...
Poppycock!
The sad but overwhelming fact is that none of this is true.
The ship did not come from Egypt; it was diverted from the African coast well before the war started. We didn't steam in circles, but on a course parallel to the coast. Nor were we heading "from the direction of Egypt" when "spotted" by the Israelis; on the contrary, we were headed directly toward Egypt. The only "Israeli coast" in sight was land the Israelis had captured just before we arrived.
It is preposterous to believe that we were "removed from Navy control," as these authors claim, or directed to "ignore" orders from the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The truth is, we were always under the direct military control of the local commander who took his orders from the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Washington.
Israel has claimed for years that the US, when asked about the Liberty, denied that the ship was American. That story, repeated here by Loftus and Aarons, is also untrue. On the contrary, Israel never asked about ships in the area until after the attack. Then they falsely claimed in a news conference to have asked days earlier. They never made that claim officially to our government, because any such false claim by the Israeli government would have brought a quick official denial from the Americans.
What about this "NSA Major" who was "in charge"? There was no major. NSA does not bestow military rank. The man in charge was US Navy Lieutenant Commander David Edwin Lewis, who reported to Captain McGonagle. Like any Navy commanding officer, McGonagle had full access to every part of his ship, including the intelligence spaces.
Alan Blue, who is identified as "the major," was in fact a 24- year-old Arab linguist who died in the attack. Blue was a GS7 civilian, just out of the Navy. He had been with the National Security Agency for less than a year. He was a technician. He didn't "consult" with the ship's captain about anything. He had no supervisory authority and never even met the captain.
What about the "Hebrew linguists" we are said to have picked up for the mission? The men we picked up were Russian and Arab linguists. If there was a single Hebrew linguist aboard, no one can recall who he was or what his job might have been.
The fact is, NSA had very few Hebrew linguists and used them sparingly because whenever Israeli supporters in the Congress learned of such things they threatened to cut the agency's budget.
Not a single message got through, including some at the most urgent precedence called "Pinnacle"? Nonsense. Some key orders were lost in overworked relay stations ashore, but this ship sent and received hundreds of messages every day. And "Pinnacle" is not a military communications precedence at all.
The authors want us to believe Israel carefully targeted only the intelligence spaces with a precisely aimed torpedo in order to spare American lives. Yet they couldn't even hit the side of this 550 foot ship with the other four torpedoes, which missed completely.
These authors have the British "downloading" the ship's satellite signals destined for NSA headquarters. Yet the Navy did not yet have satellite communications in 1967, and Liberty's sophisticated lunar relay system was not working.
When attacked, USS Liberty was near the Gaza Strip, moving away from the Israeli coast and toward Egypt. At least one linguist recalls that his orders were to concentrate on Soviet intercepts and to ignore any Israeli signals he happened to hear. "Note the signal and, if it is Israeli, drop it," were the orders. Do not collect, record, or even listen to Israeli signals. That was consistent with NSA policy. The prime target was not Israel.
What was the Liberty really doing?
In 1967, the Soviets were known to have stationed at least five Soviet TU95 Bear bombers in Egypt where they were supposedly flown by Arab pilots. But the US suspected that these were actually Soviet bombers under Soviet control using Soviet pilots. Liberty was asked to determine who controlled those aircraft.
Israel attacked our ship not because of what we were doing, but what they thought we were capable of doing. We were indeed capable of monitoring the war and could probably have detected the scheduled Golan invasion and other Israeli movements if those had been our orders.
The truth is that our primary target may have had nothing to do with the Six Day War at all. Some argue that the war merely provided a cover to explain our presence in the area while our real purpose was to determine who was piloting the Russian Bears.
"Where do they get this stuff?"
"Where do they get this stuff?" several of my shipmates asked after reviewing the Loftus/Aarons chapter on the Liberty? "Do they make it up?"
It would seem so. Many of these fables started with Anthony Pearson in his book "Conspiracy of Silence," published in England in the late 1970s. Pearson asked me to join him in that effort. I refused. Then I learned that he was lying about alliances with a prominent writer, a senator, and a dozen Arab countries. Still later I learned that most of his book was a lie.
Pearson created the "Major Blue" fable and a host of other fairy tales related to the Liberty. Many of the stories lived on, only to be repeated and embellished by others. Pearson is also the creator of the weird story that has an ICBM submarine lying 90 miles off the Israeli coast during the Six Day War, ready to nuke Tel Aviv if the Israelis start to use nuclear weapons against the Arabs. Pearson, sadly, was dying from a brain tumor when he wrote his book. It rendered him paranoid.
He died on the run from the Mossad, which he believed was trying to silence him. He spent his days slipping in and out of London subways to evade his pursuers; he never slept in the same bed twice.
His book reflects his paranoia. Sadly, Pearson's insane musings are constantly picked up and further embellished by other writers who fail to understand just how sick he really was. Then those writers cite one another as sources for their ravings, never bothering with any serious research or verification. Now, Loftus and Aarons bring 25 years of misinformed embellishments together and give them credence with long lists of "confidential sources" whose identities are known only to themselves.
In a very real sense, this is dangerous, because some of what they say will be believed. Innocent people will be frightened for no reason, and that should not happen.
In the end, the only thing Loftus and Aarons seem to have gotten right is the fact that the attack was no accident. Even that, they justify as being "necessary". It was not.
http://www.ussliberty.org/secret.htm
lain:
