Was FDR to blame for Pearl Harbor?

Actually Larry is the "Go To" guy for all things related to Pearl Harbor.

But, what is the context of the documents? Were they created to promote a success or to exploit a failure?

I am sure if "You Tube" was around in 1941 there would be ample amateur interpetation of the events.
As far as any corollary between 9/11 and Pearl Harbor they are very similar and the public's reaction to both events is very germain to the discussion. In both instances the intial shock of the event promted a majority to seek retribution against those responsible; but, as time passed many of those same people, who sought retribution, felt the need to place blame. The latter gave way to many of the conspiracy theories that currently circulate through popular media.

I think there are several that have come to their own conclusions and we seem to put less credence in it than you.

And everyone is entitled to their own opinion even if it does not correspond with your's.

 

He points out his problems with the book. I doubt he's even read the book. I highly suggest reading the book and forming your own opinion. The author very thoroughly goes over all the angles to insure a accurate picture.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

IMO, the book is well documented. All the declassified documents are in the book.

I didn't insult anyone. I was however sacastic. Opana insulted the author calling him "senile". I didn't call anyone names.

 

deleted duplicate post.

 

A book is what it is , how many people have time to go through and fact- check everything you read? I just pointed out that there was a book on the subject , read it and form your own opinion.

out

Dan

 

Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The Hearings were missing many key reports and transcripts. Much was left out.

 

Have you read the book? and if so, verified the documentation in the book with archives?

I doubt so on all counts. Until so, stop trying to confuse your opinion with facts. The hearing transcripts are not complete. The book proves that without a doubt.


Again, have you read the book? ....

 

Read the book before you critique it. That’s all I ask.

Roll tide.
PS: I attended the spring game last year.

 

To all of you FDR conspiracy fans out there, keep one thing in mind. There was no written guarentee at that time that the US and their Allies would persevere to win through to ultimate victory in WWII. You have to look at this through the eyes of the actual participants and with the knowledge of world events at this time rather than viewing this solely from hindsight, as it is always 20-20.

Germany was still on the ascendancy on all fronts, savagely kicking at the gates of Moscow, while the USSR was still reeling from the severe body blows that she'd taken over the past six months and perhaps on the verge of another disasterous, WWI-like, collapse. Had the USSR surrendered, hundreds of combat hardened, German divisions would be available for commitment in the Middle East or elsewhere.

In the North Atlantic, German U-Boats were still gnawing at Great Britain's absolutely vital, maritime lifeline and perhaps on the edge of actually winning the Battle of the Atlantic. This U boat blockade could have knocked the UK out of the war, by halting the flow of food, fuel and raw material to the British Nation and to her troops in the field, while putting her population on the verge of starvation.

In North Africa, Rommel seemed unbeatable and quite capable of beating the British 8th Army and turning the Mediterranean completely into an Axis lake. Crete had fallen and Malta seemed next on the German timetable of conquest. The way to the Middle East's oil seemed to be within Germany's very grasp. A German backed coup was already taking shape in Iraq. With unlimited supplies of oil at their command, the war machines of both Germany and Italy would have limitless possibilities, while Italy's Navy would at last have enough fuel to train and make of its fleet a much more effective combat arm.

In the far East, Japan too was clearly on the ascendancy. Japan had seized Manchuria, invaded China and recently had overun French Indo-China. They signed a treaty of non beligerence with Thailand, while effectively taking over the country. They seemed destined to overun the remainder of China and were poised to upset the balance of power in the Pacific, by challenging both Great Britain and the Dutch East Indies, in order to seize the rich oil fields there.

With all of this in his mind, why would President Roosevelt deliberately allow a major portion of the US fleet, along with their veteran sailors be destroyed in Pearl Harbor, especially when there was no guarentee of final victory? There was no "Manhatten Project." The whole comspiracy premise makes no sense, is completely illogical and criminally negligent. Lastly, it would be virtually impossible to carry it off without someone in power finding out.

 

I'll take that as a no, you have not read the book and reviewed the documents. Until you do so then...

When evidence is gathered together with supporting documents, it becomes more than "someones opinion"

 

Hi I would like to say that a lot of Leaders thought that the Japaneses were
some what un - prepaired country to take up hostilities untill they attached chine mainland their millitary tactics were those of the Italian Campaigns in Africa.

 

Have you read Velikowski's books? I haven't but still know they are garbage. If you can't make a point from a book but just give general "read the book" recommendations the implication is that either the book doesn't have much to offer or you don't really understand the issue.

 

Here is an old post from the now deceased Phil Jacobsen, a poster on the THC boards. He passed away in late 2005 or early '06, and he had made debunking Stinnet one of his pet projects. Stinnett and Irving were two men he had no use for. He was in the business of Navy Cryptology during the war years, and stationed at Hypo with Rochefort.

His opinion is more valuable than mine. However, just to see if his "take" on Stinnett was biased in any fashion I went to my local library and checked out Day of Deceit. Jacobsen was right, it is crud. Here is his post from August of 2005. (starting here and continuing to his P.S.)

We have hashed this old politically based revisionist conspiracy theory over and over again on this forum. Yes, there are still Roosevelt haters alive and well. May I suggest you do some research on the many articles etc. that have debunked Day of Deceit. You can start with some of my articles:

"A Cryptologic Veteran's Anaylysis of 'Day of Deceit'" "Cryptologia" Vol. XXIV Number 2 April 2000. Also available under Articles at:

http://www.usncva.org

"Foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor? No: The Story of the U.S. Navy's Efforts on JN-25B" "Cryptologia? Vo. XXVII Number 3 July 2003 pp. 110-118.

"Pearl Harbor: Who Deceived Whom?" "Naval History" December 2003 pp. 27-31. (Available on the Naval History website). See also Robert B. Stinnett's comment's letter in "Naval History" June 2004 (available on Stinnett's website that you quoted} and my rejoinder in "Naval History" February 2005. In essense, Stinnett only addresses part of my article and gratuitously throws in different issues. However, I responded to each argument. This last letter is a must read. It shows how easy it is to debunk the salient points of "Day of Deceit."

"Radio Silence and Radio Deception: Secrecy Insurance for the Pearl Harbor Strike Force" "Intelligence and National Security" Winter 2004 pp. 696-718.

"No RDF on the Japanese Strike Force: No Conspiracy!"
"Intelligence and CounterIntelligence" Spring 2005 pp. 142-149.

"Pearl Harbor: Radio Officer Leslie Grogan of the SS Lurline and his Misidentified Signals" "Cryptologia" Vol. XXIX Number 2 April 2005 pp. 97-120.

You might also get a copy of Stephen Budiansky's "The Battle of Wits." Very professional.

Stinnett's book makes a serious misquotation, mistates facts, misrepresents facts and is full of faulty analysis in an effort to support his failed theory. All of the book's claims that the Kido Butai transmitted by radio have been debunked by reference to the original documents in the National Archives. Stinnett failed to recognize obvious Japanese radio deception activity and used that as a basis for his erroneous claim that the Strike Force transmitted by radio. The main Japanese naval administrative code, JN-25B did not produce any intelligence of value prior to Pearl Harbor. In essense, there is no proof in "Day of Deceit" to support the claim that the U.S. Navy intelligence was aware of the existence and target of the Japanese Strike Force. The book stains the honor of my old shipmates by implying they knew the Strike Force was going to attack Pearl Harbor and are part of a cover-up existing to this day. That is garbage. Stinnett's allegations that such information was obtained from radio intelligence has been completely dubunked.

I will let others on the board address the old wornout "removed carriers" argument that you made. However, if you wish to argue any of the radio intelligence claims that Stinnett makes, please be my guest. I have chapter and verse to rebut any such claims. You might want to read some of the opposing facts before you go out on a limb. The last I counted, the book had about a hundred factual errors. For example, the Japanese did not send operational plans by radio. Stinnett only provides supposition, not proof, otherwise. He hints that the 1945-47 decrypts of 1941 Japanese naval messages might be transcripts of earlier decrypts. Clearly on their face, the decrypts were performed in 1945-46. He grossly misinterprets some of these 1945-47 decrypts. The claim that "Hitokappu Bay" was sent in the clear in the middle of a double encrypted message is an impossibity besides being ridiculous. That is an example of not knowing how the nmessage was encrypted and decrypted by the Japanese. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. The Japanese did not send operational orders by radio despite claims to the contrary. The book only makes assumptions and provides no factual basis for such claims. Stinnett often gives the wrong dates and times by trying to convert Japanese time to Hawaiian time when such conversion is not appropriate. Furthermore, Stinnett seems not to know that Hawaii used time zone 10 1/2 not time zone 10 at the time of Pearl Harbor.


(Intercepted radio traffic) This is the heart of Stinnett's claim and they are all false. The radio signals that Stinnett claims were intercepted were Japanese radio deception signals that direction finder bearings established their source as the Sasebo and Kure naval bases. It is so clear in the documentation that even other revisionists recognized them as radio deception. All the direction finder bearings came from Station C, Corregidor not Hawaii nor Bainbridge Island Washington.

Two of these radio deception tramsmissions were heard in Hawaii by no direction finder bearing was obtained on them. One of the Hawaii intercepts was also intercepted by Station C with a bearing that pointed to Sasebo, Japan and thus located it there.

Neither Admiral Nagumo nor any of his commanders/ships transmitted by radio after it left home waters around 15-16 November 1941. This is when the Kido Butai left home waters for Hitokappu Bay. In order to show some possible Strike Force radio transmissions, Stinnett uses some messages received on the Tokyo Fleet broadcast around 14-15 November as proof that radio silence was broken. However, radio silence only applied until the time the Kido Butai left home waters. Furthermore, The two or three messages that Stinnett quotes were sent while the ships or commands were in port. Most likely, they were not sent by radio but were hand delivered to the base communication office (or were sent by visual signals) for entry into the Japanese naval communications system. Even if the Strike Force units did transmit by radio in mid-November 1941 and such transmissions had been located, they would have shown locations at naval bases on Honshu or Kiushu Islands. Futhermore, a study of Nagumo's Station Serial Numbers (SMS) shows there were no radio transmissions made until 8 December 1941 (The day of the attack in Tokyo time).

Not one single message of intellige value was decrypted by U.S. naval personnel prior to Pearl Harbor. Stinnett claims that Japanese naval operational orders were sent by radio, but that is no true. Operational orders were distributed by hand not by radio. All of the decrypts that Stinnett refers to were decrypted and translated by headquarters personnel in Washington, D.C. from 1945-47. The date of the decryption is on the document if your are knowledgeable to recoginize it.

The conspiracy theorist do not tell you that the "bomb plot" messages or any report pointing out their significance were never sent to high ranking officials like General Marshall, Admiral Stark, President Roosevelt and others. Stinnett and others assume that then Lieutenant Commander McCollum made a special effort to send them to President Roosevelt when he didn't.

My early cryptological career started with a special school at the Naval Radio Station, Wahiawa to learn Japanese naval communication procedures and to be able to copy the Japanese Kata Kana Morse code at 35 words per minute.

During the Battle of Midway, I was an operator on watch at Station H, Wahiawa, copying various Japanese broadcasts.

From 10 November 1942 to 19 May 1943, I was assigned to a very small intercept, direction finding, analysis and reporting station (Station AL) on Guadalcanal.

After returning to Station H Wahiawa, I was assigned as a Search Operator and then as a special supervisor involved with Japanese naval communications.

Near the end of the war, I was transferred to Statiion I, Imperial Beach, California where I was a supervisor and analysts for the intercept and processing of Japanese naval communications.

However, much of my information comes from obtaining huge amounts of Japanese naval cryptologic information from Archives II, College Park, Maryland and elsewhere. The important point is my previous experience permits me to properly understand the original records and properly analyze what they mean. On the contray, revisionist conspiracy theorists do not always fully understand those records and, most often, interpret them for their pre-determined conspiracy goals, disregarding other benign evaluations.

Cryptographers are those who work with codes and ciphers of their own country. Cryptologists work with codes and ciphers of enemy or potential enemy countries.

P.S. Station S at Bainbridge Island, Washington did not intercept Japanese naval targets at that time. They were assigned to Japanese diplomatice targets in Nov/Dec 41.

From the end of the first paragraph to the P.S., that is all Phil Jacobsen's work, not mine.

 

"rebel1222" you may enjoy going to this old Time magazine article I found, and read the abridged reveiw of the hearing.

Goto:

Pearl Harbor Report: Who Was to Blame? - TIME

A great many things are pointed out, but look at the SIZE of the transcripts which are mentioned. If you wish to wade through those hundreds of thousands of words, to see if anything is left out, or if they are incomplete be my guest.