Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site kontron.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!voder!kontron!cramer
From: cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: The "Patria" incident
Message-ID: <606@kontron.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 13-Mar-86 14:21:07 EST
Article-I.D.: kontron.606
Posted: Thu Mar 13 14:21:07 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Mar-86 23:29:02 EST
References: <93@ubc-vision.UUCP> <1372@mtuxo.UUCP> <159@dione.rice.EDU> <3350@sun.uucp>
Organization: Kontron Electronics, Mt. View, CA
Lines: 59

> In article <159@dione.rice.EDU> salex@dione.UUCP (Scott Alexander) writes:
> > However, I think the Liberty incident shows that the Israelis are
> >willing to attack without due provocation.  In this episode (during LBJs
> >term---1968 perhaps), the Israelis sank the US intelligence ship Liberty in
> >international waters during the Six Day War.  This action occurred after
> >watching it for several hours.  Afterwards, the Israelis claimed to have
> >mistaken it for an Egyptian ship of approximately half the length of the
> >Liberty.
> 
> The Liberty was sunk in 1967, during the Six Day war, which took place during
> June of that year.
> 
> Considering that a war was underway, and that the ship (according to accounts)
> could have been confused with an Egyptian Navy vessel, how can one reasonably
> conclude that "the Israelis are willing to attack without due provocation"?  
> 

The Liberty was flying an American flag.  The Israeli planes made repeated
passes over the ship.  The planes were close enough for the crew to see
Israeli markings on the planes.  The American flag looks NOTHING like the
Egyptian flag.

> Would it be fair to say that the US attacks mental hospitals as a matter of 
> policy because such an incident took place during the invasion of Grenada?  
> Of course not.
> 

If it were intentional, as Israel's attack on the Liberty was.

> What would Israel have had to gain by knowingly attacking a ship belonging to 
> it's most important ally?  [Aside: although this is rhetorical question, I 
> imagine that we'll soon see lots of amusing answers from the anti-Israel 
> fanatics so active in net.politics - probably backed up with bogus quotations 
> from obscure far-left or pro-PLO sources; "Ink Links", indeed!]
> 

The Liberty was gathering electronic intelligence.  Israel didn't trust
its favorite sugar daddy to keep the information secret.

> By the way, Israel apologized and paid reparations to family members of those
> killed.
> 

After a lot of fighting in court, as I recall.

> It's one thing to say that Israel made a regretable mistake during war-time
> (recall that this war was one in which Israel's enemies made no secret of their
> desire to exterminate the State of Israel and it's inhabitants), and quite
> another to say that it is willing to "attack without due provocation".
> -- 
> 
> Sam Cramer	uucp:	{cbosgd,decwrl,hplabs,seismo,ucbvax}!sun!cramer

It attacked without provocation.  The facts on the Liberty are extremely
clear.  Is it that hard to admit that Israel is a country that does bad
things occasionally?  Is it that hard to admit that Israel is run by
pragmatic people who look out for Israel's interest first?

Clayton E. Cramer