Reddit reviews Assault on the Liberty

This has been extensively written about. One excellent and meticulously detailed source is, "Assault on the Liberty" written by James Ennes, a survivor of the attack.

http://www.amazon.com/Assault-Liberty-James-Ennes-Jr/dp/0972311602/

Worth checking out if you are interested in the facts of the case rather then the conjecture and propaganda that saturates most internet discourse about the subject.

To briefly answer your question, the type of ship, the flag flown, the numerous Israeli recon flights overhead preceding the attack, among other things are all factors that leave the impartial observer unable to draw any conclusion other then that the ship was known to be American. The official Navy investigation done by the JAG determined the same thing.

A single torpedo is an accident. A two hour multi-plane attack is not.

https://www.amazon.com/Assault-Liberty-James-Ennes-Jr/dp/0972311602/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1518467027&sr=1-1&keywords=Assault+on+the+Liberty

I could easily write a 15 page paper on the Six-Day-War :) But that's not an offer.

Not sure how much I can help you if you aren't even going to post your initial thoughts on the event. Do you just want to take up our feelings on it?

Well anyway I'll just get the ball rolling by giving you a book on a significant incident that happened on the peripheral of the "war":

http://www.amazon.com/Assault-Liberty-James-Ennes-Jr/dp/0972311602

I believe that reading this would be helpful for your report and also your understanding of geopolitics in the east beach of the Mediterranean. It's a well known book, you've probably even heard of it (at least if you're an American you have).

There have been several books written by officers on the Liberty that survived. The one by James Ennes is the best IMHO: https://www.amazon.com/Assault-Liberty-James-Ennes-Jr/dp/0972311602

If you were really a Vietnam Vet, you would remember LBJ's falsification of the Gulf of Tonkin incident which he used to escalate the war in Vietnam, and his shameless recalling of jets sent to assist the USS Liberty (two times!) as it was under attack which Israel hoped would be blamed on Egypt, drawing US into the 1967 war. LBJ covered up the entire incident which left 34 dead and 171 wounded.

Can you possibly imagine the howls of outrage if Bush pulled BS like that rather than LBJ, especially if the attacker was Arab, not Israeli? Appalling.

Much of the crew believes the attack was intentional. The people who were there, particularly the deck officers like LCDR James Ennes have gone on the record claiming there is no way it was not deliberate, and that much of what was in the official report was false, and things were omitted and altered, as claimed by those on board who were never allowed to go on the congressional record and testify about the attack. Why would a Navy LCDR serving on the ship adamantly lie? Also CIA director Richard Helms and Secretary of State Dean Rusk believed the attack was deliberate.

Claiming it was an error...they were flying their holiday colors for fucks sake. Huge letters on the bow, "GTR 5" signifying who they were. Israelis claimed they believed it was the Egyptian ship El Quseir which looks nothing like the Liberty!

Also the CO Capt. McGonagle following the incident never came out to make public claims, but in 1997 during the ships reunion he was quoted saying:

"I think it's about time that the state of Israel and the United States government provide the crew members of the Liberty and the rest of the American people the facts of what happened, and why . . . the Liberty was attacked 30 years ago today.

"For many years I have wanted to believe that the attack on the Liberty was pure error," Captain McGonagle said.

But "it appears to me that it was not a pure case of mistaken identity. It was, on the other hand, gross incompetence and aggravated dereliction of duty on the part of many officers and men of the state of Israel."

LDCR James Ennes wrote a book about it "The Assault on the Liberty"

I don't think you've answered my question.

>I think that they are dealing in supposition and that those statements show that they actually have no reason to believe what they say they believe.

They are short quotes intended to demonstrate that officials, not conspiracy loons and Jew haters, don't believe the official story. They weren't intended to be an exposé on the reasons for why they believe what they believe.

The quoted officials and survivors have expounded on the reasons for their position in writing and interviews. Here is the 1967 diplomatic note from Secretary of State Dean Rusk to the Israeli ambassador where he explains why he doesn't believe the USS Liberty could have been mistaken for anything it wasn't. James Ennes, one of the attack survivors, wrote a book on the incident. The linked documentary also interviews Ennes and other survivors.

>The Israelis had no cause whatsoever to attack Americans, and would not have wasted the resources without some cause.

Israel was at war with Egypt. I'm not however here to argue that Israel intentionally attacked the USS Liberty or that it had a motive to do so, anyone interested in making an actual opinion for themselves about the events is welcome to do their own research, read the transcripts of Israeli military transmissions released by the Jerusalem Post in 2004 or watch any of the available documentaries on the incident.

>Your quotes would have indicated what the cause was if any existed.

The quotes weren't intended to provide a cause for the attack. They were intended to dispel the false impression your comment gave that skepticism about the incident is associated with antisemites when the fact is that respected members of the intelligence community and high ranking military officers don't believe it was an accident.

A good non-Israel approved book is Assault on the Liberty by James Ennes. It is specifically about the attack on the US intelligence vessel by Israeli bombers and torpedo boats during the Six-Day war, not the Yom Kippur war, but OP would probably find it very interesting nonetheless.