« "Intelligence official shares his organizational vision" Walter Pincus | Main | "Clinton tells Pakistan to do more on flood relief" Reuters »

12 October 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

WILL

i hadn't read the whole post b/ i need to clear this up right away

"while France had indeed armed Israel, after the 1956 Suez War, Charles DeGaulle had branded Israel the aggressor in that war, and abrogated 12 years of close French support of Israel, cancelling all arms sales to Israel. "

France participated in the 56 Suez adventure. France was pissed off at Egyptian support of the Algerian Insurgency and made common cause w/ Israel. It was the 67 war that pissed off Degaulle & misuse of the Dimona facility. By then DeGaulle had written off Algeria or was getting ready to.

France was definitely a party, that's why it was called the "tripartite aggression."

"the Tripartite Aggression,[7][8] (Arabic: أزمة السويس - العدوان الثلاثي‎ ʾAzmat al-Sūwais/Al-ʿIdwān al-Thalāthī;"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis

zezqe@zeze.com

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeej

Ken Halliwell

Mr. Sale says: "It was the Liberty, my sources say, that discovered that Israel’s design was to lure Jordan into the war and paid the heavy price of being savaged."

USS Liberty was more than 100 nautical miles west of Cairo when the purported doctored communications --intended to lure Hussein into joining the war -- occurred between Nasser and King Hussein. Thus, if Mr. Sale's anonymous sources are correct, then signal intercept would have been limited to over-the-horizon, High Frequency (HF) radio signals; i.e., the communications link between Nasser and Hussein involved HF radio.

It seems unlikely that Nasser and Hussein would conduct secret/private communications via an indiscriminate HF voice radio circuit; although, King Hussein was an amateur radio operator (callsign JY1).

Accounts I've read about this communications doctoring incident involved a point-to-point telephone circuit between Nasser and Hussein that was discovered and broken, and then a real-time relay operator, who sounded like Nasser, selectively made statements different from or in addition to those that Nasser actually said.

This is not to say that the telephone circuit between Nasser and Hussein did not involve a directional HF radio relay link (via HF beam type antennas), but land-based telecommunication systems of that era were typically a combination of wireline and point-to-point microwave (line-of-sight) links.

So, the claim that USS Liberty intercepted doctored communications between Nasser and Hussein, at a distance of more than 100 nautical miles, before June 8, is doubtful; although, not impossible if an HF radio link was involved. Perhaps Mr. Sale's anonymous sources can explain the technical nature of the telephony signaling involved.

mo

Richard,

Firstly, apologies if my questions came across as "truculent". That wasn't the intention, and I guess one has to also be wary of interpretation of tone.

Secondly, thanks for taking the time to reply, it is appreciated.

Clifford Kiracofe

most interesting, I hope you write a book about this and more...

Jake

We can debate who said and did what for the next 30 years. Until Congress acquires some form of guts and resemblance of honor and holds congressional hearings there will be no peace for the Liberty survivors and their families. Its time to put this to rest..

The problem is no one in Congress has the guts to not just call for a hearing but force one to the table...

What the hell it was only a "UNARMED" United States Ship and crew that were attacked. Why should Congress care about getting to the truth of the matter?

No guts... Skelton, McKeon, Levin and McCain. McCain? What a waste of Navy....

WILL

Mr. Sale is a treasure & he is privy to a lot of hard to know stuff. His write ups were very informative. So What he wrote 56' instead of 67' here & there. Unfortunate scrivner's errors that an editor would have caught.

Pity that these inconsistincies provide ammunition for the Hasbara and their Operation Megaphone.

Thank you for sharing your information, Mr. Sale, Sir. I for one deeply appreciate it. & pardon the nitpicking!!!!

Illegitimi non carborundum

WILL

Industrial Diamonds you say?
http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/diamond/chap9.htm
"The Secret War Report of the OSS"- Diamonds for Hitler

Apparently one candidate for being drawn, quartered, & hanged would have been Sir Oppenheimer of DeBeers- had not that sentence been commuted to mere hanging.

Ken Halliwell

Re: Purported Nasser-Hussein intercepted communications

Another over-the-horizon radio communications possibility is a Medium Frequency (MF) radio link. These type telephony links were commonly used for medium range ship-to-shore communications -- not land-based telephony.

As stated before, it seems unlikely that Naser and Hussein would conduct secret/private communications via an indiscriminate MF or HF radio circuit.

WILL

This is new to me: Operation Cyanide
"Apparently, Operation Cyanide included an Israeli war against Egypt in order to depose Gamal Abdul Nasser, a purported Soviet puppet. U.S. intelligence and military specialists were sent to Israel months before to plan and prepare for the operation. The operation was an agreement between Johnson and Israel during which the USS Liberty was supposed to be sunk, along with all of her crew. When Israel's attack failed to sink the ship, the game plan changed which included an apology from Israel and a phony cover story"

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/spingola/100604#fn18

Jane

When one of the claims that can be easily checked can be shown to be false -- the possibility of a sub shadowing the Liberty -- and another claim -- as to the nature of the interception of a communication is shown to be unlikely, Mr. Sales should probably spend some time considering whether or not some of the less easily assessed claims were made by the same sources who were wrong on the above points. He is in a position to know who made which claims and we are not.

WILL

"In 1967, the submarine made a three-month deployment to the Mediterranean between 23 April and 24 July. The submarine was reportedly in the vicinity of the USS Liberty (AGTR-5) and filmed the attack of 8 June 1967 on the ship by IDF planes. This claim has not been substantiated. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Amberjack_(SS-522)

"In February 1997, a senior member of the crew of the submarine USS Amberjack 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. When contacted, four crewmen stated that they were so close to USS Liberty when it came under attack that some of the crew believed Amberjack itself was under depth charge attack."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

WILL

http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0697/9706019.htm

the full story of the USS Amberjack & USS Liberty that I can presently determine
(when Sale says USS Jackson Polaris it was a scrivener's error regarding 73 war that US would take out Israeli nukes on a launch alert before Soviets would thereby preventing WWIII)

http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0697/9706019.htm

"USS Liberty: Periscope Photography May Finally Reveal Truth

by James M. Ennes, Jr."

Sidney O. Smith III

Will

If you haven’t already, check out the BBC documentary, Dead in the Water. Available for online viewing. It includes an interview with Ennes.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3319663041501647311#

Also here’s another documentary, not as well produced, but full of information and also available online. Take particular note of Dean Rusk’s statements as well as those of Amb. Akins:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7384200507117357203#

I have not heard of any interpretation of the attack based upon Sale’s view: the US had knowledge that the GOI had "doctored" Jordanian transmissions and therefore “savaged” the Liberty. If such an interpretation of the attack is based upon reliable evidence, then it is extremely significant, particularly when cross referenced to developments within the Israeli war cabinet at the time.

So in addition to Halliwell’s questions, I add the following: whether or not Mr. Sale has reliable evidence that the GOI knew the US had knowledge that the Israelis had doctored the transmissions. If so, is there reliable evidence that the GOI believed the Liberty was the source of obtaining such knowledge, regardless of the Liberty’s true technical capabilities? And finally, if so, did the Israelis have this knowledge before the attack on the Liberty?

Ken Halliwell

For anybody interested,

Here are the actual distances between Liberty and Cairo, at two different times, on June 6 and 7, 1967 -- based on data found in Liberty's SITREP messages:
- June 6: 1800Z position 34-18N, 24-06E -- about 440 NM northwest of Cairo.
- June 7: 0800Z position 33-06N, 28-54E -- about 230 NM northwest of Cairo.

This supports my previous claim that Liberty was more than 100 NM from Cairo when the purported doctored communications between Nasser and Hussein occurred.

Also, at these distances, the signal intercept station in Cyprus was closer to Cairo and the northern coast of the Sinai, than Liberty. And, of course, the US Air Force and Navy had flying signal intercept platform that were much closer than Liberty.

I can imagine the IDF attacking Liberty as a grossly belligerent expression of their distrust/dislike of US intelligence operations near "their" war zone; but beyond this, no reliable/verifiable evidence has come forth for a motive.

WILL

There is one and only one reason the Israelis attacked the U.S.S. Liberty. It was to sink it. And then to blame the sinking on the Egyptians and thereby prompt U.S. retaliation. They darn well nearly succeeded.

An unarmed U.S. ship off the coast was manna from Heaven and a plum not to be ignored.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair

Jake

Let's see what response I get... I called Evan Bayh's office who is one of my Senators and sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, about the USS Liberty.

Talked to the staffer about Admiral Moorer's 2007 report and asked what Bayh's position was on an open congressional investigation of the USS Liberty. Of course they was no canned response and I caught the staffer off guard.

But I was asked to what purpose did I think opening a hearing on the Liberty would achieve.

I said... the truth no matter where the finger ends up pointing.

I expect some form of a reply. Like I said, I expect one. But that does not mean I will get one.

Bayh is leaving the Senate so who knows and just maybe the Israeli Project is not a meaningful as it once was.

Fred

Jake,

I made a similar request to my two Senators, Levin and Stabenow, regarding the Nozette investigation. Senator Levin was kind enough to reply he'd keep my opinion in mind should the matter ever come before the Senate (nice blow off there, but at least it was polite). Senator Stabenow (or her staff) has never bothered to reply.

Jake

Fred

As a bud once said .. Lobbying the Hill ain't what it was when we were trapping Hill Rats...

Today they don't even want to take your call they just send a canned "franked mail" response.... So much for representation...

confusedponderer

Mr. Sale,
thanks for the interesting reply.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

August 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          
Blog powered by Typepad