Home Australia The USS Liberty and Malcolm Fraser’s Last Interview

The USS Liberty and Malcolm Fraser’s Last Interview


USS Liberty

by Dee McLachlan 

When I interviewed Australia’s former prime minister the Rt Hon Malcolm Fraser nearly three years ago, he had just written the book Dangerous Allies — about Australia’s dependency on America. As he had recently been on Jon Faine’s ABC radio show, I directed the conversation to the deliberate attack on the USS Liberty. Mr Faine had ridiculed Mr Fraser’s knowledge and research on live radio.

However, on the subject of the USS Liberty, there was an interesting post this week about the Russians coming to the rescue — and that it might be turned into a movie called Operation Cyanide. RobertS writes:

“Few people in America or Russia are aware of the crucial and heroic role played by Destroyer 626/4 of the Soviet Navy during the Six-Day War in June, 1967. The commander and crew of this ship guarded the American intelligence vessel GTR-4, better known as the USS Liberty, after the attack on it by the combined air and naval branches of the Israeli Defense Force…” [I’d be interested to hear from survivor Joe Meaders whether he thinks a Russian ship was involved]

I have posted my video with Mr Fraser in three parts before — but below, I have added a combined version of the interview.

At the end of my interview, I asked Mr Fraser if he had heard of Building 7. Even though he was one of the most well read and informed people in Australia, he had not heard of the building’s collapse. Admitting to its demolition would expose the official narrative as a lie.

I never managed a follow up interview on 9-11 as Mr Fraser passed away in March 2015. He wrote in his book that 9-11 was a total failure in American intelligence. If he had researched 9-11, I am sure he would have been open to the attack being a false flag.



  1. Thank you Dee

    When I read “there was an interesting post this week about the Russians coming to the rescue”, I thought you were might be referring to this one …

    • 1863: The “Other Time” Russia Meddled With American Democracy

    For further reading …

    In effect, it was the Russian (naval) intervention that effectively allowed the Union to succeed and ‘democracy’ to be preserved …

    US Navy Secretary Gideon Welles: “God Bless the Russians”

    [Ref: The Diary of Gideon Welles (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1911), September 25, 1863, vol. I, p. 443.]

  2. The presence of the Russians sniffing around at the time (no surprise!) came to my notice years ago.
    The account at that time was that a Russian submarine was in the area and upped periscope ( rather than surfacing I presume) and wondered what was going on. So the whole false flag show was sprung. Russia had the goods.
    Poor billion dollar ABC. Does the billion per year provide for some essential research services if they want to continually bullshit the taxpayers from overpaid ignorant misinformation jokes.
    The Israel plan is known; to occupy everything from the Nile to the Euphrates and it is still at it.
    No doubt the usual modus of deception backed by blackmail of the US people is a handy ace in the hole. (Now add the truth about 911)
    Well, what has that to do with Australia, Malcolm and Julie?
    Seems that many in the Labor party are awakening, this time it may be a Federal election issue. About time?
    Why are we sending our kids to the ME to die for Israel’s geopolitical ambitions of more theft and destruction.
    Bob Carr [ex Aussie foreign minister before our present Julie] has awakened, wonder if he knows about all this as well.
    The Greens have now been strung up defying the Australian Constitution for two of them being dual citizens. Fancy, had they ever bothered to read the Australian Constitution whilst contemplating their zest to get into our Parliament?
    Indeed, how many of our polies have ever read our constitution and/or understand it?
    I understand that the rules in the US houses are different. Pity!

    • Hello Ned, you have stated; ‘The Israel plan is known: to occupy everything from the Nile to the Euphrates and it is still at it.’

      Really Ned? So how come they haven’t got there yet after 70 years of being the superpower in their area? Perhaps you could enlighten those of us who have no clue as to what you suggest is an Israeli goal, what the Israeli goal is meant to achieve?

      • Hi Neminis,
        Thought you would chime in.
        I await the cavalery, I am bored with your ignorance (?)
        No time, jump on it and run out the rope.
        We await, start with about the mid 1980’s with the zionist chinwag in Switzerland and the Schofield bible bullshit.

        • Sorry, bit obtuse for the uninformed.
          The sad Christian zionists fell for that ‘chosen by God’ bullshit.
          Athiests have a problem with that BS fiction, but are very quiet with that dichotomy.

          • Ned, you should have realized that Israel is a term derived from the Israelites. And that name was used thousands of years ago if you had bothered to research instead of allowing your prejudice to cloud your thinking.

      • Ned, you make accusations without any basis to them – you could at least provide just one example of what I ask – but no, you choose to hide behind what you state without providing any evidence for what you state.

        That is my only quibble with you – you on the other hand seem to have a huge chip on one of those shoulders of yours when it comes to responding to me.

        • Nemesis,
          you are confused: your accusation that I have an alleged chip on my shoulder is really the BS you keep putting up which has to be cleansed off to rid the odour.

      • Oh come on Nemesis, the plan of a ‘Greater Israel’ from the Nile to the Euphrates rivers is common knowledge (at least for those who will look into it). Hell, the Israelis even have a map of ‘Greater Israel’ on the back of the Shekel.

        Here’s a good webpage to bring you up to date. There is a picture of the Shekel (that’s how I found the webpage when I did some research).


        The webpage has many good references that I has previously seen and read. However, there is a link to a document in the Truman Library I had not seen which is quite revealing – should you decide to read it.

        The First Zionist Congress in the 1890’s adopted the Israeli flag with the two blue lines and the ‘Star of David’ between the two blue lines. The blue lines represent the Nile and Euphrates rivers and the flag is symbolic of the Jews returning to the ‘Promised Land’. See Genesis 15:18 to see what the ‘Promised Land’ is (hint: Nile to Euphrates)

        • Terry, the One Dollar United States note has a Masonic symbol on one side of it – does that make All Americans of Masonic heritage or for the Masonic One World Agenda?

          The double triangle more popularly known as the Star of David is an ancient symbol that has Eastern connections and an ancient history.

          The earliest known depiction of that symbol as representing Judaism, is from the 6th Century BC.

          Those Zionist’s you rely so heavily on, and I am guess here – along with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion – have been debunked time and time again, but no one it appears is willing to listen.

  3. I have just spent the last ten minutes refreshing a hearing of the full interview by Dee of Ex PM of Australia, the HONOURABLE Malcolm Fraser.
    The video below of the interview has brought tears to my eyes whilst recognising the betrayal of Australia’s sovereignty by most of our politicians since his time and by a corrupted monopolistic fake mass media and our fake public broadcasters.
    Please Australia, send this video (and link) to all that you know. Think of the future of your children and your grand children.
    I hate to admit, but PM Gough Whitlam was right.
    There are no ‘honourables’ in our Federal Parliament at this time and our mass media with the ABC and SBS are traitors to the Australian people.
    Dee, your interview has a historic value yet to be realised.
    That is why the fake bastards like the ABC Jonathon Faine are hiding it as with the building 7 scientific disclosures.

    • Hey Ned, I’ll leave you to your blue with Nemesis. But I have issues about any confidence you have in our two former PMs, ‘Witless’ Whitlam, and the HONOURABLE “Anyone seen my pants?” Fraser.

      Apart from that, peace, man.

      • There are not many in politics or in leadership that have not stuffed up for various reasons .
        The measure of their true character is at a time when they can be not compromised, not obligated, free of responsibilities, sit, think and reflect.
        I suggest that you listen again to Dee’s interview with Fraser at that time of his life.
        Many of us will hopefully be granted a similar opportunity.
        Peace; in old age johno.

        • Ned, I must agree on one thing in particular: Why do we send our young Australian servicemen and women to the Middle East, to defend Israel? It is a simple question, but is too hard for pollies to answer!

          Re old age, not quite there yet, I just feel like it. Although, some may wonder if I have early onset Alzheimer’s!

          • It is easy to for them to answer.
            Knowlegible compromised pollies in control know why they sacifice our children.
            That is why they lie betray and deceive Australia with the msm.
            They have the answer and will not tell……… to much to lose!
            In some jurisdictions they are shot as traitors.

  4. An interesting article here Dee. I have looked at the Russian aspect within the Liberty incident, but have yet to come across any reference at all to possible Soviet (Russian) intervention in alleviating what befell the Liberty at the hands of the Israeli Defence Force (IDF)

    One must also take on board when interviewing ex-Australian Prime Ministers, that like their political counter parts in the United States, what the Globalist Deep State wishes to reveal to outsiders, and that includes American Presidents and Australian Prime Ministers, depends on the worth of those who are to be taken into their confidence.

    Quid pro quo?

    We must remember that ‘elected’ politicians are not typical of the embedded bureaucrat who are much easiler bought and more reliable in their service for that 30 pieces of sliver paid, than someone who can be tossed out of office at the end of his/her term.

    I don’t place a lot of faith in Fraser’s assessment and for these reasons;

    1. This interview conducted by you is with a person who was out of the political loop for decades – that should give pause to anyone seeking up to update information on political whatever. His apparent unawareness of the isolated collapse of building seven during 9/11 should have anyone’s radar up as to his reliability in what he stated. He does not differentiate between what the Congress does and the Deep State tells them to do. His understanding of how the American ‘government’ is manipulated is not revealed, therefore his knowledge is limited.

    2. During the course of that interview, you Dee, sound to me like South African or Rhodesian – please correct me if I am wrong. If so, you should be aware that it was Fraser who led the charge against the South African government policy of apartheid while he was Australian Prime Minister, a most undiplomatic stance, and went out of his way in promoting the destruction of a policy that at least kept the hordes from taking over and destroying, as they have done now, what the white South Africans had made of a once undeveloped, under populated and under appreciated land.

    3. Fraser acknowledges the deliberate attack on the Liberty By Israel, but does not deliver why it was done except to say that if not for a contrived cover story Israel would have been seen as the aggressor, or words to that effect. Fraser is simply putting forward his version of the standard narrative.

    4. You, and others on this site, seem to have a fixation on this Liberty incident. I have mentioned many times in past comments about this incident a good book that outlines exactly what went wrong – but it appears no one wishes to read it.

    • In short:
      Paragraph 1
      I came across a report of Russian presence years ago.
      Paragraph 2.
      I will deal with that hereunder.
      Paragragraph 3.
      Qid pro quo.
      Paragraph 4.
      Yep, the people behind the scenes run the anti-democratic wars and murders.
      Paragraph 5.
      No faith in Fraser as former defence minister.
      I chose his experience over you obfuscations and apparent purposes.
      Paragraph 6.
      Out of the political loop for decades.
      So he forgot his experiences?
      Did not know about building 7.
      Tell us what msm, shock jokes and pollies even now know about 7 and why could that be?
      Not to differentiate between deep state and Congress.
      Was it asked and did he not, when disclosing that states are prepared to eat their own?
      So something is not revealed. Was he asked about deep state?
      There is another contribution by Fraser explaining the Jew delegation that required the use of a conference room to occupy lobbyists
      You conclude that his knowledge of deep state is limited because nothing is revealed. Ever heard of pulling yourself up by the shoelaces?
      Paragraph 7.
      I almost give up. So opposing apartheid is undiplomatic?
      Supporting apartheid is presumably kosher!?
      Paragraph 8.
      Fraser simply says the murder of US crewmen was deliberate.
      He further comments on the outcome and cover up of the mass murder,
      The standard narrative! Yep he did, what is the problem?
      Paragrah 9.
      Yep, many have a fixation on the mass murders and cover up with lies. As with other histotical lies, killing and false invasions destroying countries for what reasons?
      Live with it.
      I have waisted enough time with you and/or the author,
      There will be no proof reading.
      If the style is not up to your requirements, stiff live with it.

      • Ned the serious seeker of TRUTH will always verify his/her sources before accepting those sources as reliable.

        Para 1. A report is not verification of the FACT.

        Para 3. Have you any proof of what you assert? I for one would love to see just one example of it.

        Para 4. Yep, I can agree on that as I have researched who it is that does this and I have put forward my evidence in previous comments concerning them for anyone to look into, but it ain’t the Jews as you seem to be so set on.

        Para 5. That is your choice, however, Fraser became somewhat of a very bitter and resentful man in his later years – you should at least consider that what he utters in his interviews is colored by that bitterness.

        Para 6. When one is no longer part of the government or other entities they are no longer privy to the kind of information that us mere mortals never get to hear of. Yes, they have their ‘experience’ and ‘memories’ but as time and age progresses the mind does not stay as sharp as it once was, especially on those details that become so important to investigators. Surely you can appreciate that?

        Para 7. Fraser was more than opposed to South African policy he was actively involved is dismantling it – being opposed is one thing, but to enlist other countries in providing sanctions against South Africa in order to undo a sovereign countries political policy is not only undiplomatic, it is verging on an act of war.

        Para 8. Yes Fraser says that, as it is the standard disinformational narrative. I have offered you a source to read that would enlighten you as to what REALLY happened, but you, like many others refuse to go there!

        Para 9. I have no idea what you are on about here except for your dismissive remark about ‘wasted time’. May I add that time is only wasted on those who point blank refuse to budge from a preconceived bias largely based in lies that you seem so fond of parroting.

        Ned, if you don’t like what I write then ignore what I put up, as no one forces you to respond, but I guess your intolerance for other viewpoints will always get the better of you?

    • Nemesis, Dee is a Yarpie, according to Mary. Another aspect of Fraser’s impact in southern Africa was his role as a member of the British-inspired Eminent Persons Group overseeing the destruction of Rhodesia, reducing it from the role of ‘the breadbasket of Africa’, to a commie basketcase.

      I do not believe that our Vietnam War veterans have fond memories of Fraser’s tenure as Minister for the Army before the Liberals lost power to Labor in ’72. Some probably wonder why North Vietnam did not award him any medals!

      • Thanks Johno. I had forgotten Fraser’s role in Rhodesia – old age creeping on I guess.

        Ned briefly mentioned Fraser in his comment below and the animosity he caused as then Army Minister. So I did not include that aspect to this mongrel of a man we had the misfortune as a country to have as a Prime Minister.

        People today do not realize just how close we came to becoming embroiled in a constitutional crisis that could have torn this country asunder because of Fraser’s actions in undermining a sitting P.M.

        When he lost the election to Hawke and started blubbering I laughed my socks off.

  5. Dee,
    Fraser looked lucid and reasonably well during your interview with him. He seemed to be having his own “awakening” process over his latter years. His book “Dangerous Allies” together with his realisation that both sides of politics had become infiltrated as well as his growing outspoken criticism of The Powers That Be, may have made him a liability.

    Would they really “silence” a politician for being inconvenient?

    Oh right. JFK

  6. To the hasbara troll Nemesis: how is the weather in TelAviv? Not hot enough? never mind, soon it will be hot, scorchingly hot!

    • Oh, another sniper from the sidelines who has nothing of value to add to this thread except their own hatred for something that he/she has little understanding of.

      And your assumptions are only outweighed by your ignorant and arrogant belief in that only Jews will defend Jews.


  7. I repost a comment on this article from Joe Meadors — was attached to another USS Liberty article:

    “In reply to Nemesis.
    With all due respect and with apologies in advance to those who subscribe to the myth that there were “ten official US investigations (including five congressional investigations)” of the attack on our ship, I submit that the most pertinent question is why has the US government refused to conduct an investigation of the attack.”

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion