During the many years since the USS Liberty attack, much debate has occurred regarding USS Liberty's purported firing at the IDF (Israel Defense Force) Navy MTBs (motor torpedo boats), with a 0.50 caliber machine gun, after the air attack. For the most part, the focus of debate has been on whether the firing occurred before or after the MTBs attacked. This essay will explore the matter and attempt to determine who fired first.
Generally, it is believed that both USS Liberty’s starboard forecastle machine gun (number 51) and the starboard 03 level machine gun (number 53) fired, at different times, when the MTBs were within sight. Additionally, it is believed that the forecastle machine gun was manned and fired only a few shots; and that the 03 level machine gun was unmanned and somehow fired by itself due to rounds ignited by the heat of the nearby whaleboat fire.
There is mutually supportive NCOI (Navy Court of Inquiry) testimony that affirms both machine guns were manned and fired, at different times, when the MTBs were within sight; thus, it appears true that USS Liberty fired on the MTBs. The question that remains is: When did these firings occur?
In Captain McGonagle's NCOI testimony, he claimed "extremely effective" fire came from the 03 level machine gun (gun 53), before the MTBs attacked:
"It appeared that they [MTBs] were approaching the ship in a torpedo launch attitude... From the starboard wing of the bridge, 03 level, I observed that the fire from machine gun 53 was extremely effective and blanketed the area and the center torpedo boat. ... I sent Mr. LUCAS around the port side of the bridge, around to the skylights, to see if he could tell QUINTERO, whom I believed to be the gunner on machine gun 53, to hold fire until we were able to clarify the situation. He reported back in a few minutes in effect that he saw no one at mount 53."
McGonagle's implication that unmanned machine gun fire was "extremely effective" is doubtful. If by some magic the machine gun was firing with nobody pressing the trigger, its recoil would have caused the gun's barrel to point upward and not toward the MTBs.
On the other hand, there is clear NCOI testimony by Ensign Lucas, who testified immediately before Captain McGonagle, about a possible unmanned firing event occuring after the torpedo hit, with nothing said about its effectiveness:
"[After the torpedo hit,] there was some firing from the patrol boats. They had periodically fired at us. There was now a lull in the firing. And yet, it sounded as if the men at [gun] mount 53, this would be the 03 level starboard side aft of the pilothouse, it sounded as if they were firing at the patrol craft who at that time were within a thousand yards at an approximate relative bearing of 120. The Commanding Officer was on the starboard wing and had these patrol craft in view. He ordered me to tell the men on [gun] mount 53 to cease firing. A fire had started at this time on the starboard side. The hit had occurred somewhere in the vicinity of the bridge. The flames had gone back to the motor whaleboat, and it was burning rapidly at that time. I could not see mount 53 from the starboard side. I went [to the port side.] ... I ran back to mount 54, looked over the skylight from the engineering spaces. Had a clear view of [gun] mount 53 from, say the waste[sic] level up, and there was no one on [gun] mount 53."
Lucas speculated, later in his testimony, that the firing sound may have been due to ammunition cooking-off from the heat of the nearby whaleboat fire; i.e., it was not actual gun fire.[1]
Further, other testimony by Lucas relates that after the MTB attack began, but before the purported unmanned machine gun firing event, the men at gun 53 did fire at the MTBs:
"At one time, while the torpedo boats were firing at us, my man in charge of [gun] mount 53, seaman QUINTERO, hollered to me, 'should I fire back?', and I gave him an affirmative on that. This was before he and the other men in [gun] mount 53 had been chased away by the fire and flames from the motor whaleboat."
Perhaps this was the "extremely effective" fire that McGonagle recalled, but he confused it with the purported unmanned firing incident. In fact, McGonagle supports this possibility in later testimony -- given after returning from a short court recess -- where he reflects on his original testimony:
"On further recollection of the event involving machine gun 53 firing, the effectiveness of the firing leads me to believe that a person, whom I believe to be QUINTERO, Boatswain Mate Seaman, to have been on station at machine gun 53 and took the torpedo boats under fire. It is possible that he evacuated his station as a result of the fire and flames from the motor whaleboat prior to Ensign Lucas' arriving to determine who was on the mount."
Of course, McGonagle still believed the firing event occurred before and not after the MTB attack began. Nonetheless, his testimony indicates that he realized the implication of an unmanned gun issuing "extremely effective" fire was absurb.
Interestingly, the person who's name appears repeatedly in both McGonagle's and Lucas' testimony, Seaman Quintero, did not testify. Clearly, Quintero, who survived the attack, was a direct participant in gun 53's firing; thus, his testimony could have served to support either McGonagle's or Lucas' testimony. Regardless, Quintero was not called to testify.
Thus, for determining this matter, we have only the detailed and certain nature of Lucas' testimony; the uncertain nature of McGonagle's testimony; and abundant direct and circumstantial evidence, developed elsewhere, of many instances in McGonagle's testimony about the attack where he was confused.[2] Taking all of this evidence into account, there is reasonable doubt about McGonagle's recall of unmanned or manned machine gun fire, from gun 53, occurring before the MTBs attacked -- leaving only Lucas' detailed and certain recall that the gun fired after the MTB attack.
Remaining is the possibility that gun mount 51, the starboard forecastle gun, fired at the MTBs before they attacked.
Here is McGonagle's NCOI testimony about gun mount 51:
"I told a man from the bridge, whose identity I do not recall, to proceed to [gun] mount 51 and take the [approaching] boats under fire. ... I yelled to machine gun 51 to tell him to hold fire. I realized that there was a possibility of the aircraft having been Israeli and the attack had been conducted in error. I wanted to hold fire to see if we could read the signal from the torpedo boat and perhaps avoid additional damage and personnel injuries. The man on machine gun 51 fired a short burst at the boats before he was able to understand what I was attempting to have him do."
McGonagle's testimony is generally the same as Lucas' NCOI testimony:
"When I first did look forward at the [forward gun] mounts, there was one man cut in half on [gun] mount 51... After that time, I believe there was just one more shot fired. A seaman, LARKINS, was told to man [gun] mount 51, either told or he volunteered to, and he got off one shot, the Commanding Officer hollered for him to cease fire, which he did."
The significant difference between the two testimonies is that Lucas recalled the name of the person who fired gun 51, Seaman Larkins, but he was unclear about the timing of the event.
So, if Seaman Larkins was the person at gun mount 51, his testimony about the event had the potential to clarify the event's timing. Unfortunately, Larkins, who survived the attack, was not called to appear before the court. Nonetheless, after all of these years, Mr. Larkins remains competent and recalls his actions on June 8, 1967. In an email message sent to this author by Glenn Oliphant, one of the attack’s survivors, a recent conversation with Larkins was described. Here is Larkins' recall, as related by Glenn Oliphant:
"After the air attack was over and they [the fire fighters] had almost put out the starboard fire he [Larkins] went back to the port side to help with that fire. Then the Captain told him [Larkins] to go to [gun] mount 51 and wait for instructions. When he [Larkins] got to [gun] mount 51 he discovered that the gun shell belt had been broken and there didn’t seem to be any other ammo there so he told a fellow that was there with him to go get some more ammo. He [Larkins] then saw the torpedo boats making runs at the ship. A couple dropped torpedoes but they missed the ship, the boats were also firing at the ship. He [Larkins] fired one shot and the gun breach came apart and wouldn’t fire again. He [Larkins] crawled across the forecastle and then went down the ladder on the port side and then went into the forecastle. They were in there for a few minutes and then the torpedo hit. He [Larkins] estimates the time from his shot until the torpedo hit to be about 7 to 10 minutes."
Clearly, Larkins' recall supports Lucas' testimony about the name of the person who manned gun mount 51, and it indicates that he (Larkins) fired after the MTBs began their attack.
Some may argue that perhaps Larkins' memory is faulty about the timing, or that the interviewer, Glenn Oliphant, misreported Larkins' recall. So, assume it is wrong, and that Larkins fired shortly before the MTBs began their attack. This leaves us with Larkins firing only one bullet and then leaving the gun mount -- something he would likely not forget or that would be misconstrued. To believe a single shot was noticed by the distant (between 1000 to 2000 yards) and rapidly approaching MTB crews, or construed as absolute proof the badly damaged ship, clearly marked and rapidly heading north toward the open sea, was the Egyptian cargo ship El Qusier is extremely dubious, if not outright ridiculous.
In conclusion, with only NCOI testimony and hearsay as evidence, it is not possible to prove absolutely that USS Liberty did or did not fire the first shot during the MTB attack; although, available evidence tends to favor that shots were fired after, not before, the MTBs attacked.