As an ex-navy person, I think that this is nonsense.
Forget being in stealth mode, so others can't electronically see you. The freighter was obviously not at fault. It's like a huge turtle running over a dysfunctional and totally disabled rabbit.
What about one's command responsibility to see others? Could all of the watch detail (I bet at least 4) been asleep?
What about one's responsibility not to cross the path of others?
Unless the navy has changed more than is imaginable (by me), there had to be people on watch who saw this coming, and alerted the bridge, especially if disabling ones own radars is part of being stealthy. Didn't sonar hear it bearing down/getting closer?
As a conspiracy realist who knew with certainty that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a false flag operation way back in 1966, I smell a skunk.
Given two deadly incidents in two months, both involving 'modern-day' digital destroyers, I'm guessing a 'hack' occurred, not unlike when our Navy vessels could not respond during 'enemy' fly-overs in the Black Sea and Baltic, even if they wanted to. And if any crew member mentions what actually happened, they'll likely know the Philly brig intimately, and/or lose all bennies forever.
There's a cover-up going on, be there no doubt.
I knew it back in 1966, and left the navy asap.
These dead sailors never had a chance, and unless this is made public, more will follow.
My condolences to all who care.

What would have been affected/disabled in such a hack?
In a modern vessel like that, pretty much everything other than the ship's bell could have been disabled.

If I recall, wasn't the Fitz the result of the OOD calling for them to cut in front of the oncoming traffic - misjudging the closing speed/distance?
That might have been the initial story, or the 2nd, 3rd or 10th iteration of it, but remember--we were lied to about 9-11, the Gulf of Tonkin, the USS Liberty, and also about the Maine and who knew what and when before Pearl Harbor. Remember what Tolstoy taught us: history would be a wonderful thing, if it were only true.
What I know for certain, is I never would have joined had I known the truth, which is of course, why we aren't told it.
Including the speech earlier this evening.

The issue is not always the lie but what is being concealed by it. PR, advertising and marketing are lies of one sort or another.

Rich, have you sailed Singapore Straits and Malacca Straits? (or the English Channel that I did for the first time a few weeks ago).

They are too busy for old fashioned hairy eyeballs. These navy ships have disruptive radar signatures built into their topsides design, let alone their electronic disrupters. Plus not tx'ing the AIS position... And the other shipping is flat out reading the host of other clear signatures how the hell can they divert?

When I crossed the English channel a few weeks ago, at night, I had to select one break in the traffic and hammer it to do the 5 miles at right angles. At the end of that hour I could see I would have 5 (Five) ships abreast bearing down on me. But they could "SEE" me... And divert if I screwed up.

No one can see Navy ships if they refuse to transmit AIS is busy areas. (or a virtual radar signal)

When a navy ship is on patrol up North Korea way its fine to be full tactical... But the busy shipping lanes off Japan and Singapore has shown twice the folly of this insanity.

No man can do these areas just by being old fashioned. They must use electronics nowadays