagle, and they departed. 34 The ruthless attack by a U.S. ally was over. 

BACK IN WASHINGTON DC, SOME CONCERNS (but NOT for the US NAVY sailors)

THE RESPONSE FROM WASHINGTON DC-PRESIDENT JOHNSON, DEFENSE SECRETARY ROBERT MCNAMARA (who is responsible and/or complicit in multiple massacres of Asians by INDISCRIMINATE BOMBING and Proportional]

• The attack on the USS Liberty created a host of problems and concerns at the strategic level for the U.S. leadership. 

• The fear in the White House was that the limited information coming in on the attack might be inaccurate and unreliable. 35 Phil G. Goulding, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs for Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, wrote, “Our ignorance in Washington was abysmal: 

• We did not know who was attacking her; we did not know why she was being attacked; we did not know whether she had sunk or was soon to sink.” McNamara recalled the initial confusion and doubt of the hour: “When the Liberty was attacked, we had a task force in the Mediterranean. We received a flash report here in the Pentagon at the time of attack. We examined the situation. My first reaction – that is the question I immediately posed to the Chiefs and the Joint Staff was: Is it not likely it was attacked by Soviet forces?”

•  “The next obvious answer was it had been attacked by Egyptians. Who else would have done it if it were not the Soviets or the Egyptians? Well, that too proved in error. It took us a while to find that out.”   [unmarked israeli combat jets]

• The first decision required was how to protect a U.S. Navy ship in distress. 

  • “Authority was given to use any force required to defend the Liberty from further attacks.” The option of retaliation was raised, but the administration did not know the identity of the attackers. 

• A second order was issued to Sixth Fleet ships to steam toward the Liberty. 

The closest U.S. Navy ships were several hundred miles away. 

[ISRAELIS ARE JAMMING LIBERTY'S COMMS, block Distress Calls; US NAVY sends Assistance]

The Liberty attempted to contact Sixth Fleet for assistance, but found the communications frequencies jammed except for the few seconds the rockets were in-flight to the target. 

A message went out and was received by the USS Saratoga and relayed to the flagship USS Little Rock. Commander of Sixth Fleet, ADM William Martin, ordered both the USS Saratoga and the USS America to immediately launch American aircraft in defense of the USS Liberty.  

Ennes stated that on 8 June 1967, ADM Martin initially referred to the Liberty as “SS Liberty.” He did not know who the Liberty was. Captain Tully, the USS Saratoga’s skipper, told Ennes several years after the attack, 

“I had pilots in the cockpits and steam in the catapults. I had sent help.”  

• The USS America, commanded by Captain Donald D. Engen, had just stood down from General Quarters drill when the Liberty distress message came in. The USS Saratoga was able to respond within minutes, but the USS America was not prepared to launch immediately.  

• President Lyndon B. Johnson directed Commander Sixth Fleet to immediately return the aircraft to base.” 

RADM GEIS SAYS WTF? RETURN TO BASE?

It was in this immediate time frame that RADM Lawrence R. Geis, Commander of the Carrier Task Force in the Mediterranean Sea, protested the decision of SECDEF [MCNAMARA] to NOT allow USS Saratoga aircraft to protect their own U.S. Navy ship and crew. 

ON THE PHONE WITH PRESIDENT JOHNSON

RADM Geis asked to speak with President Johnson, who came to the phone and told Geis to recall the aircraft and 

“that he didn’t care if the ship sunk, he would not embarrass his allies.” 

This was corroborated by Chief Petty Officer Hart, who was assigned to a U.S. Navy relay station in Morocco that handled communications between Washington and the 6th Fleet. He remembered listening as McNamara ordered RADM Geis to recall the jets. 

When Geis protested that the Liberty was under attack and needed help, Hart said that McNamara retorted, 

“President [Lyndon] Johnson is not going to go to war or embarrass an American ally over a few sailors.” 

MCNAMARA DOESN'T REMEMBER in 2007, but 1967 HE SAID ISRAELI'S MADE "AN UNDERSTANDABLE WARTIME ERROR."

Robert McNamara, now 92, claims that he cannot recall the details of the Liberty attack. 

Mr. McNamara reiterated to John Crewdson of the Chicago Tribune in 2007 that he had “absolutely no recollection of what I did that day. . .I have a memory that I didn’t know at the time what was going on.” [TOTAL BULLSHIT--AN ATTACK U.S. NAVY AND HEAD OF DEPT OF DEFENSE DOESN'T FUCKING REMEMBER - LYING MOTHERFUCKER]

However, a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in 1967, McNamara conceded that: 

the attack was an “inexcusable error in judgment and professional tactics.” He also insisted that it was “an understandable wartime error.” 

CAPT McGonagle’s, Commanding Officer USS LIBERTY Open Letter to President Clinton

CAPT McGonagle died on March 3, 1999, four months after he sent this letter to President Clinton.  Jonathan Pollard received life in prison for violations of the Espionage Act; he was release on November 20, 2015.  He served 30 years.

CONGRESSIONAL MEDAL OF HONOR SOCIETY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CHARTERED BY THE CONGRESS

FROM THE DESK OF

CAPTAIN WILLIAM L. Mc GONAGLE, USN (RET.)

MEMBER, CHOH SOCIETYa

October, 24, 1998

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT CLINTON

Re:  Jonathan POLLARD

1. Please DO NOT release Jonathan POLLARD, a convicted traitor to the United Stations, to the Government of Israel, as port of the Middle East peace process, or for any other reason.

2. Please DO NOT release Jonathan POLLARD to the Government of Israel where he could continue to cause irreparable security harm to the United States of America. 

3. Please DO NOT release Jonathan POLLARD to the Government of Israel until and unless the Government of Israel acknowledges, in writing and publicly, that the Government of Israel armed forces (air and naval) deliberately attack USS LIBERTY (AGTR-5) (A Technical Research Ship) on June 8, 1967.

Israeli aircraft conducted surveillance of the ship within moments of our arrival on station off the coast of the Sinai on the morning of June 8, 1967.  The ship was soon identified as USS LIBERTY by Israeli Naval Headquarters, by referring to “JANE’S FIGHTING SHIPS” 1966 or 1967 issue, which showed a photograph of the ship and listed in detail its characteristics.  

In fact, an identification “tower” was place on their Battle Plot with an “A” on the tower to identify the ship as an American ship. The plot was not kept up to date, and was removed when the watch changed at noon that day.  The ship was overflown on several occasions before the attack commenced.  An Israeli Naval Officer went to the American Embassy Naval Attaché to obtain information that the ship was indeed USS LIBERTY, but the US Naval Attaché did not have our operating schedule, so he could neither confirm or deny that the ship was the USS LIBERTY.

When the attack began about 2:00 p.m. (local time) the ship was subjected to relentless and repeated murderous fire from the attacking aircraft (which were unmarked – a violation of international law).  The gun crews of the two (2) bow .50 cal. machine guns were killed during the initial strike on the ship. We could not man the starboard bridge level .50 cal.  machine gun, because our lifeboat was burning one (1) deck below.  Again the heat of the flames prevented anyone from approaching the gun.  We could not man the port bridge level. 50 cal.  machine gun, because two (2) 55 gallon gasoline drums were burning furiously one (1) deck below.  Again the heat of the flames prevented anyone from approaching the gun.  WE WERE DEFENSELESS against the onslaught of eight (8) or more firing passing by at least four (4) aircraft, and the strafing and launching of five (5) torpedoes by three (3) motor torpedo boats.  That a larger number of casualties was not reported is a tribute to the fighting spirit to the officers, crew, civilians, and Marines, when they had nothing to defends themselves with, during our awesome hours of peril.

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND:

USS LIBERTY (AGTR-5), a Technical Research ship was sailing legally and peacefully, in international waters in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea, twelve and one-half (12.5) nautical miles from the nearest land off the coast of the Sinai during the Arab-Israeli SIX Day war, when it was attacked, without warning or provocation, by four (4) unidentified jet fighter aircraft, firing rockets, machine guns, and napalm.  The ship was then strafed and torpedoed by three (3) Israeli motor torpedo boats.  One (1) torpedo exploded in the Research spaces of the ship, where it caused the majority of the fatalities.  The Government of Israel shortly after the attack acknowledged that their armed forces conducted the assault.  The apology for the attack was accepted by the US government.

Thirty-four (34) officers, sailors, a civilian, and a US Marine were killed or died of their wounds as a result of the attack.  One hundred seventy one (171) additional crew members received wounds as a result of the attack.  The Government of Israel did compensate the families of those killed, the individual’s that were wounded, and eventually paid reparations for the damage done to the ship and its equipment.

The ship remained afloat, in spite of the extensive hull damage from the torpedo explosion, and after hull repairs in Malta, the ship returned to Little Creek, VA, apparently to avoid undue publicity that the ship probably would have received had it returned to its home port of Norfolk, VA. No high Executive Branch members welcomed the ship home to the USA, as was the practice in later years, such as the Battleship IOWA, and other incidence.

Except for a few high ranking naval officers, no one has felt our pain of not knowing exactly why the ship was attack.  Over thirty-one (31) years after the attack, the crew is entitled to know the details concerning the attack by the Government of Israel and also the details of the role the U.S. Government in the entire affair.  

Why were our aircraft recalled to their carrier on two (2) occasions before they reached our location to assess the situation and  what official ordered the recall after “Hot Line” communication was established with Moscow to alert Nasser that the planes were being sent to see what the condition of USS LIBERTY was.  

None of the planes ever reached our location.  For over seventeen (17) hours we received no assistance from US forces in the Mediterranean.

This is the only US Navy ship attack, by a foreign nation, involving a large loss of life and so many personnel injured that has never been accorded a full Congressional hearing.

About a year after the attack, USS LIBERTY was dismantled and scrapped.

The ship was awarded the Combat Action ribbon, and the Presidential Unit Citation, and many crew members received individual combat award (Navy Cross (two (2) posthumously), Silver Star, Bronze Star, etc.).

I was the Commanding Officer, USS LIBERTY (AGTR-5) at the time of the attack, and was presented the Medal of Honor, by the Secretary of the Navy, at the Navy Yard on June 11, 1968, for my performance of duty during the attack and post-attack recovery period.

4. Please DO NOT delay release of Jonathan POLLARD, until after the elections on November 3, 1998, if it is your intention to release him, with or without due consultation with US  military and security experts.  If you are going to release him in any case, please let the people know of your intentions and executive action before they vote in the upcoming elections.

Very respectfully,

William L. Mc GONAGLE

Captain, USN (Ret.) 444-18-0694

500 e. Amado Rd., #612

Palm Springs, CA 92252-6498

(760) 325-0709

Read a copy of the original letter:

From <https://stationhypo.com/2023/10/24/capt-mcgonagles-commanding-officer-uss-liberty-open-ltr-president-clinton/>

Remembering CAPT William L McGonagle, USN, Commanding Officer USS Liberty (AGTR 5)

William Loren McGonagle was born in Wichita, Kansas, on 19 November 1925 and attended secondary school and college in California. He was active in the Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps and was commissioned in the rank of Ensign upon graduation from the University of Southern California in June 1947. After service in the destroyer Frank Knox and minesweeper Partridge during 1947-50, he served in the minesweeper Kite during the extensive Korean War minesweeping operations that earned her a Presidential Unit Citation. From 1951 to 1966, he was assigned to various positions ashore and afloat, including command of the fleet tug Mataco in 1957-58 and the salvage ship Reclaimer in 1961-63.

In April 1966, Commander McGonagle became Commanding Officer of the technical research ship Liberty, taking her on a number of communications and electronic emissions monitoring missions during the next year. On 8 June 1967, while carrying out her important function off the Sinai Peninsula during the war between Israel and Egypt, Liberty was attacked and severely damaged by Israeli aircraft and motor torpedo boats. For his heroism on that occasion, Commander McGonagle was awarded the Medal of Honor and his ship received the Presidential Unit Citation.

After promotion to the rank of Captain in October 1967, McGonagle commanded the new ammunition ship Kilauea and led the NROTC Unit at the University of Oklahoma. He retired from active duty in 1974. Captain William L. McGonagle died at Palm Springs, California, on 3 March 1999.

Source: history.navy.mil

From <https://stationhypo.com/2023/11/19/remembering-capt-william-l-mcgonagle-usn-commanding-officer-uss-liberty-agtr-5/>

[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 130 (Monday, October 11, 2004)]

[Extensions of Remarks]

[Pages E1886-E1889]

From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [REPORT LINK www.gpo.gov]

IN RECOGNITION OF ADMIRAL THOMAS H. MOORER

HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.of Michigan

in the house of representatives

Thursday, October 7, 2004

   Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, on February 5 of this year, a legendary  American naval hero passed away in Bethesda, Maryland. Admiral Thomas  H. Moorer epitomized the finest qualities of dedication and national  service. His distinguished naval career spanned 41 years, including  service as a naval aviator, as one of the first pilots off the ground  during the attack on Pearl Harbor, as a decorated hero of numerous  combat missions in the Southwest Pacific and the Battle of Midway, as  Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet, as commander of NATO's U.S.  Atlantic Command and the U.S. Atlantic Fleet, becoming the only officer  in the Navy's history to command both our Atlantic and Pacific Fleets,  as Chief of Naval Operations, as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,  and as a tireless advocate for American veterans. Admiral Moorer was  instrumental in establishing the United States Navy Memorial on  Pennsylvania Avenue. In numerous appearances before Congressional  Committees, Admiral Moorer provided valuable testimony on a variety of  national security concerns.

  Capping this extraordinary career, Admiral Moorer made his final  appearance on Capitol Hill on October 22, 2003, as Chairman of the  Independent Commission of Inquiry into the 1967 attack on the USS  Liberty. It is a privilege for me to introduce the Findings of the  Independent Commission of Inquiry Into the Israeli Attack on the USS  Liberty into the Congressional Record.

Findings of the Independent Commission of Inquiry Into the Israeli Attack on the USS ``LIBERTY,'' the Recall of Military Rescue Support Aircraft While the Ship Was Under Attack, and the Subsequent Cover-Up by the United States Government

We, the undersigned, having undertaken an independent investigation of Israel's attack on the USS Liberty, including eyewitness testimony from surviving crewmembers, a review of naval and other official records, an examination of official statements by the Israeli and American governments, a study of the conclusions of all previous official inquiries, and a consideration of important new evidence and recent statements from individuals having direct knowledge of the attack or the cover up, hereby find the following:

 1. That on June 8, 1967, after eight hours of aerial surveillance, Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against the USS Liberty, the world's most sophisticated intelligence ship, inflicting 34 dead and 172 wounded American servicemen (a casualty rate of seventy percent, in a crew of 294);

 2. That the Israeli air attack lasted approximately 25 minutes, during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on the Liberty's bridge, and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels;

 3. That the torpedo boat attack involved not only the firing of torpedoes, but the machine-gunning of the Liberty's firefighters and stretcher-bearers as they struggled to save their ship and crew; the Israeli torpedo boats later returned to machine-gun at close range three of the Liberty's life rafts that had been lowered into the water by survivors to rescue the most seriously wounded;

 4. That there is compelling evidence that Israel's attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew; evidence of such intent is supported by statements from Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Undersecretary of State George Ball, former CIA director Richard Helms, former NSA directors Lieutenant General William Odom, USA (Ret.), Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, USN (Ret.), and Marshal Carter; former NSA deputy directors Oliver Kirby and Major General John Morrison, USAF (Ret.); and former Ambassador Dwight Porter, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon in 1967;  

5. That in attacking the USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States;

6. That fearing conflict with Israel, the White House deliberately prevented the U.S. Navy from coming to the defense of the Liberty by recalling Sixth Fleet military rescue support while the ship was under attack; evidence of the recall of rescue aircraft is supported by statements of Captain Joe Tully, Commanding Officer of the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga, and Rear Admiral Lawrence Geis, the Sixth Fleet carrier division commander, at the time of the attack; never before in American naval history has a rescue mission been cancelled when an American ship was under attack;

7. That although the Liberty was saved from almost certain destruction through the heroic efforts of the ship's Captain, William L. McGonagle (MOH), and his brave crew, surviving crewmembers were later threatened with ``court-martial, imprisonment or worse'' if they exposed the truth; and were abandoned by their own government;

8. That due to the influence of Israel's powerful supporters in the United States, the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack from the American people;

9. That due to continuing pressure by the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, this attack remains the only serious naval incident that has never been thoroughly investigated by Congress; to this day, no surviving crewmember has been permitted to officially and publicly testify about the attack;

10. That there has been an official cover-up without precedent in American naval history; the existence of such a cover-up is now supported by statements of Rear Admiral Merlin Staring, USN (Ret.), former Judge Advocate General of the Navy; and Captain Ward Boston, USN, (Ret.), the chief counsel to the Navy's 1967 Court of Inquiry of the Liberty attack;

11. That the truth about Israel's attack and subsequent White House cover-up continues to be officially concealed from the American people to the present day and is a national disgrace;

12. That a danger to our national security exists whenever our elected officials are willing to subordinate American interests to those of any foreign nation, and specifically are unwilling to challenge Israel's interests when they conflict with American interests; this policy, evidenced by the failure to defend the USS Liberty and the subsequent official cover-up of the Israeli attack, endangers the safety of Americans and the security of the United States.

Whereupon, we, the undersigned, in order to fulfill our duty to the brave crew of the USS Liberty and to all Americans who are asked to serve in our Armed Forces, hereby call upon the Department of the Navy, the Congress of the United States and the American people to immediately take the following actions:

First, That a new Court of Inquiry be convened by the Department of the Navy, operating with Congressional oversight, to take public testimony from surviving crewmembers; and to thoroughly investigate the circumstances of the attack on the USS Liberty, with full cooperation from the National Security Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency and the military intelligence services, and to determine Israel's possible motive in launching said attack on a U.S. naval vessel;

Second, That every appropriate committee of the Congress of the United States investigate the actions of the White House and Defense Department that prevented the rescue of the USS Liberty, thereafter threatened her surviving officers and men if they exposed the truth, and covered up the true circumstances of the attack from the American people; and

Third, That the eighth day of June of every year be proclaimed to be hereafter known as USS Liberty Remembrance Day, in order to commemorate the Liberty's heroic crew; and to educate the American people of the danger to our national security inherent in any passionate attachment of our elected officials for any foreign nation.

 affidavit of captain ward boston, usn, jag (ret.), Senior counsel to the U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry

For more than 30 years, I have remained silent on the topic of the USS Liberty. I am a military man and when orders come in from the Secretary of Defense and President of the United States, I follow them.

However, recent attempts to rewrite history compel me to share the truth.

In June of 1967, while serving as a Captain in the Judge Advocates General Department of the Navy, I was assigned as senior legal counsel for the Navy's Court of Inquiry into the brutal attack on the USS Liberty, which had occurred on June 8th. 

ONE WEEK TO GATHER EVIDENCE

The late Admiral Isaac C. Kidd, president of the Court, and I were given only one week to gather evidence for the Navy's official investigation into the attack. Admiral John S. McCain, Jr., then Commander-in-chief, Naval Forces Europe (CINCUSNAVEUR), at his headquarters in London, had charged Admiral Kidd (in a letter dated June 10, 1967) to 

``inquire into all the pertinent facts and circumstances leading to and connected with the armed attack: damage resulting therefrom; and deaths of and injuries to Naval personnel.'' 

Despite the short amount of time we were given, we gathered a vast amount of evidence, including hours of heartbreaking testimony from the young survivors.

• The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. I am certain that the Israeli pilots that undertook the attack, as well as their superiors who had ordered the attack, were aware that the ship was American.

• I saw the flag, which had visibly identified the ship as American, riddled with bullet holes, and heard testimony that made it clear that the Israelis intended there be no survivors. 

WAR CRIME-KILLING OR ATTEMPTING TO KILL WOUNDED & SURVIVORS

• Not only did the Israelis attack the ship with napalm, gunfire, and missiles, Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned three lifeboats that had been launched in an attempt by the crew to save the most seriously wounded--a war crime.

HASBARA-ZIONIST PROPAGANDA TO COVER-UP ISRAELI ATROCITIES

I am outraged at the efforts of the apologists for Israel in this country to claim that this attack was a case of ``mistaken identity.'' In particular, the recent publication of Jay Cristol's book, The Liberty Incident, twists the facts and misrepresents the views of those of us who investigated the attack. It is Cristol's insidious attempt to whitewash the facts that has pushed me to speak out.

• I know from personal conversations I had with Admiral Kidd that President Lyndon Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara ordered him to conclude that the attack was a case of ``mistaken identity'' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. 

• Contrary to the misinformation presented by Cristol and others, it is important for the American people to know that it is clear that Israel is responsible for deliberately attacking an American ship and murdering American sailors, whose bereaved shipmates have lived with this egregious conclusion for many years.

commonly asked questions about the uss ``liberty''

1. What happened to the USS Liberty?

The USS Liberty was a virtually unarmed American Navy ship that was attacked by Israeli planes and torpedo boats on June 8, 1967.

2. What were the American casualties?

34 American sailors were killed and 172 injured that day, a casualty rate of 70%. This is the highest casualty rate ever inflicted upon a U.S. naval vessel that remained afloat after an attack.

3. What was Israel's explanation for the attack?

Israel claimed the attack was ``a case of mistaken identity''; that they didn't know it was an American ship.

4. Why would we question that explanation more than 30 years later?

The ship's survivors were afraid to speak out in the early years because of threats of ``court martial, prison or worse'' if they did not remain silent. However, as time passed, they have stepped forward to say the attack was deliberate.

Recently, high government and military officials have suggested that not only was the attack deliberate, but that the US government covered up the incident.

Today, an Independent Commission of Inquiry has found that Israel committed ``an act of war'' against the United States (see Findings of Independent Commission).

In addition, the Navy's chief attorney to the original 1967 military Court of Inquiry has issued a statement that orders to cover up the incident were issued by President Lyndon Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara [see Statement of Captain Ward Boston, USN, JAG (Ret.)].  

5. Did Israel have reason to believe the USS Liberty was an Egyptian ship?

Israel says its pilots and torpedo boat Commanders confused the USS Liberty with the El Quseir, an Egyptian ship allegedly firing upon its forces in the Sinai. But there was no Egyptian naval bombardment that day; nor did the El Quseir (an unarmed 1920s-era horse carrier out of service in Alexandria) bear any resemblance to the Liberty.

6. Isn't it difficult to identify a ship if you're in an airplane?

In 1967, the USS Liberty was the most sophisticated intelligence ship in the world, with dozens of large antennas, including a large moon-bounce ``satellite-dish'' mounted on a tall structure near the stern. It may have been one of the most easily identifiable ships of any navy in the world. With a displacement of 10,000 tons, it was four times the size of the antique Egyptian transport it is claimed to have resembled. Freshly painted, the Liberty carried large white identification numbers on its bow. Egyptian hull numbers are painted black.

7. Doesn't Israel say that the Liberty flew no flag?

According to American survivors, a 5-by-8 feet American flag was hoisted early that morning and was flying all day until it was shot away by attacking aircraft. Within several minutes, it was replaced by the giant 7-by-13 feet holiday ensign, which flew for the duration of the attack.

8. Could Israel have thought the ship was in a war zone, acting suspiciously?

According to surviving crewmembers, Israeli reconnaissance aircraft closely studied the Liberty over an eight-hour period prior to the attack, one flying within two hundred feet of the ship. At all times the Liberty was a clearly marked American ship in international waters, proceeding at a speed of only 5 knots.

9. What was the weather like the day of the attack?

Weather reports confirm that it was a clear day with unlimited visibility. The Israeli reconnaissance planes could have seen the Liberty's crew sunbathing on the upper decks just before the attack. The flag was flying in a 12-knot breeze for most of the afternoon.

10. Doesn't Israel say they ended the attack the minute they saw someone hoist an American flag?

The Israeli attack by combined air and naval forces spanned two hours--as long as the attack on Pearl Harbor.

The air attack alone lasted approximately 25 minutes:

consisting of more than 30 sorties by approximately 12 separate planes using napalm, cannon, and rockets which left 821 holes in the ship. Following the air attack, three Israeli motor torpedo boats torpedoed the ship, causing a 40' x 40' wide hole in her hull, and machine-gunning firefighters and stretcher-bearers attempting to save their ship and crew.

More than 3,000 machine-gun bullet holes were later counted on the Liberty's hull.

After the attack was thought to have ended, three life rafts were lowered into the water to rescue the most seriously wounded. The Israeli torpedo boats returned and machine-gunned these life rafts at close range. This was followed by the approach of two large Israeli Army assault helicopters filled with armed commandos carrying what appeared to be explosive satchels (they departed after hovering over the ship for several minutes, making no attempt to communicate).

11. Did the Liberty send out a distress signal when it was under attack?

Throughout the air attack, the Liberty's radio operators found it difficult to transmit a distress signal because the attacking Israeli aircraft jammed all five of the Liberty's American, not Egyptian, emergency radio channels. However, a call for help did reach the U.S. Navy command in the Mediterranean.

12. What was the American response time?

Although American carrier-based air support was only 40 minutes away, help did not reach the USS Liberty for seventeen hours. Navy fighters were launched from the aircraft carriers America and Saratoga while the Liberty was under attack.

However, they were quickly recalled by the White House.

This is the only instance in American naval history where a rescue mission was cancelled when an American ship was under attack.

13. Why would Israel have deliberately attacked an American ship?

Israel's motive for launching the attack has never been determined with certainty. This is why an impartial investigation is critical. One hypothesis is that Israel intended to sink the ship (with no survivors) and blame Egypt because this might have brought the United States into the 1967 war. Another hypothesis is that the Liberty was gathering intelligence about activities that Israel did not want revealed. Examples might include the massacre of Egyptian prisoners of war that was then occurring in the Sinai, as well as Israel's impending invasion of Syria.

14. Has the incident been investigated in the past?

Some people say that there have been ``thirteen official investigations'' all concluding the attack was a case of mistaken identity. Several were conducted by Israel. Upon examination, however, every one is based upon the conclusions of the original 1967 U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry, which accepted the Israeli version, but which has been exposed and discredited by its chief attorney as a cover-up.

15. Did the surviving crew members testify in the other investigations?

In not one of these ``investigations'' were any of the Liberty's surviving crewmembers permitted to publicly testify.

16. Why would the White House prevent the rescue of an American ship?

This is, perhaps, the most disturbing question arising out of Israel's attack.

It is why there needs to be a thorough investigation of the actions taken by the White House and the Secretary of Defense.

Why did they order the recall of the planes that had been sent to rescue the Liberty?

Why did they order that the survivors be silenced and the true facts be withheld from the American people?  

17. What kind of investigation are you calling for?

We are calling for a new Court of Inquiry by the Department of the Navy, with congressional oversight, to take public testimony from surviving crewmembers and otherwise thoroughly examine the circumstances of the attack.

18. Why are you calling for a naval--and not a congressional--investigation?

We believe this would remove the inquiry from the political pressures traditionally exerted by special interest groups upon individual congressional offices. Fundraising and election pressures have prevented an honest investigation from being conducted for the past 36 years.

19. Why is this significant for the American people 36 years later?

We have a duty to the crew of the USS Liberty, while the survivors are still alive to testify, and while the perpetrators can be brought to justice. Furthermore, any policies that paralyze our elected leadership to the extent they become unable or unwilling to protect Americans and American interests, endangers not only the safety of all Americans but also the national security of the United States.

20. Doesn't America have a special relationship with Israel? 

No nation or people should be above the law; nor should American interests be subordinated to the interests of any foreign nation. Those Israelis responsible for ordering the attack and the resulting murder of American sailors must be held accountable for their actions.

Remembering CAPT William L McGonagle, USN, Commanding Officer USS Liberty (AGTR 5)

William Loren McGonagle was born in Wichita, Kansas, on 19 November 1925 and attended secondary school and college in California. He was active in the Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps and was commissioned in the rank of Ensign upon graduation from the University of Southern California in June 1947. After service in the destroyer Frank Knox and minesweeper Partridge during 1947-50, he served in the minesweeper Kite during the extensive Korean War minesweeping operations that earned her a Presidential Unit Citation. From 1951 to 1966, he was assigned to various positions ashore and afloat, including command of the fleet tug Mataco in 1957-58 and the salvage ship Reclaimer in 1961-63.

In April 1966, Commander McGonagle became Commanding Officer of the technical research ship Liberty, taking her on a number of communications and electronic emissions monitoring missions during the next year. On 8 June 1967, while carrying out her important function off the Sinai Peninsula during the war between Israel and Egypt, Liberty was attacked and severely damaged by Israeli aircraft and motor torpedo boats. For his heroism on that occasion, Commander McGonagle was awarded the Medal of Honor and his ship received the Presidential Unit Citation.

After promotion to the rank of Captain in October 1967, McGonagle commanded the new ammunition ship Kilauea and led the NROTC Unit at the University of Oklahoma. He retired from active duty in 1974. Captain William L. McGonagle died at Palm Springs, California, on 3 March 1999.

Source: history.navy.mil

From <https://stationhypo.com/2023/11/19/remembering-capt-william-l-mcgonagle-usn-commanding-officer-uss-liberty-agtr-5/>

Israel says it will probe 1967 mass grave of Egyptian soldiers

Israeli media reports dozens of Egyptian soldiers killed in 1967 war are buried under what is now an Israeli tourist park.

Published On 11 Jul 2022 AlJazeera

Israeli media reports dozens of Egyptian soldiers killed in 1967 war are buried under what is now an Israeli tourist park.

Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid has said his office would investigate reports of a mass grave in central Israel containing the bodies of Egyptian commandos who were killed during the 1967 Middle East war.

Lapid’s office said on Sunday that Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi had brought up the issue in a call after two Israeli newspapers published witness accounts suggesting there was an unmarked grave near Latrun, an area between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv where Israel’s army fought the Egyptian soldiers decades ago.

According to the statement, Lapid directed his military secretary “to examine the issue in depth and to update Egyptian officials”.

Earlier on Sunday, Egypt’s foreign ministry had said in a statement the Egyptian embassy in Tel Aviv had been assigned to communicate with the Israeli authorities to “clarify what is being circulated in the media, call for an investigation to verify the credibility of this information, and urgently inform the Egyptian authorities of the relevant details”.

Newspapers Yedioth Ahronoth and Haaretz published archival material and interviews with residents recounting how dozens of Egyptian soldiers killed in the battle may be buried there.

According to the reports, about 80 Egyptian soldiers killed during the war were buried under what is now a popular Israeli tourist park.

The soldiers were reportedly killed on June 5, 1967, when fighting broke out between Israeli troops and a group of Egyptian soldiers in Kibbutz Nahshon, a settlement in the now illegally occupied West Bank.

After the soldiers were killed, Israeli authorities dug a 20-metre grave and buried the Egyptian soldiers’ bodies together, said the report.

Residents of the kibbutz attempted to speak out about the issue during the 1990s but were silenced by the Israeli army.

Known to the Arabs as the Naksa, meaning setback or defeat, the 1967 war saw Israel seize the remaining Palestinian territories of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza Strip, the Syrian Golan Heights and the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula.

From <https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/11/israel-says-investigate-1967-mass-grave-of-egyptian-soldiers>

Revealed: Dozens of Egyptian Commandos Are Buried Under an Israeli Tourist Attraction

During the 1967 war, an elite Egyptian army unit sustained heavy losses west of Jerusalem. The bodies were interred in a mass grave, in fields tended but not owned by Kibbutz Nahshon. The story was hushed up and the fields became part of the Mini Israel park. One of the people involved in burying some of the bodies wonders why no one has asked him about it until now

HAARETZ | Adam Raz | Jul 8, 2022 8:22 AM

Two pages of issue No. 60 of the Kibbutz Nahshon bulletin, distributed to members at the end of the 1967 Six-Day War, were glued together. After the bulletins had been mimeographed, an unknown person decided to silence the reservations members had in connection with the lands of neighboring Palestinian villages whose inhabitants had recently fled or been expelled, and whose houses had been razed to the ground. “It was decided,” says a note attached to a surviving, uncensored copy of the bulletin, “not to make our deliberations public.”

The question of whether to cultivate the now-ownerless lands nearby was not the only moral dilemma that vexed kibbutz members in the summer of 1967. An equally fraught issue was what to do about the large mass grave for Egyptian forces that was dug at the time in fields that were being tended by Nahshon but did not belong to it.

Few kibbutzniks are willing to talk about the subject today. It’s also not clear how many know the whole story. Indeed, interviews conducted by Haaretz and the Akevot Institute for Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Research in recent weeks show that even individuals at the highest levels of government and of the Israel Defense Forces were also unaware of the scale of this story – not least because of sweeping, decades-long censorship. Others, who did know about the episode, declined to talk about it on the record.

Now, however, the story can be told: Dozens of Egyptian commandos who were killed in the 1967 war were buried side by side in the soil of the kibbutz. Their remains are still there, apparently beneath a tract that, since the early 2000s, has been used by the Mini Israel park, a tourist attraction.

The first person to breach the conspiracy of silence was a member of Kibbutz Nahshon, Dan Meir, who approached the media with the story in the 1990s. The military censor, a unit in the IDF’s Military Intelligence Directorate, did not allow the revelations to be published. “I know that this information is harrowing,” Meir said in an interview back then. “It’s not right that they are still buried there and that we turned the plots of land into a full-fledged agricultural area. This story distresses and haunts me. Almost 30 years have passed [since 1967] and I feel a need to unburden myself. I want the Egyptians to be returned to their home.”

Meir, who has since died, was not alone in his views.

The Mini Israel tourist attraction. A few weeks ago, equipped with aerial and satellite photographs, Bloch succeeded, “after using the requisite caution,” in locating the mass grave, according to his best estimate, at the park’s eastern fringes.Credit: Tomer Appelbaum

• • •

Kibbutz Nahshon lies west of Jerusalem, abutting what was considered to be no-man’s land, on the border between Israel and Jordan, after Israel’s War of Independence – that is, quite close to the Green Line. It was founded by members of the left-wing Hashomer Hatzair youth movement in 1950, adjacent to the monastery at Latrun, which was established in 1890 (and became no-man’s land). Three Palestinian villages were located nearby, on what was Jordanian territory up until the Six-Day War: Bayt Nuba, Yalu and Imwas (Emmaus); the latter was closest to the kibbutz and to the site of the short battle that took place in the area in 1967. The events were well documented in the chronicles of the war. When it broke out, a small force of the Jordanian Legion was stationed in the Latrun enclave. It was joined by a commando unit from the Egyptian army’s 33rd Battalion, an elite group of about 100 soldiers.

The Egyptian force planned to capture the air bases at Lod, Tel Nof and Ramle. Opposite it were troops from the IDF’s 4th Territorial Brigade, a small contingent from the Nahal Brigade and a defense force comprised of residents from local Jewish communities. On the first day of fighting, June 5, 1967, the sides exchanged rounds of mortar shells. On the second day, the commander of the 4th Brigade, Moshe Yotvat, ordered the capture of the enclave. Within two hours the Latrun police station was taken, and a few hours later the entire surrounding Ayalon Valley was in the hands of the IDF.

• 1. • There's a Mass Palestinian Grave at a Popular Israeli Beach, Veterans Confess

     • State Archive Error Shows Israeli Censorship Guided by Concerns Over National Image

Lt. Col. (res.) Ze’ev Bloch is one of the founders of Kibbutz Nahshon. He served as the regional commander in the 1967 war and was later appointed governor of Hebron. In his memoirs he noted that the Egyptian commando unit was not organized in a professional way and not given up-to-date maps. “It’s important to grasp the depth of the confusion, shock and fear that gripped them,” he wrote. “In the absence of an organized command, they had no idea where they were… The truth is that the commando troops were lost in the field.”

The first clash with the Egyptians took place on June 6. The commandos hid in the fields of thorns that surrounded the kibbutz. About 25 of those soldiers were killed in a fire that was ignited in the fields, while they were being encircled by an Israeli infantry battalion under the command of Lt. Col. Yaakov Neria, and due to the use of phosphorus shells. Additional exchanges of fire that day and the following day brought the number of Egyptian fatalities to about 80.

This story distresses and haunts me. Almost 30 years have passed [since 1967] and I feel a need to unburden myself. I want the Egyptians to be returned to their home.

Dan Meir, in the '90s

Guy Khoury, a monk in the Latrun monastery, wrote in his diary that bodies of the commandos were “strewn along the way.” A few of the survivors were taken captive by the IDF, and some slipped into the huge convoy of refugees that departed from the three neighboring Palestinian villages.

In the afternoon of June 9, when the 4th Brigade was already heading east to continue fighting, en route to Beit Horon, a small force of IDF soldiers, accompanied by a bulldozer, arrived at Lot 5 of Kibbutz Nahshon (located on no-man’s land – not owned by the kibbutz but cultivated by it). The ground at the site was totally scorched in the wake of the fire that had raged during the three previous days. The unit dug a grave 20 meters long for the large number of Egyptians’ bodies; nothing was taken from them that might facilitate future identification. One Israeli soldier at the site counted some 80 bodies. A rumor in the kibbutz had it that one of its members had taken a watch from one soldier’s body and had worn it until the day he died. Another member told us that he took a souvenir from one of the bodies: a Kalashnikov rifle.

A pamphlet published about a year after the war, entitled “Our Six Days,” a copy of which is on file in the Kibbutz Nahshon archive, contains shocking testimony about the makeshift burial. Kibbutz member Rami Yizrael wrote: “It seems to me that two days after the war I was already sent to work with Asher cultivating the no-man’s land… When I passed by the road on the way to Lot 5, I sensed a horrible smell from the large mass grave of the commandos. When I couldn’t go on, because I felt dizzy, I decided to check things out. I discovered two arms and two legs that were severed from the Egyptian commandos, probably after they were hit by explosives and had been blown to bits. I buried them with a hoe. It didn’t help. The stench was still there. I went over to the large mass grave, and to my horror half a body was sticking out. I covered it quickly.”

A fire in Kibbutz Nashon, 2010. In 1967, the Egyptian commandos were surrounded by flames after being hit with phospherous shells.Credit: Hagai Ofen

• • •

A military source who later took an interest in the subject admitted to Haaretz that he was the one who demanded that the story of the incident be banned for publication over the years, because its revelation, he said, “was liable to generate a regional furor.” Indeed, as early as the 1990s, a report that the Yedioth Ahronoth daily intended to publish about the burial of the Egyptian commandos was banned by order of the military censor. In the materials remaining from the recently recovered article, which was based on an interview with kibbutz member Dan Meir, he relates that on the day after the burial, he noticed a huge mound.

“I was amazed that the army didn’t fence off the grave and didn’t even put up a small sign,” he said. (By contrast, kibbutz member Eli Peleg says today that the grave was actually marked temporarily by means of a pipe that was stuck into the ground and was visible for a year or two.)

Yosef Schreiber, another member of Nahshon who has since died, added in the banned article, “It is more hurtful to the kibbutz members that Canada Park was built on the grounds of three Arab villages, which were demolished in the war and their inhabitants expelled. The matter of the mass grave bothered them less.” However, Schreiber had no qualms about what he thought should be done: “I have no doubt that we need to approach the IDF and try to finish this business. I think that everyone needs to do whatever is possible in order return the Egyptians to their home.”

Similar sentiments were expressed by the late Binyamin Naor, another kibbutz member quoted in the same unpublished article. “I am certain that if Jews were buried like that, we would cry out to the heavens. Maybe the IDF should have marked the grave and fenced it off, but that didn’t happen. There was a war, and unpleasant things sometimes happen in war. Don’t forget that the Egyptians came here in order to murder us… [But] despite everything, I don’t rule out the possibility that on the other side there are Egyptian families who still believe that their sons’ remains will be returned.”

A pamphlet published about a year after the war. Kibbutz member Rami Yizrael wrote: "I sensed a horrible smell from the large mass grave of the commandos… I discovered two arms and two legs that were severed from the Egyptian commandos, probably after they were hit by explosives and had been blown to bits. I buried them with a hoe. It didn’t help."

• • •

During the Six-Day War, and in the War of Independence (1947-49), local Palestinian civilians and fighters, and troops from Arab countries who were killed in Israel, were buried wherever they fell in battle. It was only after the 1973 Yom Kippur War that arrangements were made for locating MIAs and exchanging bodies between the sides. Indeed, there were no such exchanges until 1974, so any foreign Arab or local Palestinian soldiers who were killed from 1947 until that year remained buried where they were.

Different methods of burial prevailed over the years at each battle site. In the War of Independence, as said, Palestinian residents or Arab fighters were frequently buried at the spot where they died – sometimes by Haganah militia personnel and subsequently by the IDF, or by Palestinians who did not flee. Burial was in mass graves without any markings, and with all personal identifying items. The International Red Cross collected bodies in only a few cases during that war.

The mass graves do not necessarily attest to a dark history (for example, a massacre) or to an effort at concealment, but rather to wars that claimed victims. The dead, whether they were fighters who were killed on the outskirts of a kibbutz, a moshav or a city, simply had to be buried. There are in fact many mass graves in Israel dating from the War of Independence, like the controversial one at Tantura, which was the subject of an article in these pages in January.

I am certain that if Jews were buried like that, we would cry out to the heavens… I don’t rule out the possibility that there are Egyptian families who still believe that their sons’ remains will be returned.

Binyamin Naor, in the '90s

A similar fate awaited the bodies of “infiltrators” – a term used by the state to classify the thousands of Palestinians in exile who penetrated the country’s borders in the 1950s in an attempt to return to their lands and homes. A December 1949 document on the subject that was drawn up by the IDF’s Central Command HQ ordered the dead to be dealt with in one of two ways. 

• If the infiltrators were killed in areas where no Arab citizens lived, “the commander of the patrol or of the ambush is responsible for the immediate burial of the body in the place of the killing. The body is to be interred and covered with earth.” In the cases where infiltrators entered the Triangle area – an area of dense Arab population in the center of the country – “the military governor is responsible for removing the body from the place of the killing and transferring it to the residents of the Arab villages” for burial.

• Yitzhak Pundak, commander of the 6th Brigade, which was stationed in Latrun at the end of 1948, provided testimony later about the appalling way the infiltrators’ bodies were handled:
  
  “One day I was summoned to the central front. In the bureau of Maj. Gen. Zvi Ayalon, and in the presence of intelligence officer Binyamin Jibli, I was ordered to liquidate every infiltrator encountered by our forces, and as deterrence to leave the body in the field, to make an example of it… It was an unconventional order. I don’t recall any discussion being held before it was issued, nor was any written order issued stipulating that this is how we must act.
  
  “When I asked why there was no order in writing, the general and the intelligence officer emphasized that they were speaking in the name of the chief of staff. Gradually the trails filled up with bloated bodies. In the summer heat they gave off bad smells and at night they were prey for jackals and predatory birds. Swarms of flies marked the location of the corpses. The stench that spread through the area reached our outposts and soldiers started to suffer from headaches, dizziness, nausea and breathing difficulties.
  
  “One of the battalion commanders, a member of the 53rd Battalion who had taken part in the defense of [Kibbutz] Negba and whose company had suffered many losses, took the situation in hand and displayed initiative. Without requesting authorization from his commanders, he equipped his soldiers with cans of fuel which they poured on the bodies and set them afire. For many hours the fires burned in the unit’s sector.”
  
  Bodies of troops from Arab countries were also buried near where they were killed. An army document from February 1968 that dealt with the question of “locating graves – enemy dead,” stated: “Activity to locate graves of enemy dead was carried out only close to the conclusion of the Six-Day War. All told, seven concentrations of enemy dead (the total number of dead is not clear) were located, not including the area of combat of the 80th Brigade.”
  
  Lt. Col. (res.) Ze’ev Bloch is one of the founders of Kibbutz Nahshon.Credit: Lior Yavne / Akevot Institute
  
  * * *
  
  The years have passed and the soil of Kibbutz Nahshon has also changed. The mass grave described here was dug in Lot 5, near the field in which dozens of fighters were burned to death. After the war, crops were grown on the site, and in 1983 a grove of almond trees was planted there. Afterward the grove was supplanted by a wheat field. One type of crop succeeded another, revenues flowed in. In the 1990s, it was decided to rezone the land and establish a tourist attraction on it. Thus, since 2002, Lot 5 has been subsumed within the property of the popular Mini Israel park.
  
  Ze’ev Bloch, a walking encyclopedia of the history of the conflict, was present when the Egyptian soldiers were buried. In 1968, he wrote laconically, “A week after the war I was still finding bodies scattered on the Latrun hills. I was given a backhoe to bury some of them – some were buried by the monks.”
  
  A few weeks ago, equipped with aerial and satellite photographs, he succeeded in finding, “after using the requisite caution,” the mass grave and locating it, according to his best estimate, at the park’s eastern fringes, close to Highway 424. “The soldiers were buried in what is today the boundary of Mini Israel, not far from the main road,” he said, indicating the site on a map. Other kibbutz members confirmed his explanation.
  
  Bloch can’t say with certainty today what happened to the bodies, “but it’s a reasonable assumption that the soldiers are still buried there,” he says. Conversations with a source who deals with locating MIAs in Israel make it clear that an operation to remove dozens of bodies from a grave of this size could not have been carried out without the knowledge of the kibbutz inhabitants. Nahshon member Eli Peleg adds that a few years after the inauguration of Mini Israel, an army officer visited the kibbutz and started to question the members about the grave. “In my opinion, nothing came of that,” he says.
  
  And he’s right. A source knowledgeable about MIAs confirmed to Haaretz that the fighters of the Egyptian commando unit are still buried at the site. To the best of his knowledge, he says, no request by the Egyptians to disinter them and return them to Egypt has ever been made.
  
  Bloch, who no longer lives on Kibbutz Nahshon, says that if there is no possibility to return the bodies to their home country, a monument should at least be erected for them. If any official person were to look seriously for the grave, he adds, he would be willing to help. To this day, no one has approached him. Maybe it’s time.
  
  Adam Raz is a historian and researcher in Akevot – Institute for Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Research.
  
  From <https://archive.ph/gTEl9#selection-2070.0-2128.1>
  
  From <https://archive.ph/gTEl9#selection-777.17-834.2>
  
  
  Mass grave in Plot 5
  
  USS Liberty - When Israel attacked the U.S.A. - Forgotten History
  
  

Israel’s burning alive of Egyptian soldiers proves its immorality

July 13, 2022 at 4:55 pm

Yossi Melman on February 17, 2016 in Berlin, Germany [Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images]

by Motasem A Dalloul
abujomaaGaza

Prominent Israeli journalist Yossi Melman revealed on Friday details of an Israeli army war crime committed during the Six-Day War in 1967, when Israel occupied the Palestinian West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Syrian Golan Heights and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula.

In a thread on Twitter, Melman, a security correspondent, said that at the Israeli occupation army burnt alive at least 20 Egyptian soldiers and the next day used a bulldozer to dig and bury their bodies in an unmarked mass grave.

The area of the mass grave was annexed to Israeli Kibbutz Nahshon, which was built on the land of a Palestinian neighbourhood called Wadi El-Latrun, 25 kilometres west of Jerusalem and 14 kilometres southeast of Al-Ramla. According to Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the story was “hushed up and the fields became part of the Mini Israel park.”

“After 55 years of heavy censorship,” Melman wrote, “I can reveal that at least 20 Egyptian soldiers were burnt alive and buried by IDF in a mass grave, which was not marked and without being identified contrary to war laws, in Latrun. It happened during the Six-Day-War.”

READ: Israel will work on locating graves of Egypt soldiers, says DM

While Melman found that at least 20 Egyptian soldiers were burnt alive in that incident, other sources, including Haaretz, estimated the number to be as high as 80 unidentified and unmarked buried casualties.

Melman said that the incident took place in a no-man’s land, but Haaretz disclosing that the land was a Palestinian neighbourhood “whose inhabitants had recently fled or been expelled, and whose houses had been razed to the ground.” It refers to 1948 ethnic cleansing of Palestinians – the Nakba.

For all objective observers around the globe, Israel is clearly a rogue state which has committed numerous war crimes and it has the worst and most immoral army which continues to carry out daily crimes against Palestinians across the occupied Palestinian territories and in historic Palestine.

When this rogue state commits a crime, its army and political officials claim that such incidents are isolated events. In 1995, three months before he was assassinated, late Israeli Prime Minister Ishak Rabin said: “The Israeli Defence Forces earned their glory as a humane army whose soldiers are blessed with special moral values.” However, the reality is the opposite and the disclosure or the crime of burning Egyptian soldiers alive is part of the proof.

Then Israeli army commander, Ze’ev Bloch, now 90 years old, told Melman and other media sources that at the time of the torching of the Egyptian soldiers, he watched as Israeli soldiers “looted personal belongings [of the dead Egyptian soldiers] and left the mass grave unmarked.” Looting and leaving graves unmarked without notifying the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is a breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

I am sure further investigations in the area will provide proof of other war crimes.

Haaretz’s report suggests the Israeli occupation army used prohibited phosphorus bombs to start the fire in the bush which killed the Egyptian soldiers, who either surrendered or fled. This also raises the question about another violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prevents killing soldiers who are out of the fight by reason of injury or surrender.

The scene of burning and killing prisoners of war was horrifying, according to eyewitness Bloch, who said: “We were ashamed,” but stressed that the killing was an “IDF decision.”

READ: Israel’s burning alive of Egypt soldiers shows extent of its terrorism, Hamas says

In 1995, Arye Biro, spoke of how he executed 49 Egyptian POWs in 1956. He told reporters, according to AP, that he was ready to do the same thing again; however, he said: “I don’t think I’m a war criminal.”

Biro said he was protecting others who shared the decision on the killing of POW.

According to the AP report, Israeli historians said Biro’s actions were far from unique with Israeli veteran and author Michael Bar-Zohar saying prisoner killings occurred “in all of Israel’s wars″ and “were treated forgivingly” and hushed up by leaders.

Meanwhile, the report cited Israeli military historian, Aryeh Yitzhaki, saying that Israeli troops carried out several massacres in the 1967 war, when Rabin, who is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, was army chief, in which about 1,000 Egyptian prisoners were killed.

Bar-Zohar also told AP: “Two cooks with knives … simply slaughtered three prisoners. This incident has haunted me for a long time.”

On 9-10 June 1967, some 400 Egyptian and Palestinian prisoners were killed in the sand dunes of El-Arish, Yitzhaki said, adding that there were six or seven other incidents in which Israeli troops opened fired on POWs.The leaders of the “moral army” knew about this and likely were happy with it. Yitzhaki told the AP that a report on the killings submitted to his superiors has been locked away in a safe at military headquarters. “The whole army leadership, including (then) Defence Minister Moshe Dayan and Chief of Staff Rabin and the generals knew about these things. No one bothered to denounce them,” Yitzhaki said. So, where is the morality?

On twitter, Melman claimed that both Arabs and Israelis “committed war crimes” during the wars, but he blamed Israel for “presenting itself as a democracy,” while it has been concealing its shameful past under the pretext of national security. Adding that “real democracy must face its past.”

https://twitter.com/yossi_melman/status/1545182854593880064?s=20&t=5iXGKkl05lmn08BzPmm-IQ

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

Nakba Day 1948 – Cartoon [Carlos Latuff/MiddleEastMonitor]

From <https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20220713-israels-burning-alive-of-egyptian-soldiers-proves-its-immorality/

1967: The USS Liberty attack … after executions in El Arish?

Posted on 8 June, 2020 by Headsman

On this date in 1967, during the Six-Day War between Israel and Egypt, Israeli warplanes and torpedo boats assailed the USS Liberty, an allied American communications (read: espionage) vessel — not an execution by any stretch, but perhaps occasioned by other executions?

On a sunlit afternoon in the Mediterranean the Liberty, about 13 miles off the coast of Gaza which Israel was then engaged in prying from Egypt’s hands, sunbathing American seamen found themselves suddenly being bombed by Israeli planes, and even found their lifeboats strafed by those same planes — clearly intent upon sinking the Liberty with no survivors. A torpedo hit amidships ripped open the ship at the waterline.

The Liberty was the only large ship anywhere in the vicinity and recordings of the Israeli fighter pilots’ communications with their control tower confirm that her prominent U.S. markings were observed by her assailants.

Only by dint of some heroic and lucky jury-rigging was the ship’s communications tower coaxed to send out a life-saving SOS to the U.S. Sixth Fleet, maneuvering hundreds of miles distant. In all, 34 Americans lost their lives in what Wikipedia delicately calls the USS Liberty Incident; another 170-plus were injured, while the Liberty herself limped back to Malta for repairs. She’d be decommissioned in 1968.

This shock bloodbath between two countries who have proven firm and ever firmer allies in the half-century since has long been shrouded in mystery and speculation.

Sure, maybe the U.S. prized its statecraft enough to wave the whole thing off as an accident. But what compelling motivation drove Israel to attack the Liberty — at the risk of jeopardizing its relationship its superpower partner?

Many far wiser than a humble headsman have had a go at this question. In his history of the National Security Agency, Body of Secrets, James Bamford suggests that the Liberty‘s offense in Israeli eyes resided in its proximity to a number of war crimes that she would be able to document — including mass executions of Egyptian POWs at the north Sinai town of El Arish in the aftermath of a nearby battle.

Although no one on the ship knew it at the time, the Liberty had suddenly trespassed into a private horror. At that very moment, near the minaret at El Arish, Israeli forces were engaged in a criminal slaughter.

…

By June 8, three days after Israel launched the war, Egyptian prisoners in the Sinai had become nuisances. There was no place to house them, not enough Israelis to watch them, and few vehicles to transport them to prison camps. But there was another way to deal with them.

As the Liberty sat within eyeshot of El Arish, eavesdropping on surrounding communications, Israeli soldiers turned the town into a slaughterhouse, systematically butchering their prisoners. In the shadow of the El Arish mosque, they lined up about sixty unarmed Egyptian prisoners, hands tied behind their backs, and then opened fire with machine guns until the pale desert sand turned red. Then they forced other prisoners to bury the victims in mass graves. “I saw a line of prisoners, civilians and military,” said Abdelsalam Moussa, one of those who dug the graves, “and they opened fire at them all at once. When they were dead, they told us to buiy them.” Nearby, another group of Israelis gunned down thirty more prisoners and then ordered some Bedouins to cover them with sand.

In still another incident at El Arish, the Israeli journalist Gabi Bron saw about 150 Egyptian POWs sitting on the ground, crowded together with their hands held at the backs of their necks. “The Egyptian prisoners of war were ordered to dig pits and then army police shot them to death,” Bron said. “I witnessed the executions with my own eyes on the morning of June eighth, in the airport area of El Arish.”

The Israeli military historian Aryeh Yitzhaki, who worked in the army’s history department after the war, said he and other officers collected testimony from dozens of soldiers who admitted killing POWs. According to Yitzhaki, Israeli troops killed, in cold blood, as many as 1,000 Egyptian prisoners in the Sinai, including some 400 in the sand dunes of El Arish.

Above interpretation suffices as a hook for this here executions blog but its explanatory force feels far less than sufficient.

The facts alleged here against Israel have been contested; one of the sources quoted above, Gabi Bron, has said that only five (not 150) prisoners were executed at El-Arish, and that the dead there were overwhelmingly legitimate battle casualties. But let an intentional massacre number not merely hundreds but thousands upon millions and still we would sit very far from dampening the ardor for any policy that has been decided in Washington or Langley. Surely it is unnecessary to dwell upon what these same statesmen were simultaneously doing in Southeast Asia.

Where that leaves the matter is a still-going debate. Was it a false flag attack meant to be laid to Israel’s Arab enemies? Did the spy ship need to be blinded to hide Israel’s forthcoming (June 9-10) incursion into the Golan Heights? Do war atrocities reveal more than this writer supposes? Or are we really to take seriously the thought-it-was-an-Egyptian-ship official line?

From <https://www.executedtoday.com/2020/06/08/1967-the-uss-liberty-attack-after-executions-in-el-arish/>

Egypt Says Israelis Killed P.O.W.'s in '67 War

By Youssef M. Ibrahim

Sept. 21, 1995

Credit...The New York Times Archives

See the article in its original context from

September 21, 1995, Section A,Page 1Buy Reprints

New York Times subscribers* enjoy full access to TimesMachine—view over 150 years of New York Times journalism, as it originally appeared.

Egypt said today that it had discovered two mass graves in the Sinai containing the remains of Egyptian prisoners of war and unarmed civilians shot by Israeli soldiers during the 1967 war.

The discovery, near El Arish, is likely to generate further pressure on President Hosni Mubarak and feed public opinion against Israel. The Egyptian Government has been accused by opposition groups of not pushing for a serious investigation after initial revelations last month because of Egypt's eagerness to please Israel and the United States.

The charges first came to prominence when a retired Israeli brigadier general, Arieh Biroh, said in interviews that in October 1956, he and another officer killed 49 Egyptian prisoners of war in the Sinai Desert.

At the same time, an Israeli historian said that as many as 300 unarmed Egyptians were killed in both the 1967 war and in the war of 1956. Those reports led to other allegations and revelations.

Since last month, opposition parties and newspapers in Egypt have questioned why the Government did not pursue the charges vigorously until Israelis raised the issue.

The discovery of the two graves, one near a former Egyptian air base about three miles from El Arish and the other about 18 miles from town, was described today in the Government-owned newspaper Al Ahram.

Sign up for the Israel-Hamas War Briefing.  The latest news about the conflict. Get it sent to your inbox.

The paper said the two shallow graves held the remains of at least 30 and possibly 60 people. It quoted several Bedouins in the region as saying they had witnessed the killing of Egyptian soldiers after their surrender on June 6 and June 7, 1967, and had helped to bury them.

The paper said an expedition organized by reporters had uncovered the two graves with the help of an Egyptian guide who had served as a sergeant during the 1967 war.

The former sergeant, Abdelsalam Moussa, said he had helped to bury some victims in one grave. The newspaper showed pictures of one grave that it said contained the remains of 30 people.

Mr. Moussa, now 55, said he had been ordered to bury some of his comrades by Israeli soldiers who took him prisoner. The 1967 war was a major military triumph by Israeli over Egypt, Syria and Jordan, during which Israel occupied the Golan Heights, the West Bank, the Gaza strip and the Sinai Desert.

It was not clear why Mr. Moussa did not come forward earlier, but the Egyptian Government has discouraged delving into such issues since it recovered Sinai from Israel in the early 1980's.

"I saw a line of prisoners, civilians and military, and they opened fire at them all at once," Mr. Moussa was quoted as saying. "When they were dead, they told us to bury them."

Al Ahram also quoted a Bedouin, Suleman Moghnem Salameh, who said he saw Israelis kill about 30 Egyptians soldiers and officers after they surrendered, leaving them for the Bedouins to bury.

Although the allegations initially led to widespread introspection in Israel, the issue has largely died down there, and Israel, which has a 20-year statute of limitations, decided not to pursue the charges, which further inflamed segments of the Egyptian public.

While the killing of unarmed Egyptians could pose serious problems for relations between Egypt and Israel, the first two countries to sign an Arab-Israeli peace treaty, there have been few indications of a crisis.

But Shimon Peres, the Israeli Foreign Minister, has refused to agree to Cairo as the site for current talks with Palestinians over self-rule in the West Bank. The talks are continued in Taba, Egypt, on the Gulf of Aqaba, because Mr. Peres said going to Cairo would mean he would have to answer questions about the graves.

President Mubarak has called for an investigation in Israel and punishment of those responsible.

Israel responded by sending Elli Dayan, a Deputy Foreign Minister, to discuss the matter. During his visit here, he offered compensation to the families of victims but noted Israel's 20-year statute of limitations.

In the last month, both left-wing and right-wing parties in Egypt have demanded a suspension of diplomatic ties with Israel until a full investigation is conducted.

Rose el-Youssef, Egypt's most widely read weekly, condemned the Egyptian Ambassador to Israel, Mohammed Bassiouni, who has served in the post for more than 12 years, for deliberately overlooking the issue. Accusing him of unpatriotic behavior and of becoming servile to Israel, the weekly called for his dismissal.

After the revelations last month, Mr. Bassiouni demanded an explanation from Israel, but he also emphasized that the incident would not affect the peace pact that Egypt signed with Israel in 1979.

The Israeli Ambassador to Cairo, David Sultan, asked to be relieved of his post after Al Shaab, a daily with strong Muslim fundamentalist views, said he was personally responsible for the killing of 100 Egyptian prisoners of war in 1967.

The Israeli Embassy and Foreign Ministry have vehemently denied the charge, and Israeli officials have been unclear on when or whether Mr. Sultan served in the military.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry is looking for a new ambassador, and in the meantime, Egyptian security officials have discreetly but significantly increased the protection of Israeli diplomats here.

On Tuesday night, even before today's report in Al Ahram, the main television channel devoted a substantial part of a popular program, "The Talk of the City," to the issue.

In the program, the host rides around Cairo in a car, stopping to interview people on the streets. Nearly everyone he spoke to demanded further investigations into the matter.

Some said peace does not mean all is forgotten. Others went further, insisting that Israelis found guilty of killing unarmed war prisoners should be put on trial and jailed.

A correction was made on 

Sept. 22, 1995

: 

A map yesterday with an article about accusations that Israeli forces executed captured Egyptians during the 1956 and 1967 Middle East wars represented the area of Israeli control incorrectly. The map and the key should have shown the West Bank, not Egypt, under Israeli occupation.

When we learn of a mistake, we acknowledge it with a correction. If you spot an error, please let us know at nytnews@nytimes.com.Learn more

A version of this article appears in print on Sept. 21, 1995, Section A, Page 1 of the National edition with the headline: Egypt Says Israelis Killed P.O.W.'s in '67 War. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

From <https://www.nytimes.com/1995/09/21/world/egypt-says-israelis-killed-pow-s-in-67-war.html>

Mass grave may strain Israeli-Egyptian relations

September 25, 1995

Web posted at: 6:53 p.m. EDT (2253 GMT)

From Correspondent Gayle Young

EL-ARISH, Egypt (CNN) -- While Israel takes a big step toward peace with the Palestinians, Israeli relations with one neighbor, Egypt, are being strained again.

The recent discovery of mass graves in the Sinai threatens to re-open old wounds between Israel and Egypt.

"Such people should be punished according to the law."

-- Mohamed Abdel Moneim, Al-Ahram newspaper.

Villager Hassan Al-Malah declares to other searchers he's found more bones. Neighbors quickly dig up what they say is a mass grave of Egyptian prisoners killed by Israeli soldiers during the 1967 war.

The Bedouins say they witnessed hundreds of Egyptian soldiers executed without trial. Then they buried the bodies when Israelis left them to rot in the desert sun. "They would nail the prisoners hands to the trees like this and shoot them," said witness Hassan Al-Malah, raising his hands behind his head. "It was Jews from America."

Neither Egyptian nor Israeli authorities ever investigated what happened here at El-Arish. "Mothers and fathers would come and look for their kids but what could we tell them? We didn't know the names of these guys," said Hamada Mohamed Hassan.

Aryeh Biro, a retired Israeli officer, publicly admitted weeks ago that war crimes were committed in the Sinai in 1967. But the recent discovery of mass graves has revived memories in Egypt and perhaps renewed animosity against the former enemy. Egypt and Israel made peace a decade after the war but there is little trade or tourism between the two countries.

Now the Israelis are offering to compensate families of the victims but some Egyptians want Israeli officers put on trial as well. "Such people should be punished according to the law," said Mohamed Abdel Moneim of the Al-Ahram newspaper.

The Israelis have refused to put any officers on trial, saying it was all too long ago. However, the memories are still fresh for the villagers near El-Arish in the Sinai.

Egypt and Israel may have buried their differences, but for now, the remains of what may be hundreds of massacred soldiers are unlikely to rest in peace.

From <http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/9509/mass_graves/>

The cover-up

At the height of the six-day war in 1967, Israel attacked a US spy ship, killing 34 men and injuring many more. The Israelis claimed it was an accident, the Americans backed them up. But, as James Bamford reveals in his new book, both governments concealed the horrific truth

Special report: Israel and the Middle East

James Bamford

Tue 7 Aug 2001 21.20 EDT

Early in the morning of Thursday June 8 1967 and the first rays of sun spilled softly over the Sinai's blond waves of sand. A little more than a dozen miles north, in the choppy eastern Mediterranean, the USS Liberty headed eastward. But the calmness was like quicksand - deceptive, inviting and friendly - until it was too late.

As the Liberty passed the desert town of El Arish, it was being closely watched. About 4,000ft above was an Israeli reconnaissance aircraft. At 6.05am, the observer on the plane reported back to Israeli naval headquarters: "What we could see were the letters written on that ship and we gave these letters to ground control," he said. The letters were "GTR-5" - the Liberty's identification. "GTR" stood for "General Technical Research" - a cover designation for the National Security Agency (NSA)'s fleet of spy ships.

The Liberty was in dangerous waters at a dangerous time. The six-day war, in which Israeli air and ground forces launched a massive attack on Egypt, Syria and Jordan, was raging. Fearing involvement in a Middle East war, the US joint chiefs of staff needed rapid intelligence on the ground situation in Egypt. Ships were considered the best option for the job. They could sail relatively close and pick up the most important signals. Also, unlike aircraft, they could remain on station for weeks at a time, eavesdropping, locating transmitters, and analysing the intelligence. And so the Liberty, which was large, fast and had been stationed relatively close on the Ivory Coast, had been ordered in.

Throughout the morning, the ship sailed on, with reconnaissance repeated at approximately 30-minute intervals. At one point, an Israeli air force Noratlas Nord 2501 circled the ship and headed back towards the Sinai. "It had a big Star of David on it and it was flying just a little bit above our mast," recalled crew member Larry Weaver. "I was actually able to wave to the co-pilot. He waved back and actually smiled at me - I could see him that well. There's no question about it. They had seen the ship's markings and the American flag. They could damn near see my rank. The underway flag was definitely flying, especially when you're that close to a war zone."

By 9.50am, the minaret at El Arish could be seen with the naked eye like a solitary mast in a sea of sand. Although no one on the ship knew it at the time, the Liberty had suddenly trespassed into a private horror. At that very moment, near the minaret, Israeli forces were engaged in a criminal slaughter.

Three days after Israel had launched the six- day war, Egyptian prisoners in the Sinai had become a nuisance. There was no place to house them, not enough Israelis to watch them, and few vehicles to transport them to prison camps. But there was another way to deal with them.

As the Liberty sat within eyeshot of El Arish, eavesdropping on surrounding communications, Israeli soldiers turned the town into a slaughterhouse, systematically butchering their prisoners. An eyewitness recounted how in the shadow of the El Arish mosque, they lined up about 60 unarmed Egyptian prisoners, hands tied behind their backs, and then opened fire with machine guns until the pale desert sand turned red.

This and other war crimes were just some of the secrets Israel had sought to conceal since the start of the conflict. An essential element in the Israeli battle plan seemed to have been to hide much of the war behind a carefully constructed curtain of lies: lies about the Egyptian threat, lies about who started the war, lies to the US president, lies to the UN Security Council, lies to the press, lies to the public. Thus, as the American naval historian Dr Richard K Smith noted, "any instrument which sought to penetrate this smoke screen so carefully thrown around the normal 'fog of war' would have to be frustrated".

Into this sea of deception and slaughter sailed the USS Liberty, an enormous spy factory loaded with the latest eavesdropping gear.

About noon, as the Liberty was again in sight of El Arish, and while the massacres were taking place, an army commander there reported that a ship was shelling them from the sea. But that was impossible. The only ship in the vicinity was the Liberty, and she was eavesdropping, not shooting. As any observer would have recognised, the ship was a tired old second world war vessel crawling with antennae, and unthreatening to anyone - unless it was their secrets, not their lives, they wanted to protect.

By then the Israeli navy and air force had conducted more than six hours of close surveillance of the Liberty off the Sinai and must have positively identified it as an American electronic spy ship. They knew she was the only military ship in the area. Nevertheless, the order was given to kill her and at 12.05pm, three motor torpedo boats from the port of Ashdod, about 50 miles away, departed. Israeli air force fighters, loaded with 50mm cannon ammunition, rockets and napalm, followed.

Without warning, the Israeli jets - swept-wing Dassault Mirage IIICs - struck. On board Liberty, Lieutenant Painter observed that the aircraft had "absolutely no markings", their identity unclear. He then attempted to reach the men manning the gun mounts, but it was too late. "I was trying to contact these two kids," he recalled, "and I saw them both; well, I didn't exactly see them as such. They were blown apart, but I saw the whole area go up in smoke and scattered metal. At about the same time, the aircraft strafed the bridge area. The quarter-master, Petty Officer Third Class Pollard, was standing right next to me, and he was hit."

The Mirages raked the ship from bow to stern with armour-piercing lead. A bomb exploded near the whaleboat aft of the bridge, and those in the pilothouse and the bridge were thrown from their feet. Commander William L McGonagle grabbed for the engine order annunciator and rang up all ahead flank.

In the communications spaces, radiomen James Halman and Joseph Ward had patched together enough equipment and broken antennae to get a distress call off to the Sixth Fleet, despite intense jamming by the Israelis. 

"Any station, this is Rockstar," Halman shouted, using the Liberty's voice call sign. "We are under attack by unidentified jet aircraft and require immediate assistance."

"Great, wonderful, she's burning, she's burning," said an Israeli pilot.

At 2.09pm, the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga, operating near Crete, acknowledged Liberty's cry for help. "I am standing by for further traffic," it signalled.

After taking out the gun mounts, the Israeli fighter pilots turned their attention to the antennae so the ship could not call for help or pick up any more revealing interceptions. Then the planes attacked the bridge, killing instantly the ship's executive officer. 

• With the Liberty now deaf, blind, and silenced, unable to call for help or move, the Israeli pilots proceeded to kill her. Designed to punch holes in the toughest tanks, their shells tore through the Liberty's steel plating like hot nails through butter, exploding into jagged bits of shrapnel and butchering men deep in their living quarters.

NSA IS LISTENING IN ON SLAUGHTER!!!!

• As the slaughter continued, neither the Israelis nor the Liberty crew had any idea that witnesses were present high above. Until now, that is. According to information, interviews and documents obtained, for nearly 35 years the NSA has hidden the fact that one of its planes - a Navy EC-121 ferret - was overhead at the time of the incident, eavesdropping on what was going on below. The interceptions from that plane, which answer some of the key questions about the attack, are among the NSA's deepest secrets.

• The ferret had taken off from Athens for its regular patrol of the eastern Mediterranean, and at about the time that the air attack was getting underway, Navy Chief Petty Officer Marvin Nowicki heard one of the other Hebrew linguists on the plane excitedly trying to get his attention on the secure intercom. "Hey, chief," he shouted, "I've got really odd activity on UHF. They mentioned an American flag. I don't know what's going on." Nowicki asked the linguist for the frequency and "rolled up to it". "Sure as the devil," said Nowicki, "Israeli aircraft were completing an attack on some object. I alerted the evaluator, giving him sparse details, adding that we had no idea what was taking place."

Deep down in Liberty, Terry McFarland, head encased in earphones, was vaguely aware of flickers of light coming through the bulkhead. He had no idea that they were armour-piercing tracer bullets slicing through the ship's skin. Larry Weaver had run to his general quarters station but it was located on an old helicopter pad that left him exposed and vulnerable. He grabbed a dazed shipmate and pushed him into a safe corner. "I said, 'Fred, stay here, you've just got to because he's coming up the centre'," Weaver recalled. "I got in the foetal position," he said, "and before I closed my eyes I looked up and I saw the American flag and that was the last thing I saw before I was hit. I closed my eyes, just waiting for hell's horror to hit me. And I was hit by rocket and cannon fire that blew two and a half feet of my colon out and I received over 100 shrapnel wounds. It blew me up in the air about four and a half, five feet. And just blood everywhere."

Stan White raced through the sick bay for the enclosed NSA spaces. "Torn and mutilated bodies were everywhere," he said. "Horrible sight!"

As soon as the Mirages pulled away, they were replaced by Super Mystere fighters which raked the ship. A later analysis would show 821 separate hits on the hull and superstructure. Now, in addition to rocket, cannon, and machine-gun fire, the Mysteres attacked with 1,000lb bombs and napalm. Deafening explosions tore through the ship and the bridge disappeared in an orange-and-black ball. Lying wounded by shrapnel, his blood draining into his shoe, was Commander McGonagle. Seconds later the fighters were back. Flesh fused with iron as more strafing was followed by more rockets, followed by napalm.

As the last fighter departed, having emptied out its onboard armoury, turning the Liberty's hull into a flaming mass of grey Swiss cheese, sailors lifted mutilated shipmates on to makeshift stretchers of pipe frame and chicken wire. Damage control crews pushed through passageways of suffocating smoke and blistering heat, and the chief petty officer's lounge was converted into a macabre sea of blood-soaked mattresses and shattered bodies.

After landing back at Athens airport, Nowicki and the intercept crew were brought directly to the processing centre. "By the time we arrived at the USA-512J compound," he said, "collateral reports were coming in to the station about the attack on the USS Liberty. The NSA civilians took our tapes and began transcribing. It was pretty clear that Israeli aircraft and motor torpedo boats attacked a ship in the east Med. Although the attackers never gave a name or a hull number, the ship was identified as flying an American flag. We logically concluded that the ship was the USS Liberty."

At 2.50pm (Liberty time), 50 minutes after the first shells tore into the ship and as the attack was still going on, the aircraft carrier USS America, cruising near Crete, was ordered to launch four armed A-4 Skyhawks. At the same time, the carrier USS Saratoga was also told to send four armed A-1 attack planes to defend the ship. "Sending aircraft to cover you," the Sixth Fleet told the Liberty at 3:05pm (9.05am in Washington). "Surface units on the way."

At that moment in Washington, President Johnson was at his desk, on the phone, alternately shouting at congressional leaders and coaxing them to support his position on several pieces of pending legislation. But four minutes later he was interrupted by Walt Rostow, national security adviser, on the other line. "The Liberty has been torpedoed in the Mediterranean," Rostow told Johnson excitedly.

The NSA's worst fears had come true. "After considerations of personnel safety," said deputy director Tordella, "one of my immediate concerns, considering the depth of the water and the distance of the ship off shore, had to do with the classified materials on board." Tordella got on the phone to the Joint Reconnaissance Centre (JCS) and spoke to the deputy director, a Navy captain named Vineyard. "I expressed my concern that the written material be burned if at all possible, and that the electronic equipment be salvaged if that were possible," he said.

But Tordella was not prepared for what he heard. According to NSA documents - classified top secret- he was told that some senior officials in Washington wanted above all to protect Israel from embarrassment. "Captain Vineyard had mentioned during this conversation," wrote Tordella, "that consideration was then being given by some unnamed Washington authorities to sink[ing] the Liberty in order that newspaper men would be unable to photograph her and thus inflame public opinion against the Israelis. I made an impolite comment about the idea." Almost immediately, Tordella wrote a memorandum for the record, describing the conversation, and then locked it away.

A cover story for the Liberty was then quickly devised. "

She was a communications research ship that was diverted from her research assignment," it said, "to provide improved communication-relay links with the several US embassies around the entire Mediterranean during the current troubles."

On the Liberty, black smoke was still escaping through more than 800 holes in the hull, and the effort to hush up the incident had already begun. Within hours of the attack, which left 34 men dead and two-thirds of the rest of the crew wounded, Israel asked President Johnson to quietly bury the incident. "Embassy Tel Aviv," said a highly secret, very limited distribution message to the state department, "urged de-emphasis on publicity since proximity of vessel to scene of conflict was fuel for Arab suspicions that the US was aiding Israel." Shortly thereafter, a total news ban was ordered by the Pentagon. No one in the field was allowed to say anything about the attack. All information was to come only from a few senior Washington officials.

Later that morning, Johnson took the unusual step of ordering the JCS to recall its fighters while the Liberty still lay smouldering, sinking, fearful of another attack and with its decks covered with the dead, dying and wounded. On board the flagship of the Sixth Fleet, Rear Admiral Lawrence R Geis, who commanded the carrier force in the Mediterranean, was angry and puzzled at the recall and protested to the secretary of defence, Robert S McNamara.

Geis was shocked by what he heard next. "President Lyndon Johnson came on with a comment that he didn't care if the ship sunk, he would not embarrass his allies." Geis told Lieutenant Commander David Lewis, head of the NSA group on the Liberty, about the comment but asked him to keep it secret until after Geis died. It was a promise that Lewis kept.

ISRAELI COURT OF INQUIRY

In the days following the attack, the Israeli government gave the US government a classified report that attempted to justify the claim that the attack was a mistake. On the basis of that same report, an Israeli court of inquiry completely exonerated the government and all those involved. No one was ever court-martialled, reduced in rank or even reprimanded. On the contrary, Israel chose instead to honour motor torpedo boat 203, which fired the deadly torpedo at the Liberty. The ship's wheel and bell were placed on prominent display at the naval museum, among the maritime artefacts of which the Israeli navy was most proud.

Despite the overwhelming evidence that Israel had attacked the ship and killed the American servicemen deliberately, the Johnson administration and Congress covered up the entire incident. Johnson was planning to run for president the following year and needed the support of pro-Israel voters.

A mistake or mass murder? It was a question Congress never bothered to address in public hearings at the time. Among those who have long called for an in-depth congressional investigation is Admiral Thomas Moorer, who went on to become chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. "Congress to this day," he said, "has failed to hold formal hearings for the record on the Liberty affair. This is unprecedented and a national disgrace." Perhaps it is not too late.

Extracted from Body of Secrets by James Bamford, published by Century at £20 © 2001 James Bamford

From <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/aug/08/israel>

The USS Liberty Incident: “The USS Liberty: Case Closed”

by Michael B. Oren | Source- Zionist Jewish Virtual Library

• Such charges persisted in the face of successive inquiries by a broad range of American agencies and Congressional committees, as well as a full Israeli court of inquiry, all of which found no proof whatsoever that Israel knowingly attacked an American ship. 

• On the contrary, the evidence produced by these investigations lent further support to Israel's claim that its decision to attack was, given the circumstances, a reasonable error.

• The claim that Israel's attack on the Liberty was premeditated has also appeared persistently in the press. 

  1. In 1992, nationally syndicated columnists Roland Evans and Robert Novak dedicated a column, "Twenty-Five Years of Cover-Up,"8 to this charge. 

  2. Similar accusations have been aired on television programs such as ABC's 20/20 and Geraldo Rivera's Now It Can Be Told.9

• The claim is particularly widespread on the Internet, where a search for the "USS Liberty" yields dozens of sites, from those of Arab propagandists (Birzeit.edu, Salam.org, PalestineForever) and anti-Semitic hate mongers (The Tangled Web, Jew Watch) to the award-winning USS Liberty Homepage, posted by Ennes and other veterans. [HOW NASTY TO PLACE ALLEGED ANTI-SEMITISM NEXT TO WEBPAGE OF PATRIOTIC AMERICAN SURVIVORS OF ZIONIST TERRORISM] 

• But while the tenor of these pages may differ - the veterans abjure any anti-Semitism, stressing that several of their crewmates were Jewish - their conclusions are indistinguishable: 

Israel wantonly attacked the Liberty with the intention of killing every man on board, and then thwarted attempts to investigate the crime.10

  [THIS IS A NAKED SLUR AGAINST U.S. SERVICE MEMBERS--THROWING DOWN THE ANTI-SEMITISM CARD]

From <https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/quot-the-uss-liberty-case-closed-quot>

Early in the afternoon of June 8, 1967, Israeli jets and missile boats opened fire on the USS Liberty, an American surveillance ship operating off the coast of Gaza. Struck by rockets, cannons and torpedoes, the vessel suffered extensive damage and over 200 casualties. Israeli forces were then engaged in the fourth day of what would soon be called the Six Day War, which would result in a devastating defeat for the combined armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan.

At first overshadowed by Israel's stunning victory, the attack on the Liberty was destined to become a recurring source of tension between Israel and the United States. Although Israel apologized for the attack and paid compensation to its victims, many American officials rejected Israel's claim that the Liberty incident had been an honest mistake. Rather, they blamed Israel for what was at best inexcusable negligence, or at worst the premeditated murder of American servicemen. Such charges persisted in the face of successive inquiries by a broad range of American agencies and Congressional committees, as well as a full Israeli court of inquiry, all of which found no proof whatsoever that Israel knowingly attacked an American ship. On the contrary, the evidence produced by these investigations lent further support to Israel's claim that its decision to attack was, given the circumstances, a reasonable error.

These findings notwithstanding, the case of the assault on the Liberty has never been closed. If anything, the accusations leveled against Israel have grown sharper with time. In recent years, an impressive number of former American officials have gone on record insisting that the Israeli action was, in fact, deliberate. These include Adm. Thomas H. Moorer, who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) at the time of the Liberty incident, who has labeled the episode a "cover-up," adding that he "cannot accept the claim by the Israelis that this was a case of mistaken identity."1 Paul C. Warnke, then Under Secretary of the Navy, has written that

I found it hard to believe that it was, in fact, an honest mistake on the part of the Israeli air force units.... I suspect that in the heat of battle they figured that the presence of this American ship was inimical to their interests.... 2

Similarly, former Secretary of State Dean Rusk has called the attack "outrageous," adding in a 1990 radio interview that "the Liberty was flying an American flag. It was not all that difficult to identify, and my judgment was that somewhere along the line some fairly senior Israeli official gave the go- ahead for these attacks...."3 David G. Nes, who at the time served as deputy head of the American mission in Cairo, puts it more bluntly: "I don't think that there's any doubt that it was deliberate.... [It is] one of the great cover-ups of our military history."4 And George Ball, then Under Secretary of State, has called the American government's response to the assault an "elaborate charade.... American leaders did not have the courage to punish Israel for the blatant murder of its citizens."5

Support for these charges can be found in a wide range of publications on the Liberty incident. Assault on the Liberty, a 1979 memoir by former Liberty officer Jim Ennes, Jr., describes the attack as intentional and malicious, and argues that the truth has been obscured by a massive cover-up conducted by Israel and its advocates abroad.

This allegation has been repeated in Richard Deacon's The Israeli Secret Service (1977), in JohnRanelagh's The Agency: The Rise and Decline of the CIA (1986), and in

Andrew and Leslie Cockburn's Dangerous Liaison: The Inside Story of the U.S.-Israel Covert Relationship (1991).

The cover-up theory is also central to Stephen Green's Taking Sides: America's Secret Relations with a Militant Israel (1984), one of the best-selling of all anti-Israel polemics.

Nor is the charge of Israeli premeditation confined to books aimed at a popular audience. It also features prominently in academic works such as The USS Liberty: Dissenting History vs. Official History by historian John E. Borne (1993), as well as

Donald Neff's Warriors for Jerusalem: The Six Days that Changed the Middle East (1984), considered by many scholars a standard text on the Six Day War.6

Indeed, so powerful is the trend towards acceptance of Israeli guilt for having planned the attack that a 1995 issue of the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence was able to carry the assertion of Reverdy S. Fishel that "all serious scholarship on the subject accepts Israel's assault as having been perpetrated quite deliberately...."7

The claim that Israel's attack on the Liberty was premeditated has also appeared persistently in the press.

In 1992, nationally syndicated columnists Roland Evans and Robert Novak dedicated a column, "Twenty-Five Years of Cover-Up,"8 to this charge.

Similar accusations have been aired on television programs such as ABC's 20/20 and Geraldo Rivera's Now It Can Be Told.9

The claim is particularly widespread on the Internet, where a search for the "USS Liberty" yields dozens of sites, from those of Arab propagandists (Birzeit.edu, Salam.org, PalestineForever) and anti-Semitic hate mongers (The Tangled Web, Jew Watch) to the award-winning USS Liberty Homepage, posted by Ennes and other veterans. But while the tenor of these pages may differ - the veterans abjure any anti-Semitism, stressing that several of their crewmates were Jewish - their conclusions are indistinguishable: Israel wantonly attacked the Liberty with the intention of killing every man on board, and then thwarted attempts to investigate the crime.10

Refuting this accusation was difficult if not impossible in the past, when the official records on the Liberty were designated top-secret and closed to the general public. With the recent declassification of these documents in the United States and Israel, however, researchers have gained access to a wealth of primary sources - Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and U.S. military records, Israeli diplomatic correspondence, and memoranda from both the State Department and the White House. With the aid of these materials, the attack on the Liberty can now be reconstructed virtually minute-by-minute and with remarkable detail. The picture that emerges is not one of crime at all, nor even of criminal negligence, but of a string of failed communications, human errors, unfortunate coincidences and equipment failures on both the American and Israeli sides - the kind of tragic, senseless mistake that is all too common in the thick of war.

The USS Liberty was cruising from Norfolk, Virginia to Abidjan on the Ivory Coast when, in mid-May 1967, crisis erupted in the Middle East. Without warning, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser sent thousands of troops into the Sinai desert, ousted the UN peacekeeping forces stationed there and then closed the Straits of Tiran - the critical waterway leading to Israel's southern port of Eilat - to Israeli shipping.

In weighing its response, the Israeli government consulted with President Lyndon Johnson, who, though preoccupied with the Vietnam War, was sympathetic to Israel's plight. The President proposed to challenge the Tiran blockade with an international maritime convoy and on May 24, in preparation for this plan, he ordered the U.S. Sixth Fleet to advance into the eastern Mediterranean. Aware of the danger of becoming embroiled in an Arab-Israeli war, however, Washington cautioned the fleet to remain, until further notice, "outside an arc whose radius is 240 miles from Port Said," on the Egyptian coast.11

At this time, the Liberty was formally under the command of the Sixth Fleet, although in practice its orders came directly from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, operating under the aegis of the National Security Agency (NSA). Code-named "Rockstar," the 455-foot "Auxiliary General Technical Research Ship (agtr)," as it was euphemistically called, was in fact a signals intelligence vessel (sigint) equipped with cutting-edge listening and decoding devices. Among its 294-man crew were several dozen members of the Naval Security Group, who worked below the starboard deck in an area strictly off-limits even to the Liberty's skipper, Cmdr. William L. McGonagle. The ship sported large antennas and radar discs, but apart from four .50-caliber machine-gun mounts, it had no visible armaments. The markings "GTR-5" were freshly painted on its bow, and from its mast flew a standard, navy-issue American flag.

As the Sixth Fleet steamed toward the eastern Mediterranean, the Liberty headed for Rota, Spain. There, in addition to supplies, it took on three Marine Corps Arabic translators, augmenting the three NSA Russian-language experts already on board. Then, on May 30, McGonagle received new instructions to sail "at best speed" to a point just half a mile outside Egyptian and Israeli territorial waters, which extended twelve and six nautical miles, respectively, from the coast. The order, originating with the JCS, superseded a request by the U.S. Naval Command in Europe (cinceur) to hold the Liberty in Rota "until directed otherwise." Neither cinceur nor McGonagle was aware of the Liberty's objective, later described by the Defense Department as "assuring communications between U.S. government posts... and assisting in... the evacuation of American citizens." Though the exact nature of its mission remains classified, the Liberty was most likely sent to track the movements of Egyptian troops and their Soviet advisors in Sinai - hence the need for Arabic and Russian translators.12

Johnson's idea of a convoy aimed at breaking the blockade came to nothing, and Nasser's troops remained mobilized in the Sinai. Syrian and Jordanian forces were also poised to attack. On the morning of June 5, with diplomatic options exhausted, the Israeli government went to war.13 The IDF launched lightning air and ground strikes against Egypt, quickly gaining the initiative, and repulsed attacks from Syria and Jordan. Yet the Israelis remained highly concerned about threats to their coastline, along which most of the country's major industrial and population centers were situated. The Egyptian navy outnumbered Israel's by more than five to one in warships and, in a crisis, could call on the support of some seventy Soviet vessels in the vicinity.14 The failure of the Israeli navy's attacks on Egyptian and Syrian ports early in the war did little to assuage Israel's fears. Consequently, the IDF Chief of Staff, Gen. 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. The United States had also rejected Israel's request for a formal naval liaison. On May 31, Avraham Harman, Israel's ambassador to Washington, had warned Under Secretary of State Eugene V. Rostow that "if war breaks out, we would have no telephone number to call, no code for plane recognition, and no way to get in touch with the U.S. Sixth Fleet."16

Before dawn on June 8, three days into the war, the Liberty finally reached its destination, barely within international waters north of the Sinai coast. Plying at a speed of five knots between Port Said and Gaza, the Liberty entered a lane rarely used by commercial freighters, which Egypt had declared closed to neutral vessels. Anxious about his proximity to the fighting, McGonagle asked the Sixth Fleet commander, Vice-Adm. William Martin, for permission to pull back from the shore, or else to be provided with a destroyer escort. Martin rejected these requests, noting that the Liberty "is a clearly marked United States ship in international waters and not a reasonable subject for attack by any nation."

Unbeknownst to both Martin and McGonagle, however, the JCS had repeatedly cabled the Liberty the previous night with instructions to withdraw to a distance of one hundred miles from the Egyptian and Israeli coasts. The transmission was delayed, however, by the navy's overloaded, overly complex communication system, which routed messages as far east as the Philippines before relaying them to their destinations. The JCS' orders would not be received by the Liberty until the following day, June 9, by which time they would no longer be relevant.17

At 5:55 a.m. on June 8, Cmdr. Uri Meretz, a naval observer aboard an Israel Air Force (IAF) reconnaissance plane, noted what he believed to be an American supply vessel, designated GTR-5, seventy miles west of the Gaza coast. At Israeli naval headquarters in Haifa, staff officers fixed the location of the ship with a red marker, indicating "unidentified," on their control board. Research in Jane's Fighting Ships, however, established the vessel's identity as "the electromagnetic audio-surveillance ship of the United States, the Liberty." The marker was changed to green, for "neutral." Another sighting of the ship - "gray, bulky, with its bridge amidships" - was made by an Israeli fighter aircraft at 9:00 a.m., twenty miles north of El-Arish, on the Sinai coast, which had fallen to Israeli forces the day before.18 Neither of these reports made mention of the 5-by-8-foot American flag which, according to the ship's crewmen, was flying from the Liberty's starboard halyard.

The crew would also testify later that six IAF aircraft subsequently flew over the ship, giving them ample opportunity to identify its nationality. Israel Air Force reports, however, make no further mention of the Liberty.19 There may indeed have been additional Israeli overflights, but the IAF pilots were not looking for the Liberty. Their target was Egyptian submarines, which had been spotted off the coast. At 11:00 a.m., while the hunt for Egyptian submarines was on, the officer on duty at Israel's naval headquarters, Capt. Avraham Lunz, concluded his shift. In accordance with procedures, he removed the Liberty's green marker on the grounds that it was already five hours old and no longer accurate.20

Then, at 11:24, a terrific explosion rocked the shores of El-Arish. The blast was clearly heard by the men on the Liberty's bridge, who had been navigating according to the town's tallest minaret, and who also noted a thick pall of smoke wafting toward them. In El-Arish itself, Israeli forces were convinced they were being bombarded from the sea, and the IDF Southern Command reported sighting two unidentified vessels close offshore. Though the explosion probably resulted from an ammunition dump fire, that fact was unknown at the time, and both Egyptian and Israeli sources had reported shelling of the area by Egyptian warships the previous day. There was therefore good reason to conclude that the Egyptian navy had trained its guns on Sinai.21

Minutes after the explosion, the Liberty reached the eastern limit of its patrol and turned 238 degrees back in the direction of Port Said. Meanwhile, reports of a naval bombardment on El-Arish continued to reach IDF General Staff Headquarters in Tel Aviv. Rabin took them seriously, concerned that the shelling was a prelude to an amphibious landing that could outflank advancing Israeli troops. He reiterated the standing order to sink any unidentified ships in the war area, but also advised caution: Soviet vessels were reportedly operating nearby. Since no fighter planes were available, the navy was asked to intercede, with the assumption that air cover would be provided later. More than half an hour passed without any response from naval headquarters in Haifa. The General Staff finally issued a rebuke: "The coast is being shelled and you - the navy - have done nothing."22 Capt. Izzy Rahav, who had replaced Lunz in the operations room, needed no more prodding. He dispatched three torpedo boats of the 914th squadron, code-named "Pagoda," to find the enemy vessel responsible for the bombardment and destroy it. The time was 12:05 p.m.

At 1:41 p.m., Ensign Aharon Yifrah, combat information officer aboard the flagship of these torpedo boats, T-204, informed its captain, Cmdr. Moshe Oren,23 that an unidentified ship had been sighted northeast of El-Arish at a range of 22 miles. The ship was sailing toward Egypt at a speed, Yifrah estimated, of 30 knots.

Yifrah's assessment, twice recalculated and confirmed by him, was pivotal. It meant that the ship could not be the Liberty, whose maximum speed was 18 knots. Moreover, the Israelis had standing orders to fire on any unknown vessel in the area sailing at over 20 knots, a speed which, at that time, could only be attained by fighting ships. This information, when added to the ship's direction, indicated that the target was an enemy destroyer fleeing toward port after having shelled El-Arish.

The torpedo boats gave chase, but even at their maximum speed of 36 knots, they did not expect to overtake their target before it reached Egypt. Rahav therefore alerted the air force, and two Mirage III fighters were diverted from the Suez Canal, northeast to the sea. When they arrived, the vessel they saw was "gray with two guns in the forecastle, a mast and funnel." Making two passes at 3,000 feet, formation commander Capt. Spector (IDF records do not provide pilots' first names) reckoned that the ship was a "Z" or Hunt-class destroyer without the deck markings (a white cross on a red background) of the Israeli navy. Spector then spoke with air force commander Gen. Motti Hod, who asked him repeatedly whether he could see a flag. The answer was "Negative." Nor were there any distinguishing marks other than some "black letters" painted on the hull.

IAF Intelligence Chief Col. Yeshayahu Bareket also claimed to have contacted American Naval Attaché Castle at this point in an attempt to ascertain whether the suspect ship was the Liberty, but the latter professed no knowledge of the Liberty's schedule - a claim later denied by Castle but, strangely, confirmed by McGonagle.24 One fact is clear, however: After two low sweeps by the lead plane, at 1:58 p.m., the Mirages were cleared to attack.

The first salvos caught the Liberty's crew in "stand-down" mode; several officers were sunning themselves on the deck, unaware of the Israeli jets bearing down on them. Before they could take shelter, rockets and 30-mm cannon shells stitched the ship from bow to stern, severing the antennas and setting oil drums on fire. Nine men were killed in the initial assault, and several times that number wounded, among them McGonagle. Radio operators on board found most of their frequencies inoperable and barely managed to send an SOS to the Sixth Fleet. The Mirages made three strafing runs and were then joined by two additional aircraft, Israeli Super-Mysteres returning from the Mitla Pass with a payload of napalm. After fourteen minutes of action, the pilots reported having made good hits - over eight hundred holes would later be counted in the hull. The entire superstructure of the ship, from the main deck to the bridge, was aflame.

Throughout these sorties, no one aboard the Liberty suspected that the planes were Israeli. Indeed, rumors spread that the attackers were Egyptian MiGs. After the first strike, the visibility that had enabled crewmen to identify IAF reconnaissance craft earlier in the day was lost to the smoke of battle. One of the Israeli pilots, curious as to why the vessel had not returned fire, made a final pass at ninety feet. "I see no flag," he told headquarters. "But there are markings on the hull - Charlie-Tango-Romeo-five."25

While Egyptian naval ships were known to disguise their identities with Western markings, they usually displayed Arabic letters and numbers only. The fact that the ship had Western markings led Rabin to fear that it was Soviet, and he immediately called off the jets. Two IAF Hornet helicopters were sent to look for survivors - Spector had reported seeing men overboard - while the torpedo boat squadron was ordered to hold its fire pending further attempts at identification. Though that order was recorded in the torpedo boat's log, Oren claimed he never received it.26 It was now 2:20 in the afternoon; twenty-four minutes would pass before the squadron made contact with the Liberty.

During that interval, the ship's original flag, having been shredded during the attack, was replaced by a larger (7-by-13-foot) holiday ensign. As the crew labored to tend to the wounded, extinguish the fire, and burn classified papers, contact was finally made with the Sixth Fleet. "Help is on the way," replied the carrier America, which quickly unleashed eight of its most readily available warplanes - F-104s [sic - probably A-4] armed with nuclear weapons. Before they reached their objective, however, the jets were recalled by Vice-Adm. Martin. If Rabin feared that the ship was Russian, Martin suspected that its attackers were Russian, and without authorization from the highest level, he did not want to risk starting a nuclear war.27

Meanwhile, the Israeli torpedo boats came within range. The Liberty was shrouded in smoke, but even so, Oren could see that it could not be the destroyer that had supposedly shelled El-Arish. Rather, he believed, it was a slower-moving vessel that had either serviced that destroyer or evacuated enemy soldiers from the beach. At 6,000 meters, Oren's T-204 flagship paused and signaled "AA" - "identify yourself." Due to damaged equipment, McGonagle could only reply in kind, AA, with a hand-held Aldis lamp.28 Oren remembered receiving a similar response from the Egyptian destroyer Ibrahim al-Awwal, captured by the Israeli navy in the 1956 war, and was sure that he now faced an enemy ship. Consulting his naval intelligence manual, he concluded that the vessel in front of him - its deck line, midship bridge and smokestack - resembled the Egyptian freighter El-Quseir. The officers of the other two boats reached the same conclusion independently, and followed Oren into battle formation.29

Any lingering doubts were soon dispelled as the Israeli boats came under sudden fire from the Liberty. Unaware of McGonagle's order not to shoot at the approaching boats, a sailor had opened up with one of the Brownings. Another machine gun also fired, apparently on its own, triggered by exploding ammunition. Oren repeatedly requested permission from naval headquarters to return fire. Rahav finally approved. 30

Of the five torpedoes fired at the Liberty only one found its mark, a direct hit on the starboard side, killing twenty-five, almost all of them from the intelligence section. The Israeli craft closed in, their cannons and machine guns raking the Liberty's hull and, according to the crew's testimony, its life rafts as well. One of those rafts, picked up by T-203, was found to bear U.S. Navy markings - the first indication that Oren had that the ship might be American. His suspicions mounted when while circling the badly listing ship, Oren confronted the designation GTR-5. But still no flag was spotted, and it would take another half an hour, until 3:30 p.m., to establish the vessel's identity.31

"I must admit I had mixed feelings about the news - profound regret at having attacked our friends and a tremendous sense of relief [that the boat was not Soviet]," Rabin later recalled.32 News of the ship's American nationality had arrived during an emergency meeting of the General Staff to discuss possible Soviet reprisals. An apology was immediately sent to Castle, and none too soon, as eight conventionally armed warplanes had been launched from the USS Saratoga and sanctioned to "use whatever force required to defend the Liberty."

As the American jets returned to their carrier, the two Israeli Hornets reached the Liberty and offered assistance. Oren, shouting through a bullhorn, also tried to communicate with the ship. But McGonagle refused to respond. Realizing, finally, that his assailants had been Israeli, he flagged the torpedo boats away and gestured provocatively at the Hornets. Even Castle himself, arriving just before dusk in another Israeli chopper, was denied permission to land. By 5:05 p.m., the Israelis had broken off contact, and the Liberty, navigating virtually without systems, with 34 dead and 171 wounded aboard, staggered out to sea. 33

The center of the crisis then shifted from the Mediterranean to Washington. It was only at 9:50 a.m. eastern time - nearly two hours after the first shots were fired34 - that the White House received word from the JCS that the Liberty, "located 60-100 miles north of Egypt," had been torpedoed by an unknown vessel. Johnson assumed that the Soviets were involved. To forestall further escalation, he hotlined the Kremlin with news of the attack and of the dispatch of jets from the Saratoga.

But then the Israelis informed the Americans of the "mistaken action," and Johnson, like Rabin before him, breathed a sigh of relief.35 While "strong dismay" was conveyed to Ambassador Harman, so too were the Administration's thanks for the speed of Israel's notification. Apologies soon came in from Prime Minister Levi Eshkol ("Please accept my profound condolences and convey my sympathy to all the bereaved families") and Foreign Minister Abba Eban ("I am deeply mortified and grieved by the tragic accident involving the lives and safety of Americans"), as well as from the Israeli chargé d'affaires in Washington, Efraim Evron, a personal friend of Johnson's ("I grieve with you over the lives that were lost, and share in the sorrow of the parents, wives and children of the men who died in this cruel twist of fate"). Within forty-eight hours, the Israeli government offered to compensate the victims and their families.36

At first, Israeli expressions of regret and offers of restitution seemed to satisfy the Administration, whose initial reaction was to downplay the incident. Of particular concern was the danger that the Liberty's presence in the area might reinforce Nasser's charge that the Sixth Fleet had aided Israel in the war - what Washington called "The Big Lie."37 These reservations soon faded, however, as senior officials began to ask pointed questions: Why did the Israelis attack a neutral ship on the high seas, without the slightest provocation? How had they failed to see the Liberty's flag or the freshly painted markings on its hull? How could they confuse the Liberty with the El-Quseir, a far slower, smaller boat, with no distinctive antennas? And finally, how could a ship sailing at 5 knots, whose maximum speed was 18, be gauged at 30?

"Beyond comprehension," fumed Secretary of State Dean Rusk. "We cannot accept such a situation." Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board chief Clark Clifford, known for his pro-Israeli views, reported to Johnson that the attack was "inexcusable... a flagrant act of gross negligence for which the Israeli government should be held completely responsible." While no official could explain what motivation Israel might have had for assaulting an American vessel, neither did the facts seem to square. Either the Israelis had exhibited rank incompetence - in the midst of a victory that was nothing short of brilliant - or they had struck the Liberty on purpose. Indeed, many in the Administration had already concluded that the attack was intentional and that Israel's explanations were entirely disingenuous. Increasingly, the charge of negligence gave way to one of cold-blooded murder.38

The Israelis moved to dispel these accusations with two preliminary reports on the incident. These admitted the IDF's culpability in erroneously reporting a naval barrage on El-Arish, miscalculating the Liberty's speed, and confusing the ship with the El-Quseir. Yet both studies insisted that the attack was an "innocent mistake," with no malice or gross negligence involved.39

"This makes no goddamned sense at all," remarked Under Secretary of State Eugene Rostow when presented with these findings on June 10. The attack, wrote Rusk, was "quite literally incomprehensible... an act of military recklessness reflecting wanton disregard for human life." Further umbrage was taken at the Israeli reports' suggestion that the Liberty had no business being where it was, had failed to inform Israel of its presence, and had failed to use all means (semaphores, flares, flags) to identify itself to the torpedo boats. The United States now demanded that Israel not only pay compensation but admit wrongdoing and court-martial those responsible for the attack "in accordance with international law."40

Israel rebuffed these demands, but at the same time it launched a third and even more comprehensive investigation. Headed by military jurist Col. Yeshayahu Yerushalmi, the commission delved into the question of the control-board markers, the pilots' testimonies and the orders given to the torpedo boats. Yet, while critical of the same intelligence failures noted in the earlier reports, as well as the awkward command relationship between the air force and the navy, Yerushalmi's findings were identical to those of his predecessors. "For all my regret that our forces were involved in an incident with a vessel belonging to a friendly state," he wrote, "I have not discovered any deviation from the standard of reasonable conduct which would justify a court- martial."41

The top-secret Yerushalmi report was conveyed to the Americans, who rejected it with the same mix of incredulity and indignation that had marked their responses to the previous reports. But the United States was holding its own investigations into the affair, beginning with the Navy Court of Inquiry held in Malta shortly after the attack. The hearings revealed basic contradictions in the testimonies of McGonagle and other officers regarding the length and sequence of the attack, and raised the possibility that, due to light winds, the flag might well not have been visible to Israeli pilots. Furthermore, Rear-Adm. IsaacC. Kidd, Jr., the presiding officer, found no evidence that the attack was in any way intentional, calling it "a case of mistaken identity." Subsequent closed-door inquiries were conducted by the CIA, the NSA, the JCS, as well as by both houses of Congress. All reached the same conclusion: That the Israeli attack upon the USS Liberty had been the result of error, and nothing more.

Yet suspicions of Israel's duplicity in the incident, even among high officials, lingered. As Rusk asserted many years later in his memoirs, "I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day."42

The American and Israeli investigative reports go a long way toward disproving the charge that the Israelis maliciously opened fire on a ship they knew to be American. In the three decades prior to their declassification, however, numerous theories were posited to explain why Israel, engaged in war and internationally isolated, would willingly attack its only superpower ally. Now, with the aid of the recently released documents, it is possible to determine whether any of these hypotheses had a basis in fact. Among the more far-fetched theories that have been suggested is the possibility that the Liberty was attacked because it had learned of the Israeli execution of Egyptian POWs; or that it had picked up Israeli attempts to draw Jordan into the war so that Jerusalemmight be brought under Israeli control.43 But no document, American or Israeli, contains any reference to prisoner executions; neither are they mentioned in any Arabic source that has come to light to date.44 By the same token, the Jordanian attack on Israel on June 5 and the fall of Jerusalem to Israeli forces on June 7 took place well before the Liberty's arrival off the Gaza coast, and none of the documents now available in any way link the Liberty incident on June 8 to these events.

Far more serious has been the claim that the Israelis attacked the Liberty because it had been eavesdropping on Israel's plans for capturing the Golan Heights. Thus Adm. Thomas Moorer, writing in the July-August 1997 issue of The Link magazine, has speculated that

Israel was preparing to seize the Golan Heights from Syria despite President Johnson's known opposition to such a move.... And I believe [Israeli Defense Minister] Moshe Dayan concluded that he could prevent Washington from becoming aware of what Israel was up to by destroying the primary source of acquiring that information - the USS Liberty.45

Historian Donald Neff takes the supposition a step further, presenting it as fact:

If the ship could listen in on Israeli military communications, as it could, then the United States could discover Israel's plans to attack Syria. Foreknowledge of the attack might bring an ultimatum from the United States, an ultimatum that could not be ignored because Israel desperately still needed Washington's support both in the United Nations and to fend off any threats from the Soviet Union. Without the United States, the Soviet Union might directly intervene if Israel took on its last, comparatively unscathed, client, Syria.

Indeed, Neff goes so far as to posit that Israel actually delayed its attack on Syria until after the Liberty was neutralized.46

The theory that the attack on the Liberty was motivated by a desire to conceal the impending Israeli attack on the Golan Heightsis not, then, confined to the extremist fringe, but has made headway in important political and academic circles. In the past, refuting it was dependent largely on appeals to common sense, such as that made by Ernest Castle, the former U.S. naval attaché, in an interview with British television:

Let us presume the Israeli high command was... fearful that the United States would learn of what was an evident Israeli plan to take the Golan, or any other plan on the part of the Israelis. Would they say, "my golly, that will irritate the United States, our great friend. We'd better not... let that happen - so let's sink their ship instead"?47

Common sense would also dictate that the Israelis, in the process of handily defeating three Arab armies, could have easily sunk a single, lightly armed ship if they had wanted to. In such a case, they would not have attacked the Liberty in broad daylight with clearly marked boats and planes - submarines could have done the job - nor would they have ultimately halted their fire and offered the ship assistance.

But it is no longer necessary to decide the argument on the basis of common sense alone. Like the other claims for Israel's alleged motive in attacking the Liberty, the one linking the assault to the Golan Heights campaign cannot withstand the scrutiny of the newly declassified documents. These confirm that Israel made no attempt to hide its preparations for an offensive against Syria, and that the United States government, relying on regular diplomatic channels, remained fully apprised of them. Thus, on June 8, the American consulate in Jerusalem reported that Israel was retaliating for Syria's bombardment of Israeli villages "in an apparent prelude to large-scale attack in effort to seize Heights overlooking border kibbutzim." That same day, U.S. Ambassador Walworth Barbour in Tel Aviv reported that "I would not, repeat not, be surprised if the reported Israeli attack [on the Golan] does take place or has already done so," and IDF Intelligence Chief Aharon Yariv told Harry McPherson, a senior White House aide who was visiting Israel at the time, that "there still remained the Syria problem and perhaps it would be necessary to give Syria a blow."48

Similarly, the United States National Archives contain no evidence to suggest that information obtained by the Liberty augmented Washington's already detailed picture of events on the Golan front and of Israel's intentions there. The Israeli records, for their part, reveal no fear whatsoever of American opposition to punishing Syria, but only of possible Soviet military intervention. (It was this fear that led Israel to delay its decision to capture the Golan until the morning of June 9.) Nor do they suggest that there was any danger of an American ultimatum. On the contrary, from his conversations with presidential advisor McGeorge Bundy and other administration officials, Foreign Minister Abba Eban understood that "official Washington would not be too aggrieved if Syria suffered some painful effects from the war that it had started...."49

Once again, there is no indication in the archives that the Israelis were troubled by the Liberty, much less considered it worthy of attack. Indeed, there is no evidence that anyone in the Israeli government, or the IDF Chief of Staff, knew of the ship's presence at all.50

The USS Liberty was decommissioned in 1968 and later sold for scrap. That same year, William McGonagle received the Congressional Medal of Honor for gallantry displayed during the attack, and Israel paid over $6 million in restitution to the families of those wounded and killed. An additional $6 million in damages was paid under a 1980 agreement in which Israel and the United States consented "not to address the issue or motive or reopen the case for any reason."51 But the case remained open nonetheless. While the controversy surrounding similar incidents would subside - the Iraqi missile attack on the USS Stark in 1987 and the downing of an Iranian jetliner by the USS Vincennes in 1988 come to mind - the bitterness over the Liberty incident endured. The release of hitherto classified papers on the incident, however, now enables us to dispel spurious theories about the incident, and to conclude that Israel's assault upon the USS Liberty was a tragic error, and nothing more. In light of the new documents, it is now possible to reconstruct the chain of mishaps on the part of both sides that led to the unintended Israeli attack.

The incident began with the ill-conceived decision to send the Liberty to the crisis-torn Middle East, a mere half-mile beyond Egyptian waters, in an area not used by commercial shipping and which Nasser had declared off-limits to neutral vessels. The Americans did not accede to Chief of Staff Rabin's request for the identification of all U.S. ships in the area or Ambassador Harman's request for a strategic liaison between Israel and the Sixth Fleet. The Liberty's dispatchers, meanwhile, overrode naval orders to keep the ship in Spain, and then failed to inform the U.S. attaché in Tel Aviv of its presence near the war zone. These mistakes were compounded by the navy's communications system, which delayed by as much as two days orders to the Liberty to withdraw 100 miles from the coast.52 Even after it was hit, the Americans had difficulty locating the Liberty, the JCS placing it at "60-100 miles north of Egypt." If neither Castle, nor cinceur, nor even the President of the United States could know where the Liberty was, it seems unreasonable to expect that the Israelis, in the thick of battle, should have been able to locate it.

The Israelis, too, committed their own share of fateful errors, as the Yerushalmi report points out: The erroneous reports of bombardment at El-Arish, the failure to replace the Liberty's marker on the board after it had been cleared, the over-eagerness of naval commanders, and worst of all, Ensign Yifrah's miscalculation of the ship's speed. Though Yerushalmi's report suggested reasons for these errors - inflexible naval procedures, the inaccuracy of speed-measuring devices - one is still left with a sense of poor organization and sloppy execution. Moreover, there were breakdowns in communications between the Israeli navy and air force stemming from inadequate command structure and the immense pressures of a multi-front war. To these factors must be added Israel's general sensitivity about its coastal defenses, and the exhaustion of its pilots after four days of uninterrupted combat. Yet none of these amount to the kind of gross negligence of which the Israelis have been accused.

And then there were "bad breaks" that are unfortunately commonplace in war: The U.S. planes that were called back because of their nuclear payload (their mere presence might have warded off the torpedo boats); the Liberty's inability to signal the approaching Israeli boats, and the machine gunner who fired on them; and the smoke that hid the identities of both the attackers and the attacked.

All of these elements combined to create a tragic "friendly fire" incident of the kind that claimed the lives of at least fifty Israeli soldiers in the Six Day War, and caused 5,373 American casualties in Vietnam in 1967 alone.53 Obviously, these findings can do little to lessen the suffering of those American servicemen who were wounded in the incident, nor can they be expected to offer comfort to the families of the dead. But they should at least permit us to bring to a close what has for a generation remained one of the most painful chapters in the history of America's relationship with the State of Israel.

Sources: Azure: Ideas for the Jewish Nation

The author wishes to thank Mihal Tzur, Director of the Israel Defense Forces Archive, and Judge A. Jay Cristol for their assistance in researching this article.

1. Thomas H. Moorer's foreword to James M. Ennes, Jr., Assault on the Liberty: The True Story of the Israeli Attack on an American Intelligence Ship (New York: Ivy, 1979), p. ix.

2. Cited in USS Liberty Internet site (www.halcyon.com/jim/ussliberty/liberty.htm).

3. Wisconsin Public Radio station wlfm interview of Dean Rusk by Tom Clark, February 1999, cited in USS Liberty Internet site.

4. Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Library (hereafter "LBJ"), Oral History of David G. Nes, p. 31.

5. Cited in USS Liberty Internet site.

6. Donald Neff, Warriors for Jerusalem: The Six Days that Changed the Middle East (Brattleboro, Vt.: AmanaBooks, 1984).

7. Reverdy S. Fishel, "The Attack on the Liberty: An 'Accident'?" in International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence 8, no. 3, 1995.

8. June 1992. See also Evans and Novak's "Remembering the Liberty," in The Washington Post, November 6, 1991; "The Liberty Quotes," in The Washington Post, November 11, 1991; Mark Genrich, editorial page column, The Phoenix Gazette, June 5, 1996.

9. ABC's 20/20, May 21, 1987, and NBC's The Story Behind the Story, January 27, 1992, cited in A. Jay Cristol, The Liberty Incident, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Miami, 1997, pp. 145-148. Cristol, a federal judge in Miami, is the leading expert on the Liberty incident, having devoted years to its study.

10. Anyone in doubt about the nature of the USS Liberty Internet site can follow its links to any number of rabidly anti-Israel sites, among them Palestinian Geocities and Paul Findley's Council for the National Interest.

11. LBJ, National Security File, History of the Middle East Crisis, Box 18, Joint Chiefs of Staff: Military Actions - Straits of Tiran, May 24, 1967.

12. LBJ, Box 1-10, The USS Liberty: Department of Defense Press Release, June 8, 1967; Box 19: CINCUSNAVEUR Order, May 30, 1967; Box 18, Joint Chiefs of Staff: Military Actions - Straits of Tiran, May 25, 1967; Box 104/107, The National Military Command Center: Attack on the USS Liberty, June 9, 1967.

13. For a discussion of Israel's considerations in going to war, see Michael B. Oren, "Did Israel Want the Six Day War?" Azure 7, Spring 1999, pp. 47-86.

14. United States National Archives, Middle East Crisis Files, 1967, Record Group 59 (hereafter "USNA"), USUN, Box 6: CINSTRIKE to AIG, June 2, 1967. Ben-Gurion Archive, Diary, Entry for May 26, 1967. See also Cristol, Liberty Incident, pp. 25-26.

15. British Public Record Office, FCO17/498, Israel - Political Affairs: Tel Aviv to Foreign Office, June 5, 1967. See also Yitzhak Rabin, The Rabin Memoirs (Berkeley: University of California, 1996), pp. 100, 110; Hirsh Goodman and Ze'ev Schiff, "The Attack on the Liberty," The Atlantic Monthly, September 1984, p. 81.

16. LBJ, National Security File, History of the Middle East Crisis, Box 20: United States Policy and Diplomacy in the Middle East Crisis, May 15-June 10, 1967, pp. 87-88.

17. 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 9, 1967; Department of Defense: USS Liberty Incident, June 15, 1967. usna, Chairman Wheeler Files, Box 27: The Court of Inquiry Findings, June 22, 1967.

18. Israel Defense Forces Archive, 2104/92/47: "Attack on the Liberty," IDF Historical Department, Research and Instruction Branch, June 1982 (hereafter "IDF, Attack on the Liberty"). The Israeli fighter pilot originally thought that the ship had fired at him, and Israeli destroyers were ordered to find it. The orders were rescinded, however, following further debriefing of the pilot.

19. Israel State Archives (hereafter "ISA"), 4079/26 Foreign Ministry Files, The Liberty Incident; IDF Preliminary Inquiry File 1/67 Col. Y. Yerushalmi (hereafter "ISA, The Yerushalmi Report"). Report by Carl F. Salans, Department of State Legal Advisor, September 21, 1967, to the Under Secretary of State. (Document available on the USS Liberty site.)

20. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report. The Liberty was also sailing near 'Point Boaz,' the location at which Israeli aircraft entered and exited Sinai - another reason for the heavy air traffic that morning. See IDF, Attack on the Liberty, p. 39, note 14.

21. Muhammad Fawzi, The Three Years War (Cairo: Dar al-Mustaqbal al-Arabi, 1980), p. 149 [Arabic]; Cristol, Liberty Incident, p. 30.

22. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report. See also Rabin, Memoirs, pp. 108-109.

23. No relation to the author.

24. Interview with Gen. (ret.) Mordechai Hod, March 9, 1999. Ehud Yanay, No Margin for Error: The Making of the Israeli Air Force (New York: Pantheon, 1993), p. 257. Castle's denial and McGonagle's confirmationof Bareket's claim both appear on the USS Liberty site.

25. The Israeli pilot mistook the "G" on the Liberty's hull for a "C." IDF, Attack on the Liberty. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report.

26. Rabin, Memoirs, p. 108. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report.

27. LBJ, Country Files, Box 104/107, The National Military Command Center: Attack on the USS Liberty, June 9, 1967. See also Cristol, Liberty Incident, p. 55.

28. IDF, Attack on the Liberty. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report. USNA, Chairman Wheeler Files, Box 27: The Court of Inquiry Findings, June 22, 1967.

29. IDF, Attack on the Liberty. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report.

30. IDF, Attack on the Liberty. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report.

31. IDF, Attack on the Liberty. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report.

32. Rabin, Memoirs, p. 109.

33. USNA, Box 16: "Liberty Hit by Torpedo," June 8, 1967; "Inventory of Submarines," June 8, 1967; W. Rostow to the President, June 8, 1967; Box 15: DOS to CINSTRIKE, June 9, 1967. LBJ, Country Files, Box 1-10, The National Military Command Center: Memorandum for the Record of Preliminary Information - USS Liberty Struck by Torpedo, June 8, 1967; Box 104/107, The National Military Command Center: Attack on the USS Liberty, June 9, 1967; History of the Middle East Crisis, Box 19: JCS to USCINCEUR, June 8, 1967.

34. The United States had gone over to daylight savings time, while Israel had not, and the result was a six-hour time difference between Washington and Israel.

35. LBJ, Country Files, Box 104/107, Middle East Crisis: Rostow to the President, June 8, 1967; Note to the President, June 8, 1967; Message to Kosygin, June 8, 1967. See also Lyndon Baines Johnson, The Vantage Point: Perspectives of the Presidency, 1963-1969 (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971), pp. 301-303; Dean Rusk, As I Saw It (New York: Penguin, 1990), p. 388.

36. usna, Box 16: Diplomatic Activity in Connection with the USS Liberty Incident, June 14, 1967. LBJ, Country Files, Box 104/107, Middle East Crisis: Eshkol to Johnson; Memos to the President (W. Rostow), Box 17: Barbour to Department of State, June 8, 1967. ISA, 4079/26 Foreign Ministry Files, The Liberty Incident: Harman to Foreign Ministry, June 10, 1967; Eban to Johnson, June 9, 1967; Evron to Johnson, June 8, 1967.

37. Upon learning of the attack, the U.S. Ambassador in Tel Aviv, Walworth Barbour, warned the State Department that "its [the Liberty's] proximity to the scene of the conflict could feed Arab suspicions of U.S.-Israeli collusion." Similarly, Ambassador-Designate Richard H. Nolte in Egypt wrote, "We had better get our story on the torpedoing of USS Liberty out fast and it had better be good." See LBJ, National Security File, Box 20: United States Policy and Diplomacy in the Middle East Crisis, May 15-June 10, 1967, pp. 143-144; Box 104/107, Middle East Crisis: Cairo to Department, June 9, 1967.

38. ISA, 4079/26 Foreign Ministry Files, The Liberty Incident, Harman to Foreign Ministry. LBJ, Country Files, Box 104/107, Middle East Crisis: Diplomatic Activity in Connection with the USS Liberty Incident, June 14, 1967. See also Clark Clifford (with Richard Holbrooke), Counsel to the President (New York: Random House, 1991), pp. 446-447; Phil G. Goulding, Confirm or Deny: Informing the People on National Security (New York: Harper and Row, 1970), pp. 123-130; Cristol, Liberty Incident, pp. 93-94.

39. ISA, 4079/26 The Liberty Incident: Bitan to Harman, June 18, 1967.

40. ISA, 4079/26 The Liberty Incident: Bitan to Harman, June 18, 1967; Evron to Eban (Rostow quote), June 19, 1967. LBJ, National Security File, Country Files, Box 104/107, Middle East Crisis: Rusk to Harman, June 10, 1967.

41. ISA, The Yerushalmi Report. LBJ, National Security File, Country Files, Box 104/107: Middle East Crisis: Diplomatic Activity in Connection with the USS Liberty Incident, June 14, 1967. Though none of the Israeli officers involved in the incident stood trial, Capt. Rahav, who dispatched the torpedo boats and called on the air force to attack the Liberty, was forced to resign his commission. See Shlomo Erell, Facing the Sea: The Story of a Fighting Sailor and Commander (Tel Aviv: Ministry of Defense, 1998). [Hebrew]

42. USNA, Chairman Wheeler Files, Box 27: The Court of Inquiry Findings, June 22, 1967. LBJ, National Security File, Special Committee, Box 1-10: Why the USS Liberty Was Where It Was. Cristol, Liberty Incident, pp. 86-105. Rusk, As I Saw It, p. 388.

43. See, for example, Anthony Pearson, Conspiracy of Silence: The Attack on the U.S.S. Liberty (London: Quartet Books, 1978).

44. Though Arab archives remain closed, the Six Day (or June) War has yielded numerous memoirs by the civilian and military leaders of Egypt and Jordan. Examples can be found in Mahmud Riad, Mahmud Riad's Memoirs (Beirut: Al-Muasasah al-'Arabiyya Lil'Dirasat al-Nashr, 1987), vol. 2 [Arabic]; Muhammad Hassanayn Heikal, 1967: The Explosion (Cairo: Markaz al-Ahram, 1990) [Arabic]; Abdel-Latif Al-Baghdadi, Memoirs (Cairo: al-Maktab al-Misri al-Hadith, 1977) [Arabic]; Abdel Muhsin Kamil Murtagi, Major-General Murtagi Attests to the Truth (Cairo: Dar al-Watan al-Arabi, 1976). [Arabic]

45. The Link, July-August 1997.

46. Neff, Warriors for Jerusalem, p. 253. Further exposition of the theory appears in Richard K. Smith, "The Violation of the Liberty," in the Institute for Naval Proceedings, June 1978.

47. Thames TV documentary, Attack on the Liberty, cited in Cristol, Liberty Incident, p. 204.

48. LBJ, National Security File, Box 104/107, Middle East Crisis: Jerusalem to the Secretary of State, June 8, 1967; Barbour to Department, June 8, 1967; Joint Embassy Memorandum, June 8, 1967.

49. Abba Eban, Personal Witness: Israel Through My Eyes (New York: Putnam, 1992), p. 423. On Israeli decisionmaking on the Golan, see Hanoch Bartov, Dado: 48 Years and 20 Days (Tel Aviv: Ma'ariv, 1978), pp. 100-102 [Hebrew]; Eitan Haber, Today War Will Break Out (Tel Aviv: Yedi'ot Aharonot, 1987), pp. 244-246 [Hebrew]; Zerah Verhaftig, Fifty Years and One (Jerusalem: Yad Shapira, 1998), pp. 190-191 [Hebrew]; Rabin, Memoirs, pp. 113-116.

50. It is ironic, perhaps, that the force of this logic was upheld not only by Israelis but also by Arab writers who, sticking to the "Big Lie," alleged that the Liberty had been directing IAF strikes in Sinai and was only inadvertently attacked. Suleiman Mathhar, Annals of the June War Issue: Transcript of the Testimony before the Revolutionary Historical Commission (Cairo: Kitab al-Huriyya, 1990), pp. 86-88 [Arabic]; Muhammad El-Farra, Years of No Decision (London: KPI, 1987), pp. 58-68; Riad, Memoirs, p. 312; Heikal, The Explosion, pp. 731-732; Fawzi, The Three Years War, pp. 135-136. The claim also featured prominently in Egyptian radio broadcasts; see BBC World Service, Daily Report, Middle East, Africa and Western Europe B 8, June 16, 1967.

51. Details of the Israeli compensation payments can be found in U.S. Department of State Bulletin, vol. lviii, no. 1512, June 17, 1968, and vol. lx, no. 1562, June 2, 1969, and U.S. Department of State Daily News Briefing, DPC 2451,

December 18, 1980.

52. Congressman John Rhodes, a member of the House Appropriations Committee which investigated the Navy's communications network in 1971, called the events surrounding the Liberty incident a "comedy of errors," and then added: "Here we are, with the most sophisticated communications system ever known to mankind, and maybe it is so sophisticated we do not know how to operate it." John J. Rhodes, Committee Hearing Report, p. 394, cited in Cristol, Liberty Incident, p. 98.

53. Friendly Fire Casualty Statistics on Southeast Asia, by Month at the American War Library Internet site.

From <https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/quot-the-uss-liberty-case-closed-quot>

Michael Oren's Vision for Israel: Unity Challenges, Two-State Solution, and Preserving Identity

Former Israeli ambassador to the US says cracks in our unity as a people are a greater danger than Hamas.

By TANIA SHALOM MICHAELIANDECEMBER 17, 2023 18:06 Updated: DECEMBER 19, 2023 16:57

From <https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/article-778396>

When asked what concerns him most about “The Day After,” Michael Oren doesn’t hesitate. The American born Israeli diplomat, historian, novelist, and politician told Steven Shalowitz, host of Jewish National Fund - USA’s podcast, IsraelCast that we need to work even harder to retain and preserve our unity as a people after the October 7 terrorist attacks.

“The irony of the recent events is that the Hamas reminded us of who we are – as a nation, a state, a people, [and] a family,” he said.

But that unity is starting to show cracks in our peoplehood, he believes, and that is “a greater danger than Hamas”.

Responsibility, Vision, Will and a Two-State Solution

Oren spoke about his latest book, 2048, The Rejuvenated State, where the former Israeli Ambassador to the US sets out his vision for Israel in honor the country’s 75th year of independence and speaks about its main themes of Responsibility, Vision and Will.

For Oren, the concept of Zionism can be defined by one word – Responsibility.

“It is only within the framework of a sovereign Jewish state that Jews can take responsibility for ourselves as Jews,” he said. “In Israel, as a Jew, you’re responsible for everything – from sewerage to foreign policy. That is what Zionism is.”

The book speaks about Israel’s vision as a country on its 100th anniversary, and Oren hopes that by 2048, “Israel will have a 2-state solution that meets its security needs and enhances its international standards and that preserves its democratic and Jewish identity.”

Yet, because of his decades of experience as ambassador, academic and member of think-tanks examining the idea of a two-state solution, Oren is also realistic about the chances of this vision being met. He refers to the same concepts of responsibility and peoplehood when discussing the Palestinians.

Palestinians and Peoplehood

He believes that one of the biggest problems facing the peace process is that the Palestinians aren’t enough of a ‘people’.

“You took Jews from 70 different countries, with different languages and cultures, stuck them in the desert surrounded by hostile enemies and you created one of the most highly functioning nation states on the planet, because we’re a people,” he said.

But in all the years of attempts to reach peace with the Palestinians, there has never been a leader willing to live life with the Jews in peace and commit to the idea of two States for two Peoples.

“No Palestinian leader has ever subscribed to that formula because they won’t recognize us as a people,” he said. “For them, Jews are ‘colonialist imports.’ They ignore thousands of years of history. They refuse to sign an end to claims and an end to conflict. They all say that a two-state solution is a temporary solution.”

What’s clear to Oren is that Israel will not create a Palestinian state tomorrow that’s going to endanger its existence, “just to appease our opponents on US campuses.”

Gaza and International Trusteeship

Oren is adamant that indoctrination needs to be nipped in the bud and that the Palestinian education system needs to change. Gazan children are taught from infancy that the most sacred thing in life is slaying a Jew.

To this end, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA) “should not be allowed to set foot in Gaza again,” he believes, since they were the greatest catalyst for perpetuating the conflict.  Instead, he thinks that the future of Gaza lies in its internationalization. Only through international trusteeship does Gaza have a chance to educate Palestinian youngsters to strive for peace and not war.

Upsetting a Fragile Co-Existence

Michael Oren is angry that October 7 has managed to upset what has already been achieved in Israeli Jewish-Arab relations over the 75 years and sees Israel as an example of how people in a Middle Eastern state can co-exist.  But recent events have created an element of fear in both communities.

He revealed remarkable statistics which showed that up to 80% of Palestinians had no problem with Hamas atrocities of October 7, yet 77% of Israeli Arabs were appalled by them. On the other hand, Israeli Jews are afraid of the other 23% who may support Hamas.

“Hamas mustn’t be allowed to destroy what we achieved,” he said. “We can’t let fear defeat us!”

Israel and a Jewish and Democratic State

When asked about the other part of his vision statement, that of preserving Israel’s democratic and Jewish identity, Oren says that we have a responsibility to protect the pillars of democracy on which the country was founded upon.

“Some of the greatest ideas of democracy come from the Bible,” he said.

Israel is one of only five countries in the world – the others being the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia - that has never had a second of non-democratic governance. Yet it’s the only country which has never had a second of peace.  This becomes all the more remarkable when we consider that what usually affects democracy is upheaval and war.

“Israel is a flagrantly democratic state, even now,” he said. “To be a truly democratic state we must be Jewish, and to be true Jews, we must be democratic.”

This article was written in cooperation with JNF-USA

https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/article-778396