The Court found that "from the time of the first air attack onward,
attackers were well coordinated, accurate and determined. Criss-crossing
rocket and machine gun runs from both bows, both beams and quarters
effectively chewed up the entire topside, including ship control and internal
communications -- sound powered -- network. Well directed initial air
attacks had wiped out the ability of the four .50 cal. machine guns to be
effective."
"The heroism displayed by the Commanding Officer, officers and
men of LIBERTY was exceptional," the Court reported, "The Commanding
Officer is being recommended for an appropriate award and the ship for an
appropriate unit citation. These planned actions are fully supported by
testimony to the Court."
"It is the opinion of the convening authority that USS LIBERTY was
operating in international waters in conformance with the most recent
guidance received by her, provided by competent authority," Admiral
McCain wrote in his endorsement forwarding the Court record to the Depart-
ment of the Navy.
Admiral McCain's endorsement continued:
"Heroism was the order of the day ... It is the conviction of the con-
vening authority that the possibility is high that the ship would have been lost
completely had there not been the highest order of damage control competence
on board, combined with the fact that the ship had secured from General
Quarters for drill only minutes before the attack took place."
Early on the 8th, the Joint Chiefs of Staff had issued orders for LIBERTY
to move farther from the coast, even though such a move would partially
degrade her mission. The messages were misrouted, delayed, and not
received until after the attack. LIBERTY'S Commanding Officer also had the
authority to move farther to sea on his own initiative, had he any reason to
believe that his ship was in danger of attack, or for any other cause. The
Court found, however, that since he was in international waters, his standard
identification symbols were clearly visible, and foreign aircraft had inspected
him three times that day, he had no reason to believe that his ship was in
danger of attack. The convening authority specifically concurred that "no
indication was received by the ship prior to the attack which would have
dictated a need for emergency measures."
LIBERTY continued to carry out her assignment at the location which
her Commanding Officer considered optimum for that purpose. The Court
reached no judgment on whether earlier arrival of the messages would have
reduced the likelihood of the attack.
