(Steve Richter) wrote in message . com...
Here is a link to a document on the ussliberty.org site.

http://ussliberty.org/limor.txt

It is an article that was published in the NY Times a month after the
attack. It recounts what Micha Limor, who is said to be a crewman on
the attacking MTBs, says he saw and did. Much of what Limor has to say
does not square with the testimony from the US Naval inquiry, so he is
obviously lying in those accounts.

But Micha Limor also has knowledge of events that has been confirmed
after the fact by physical evidence and testimony produced by the USN
and NSA.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: THE NEW YORK TIMES, July 7, 1967.

ISRAELI NAVY MAN DESCRIBES THE ATTACK ON THE LIBERTY

The following article was written for The
Associated Press by Micha Limor, described as an
Israeli naval reservist who was serving on one of
the torpedo boats that attacked the United States
communications ship Liberty off the Sinai coast on
June 8.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TEL AVIV, July 6--The torpedos were ready
for firing when our three Israeli torpedo boats
zeroed in on the gray ship moving slowly on a
south-easterly course off El Arish.

The Liberty is moving slowly. Limor is correct.

On June 8, the sun was already high in the
sky when we received notification of an
unidentified vessel some 12 miles off El Arish
susoected of being an enemy craft.

ok.

We spooted the objective once on the radar
screen. She was moving on a steady course,
southeast at about 10 knots.

Note that Limor, who I think is an officer on the MTB, says the radar
reading showed the Liberty is moving at 10 knots. Cristol and the
Israeli Navy say the radar indicated a much greater speed, hence it
was a warship. Why should Limor be doubted and the Israeli Navy
believed?

We sailed toward the
objective at an increased speed, looking at her
through binoculars in an effort to identify the
vessel. Two of our planes flew over our heads a
few minutes afterward.

this is absolutely correct. In the USN court of inquiry testimony was
introduced that the radar on the Liberty first picked up the IAF
attack planes as they passed over the approaching MTB squadron.

We saw them circle the ship
several times, and then dive into the attack.

Well there is no evidence from the US Navy side that the planes
circled the Liberty even once. So lets just say Limor is incorrect on
this account.

They spat two rockets into the gray ship,
and plumes of smoke rose from her. Then the two
jets headed away toward the coast.

They attacked repeatedly in a criss crossing manner. And there was
also a 2nd set of planes involved. But the planes did leave once the
MTBs arrived on the scene. There is no reason for Limor to lie about
this, so lets just assume he is very excited and leave it at that.

About 2,000 yards from the ship, a strange
soectacle met our eyes. The high masts and the
many weird antenna showed that this was a warship.

Fascinating, aye? Limor says "we" saw high masts and weird antenna (
the Liberty has a 10' wide parabolic satelite dish used to bounce
messages off of the moon. ) Cristol tells his reader that the MTB
CDRs were in agreement that the ship they saw closely resembled an
Egyptian freighter. The NSA 1981 report says Oren and all are full of
crap.

Limor flatly states what it was obvious the MTB crew would have seen.

The side of the vessel was blotted out by smoke.,
and aprt from three numbers along her side, which
meant nothing to us, we could not discern a thing.

Now read this last Limor sentence again. Focus on the phrase "which
meant nothing to us". Now read the following exchange that the NSA
recorded between Pagoda ( MTB ) and the IAF helicopter as the
helicopter hovers over the Liberty 30+ minutes after the torpedo
attack:

---pilot: I understand that the ship is not dangerous.
---Pagoda: Not sure it is not dangerous, do you identify its
nationality?
---pilot: Negative, it is written "GTR5".
---Pagoda: Roger.
---pilot: Does it mean something?
---Pagoda: Negative, it means nothing.

Limor, in this report written days to a month after the attack, in a
report which presumably Cristol does not give any credence because he
leaves it completely out of his "final word" book, uses the SAME WORDS
to describe the SAME CIRCUMSTANCE that pagoda ( MTB CDR Oren ) uses.

You cant get more accurate than this. Limor sees the "high masts and
weird antenna" ( and 10' satelite dish ). By the 3 numbers along the
side, presumably he means the "GTR-5" hull marking on the bow of the
Liberty. He sees all this from a mile distance from the ship. Why
would CDR Oren not see the same thing?

No Answer Received

We spent several minutes trying to contact
the ship and demanding identification. We tried by
radio and by heliograph, in accordance with
internationally accepted means. But she gave no
answer. It also seemed that she had managed to
control the fires and continued on a stable
course.

Limor now describes the attack on the Liberty. Up to this point he
has been accurate. His description of the attack seems to be way off
base, so for the purpose of showing where he is uncanningly, eye
witness , accurate, lets just skip it.

First Identification

Suddenly, something fell into the sea. One
of our boats approached and picking it up from the
waters, found it to be a rubber lifeboat with the
lettering "U.S. Navy."

Now Limor the eyewitness is at odds with Cristol the whitewash author
again. At least Cristol the author of the timeline that says the MTB
crew did not pick up the liferaft until 30 minutes later at 1540,
after the IAF helicopters had identifed the Liberty and left the
scene. In TLI, Cristol does report the time of the liferaft pickup as
Limor reports. The reason this has some importance is that MTB CDR
Oren and the Israeli Navy and the GOI say they do not know the
attacked ship was American until the IAF helicopters see the american
flag.

And in the recently released NSA tapes of the conv between
MTB/Pagoda/Oren and the IAF Helicopters, Oren tells the helos that the
ship may still be dangerous and that the GTR-5 hull markings "mean
nothing".

But Limor and maybe Cristol say that Oren does know the ship is
American and as such it will not be dangerous and the lettering on the
side is what the IAF attack planes knew it was as soon as they saw it.
The identifying hull markings of the ship.


A moment later there arrived on the scene
the helicopter that was to have picked up
prisoners. He hovered over the ship and then
signaled us:

"They are raising the American flag."

Limor is correct about the helos arriving on the scene. He is probably
correct about them signaling, because the NSA intercepts dont record
the helicopter crew verbally telling the MTBs that they see the
american flag.

As far as "they are raising the American flag", this is Limor moving
back to incorrect/lying territory again. No where in the NSA
intercepts and the IAF transcripts do we hear the helicopter pilot say
the flag is being raised. Only that they see the flag.

Help Offered

We received orders directly from the
officer commanding the navy to give all necessary
help. So we approached the Liberty and offered
help through a loudspeaker,

Then an officer appeared for the first
time on the bridge and screamed, "Go to hell!"

Learning they did not need aid, we left.
And the Liberty returned to her regular
operations. It seemed any other ship would have
sunk.

Again Limor is accurate and he shows that he knows things that only an
eyewitness would know. Why does Cristol ignore this person??

This Limor account provides us with a lot of good, accurate, important
information. It blows the the entire Israeli Navy account out of the
water, dont mind the pun. Limor says the MTB radar measures the
Liberty speed as 10 knots. He says the ship is bristling with odd
antenna and tall masts. ( which the IAF controller on the NSA
intercepts warns the helicopter pilot about ).

And the fact that Limor is only inaccurate when recounting actual
attack on the ship, is more proof in a negative sort of a way. Why
would someone who demonstrates repeatedly that they can accurately
report what they see, suddenly start to be inaccurate unless they are
trying to hide the truth?

-Steve