My understanding of the truth is that the Liberty was gathering intelligence (under command of the NSA) on radio locations (any person using radio in the area would be picked up including their locations). The Liberty was sharing this with the British who were making a working map of vehicle and troop locations as well as communications. The British were giving the same intel to the Arabs (because of some other prior agreements) who were able to pinpoint Israeli movements. After attacking the ship Israel began to turn the tide back to their favor. If the US made this known they would be selling out their British ally internationally. So they lied. This has been my understanding since the 90s.
In other words, the British are the first problem. The US and Israel lied to cover up. The soldiers on the Liberty were caught between. I wonder if the US won't speak up because they were not operating legally (NSA) or maybe the US military versus intel agencies were actually divided. Or some other cover up of deep state agendas. The US let it go on, that is indicative of some kind of divide in leadership. I think this will never be allowed come to light. But there has to be more to the story than people mention. What is the strategic value for Israel to intentionally hit the ship of an ally? Just because jews are dumb or evil, or because they needed the intel leak to stop? Is the president and the three letter agencies at odds with each other? Is Britain and the US playing both sides of the war? The guy in the interview that was on the ship mentioned Israel was targeting the antennas and the ship did not ultimately sink. I suppose the main support for this argument is what is the point of hitting the ally ship if not to stop intelligence leaking? Just for fun? But it also seems the US was at a war with itself to not help.
Nonsense. Israel has had the US (and the UK) by the balls at that point. POTUS, at that point, was a huge Zionist and would've happily stopped any of that, had it actually been taking place (it wasn't).
Neither the US/UK were sharing Israeli troop locations with the Arabs. That's a convenient Israeli excuse for the failed mission to sink the USS liberty.
Israel targeted the antennas to disable its rescue. Luckily, a previously-disconnected antenna was used to call for help. Twice the USAF deployed to help the ship, and POTUS intervened to halt the rescue.
Turns out that a Soviet ship, nearby, threatened to nuke Israel if it went ahead with the sinking. That's what saved it.
All anons who support Israel should watch this one.
The truth of Oct 7, 2023 will someday be common knowledge.
My understanding of the truth is that the Liberty was gathering intelligence (under command of the NSA) on radio locations (any person using radio in the area would be picked up including their locations). The Liberty was sharing this with the British who were making a working map of vehicle and troop locations as well as communications. The British were giving the same intel to the Arabs (because of some other prior agreements) who were able to pinpoint Israeli movements. After attacking the ship Israel began to turn the tide back to their favor. If the US made this known they would be selling out their British ally internationally. So they lied. This has been my understanding since the 90s.
In other words, the British are the first problem. The US and Israel lied to cover up. The soldiers on the Liberty were caught between. I wonder if the US won't speak up because they were not operating legally (NSA) or maybe the US military versus intel agencies were actually divided. Or some other cover up of deep state agendas. The US let it go on, that is indicative of some kind of divide in leadership. I think this will never be allowed come to light. But there has to be more to the story than people mention. What is the strategic value for Israel to intentionally hit the ship of an ally? Just because jews are dumb or evil, or because they needed the intel leak to stop? Is the president and the three letter agencies at odds with each other? Is Britain and the US playing both sides of the war? The guy in the interview that was on the ship mentioned Israel was targeting the antennas and the ship did not ultimately sink. I suppose the main support for this argument is what is the point of hitting the ally ship if not to stop intelligence leaking? Just for fun? But it also seems the US was at a war with itself to not help.
Nonsense. Israel has had the US (and the UK) by the balls at that point. POTUS, at that point, was a huge Zionist and would've happily stopped any of that, had it actually been taking place (it wasn't).
Neither the US/UK were sharing Israeli troop locations with the Arabs. That's a convenient Israeli excuse for the failed mission to sink the USS liberty.
Israel targeted the antennas to disable its rescue. Luckily, a previously-disconnected antenna was used to call for help. Twice the USAF deployed to help the ship, and POTUS intervened to halt the rescue.
Turns out that a Soviet ship, nearby, threatened to nuke Israel if it went ahead with the sinking. That's what saved it.