Editing USS Liberty incident (section)

==Ongoing controversy and unresolved questions==
Some intelligence and military officials dispute Israel's explanation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.washingtonreport.me/2003-july-august/navy-captain-other-officials-call-for-investigation-of-israel-s-attack-on-uss-liberty.html |title=Navy Captain, Other Officials Call For Investigation Of Israel's Attack On USS ''Liberty'' |publisher=[[Washington Report on Middle East Affairs]] |first=Delinda C. |last=Hanley |date=July–August 2003 |pages=42, 53 |access-date=22 June 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170907022941/https://www.washingtonreport.me/2003-july-august/navy-captain-other-officials-call-for-investigation-of-israel-s-attack-on-uss-liberty.html |archive-date=7 September 2017 |url-status=live |df=dmy-all }}</ref> [[Dean Rusk]], U.S. Secretary of State at the time of the incident, wrote:

{{Blockquote|text=I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink ''Liberty'' precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous.<ref>{{cite book |last=Rusk |first=Dean |author-link=Dean Rusk |title=As I Saw it |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RKdTAAAACAAJ&pg=PP1 |year=1991 |publisher=Penguin Books |isbn=978-0-14-015391-0 |page=388}}</ref>}}

Retired naval [[Lieutenant Commander (United States)|Lieutenant Commander]] [[James Ennes]], a [[junior officer]] (and off-going [[Officer of the Deck]]) on ''Liberty''{{'}}s bridge at the time of the attack, authored a book titled ''Assault on the Liberty'' describing the incident and saying, among other things, that the attack was deliberate.<ref>{{harvnb|Ennes|1987}}</ref> Ennes and Joe Meadors, also a survivor of the attack, run a website about the incident.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gtr5.com/ |title=USS ''Liberty'' Memorial |publisher=Gtr5.com |date=8 June 1967 |access-date=26 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111126202048/http://www.gtr5.com/ |archive-date=26 November 2011 |url-status=live |df=dmy-all }}</ref> Meadors states that the classification of the attack as deliberate is the official policy of the USS ''Liberty'' Veterans Association,<ref name="usslibertyveterans.org">{{cite web |url=http://www.usslibertyveterans.org/ |title=USS ''Liberty'' Veterans Association |publisher=Usslibertyveterans.org |access-date=26 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111206122547/http://www.usslibertyveterans.org/ |archive-date=6 December 2011 |url-status=live |df=dmy-all }}</ref> to which survivors and other former crew members belong. Other survivors run several additional websites. Citing Ennes's book, Lenczowski notes: ''Liberty''{{'}}s personnel received firm orders not to say anything to anybody about the attack, and the naval inquiry was conducted in such a way as to earn it the name of "coverup".{{sfn|Lenczowski|1990|pp=110–112}}

In 2002, Captain [[Ward Boston]], JAGC, U.S. Navy, senior counsel for the Court of Inquiry, said that the Court of Inquiry's findings were intended to cover up what was a deliberate attack by Israel on a ship that the Israelis knew to be American. In 2004, in response to the publication of [[A. Jay Cristol]]'s book ''The Liberty Incident'', which Boston said was an "insidious attempt to whitewash the facts", Boston prepared and signed an affidavit in which he said that Admiral Kidd had told him that the government ordered Kidd to falsely report that the attack was a mistake, and that Boston and Kidd both believed the attack was deliberate.<ref name="WRMEA">{{cite web |url=http://www.washingtonreport.me/2004-march/declaration-of-ward-boston-jr.-captain-jagc-usn-ret.html |title=Declaration of Ward Boston, Jr., Captain, JAGC, USN (Ret.) |publisher=Washington Report on Middle East Affairs |date=March 2004 |page=10}}</ref> Cristol wrote about Boston's professional qualifications and integrity, on page 149 of his book:

{{Blockquote|text=Boston brought two special assets in addition to his skill as a Navy lawyer. He had been a naval aviator in World War II and therefore had insight beyond that of one qualified only in the law. Also, Kidd knew him as a man of integrity. On an earlier matter Boston had been willing to bump heads with Kidd when Boston felt it was more important to do the right thing than to curry favor with the senior who would write his fitness report.|author=A. Jay Cristol |source=The Liberty Incident}}

Cristol said he believes that Boston is not telling the truth about Kidd's views and any pressure from the U.S. government.<ref>{{cite web |title=Boston, Ward – Affidavit |date=22 October 2003 |publisher=The Liberty Incident |url=http://www.thelibertyincident.com/docs/boston-comments.pdf |access-date=8 April 2005 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050416213047/http://www.thelibertyincident.com/docs/boston-comments.pdf |archive-date=16 April 2005 |url-status=live |df=dmy-all }}</ref> Cristol, who also served as an officer of the U.S. Navy's Judge Advocate General, suggests that Boston was responsible in part for the original conclusions of the Court of Inquiry and, that by later declaring that they were false, Boston has admitted to "lying under oath". Cristol also notes that Boston's statements about pressure on Kidd were hearsay, and that Kidd was not alive to confirm or deny them and that Boston did not maintain, prior to his affidavit and comments related to it, that Kidd spoke of such instructions to Boston or to others. Cristol also provides a handwritten 1991 letter from Admiral Kidd<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thelibertyincident.com/docs/Kidd.pdf |title=Letter to Cristol from Admiral Isaac C. Kidd, Jr |publisher=The Liberty Incident |date=3 August 1991 |access-date=26 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120307220600/http://www.thelibertyincident.com/docs/Kidd.pdf |archive-date=7 March 2012 |url-status=live |df=dmy-all }}</ref> that, according to Cristol, "suggest that Ward Boston has either a faulty memory or a vivid imagination". According to James Ennes, however, Admiral Kidd urged Ennes and his group to keep pressing for an open congressional probe.<ref>{{cite journal |first=David C. |last=Walsh |title=Friendless Fire? |publisher=[[United States Naval Institute]] |journal=[[Proceedings (magazine)|Proceedings]] |date=June 2003 |volume=129 |issue=6/1,204 |url=https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2003-06 |access-date=22 June 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307230717/http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2003-06 |archive-date=7 March 2016 |url-status=live |df=dmy-all }}</ref>

The following arguments, found in official reports or other sources, were published to support the hypothesis that the attack was due to mistaken identity:
* Accidents and mistakes do occur in wartime. Journalist [[Ze'ev Schiff]] gave an example of a [[friendly fire]] incident where Israeli aircraft had bombed an Israeli armored column south of the West Bank town of [[Jenin]] the day before the attack on the ''Liberty''.<ref>Hirsh Goodman and [[Ze'ev Schiff]], "The Attack on the Liberty," ''[[The Atlantic Monthly]]'', September 1984</ref> Also given as an example was a  similar incident that took place during the [[Suez Crisis]] in 1956, when Israeli aircraft attacked and damaged the British frigate [[HMS Crane (U23)|HMS ''Crane'']] after mistaking it for an Egyptian warship, at a time when Britain and Israel were fighting together.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-lie-that-wont-die-the-u-s-s-liberty-attack-slander/|title=The Lie that Won't Die: The U.S.S. Liberty Attack Slander|website=blogs.timesofisrael.com}}</ref>
* The incident took place during the [[Six-Day War]] when Israel was engaged in battles with two Arab countries and preparing to attack a third, creating an environment where mistakes and confusion were prevalent. For example, at 11:45, a few hours before the attack, there was a large explosion on the shores of [[El Arish|El-Arish]] followed by black smoke, probably caused by the destruction of an ammunition dump by retreating Egyptian forces. The Israeli army thought the area was being bombarded, and that an unidentified ship offshore was responsible.
* As the torpedo boats approached, ''Liberty'' opened fire on them. McGonagle said that he felt sure the torpedo boat captains believed they were under fire from the ''Liberty''. Ensign Lucas, testified that he gave permission for the firing of the 03 level machine gun after the torpedo boats began firing at ''Liberty''. Later, when the gun was unmanned, heat from a nearby fire apparently caused machine gun rounds at the gun to explode.<ref name=USNCOIreport />
* Admiral Shlomo Erell, head of the Israeli Navy in 1967, stated that no successful argument of benefit has been presented for Israel purposely attacking an American warship, especially considering the high cost of predictable complications that would follow an attack on a powerful ally. He also pointed out that Israel notified the American embassy immediately after the attack.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20030618102439/https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/shlomo_erell_interview.shtml Dead in the Water] [[BBC]] Interview with Former Head Israeli Navy 1967, Admiral Shlomo Erell</ref>

[[File:h97478t.jpg|thumb|[[Amidships]] [[starboard]] [[hull (watercraft)|hull]] and [[superstructure]] attack damage]]
Several books and the BBC documentary ''USS Liberty: Dead in the Water'' argued that ''Liberty'' was attacked in order to prevent the U.S. from knowing about the forthcoming attack in the [[Golan Heights]], which would violate a cease-fire to which Israel's government had agreed.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/240/87/IMG/NR024087.pdf |title= Ods Home Page|website=daccessdds.un.org |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090327062036/http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/240/87/IMG/NR024087.pdf |archive-date=27 March 2009}}</ref> However, Syria did not accept the cease fire until 9 June, after the attack on ''Liberty''.<ref>{{cite book |last=Wellens |first=Karen |author2=T.M.C. Asser Instituut |title=Resolutions and statements of the United Nations Security Council (1946–1989): a thematic guide |publisher=Brill |year=1990 |page=447 |isbn=978-0-7923-0796-9}}</ref> Russian author Joseph Daichman, in his book ''History of the Mossad'', states Israel was justified in attacking the ''Liberty''.<ref name="Daichman">{{cite book |last=Daichman |first=Josef |title=Mossad: istoria luchshei v mire razvedki |publisher=Smolensk: Rusich |year=2001}}</ref> Israel knew that American radio signals were intercepted by the Soviet Union and that the Soviets would certainly inform Egypt of the fact that, by moving troops to the Golan Heights, Israel had left the Egyptian border undefended.<ref>[http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/09/14/36639_.html Hot summer of 1967: The Israeli attack on America and the 'Soviet destroyer.'] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071017013724/http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/09/14/36639_.html |date=17 October 2007 }} ''[[Pravda]]'' 14 September 2002</ref>

Lenczowski notes that while the Israeli decision to "attack and destroy" the ship "may appear puzzling", the explanation seems to be found in ''Liberty''{{'}}s nature and its task to monitor communications from both sides in the war zone. He writes that timely knowledge of their decision to invade Syria and preparatory moves toward it "might have frustrated Israeli designs for the conquest of Syria's Golan Heights" and, in the sense of Ennes's accusations, provides "a plausible thesis that Israel deliberately decided to incapacitate the signals-collecting American ship and leave no one alive to tell the story of the attack".{{sfn|Lenczowski|1990|pp=105–115}}

The U.S. ambassador to Israel, Barbour, had reported on the day of the ''Liberty'' attack that he "would not be surprised" by an Israeli attack on Syria, and the IDF Intelligence chief told a White House aide then in Israel that "there still remained the Syria problem and perhaps it would be necessary to give Syria a blow".<ref>LBJ, National Security File, Box 104/107, Middle East Crisis: Jerusalem to the Secretary of State, 8 June 1967; Barbour to Department, 8 June 1967; Joint Embassy Memorandum, 8 June 1967.</ref>

The 1981 book ''Weapons'' by [[Russell Warren Howe]] says that ''Liberty'' was accompanied by the [[UGM-27 Polaris|Polaris ballistic missile]]-armed [[Lafayette class submarine|''Lafayette''-class submarine]] {{USS|Andrew Jackson|SSBN-619|6}}, which filmed the entire episode through its periscope but was unable to provide assistance.{{efn|Several ''Liberty'' crew members testified that they had briefly seen a periscope during the attack. In 1988, the Lyndon Johnson Library declassified and released a document from the ''Liberty'' archive with the "Top Secret—Eyes Only" security caveat (Document #12C sanitized and released 21DEC88 under review case 86–199). This "Memorandum for the Record" dated 10 April 1967 reported a briefing of the "303 Committee" by General Ralph D. Steakley. According to the memo, General Steakley "briefed the committee on a sensitive DOD project known as FRONTLET 615", which is identified in a handwritten note on the original memorandum as "submarine within U.A.R. waters". Further Freedom of Information Act requests returned no information on any project called "FRONTLET 615". In February 1997, a senior member of the crew of the submarine {{USS|Amberjack|SS-522|6}} told James Ennes that he had watched the attack through the periscope and took pictures. According to the official ship's history from the Department of Defense, ''Amberjack''{{'}}s mission between 23 April and 24 July was reconnaissance within U.A.R. waters. When contacted, four crewmen stated that they were so close to ''Liberty'' when it came under attack that some of the crew believed ''Amberjack'' itself was under depth charge attack. August Hubal, Captain of the ''Amberjack'', insists that the vessel was {{convert|100|mi|km|abbr=on}} from the ''Liberty'' and when told the crew believed they were closer replied "They must be mistaken". On 2 July 2003, as a result of a lawsuit using the Freedom of Information Act by Joel Leyden on behalf of the Israel News Agency requesting any evidence that the U.S. submarine ''Amberjack'' had gathered by means of its periscope, the National Security Agency stated that there had been "no radio intercepts made by the U.S. submarine ''Amberjack''". James Ennes believes that if the submarine photography exists, it should show that the ship's flag was clearly visible to the attacking fighters and torpedo boats.}}

James Bamford, a former [[ABC News (United States)|ABC News]] producer, says in his 2001 book ''Body of Secrets'',<ref name="Excerpt">[http://hnn.us/articles/191.html Excerpt] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090201115113/http://hnn.us/articles/191.html |date=1 February 2009 }} from ''Body of Secrets'' by James Bamford.</ref> that Israel deliberately attacked ''Liberty'' to prevent the discovery of what he described as war crimes, including the killing of Egyptian prisoners of war by the IDF that he alleges was taking place around the same time in the nearby town of El-Arish.<ref>[https://fas.org/sgp/eprint/bamford.html Memo] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303204918/http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/bamford.html |date=3 March 2016 }} from James Bamford regarding criticism of his charges.</ref> However, according to [[Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America|CAMERA]], his claim that 400 Egyptians were executed has been cast into doubt since reporters present in the town claimed that there had been a large battle and this was the main cause of casualties.<ref>''New York Times'', 8 June 1967</ref> Bamford also stated that eyewitness Gabi Bron had claimed he saw 150 people executed by Israeli troops at El-Arish.<ref name="Excerpt"/> However, Gabi Bron claimed to have only seen 5 people executed by Israeli troops.<ref>''New York Times'' article by Serge Schmemann, 21 August 1995</ref><ref>[http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=181&x_context=7 Bamford Bashes Israel] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140426201356/http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=181&x_context=7 |date=26 April 2014 }} CAMERA</ref>

The press release for the BBC documentary film ''Dead in the Water'' states that new recorded and other evidence suggests the attack was a "daring ploy by Israel to fake an Egyptian attack" to give America a reason to enter the war against Egypt. It claimed that President [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] launched allegedly nuclear-armed aircraft targeted against Cairo from a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean. The aircraft were recalled only just in time, when it was clear the ''Liberty'' had not been sunk and that Israel had carried out the attack. An information source for the aircraft being nuclear-armed, James Ennes later stated:

{{Blockquote|It is clear that I was mistaken about the aircraft involved, as F4s do not carry nuclear weapons. Others tell me that the aircraft that were launched carried [[AGM-12 Bullpup|Bullpup missiles]], which might easily be mistaken for nuclear bombs. And we learned much later that the USS ''America'' was involved in a nuclear weapons loading drill at the very time the ship learned of the attack on the Liberty and that this drill is one factor that delayed ''America''{{'s}} response to our call for help. It is also possible that those were the weapons seen by our sources.

Also confusing this issue is an oral history report from the American Embassy in Cairo, now in the LBJ Library, which notes that the Embassy received an urgent message from Washington warning that Cairo was about to be bombed by U.S. forces, presumably in mistaken retaliation for the USS ''Liberty'' attack. That strange message was never explained or cancelled.<ref>[http://www.ussliberty.org/addendum.htm Addendum to 2007 Edition] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100608161826/http://www.ussliberty.org/addendum.htm |date=8 June 2010 }}, online statement, June 2007.</ref>
}}

The video also reports hearsay of a covert alliance of U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies.<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2002/06_june/08/uss_liberty.shtml "New evidence for American cover-up of Israeli attack on U.S. warship"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040911070928/http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2002/06_june/08/uss_liberty.shtml |date=11 September 2004 }}, [[BBC]], 6 August 2002.</ref>

Admiral [[Thomas Hinman Moorer|Thomas H. Moorer]], former [[Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff]] and a critic of the official U.S. government version of events, chaired a non-governmental investigation into the attack on the ''Liberty'' in 2003. The committee, which included former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia [[James E. Akins]], found Israel to be culpable and suggested several theories for Israel's possible motives, including the desire to blame Egypt and so bring the U.S. into the Six-Day War.<ref name=ap2003-10-23>{{cite news |url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100960,00.html |title=Ex-Navy Official: 1967 Israeli Attack on U.S. Ship Was Deliberate |access-date=16 November 2008 |date=23 October 2003 |agency=Associated Press |publisher=Fox News Channel |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080415215706/http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100960,00.html |archive-date=15 April 2008 |url-status=dead |df=dmy-all }}</ref>

According to [[John Loftus (military author)|John Loftus]] and [[Mark Aarons]] in their book, ''The Secret War Against the Jews'', ''Liberty'' was attacked because the Israelis knew that the ship's mission was to monitor radio signals from Israeli troops and pass troop movement information to the Egyptians.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Loftus |first1=John |author-link1=John Loftus (military author) |last2=Aarons |first2=Mark |author-link2=Mark Aarons |title=The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed The Jewish People |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=trU7nY-T-4EC&pg=PA281 |year=1994 |publisher=St. Martin's Press |isbn=978-0-312-15648-0 |page=281}}</ref>{{Unreliable source?|date=July 2015}}