I consider USS Liberty survivor and author Lt. Jim Ennes a friend. His only agenda is the truth about the Liberty attack. It is extremely relevant today specifically because of the danger of "false-flag" attacks.

(see: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/jenn.html )

[begin excerpt]

Q: There have been many cases of "friendly fire" and misidentification in wartime. unlike other cases, attack on USS Liberty has lingered for 35 years and still remains unresolved. Israelis claim that attack on USS Liberty, was also a case of mistaken identity and that they misidentified Liberty for an Egyptian horse carrier EL Quseir. One of the reasons that they present for their argument, is that, the attacking jets circled the ship three times looking for a flag, but no flag was flown. Do you agree with that statement?

A:"Friendly fire" is a brief, accidental attack. This was a prolonged, carefully coordinated attack. It has been called the most carefully planned "accident" in the history of warfare. The Israeli account of the attack is untrue. We flew a flag at all times, and it stood out clearly displayed in a good breeze. Israeli jets circled us thirteen times during the several hours before the attack, and during that period we heard their pilots informing their headquarters by radio that we were American. When the attack started, the attacking jets passed high overhead once, then turned 180 degrees and came down the centerline firing without any attempt to identify us.

Long after the attack I was contacted by an Israeli pilot who told me that on his first flight over the ship he saw our American flag and informed his headquarters that we were American but was told to ignore the flag and attack anyway. He refused to do so and returned to base where he was arrested. I was told by an Israeli in the war room that they knew we were American. I have been told by several American intelligence analysts who read or in some cases heard the messages between the pilots and their headquarters that these messages make it very clear that the pilots and their headquarters knew we were American.

[end excerpt]

Back to the USS Liberty debate, I'm not 100% on either side of the argument, but I have to agree with you re absence of leaks and absence of credible motives as indications that Israel didn't know it was attacking a US ship (or at least recklessly put its head in the sand during the attack).

Ironically, from an Arab standpoint, I like the thesis that they thought they were gunning down an Egyptian ship better. Consider those two arguments:

- Israel attacked a US ship hoping it would completely eliminate any witness in order to implement conspiracy theory XYZ. (Yawn)

- Israel attacked by mistake a ship it thought was Arab. It doesn't matter that it actually wasn't. Fact is, because they thought it was Arab, they used napalm and torpedoes against an unarmed ship which they could simply have taken over, and went down to gunning its life boats.

The latter argument definitely has more value.

False dichotomy (yawn).

Israel's military actions have always been part of a chess board strategy; with both subtle and bold moves. Regardless of Israeli motives (unknown) in their attack on the USS Liberty and the attempt to sink the ship and murder the crew members in lifeboats (a war crime which the Liberty crew recently filed), what is known is that the Israelis knew they were attacking a US Navy ship. If an actual investigation were conducted, it's possible that the Israeli motives could be uncovered rather than continuied misdirection by invoking "conspiracy."

An example from Moshe Dayan ( http://www.ussliberty.org/orenbook.htm )

[begin excerpt]

In an interview that created a stir in Israel after its belated publication, Defense Minister Moshe Dayan declared:

I know how at least 80 percent of all of the incidents there started. In my opinion, more than 80 percent, but let's speak about 80 percent. It would go like this: we would send a tractor to plow in the demilitarized area, and we would know ahead of time that the Syrians would start shooting.

If they did not start shooting, we would inform the tractor to progress farther, until the Syrians, in the end, would get nervous and would shoot. And then we would use guns, and later, even the air force, and that is how it went. We thought.that we could change the lines of the cease-fire accords by military actions that were less than a war. That is, to seize some territory and hold it until the enemy despairs and gives it to us.

It was just such a staged provocation - an Israeli tractor plowing through a disputed field despite Syrian pleas for compromise - that sparked the April 1967 aerial battle.

[end excerpt]

On the old issue, I kind of agree; the behavior was consistent with a rash attack on what was first thought to be an Arab boat, and doubts crept in after. If they seriously wanted to sink it fast with all aboard they could have used heavy bombs and probably a captured Russian plane as cover.

Meanwhile, for today, it comes back in the all buzz on Iran. A story put out as noise to suggest a serious escalation or indeed actual planning level escalation??.... I dont know.

Matthew,

My response that hasn't gone up so far yet answers some of the previous assertions. Your theorizing of what the Israelis *would* have done if they wanted to sink the ship was itself far-fetched. The fact is that they tried and they failed.

The Russian plane was just speculation, though using French-made jets as happened, would have identified them as Israeli clearly, if it was an attempt to make it look like an Egyptian attack. But using large iron bombs to quickly and decisively sink ships is SOP, I believe.

I think the torpedo boats commander may have acted recklessly or murderously on his own initiative with clear awareness it may have been American.

I dislike that it has become a sort of article of dogmatic faith and an admissions pass of sorts, among those who are fundamentally critical of the US-Israeli too-close relationship, to have to accept the foreknwoledge theory of what is a messy non-obvious factual incident, with alot of data possibly still in concealed repose.

Matthew,

The lack of true investigation supports the theory that there were parties who seemed to know what might actually be uncovered had any occured.

My "admissions pass" came about after 9/11 whereby I found that Israel's "official narrative" was recognizably slanted. The fact that you've still chosen not to post my previous comments supports that position as well. Yeah get comments nad pretend to respond to them, but in actuality you are yet another "gatekeeper."

I dislike the sort of dogmatic faith that a person's argument cannot hold up to scrutiny and therefore needs a little "assistance" the retain the edge.

The fact that you've still chosen not to post my previous comments supports that position as well. Yeah get comments nad pretend to respond to them, but in actuality you are yet another "gatekeeper."

I don't control those comments, nor have I seen them; the site manager has a system involving the word "cat" which I miss half the time and have to wait.

I'm not keeping anyone's gate.

I didnt respond to you except to agree that the Russian airplane use might be far-fetched on my part, but that in any event if there was a deception motive, it could have been cleverer.

The comment about the admissions pass to critiquing the US-Israeli relationship was not directed at you, just a general complaint.

Mate, Hogan has fuck all to do with your comments getting posted. You fucked up your sub and it got spam gated. I'll fix that now, but keep the loony accusations to a min, you look less batty that way.

Hey "The Lounsbury,"

It would have been nice for you to explain what was f*cked up in the sub to get it spam gated but no matter. My apologies to Mr. Hogan. If I could have found an email contact I would have written directly.

Unless you're incredibly clueless or dishonest, you would know that a tremendous amount of gatekeeping takes place. I wanted my missing post to go up because it establishes from an Israeli source the type of provocation that goes on and is then used to blame the other side for its "initiation" (false-flag). The suggestion that "this is how Israel could have/would have done it" acknowledges the reality that Israel could both conduct and benefit from a false-flag operation (as they have indeed done in the past).

Apologists for Zionist lies and abuses often seem to get angry at those using facts to challenge the official narrative. Israel goes on mock bombing runs and it's a "defensive" exercise. Iran test fires missiles and it's saber rattling.

I haven't checked out much of your web site but wanted to add what I knew about the USS Liberty story to this entry. If you have anything to do with the rest of what's here, there's not much sense checking any of it out as you seem capable of adding mostly heat and little light.

Thanks for posting my comments anyway. Sorry you get your panties in such a bunch merely because someone who has seen the gatekeeping first hand many, many times was too quick to ascribe those motives to you. I guess you're a pillar of integrity after all (though that's coming from a loon).

Anyone still convinced of Israel's innocence should take their scary arguments over to the USS Liberty forum. Otherwise, it's just more little fish in a little pond preaching to the choir.

I don't bloody know what was fucked up mate, but no doubt you were unable to type the meow meow name properly.

Why the fuck you want an email contact escapes me, but

As for this Unless you're incredibly clueless or dishonest, you would know that a tremendous amount of gatekeeping takes place.: This is my fucking site mate, no fucking gatekeeping goes on at all (except to screen out the metric fuckloads of Robot Spam we get, via the stunningly simple screener). However, I do have utter contempt for loons and paranoid wingnuts, post your comments away as you bloody well like, I frankly don't give a flying fuck about the bloody Liberty one way or the other, and rather wish Hogan wouldn't bring it up as its fucking irrelevant, boring and brings out the Loons.

But out of respect for me compadres freedom to post, Qbelna.

Hogan wouldn't bring it up as . . .

its fucking irrelevant

Not really, as it hovers behind US and MENA and more importantly it came up now as indication of onoging US/Israeli action vis a vis Iran.

, boring

...matter of taste as I and many others like good historical whodunits probably more than spreadsheets of ROI percentages. (Though am not averse to latter.)

and brings out the Loons.

Can't argue with that. I prefer "smokes out". Generates traffic, some of which might find the site useful and stick around, and helps identify the Loons. Also Loons help illustrate why for reasons of sanity many of us might avoid the Israeli-Palestine-US issue more often than most MENA fans would like.

Fair response, I don't mind the odd loon, but do take the censorship accusation badly, above from someone afraid of the good strong Anglo Saxon fuck root.

...help(s) illustrate why for reasons of sanity many of us might avoid the Israeli-Palestine-US issue more often than most MENA fans would like.

Think how frustrating it is for those who want to discuss why paying to support Israel's apartheid system is not in America's interest. There's a reason it is the 3rd rail of US politics. AIPAC goes out of its way to punish those not on board with their agenda.

Watch how fast Israel tries to make peace if they ever have to fund their oppression on their own dime.

Moshe Dayan once remarked "describing Israel's relationship with the United States":

"Our American friends offer us money, arms, and advice. We take the money, we take the arms, and we decline the advice." (Iron Wall, p. 316)

Freudian monnikered guy --

Yes, Israel has done provocative operations and even sought to shift blame. One need only cite the Lavon Affair. This doesn't mean it happened in the case of the USS Liberty.

Yes, there's plenty of attack-dogging by pro-Israel lobbyists. Their job is often made alot easier by the foolish assumptions of their adversaries.

The USS Liberty issue is widely discussed, gatekeepers or otherwise. It should get a Congressional investigation, if not to clear the air, at least to give the sailors their time to publicly express their experiences and feeling of the situation, which was swept under the rug too quickly.

"what is known is that the Israelis knew they were attacking a US Navy ship"

No, that is not known; though it is credibly suspected. But the case for considering it to be known, ie the case for assuming the existence of the most culpable state of mind in an air-naval attack in the Eastern Mediterranean in 1967 near Egypt is not substantially bolstered by a recitation of provocative land bulldozers near the Syrian Golan Heights, or recitations of the heavy-handed tactics of Israel's shrill lobby.

Quoting from our very own "About us," unedited and unchanged since 05: ‘Aqoul does not want to be a place to fight political battles more tied to outside the region politics. It does not intend to become a place for irrational American centric Israeli-Palestinian flame wars, ......

Enough said.

Which is why I want to set a slight pattern of smoke out. Rational ISraeli-Palestinian stuff is admissible and may have to come up from time to time and it can generate some additional rational readership (admittedly high risk that); America-centric may be important to a story or two that needs be covered.

Setting a pattern of loon identification and rapid crushing may allow us to address the issue when necessary or useful or interesting with the Loons forewarned, and other interested folk feeling worth participating or reading.

Also, loon crushing is part of the appeal of this blog.

And a bit of that too, though I don't have the anonymity luxury of a full court Lounsbury press. Though I wish it at times.

I rather despise the tendency to resolve everything in MENA downed to the damned I-P conflict. But you guys can write about it if you want.

Sometimes the I-P conflict is just that, though - why ignore it? It's not required to superimpose the I-P framework on every other MENA issue, though.

I rather despise the tendency to resolve everything in MENA downed to the damned I-P conflict.

D'accord. And I agree it is a raison d'etre here to reverse that idiocy (which is not only prevalant in USA but also in the region, but you may see that less in the maghreb than the sharq). I do think though that addressing it in context, rationally, and in proper proportion helps debug the broader dialogue to some small but appreciable degree.

But the noise level is irritating.

Why motherfucking ignore it?

Because every motherfucking goddamned MENA blog whanks on about Iraq and Irsael like they are the end all of the fucking region and planet.

Because it is a lazy and stupid motherfucking subject that allows ignoramuses that know fuck all about the region to fucking whank on endlessly and because there is no fucking value added, period.

But what gets the fucking attention, the fucking Palestinians and Israelis fucking scratching each others eyes out.

Fucking bloody American Liberty? Why not whank on about the goddamned King David Hotel? Fuck.

It's fucking history and UTTERLY irrelevant to the future.

Talking corruption in financing.

Business practices, and small firms.

Rent seeking behaviour.

... Anything from this fucking century is goddamned useful.

But I-P and worse, its history. There is no upside because nobody has their ears open.

I'd gladly throw the lot of both into the goddamned sea and bring in the Turks again, right reasonable people they are.

Well, feel free, but I am rightly utterly sick of this topic and the irritation that it brings, with no to little damned real value.

... Anything from this fucking century is goddamned useful.

OK, let's talk about Jenin then.:-) Kidding!!

I'd gladly throw the lot of both into the goddamned sea and bring in the Turks again

Amen.

Mostly all I see are here ad hominems by those claiming to all ready have the truth. Those indicating that the truth has never really been sought and further investigation is merited are dismissed as "loons."

Former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky wrote of sayan operatives. Many do the work of sayanim whether they know it or not by the way they promote a false narrative. Turning up the volume appears easier than thinking, therefore you get idiotic statements such as, "It's fucking history and UTTERLY irrelevant to the future."

At least Matthew states that a full investigation is not an unreasonable request. I don't know how someone who takes a position on what he says is, "credibly suspected" as being batty or a loon, but then maybe I have a different approach to truth-tellers.

If "The Lounsbury" cannot address issues such as these with any credibility, why should he expect to have any elsewhere?

Truth?

Listen Looney Boy, there is not one whit of concern on my part for the "Truth" about your bloody damned ship. I simply don't give a flying fuck one way or the other. Clear enough? There is no "truth telling" and why you're a bloody loon is your paranoid bizzaro world responses. Credibility? There is no issue of credibility on something I find to be utterly irrelevant to here and now. Mossad, Israeli, US Flags.... I don't fucking care you stupid paranoid git.

"The Lounsblurty" - I simply don't give a flying fuck one way or the other. Clear enough?

Which is why your blog has so little traffic, relevance, or value. You flap your gums quite a bit for someone who doesn't care. If you really could give a rat's ass, then STFU, douchebag. Heaven forbid that someone actually has an observation to make on something that was written here. You seem to think that "smug" substitutes for substance.

Enjoy your obscurity.

LT --

To speak for my ever-irascible colleague, his point is that he find this issue irrelevant and nuisancey. I disagree (not wholly).

His accusation of paranoia is not about your particular belief about the who-knew-what-when of the ship incident (a possibly correct one, and one I assumed true only until about last year or so) but the odd goings on about gatekeepers and censorship, (especially on a site that is not known for being run by pro-Israel loons).

As a point of fact, as James Ennes for example observes elsewhere, there are tens of thousands of references to the Liberty incident online, much of which quite freeely discusses and endorses the accusations of wilfull attack.

The sole reason your comment got black-holed is a common glitch in the system that I myself regularly run afoul of.

Thanks Matthew - I had an earlier response that never made it up and considering the Lounsbury's testy nature, did not bother to ask him specifically to allow it through, thinking it would be eventually anyway.

Maybe it still might make it up, but the level of filtering has a negative impact on open discussion regardless. I do not encounter such problems with spam filters from those sites that allow open discusion on the I/P conflict or Zionism. As to open discussion online versus what makes it into the MSM, my question regarding the MSM is always the same; who benefits?

Regards,

LT

Listen retard, your comment is published, and as to your comments getting screened, well most people don't have a problem... but you consistently do. I'd put it down to not being able to string three fucking letters together properly.

As to "obscurity" - this blog is exactly where it wants to be. We're not a bloody wanna be media operation mate, or journo wanna be, just professionals having fun. Now piss off monkey boy, and go whank on about Israel and your pathetic ship somewhere else.

The Lounsbury - It seems as if you've got your head so far up your ass it's cutting off the oxygen to your brain.

I guess that is "where you want to be; 'professionals' having fun."

Are we having fun yet? ~ Zippy the Pinhead

Aw, give it a rest, you two.

The point of this whole thing is actually to discuss what may have been leaked reports of possible joint US-Israeli planning TODAY of an attack on Iran TOMORROW. The Liberty was a convienient reference made in the leaked alleged talks, and I bring it up again, not to annoy our senior blog guy (though it does), but to see if the flotsam and jetsam attracted by the bait include quality new folks.

Mr Thruster appears to have the passion of the newly converted to the rather accurate view that Israeli history, and the US-Israeli relationship, is less savory than the conventional wisdom indicates. Often such folks then tend to see an Israeli-AIPAC machination in every negative Middle East related development. (One can for example overdose on Paul Findley's book, which if less shrill, had something important to say.)

I brought up the tired issue of the ship in the past only because only very recently I bothered to give it a thought as a curious issue (thanks to having some records literally near my fingertips while working on another historical project). I generally had long presumed the attack to be a wilfull one but noticed the closer I looked the less it appeared to be. (Still warrants an open congressional investigation).

But the issue is excellently illustrative (with an intriguing edge for the detective personality type) of the kind of blinkered emotion-laden paranoia-tinged a-critical thinking and fact-sloppy stuff that passes for Middle East, and far more especially Israel-Palestinian and US-Israeli, issues discussion.

Aw, give it a rest, you two.

The point of this whole thing is actually to discuss what may have been leaked reports of possible joint US-Israeli planning TODAY of an attack on Iran TOMORROW. The Liberty was a convienient reference made in the leaked alleged talks, and I bring it up again, not to annoy our senior blog guy (though it does), but to see if the flotsam and jetsam attracted by the bait include quality new folks.

Mr Thruster appears to have the passion of the newly converted to the rather accurate view that Israeli history, and the US-Israeli relationship, is less savory than the conventional wisdom indicates. Often such folks then tend to see an Israeli-AIPAC machination in every negative Middle East related development. (One can for example overdose on Paul Findley's book, which if less shrill, had something important to say.)

I brought up the tired issue of the ship in the past only because only very recently I bothered to give it a thought as a curious issue (thanks to having some records literally near my fingertips while working on another historical project). I generally had long presumed the attack to be a wilfull one but noticed the closer I looked the less it appeared to be. (Still warrants an open congressional investigation).

But the issue is excellently illustrative (with an intriguing edge for the detective personality type) of the kind of blinkered emotion-laden paranoia-tinged a-critical thinking and fact-sloppy stuff that passes for Middle East, and far more especially Israel-Palestinian and US-Israeli, issues discussion.

Thanks for your analysis, Matthew. You're right that your mention of the Liberty was secondary to the overall point you were making, but still relevant considering that the meme being put forth was the desire not to have another "mistake."

If the "mistake" wasn't "mistaken identity" but the failure to fully dispatch the ship, then it takes on a whole new meaning. I will look for opportunities elsewhere to add comments where I'm not arguing my case from the position of the "newly converted." However, it is my general perception that the Israeli official narrative is rarely challenged when appropriate and, more importantly, is given cover when a more balanced assessment of ME affairs would bring greater understanding.

Thanks again for a more rational approach to discourse.