By James Ennes
Published: 2002-07-27
James M. Ennes was serving as a US Navy lieutenant on board the USS
Liberty when it was attacked by Israeli forces on June 8, 1967. He is the
author of Assault on the Liberty, a detailed account of the attack
published in 1980 by Random House. Born in 1933 and now retired, he served with
the US Navy during most of his adult life.
This interview, published in the Iranian newspaper Jam-e-Jam, July 27, 2002, was conducted by Ali Jafar. The text is posted on-line at:
This interview, published in the Iranian newspaper Jam-e-Jam, July 27, 2002, was conducted by Ali Jafar. The text is posted on-line at:
Question: When did you join the USS Liberty and what position did you serve on
June 8, 1967?
Answer: I joined the ship in April
1967. I was a lieutenant and was assigned to be the ship’s Electronic Materiel
Officer, responsible for the maintenance and repair of all of the ship’s
electronic equipment. I also stood watches on the bridge as Officer of the
Deck.
Q: There have been many cases of
“friendly fire” and misidentification in wartime. Unlike other cases, the
attack on the USS Liberty has lingered for 35 years and still remains unresolved. Israelis claim
that the attack on the Liberty was also a case of mistaken
identity, and that they misidentified the Liberty for an Egyptian horse carrier, El Quseir. One of the reasons that they
present for their argument is that the attacking jets circled the ship three
times looking for a flag, but no flag was flown. Do you agree with that
statement?
A: “Friendly fire” is a brief,
accidental attack. This was a prolonged, carefully coordinated attack. It has
been called the most carefully planned “accident” in the history of warfare.
The Israeli account of the attack is untrue. We flew a flag at all times, and
it stood out clearly displayed in a good breeze. Israeli jets circled us 13
times during the several hours before the attack, and during that period we
heard their pilots informing their headquarters by radio that we were American.
When the attack started, the attacking jets passed high overhead once, then
turned 180 degrees and came down the centerline firing without any attempt to
identify us. Long after the attack I was contacted by an Israeli pilot who told
me that on his first flight over the ship he saw our American flag and informed
his headquarters that we were American, but was told to ignore the flag and
attack anyway. He refused to do so and returned to base where he was arrested.
I was told by an Israeli in the war room that they knew we were American. I
have been told by several American intelligence analysts who read, or in some
cases heard, the messages between the pilots and their headquarters that these
messages make it very clear that the pilots and their headquarters knew we were
American.
Q: You have written a book titled Assault on the Liberty. What are some of the most
convincing reasons or evidences you presented in that book to prove that the
Israelis knowingly attacked the Liberty?
A: Among other things, the extensive
reconnaissance, the fact that the attack continued for 75 minutes, and the fact
that they compiled a totally false account of what happened. After the torpedo
explosion the torpedo boats examined our name in English on the stern and our
American flag on the mast from less than 50 feet away, and continued to fire
from close range for another 40 minutes. As US Secretary of State Dean Rusk
said later, an accident may occur for a few minutes, but there is no way our
very distinctive-looking ship could have been fired upon for 75 minutes from
close range without it being recognized as American.
In the hours after the attack a
“consensus report” was written reflecting the view of all American intelligence
agencies that the attack was deliberate. This report was circulated, but was
withdrawn and cancelled and all copies destroyed because it was too
embarrassing politically to be allowed to stand.
Q: Being small in size and
population, Israelis have always relied on spying to get intelligence
information. They have spied on many Arab and non-Arab countries including the
US. In October 1954 quite a few of the Israeli spies were arrested and two of
them were executed in Egypt. Elias Cohen was the Israeli spy who was caught in
1965, and later executed in Syria, and I am sure you know about Jonathan
Pollard, the Israeli spy whose spying activities cost the lives of America’s
most loyal and best agents in the Communist world. Generally speaking, how
could the Israelis not have known that El Quesir was not even there?
A: They could not have made such a
mistake. Israeli naval officers have told me they are embarrassed by the claim
that they could been so incompetent as to make such a mistake.
Q: It has been reported that after
the Liberty radioed for help, two aircraft
carriers in the Mediterranean responded by launching fighter aircraft, but they
were recalled before reaching their destination to help the Liberty. Can you tell us who gave the
orders, and why they were recalled?
A: Secretary Robert McNamara ordered
the recall of rescue aircraft. He has refused to discuss the matter. The recall
order was confirmed by President Lyndon Johnson. President Johnson later said
that he would not risk shooting down Israeli aircraft, even if Americans died
as a result.
Q: Quite often the American
government is referred to as a “government of the people, for the people, by
the people.” In 1967 your responsible officials, by recalling the launched
aircraft, left you practically unprotected, and since then, your government not
only blocked every effort to launch an investigation, but in fact did
everything it could, to cover it up for 35 years. Is there any doubt in your
mind that the very government, that you put your life on the line to protect,
betrayed you and your shipmates?
A: Someone in our government
certainly failed to protect us after promising that we would be protected.
Q: There are certain motives behind
any crime that is committed. If indeed, as you believe, the Israeli attack on
the Liberty was premeditated, what was their
motive for attacking the Liberty?
A: The USS Liberty was an
intelligence ship. Clearly someone in Israel feared that we would learn
something that Israel did not want the US to know. Some American intelligence
experts have said that they believe this was the pending invasion of Syria to
capture the Golan Heights.
Q: In recent years an impressive
number of American officials, including Admiral Thomas Moorer, who was chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) at the time of the Liberty incident, have gone on record
insisting that the Israeli action was, in fact, deliberate. Are you optimistic
that after 35 years of cover up, the truth may finally come out?
A: No. I fear that Israel has so
many friends in the Congress and the White House that no effective
investigation is ever likely to be conducted. But we can continue to report the
facts so that the world may learn the truth. In 1956 President Eisenhower forced
the Israelis to cease their advance toward Suez. This was still a bitter memory
in Israel in 1967. The Israelis did not want to risk having to withdraw from
the Golan Heights as they had from Suez, so they disabled the USS Liberty
in the hope that the US could be kept in the dark until the Heights were in
Israeli hands.
This week a Navy Times survey
of its readers showed that about 90 percent support a call for a new
investigation of the attack. Yet few members of Congress are likely to support
an inquiry, as it would certainly prove embarrassing to Israel.
Q: Generally speaking, in an
incident like the Liberty attack, one would feel that the most valuable, viable and valid sources
of information would be people such as yourself, who were present on the
battlefield on June 8, 1967. A. Jay Cristol, a pro-Israeli federal judge and
one of the most outspoken critics of the Liberty story, is the author of a book
titled The
Liberty Incident. He supposedly has done extensive research, and has interviewed many of
the survivors. It has been reported that you refused to cooperate with him. Was
there any particular reason that caused you not to cooperate?
A: After a brief telephone
conversation, I did not trust him to treat the subject fairly or objectively.
His dissertation and his later book proved that judgment to be valid, in that
he has distorted many of the facts.
For instance, his book makes much of
what he claims is the visual acuity of fighter pilots, yet experienced pilots
tell me that pilots can see much more than Cristol claims, and could easily
have seen our flag. Cristol discounts as untrue the unanimous eyewitness
reports of American survivors, but accepts as true virtually every false claim
by the Israelis. He relies upon the Court of Inquiry, which is itself false and
has been discredited by its own legal counsel. He claims Liberty’s
radio intercept range was only 25 miles, which is dead wrong. He claims the Liberty
had no radio telephone contact with Washington, which is untrue. He claims
only a few survivors regard the attack as deliberate, yet the truth is that
survivors are unanimous in calling the attack deliberate. He claims our radios
were not jammed, when even the corrupt Court of Inquiry says they were. He
claims he came to Seattle to interview me, and that I broke a promise to see
him, which is untrue. In fact, he had asked only to talk to me by telephone
during a layover in Seattle, and I chose not to take the call because I
realized that his intent was to try to discredit us, not to report our story
objectively.
In fact, Cristol claims to have made
numerous trips to Israel and to have interviewed over 200 people for his book,
but his research is very unbalanced, drawing primarily from Israeli sources
while ignoring or discounting most eyewitness reports. He has interviewed few
survivors, and those only very briefly. He brands Liberty’s senior
intercept officer a liar, yet made no attempt to interview him. His research
appears to be aimed entirely at attempting to discredit survivors, not to
investigate the attack objectively. He claims to be the world’s foremost expert
on the attack, but I have never heard from a survivor who believes he can be
taken seriously.
Q: Upon returning to the US, the Liberty crew members were ordered and in
fact threatened to be silent. Who gave the order and why?
A: Survivors were visited in
hospitals all over the US by many different officers and warned to be quiet.
Aboard the ship, Admiral Kidd called men together in groups and warned them
never to talk about the attack with anyone, not even their wives and mothers,
or risk being sent to prison.
Q: In November of 1979 the Iranian
students in protest to the US government policy of letting the former Shah of
Iran in the US for medical treatment, stormed the US embassy in Tehran and held
52 American hostage for 444 days. ABC news almost immediately launched a new
[television] program by the name of “Nightline,” with correspondent Ted Koppel
reporting on the condition of the hostages as well as the developments of the
story itself, night by night. The title of the nightly report was: “The Iran
Crisis: America Held Hostage.” As I am sure you know, the hostages finally came
home safe and sound, and were given a hero’s welcome, and “Nightline” has
continued its special reports on important events, including many interviews
with former hostages. By comparison, the brutal and tragic Israeli attack on
the USS
Liberty,
in which 34 innocent young Americans were killed and 171 others were badly
wounded, is something that most Americans, who are well-informed about
President Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky, may not even be aware
that it ever took place. You know, Mr. Ennes, one wonders why there wasn’t a
similar program like “Nightline” launched for the Liberty and her survivors? What would have
been wrong if ABC news had a nightly report with a title such as “The Middle
East Crisis: Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty”? It seems as if the mainstream
mass media had a tacit agreement with the US government to keep the public in
the dark about the Liberty and the plight of its survivors. Don’t you feel that they have acted
very selectively, and in fact unfairly, in regards to the Liberty incident?
A: There is much opposition in this
country to this story being told. Ted Koppel is an interesting case. In 1982
Ted Koppel invited several survivors to his studios in Washington, DC, where we
filmed a full report on the attack. It was edited and scheduled for broadcast,
and then on the very day it was to be broadcast Israel invaded Lebanon, and
that bigger story replaced the Liberty story. Later, when broadcasters
planned to present the Liberty show, the films had mysteriously
vanished from the file room, never to be found.
Q: Jean-Paul Sartre, the famous
French philosopher, has said, and I quote, “Man is a product of time and
place.” By reading chapter six of your book, one can see that on June 8, 1967,
you experienced perhaps the worst day of your life. The political officials who
were supposed to help you, betrayed you. The president and military officials
who were supposed to rescue you and your shipmates, recalled the aircraft and
left you unprotected against the attacking Israeli jets. The mass media, which
was supposed to give extensive coverage to the Liberty and the plight of its survivors,
has acted with deafening silence, and finally, taking your experience with A.
Jay Cristol into consideration, one could say that the pen that should have
elicited the facts and told the truth, has distorted it. Can you please tell us
how the Liberty incident has affected your life?
A: I published the first edition of
this book in 1980, expecting to go on to other things. To my surprise, the
story lives on. Twenty-two years later I continue to get daily mail and phone
calls. I have created the web site at http://www.ussliberty.org to help answer the many questions that still arise.
Q: Is there anything else that you
would like to say regarding the Liberty or in general.
A: My shipmates and I have tried for
35 years to tell the truth about the attack to the American public and to the
world. We appreciate the opportunity you have given us to tell the story to the
Iranian people. We wish you peace.
Candor About War
Against Iraq
"Those
who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and
privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the
United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a
nuclear weapon to use it against Israel."
-General Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander. Interview in The Guardian (Britain), August 20, 2002.
-General Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander. Interview in The Guardian (Britain), August 20, 2002.
War: Enemy of Freedom
"Of
all the enemies to liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it
comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies;
from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the
known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In
war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence
in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means
of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people.
The Constitution expressly and exclusively vests in the Legislature the power
of declaring a state of war [and] the power of raising armies... A delegation
of such powers [to the president] would have struck, not only at the fabric of
our Constitution, but at the foundation of all well organized and well checked
governments. The separation of the power of declaring war from that of
conducting it, is wisely contrived to exclude the danger of its being declared
for the sake of its being conducted."
-James Madison, Political Observations, 1795
On America's Foreign
Policy
"Wherever
the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there
will her [Americas] heart, her benedictions, and her prayers be. But she goes
not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the
freedom and independence of all. But she is the champion and vindicator only of
her own. She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her
own, were they even the banner of foreign independence, she would involve
herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and
intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and
usurp the standard of freedom."
-John Quincy Adams, 1821
-John Quincy Adams, 1821
Lincoln On the
President's Power to Make War
"Allow
the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it
necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may
choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose, and you allow him to
make war at his pleasure.
"... Study to see if you can
fix any limit to his power in this respect... If, today, he should choose to
say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from
invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability
of the British invading us,' but he will say to you, 'Be silent; I see it, if
you don't?'"
-Abraham Lincoln,
The Writings of Abraham Lincoln (ed., A. Lapsley), vol. 2, pp. 51-52.
"For those who
have Awareness,
a hint is quite enough.
For the multitudes of heedless,
mere knowledge is useless."
a hint is quite enough.
For the multitudes of heedless,
mere knowledge is useless."
- Haji Bekdash, circa 1200 AD
"You
can muffle the drum, and you can loosen the strings of the lyre, but who shall
command the skylark not to sing?"
- Khalil Gibran
No comments:
Post a Comment