Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Was FDR to blame for Pearl Harbor?

Discussion in 'Pearl Harbor' started by DogFather, Aug 25, 2009.

  1. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    11,510
    Likes Received:
    1,932
    "conclusive evidence", meaning you want it to be true. First you say there is no proof. Then you claim there is proof.

    Now, for the trap. When were the policies you say were implemented first proposed? And who proposed them? Who knew of them before they were implemented? Good luck with that.
     
  2. rebel1222

    rebel1222 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    4
    Would you call the 39 volumes of investigative transcrips of the various Pearl Harbor investgations discredited by the acedemic community, or the dairies of the active participates, or the ships logs, or the newspaper articles? The sources are at the end of each action item example. Check them out. I'm sure Stinnett couldn't have created them and put them in the files. Could he?


    I was using the sources of the investigations, as stated above. Along with diaries, and ship logs. The sources are at the end of each action item example.

    Yes, there are several documents that are still classified to this day. That of course is one of the big things that lend even more credence to the info in Stinntts book. If everthing's on the up-n-up, release the documents and clear it all up.

    Well, The info I provided, demonstrates that the FDR administration implemented the proposals. It has dates and times.The McCollum memo was the first official proposal, although there could have been private suggestions of this sort for years prior to 1940. I have provided the source information that you and others requested. This info came from the 39 volumes of investigative transcripts. Also War diaries, newspaper articles and so forth. It is all in the achives and readily available to anyone will to drive to Maryland, and spend the time necessary to read it. If someone really wants to "discredit" Stinnett's book, I suggest they start with the source information, and keep opinions, to the side.


    Good luck with that...:D
     
  3. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    11,510
    Likes Received:
    1,932
    I'm aware where you got the information, I put Vol 39 online. But a superficial reading of the information doesn't answer the questions I asked. That takes more work than most people are willing to give.

    And Stinnett's book is a farce, that's not an opinion, it's just plain fact. Good luck with that.
     
  4. rebel1222

    rebel1222 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    4

    I think you are wrong. I provided you with the documentation. There. We'll just have to agree to disagree and let that be the end of it.
     
  5. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    17,432
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    Location:
    Alabama
    I think that is a good choice for all concerned.
     
  6. rebel1222

    rebel1222 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    4
    There are 38 other volumes. What about those? A reading is a reading of the information. I answered all your questions more than adequately.

    Let's let it end. I'm not going to change your mind, and your not going to change mine. Let's enjoy this forum for all the great WWII info available here.
    Happy posting.:)
     
  7. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    11,510
    Likes Received:
    1,932
    I have 10,000 pages of the Hearing online. That's all the exhibits. The testimony would have been online by now but the NHC diverted me to the Antebellum USN.
     
  8. mikebatzel

    mikebatzel Dreadnaught

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,185
    Likes Received:
    406
    Perhaps you should look again at the portion I qouted origionaly. You claim your information came from the Peral Harbor investigations? Why would they claim "Stinnett conclusivly demonstrates" if he is not the source of your information? Why did I find the exact text of your first paragraph on another website under a book review for Day of Deciet?
    The Conspiracies of Empire
     
  9. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,003
    That's his second attempt at breaking contact and negotiating an armistice. Peace with honor.........let it end
     
  10. Glenn239

    Glenn239 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    9
    Do you know what is still classified? Specifically, are the Hypo and Cast original logs and worksheets declassified or not (not any summary, the originals). Are all the original logs of all the listening stations declassified? For example, the Japanese stated they made no transmissions on their voyage. That should be easily verifiable by examing the listening post intercept logs in Hawaii, the West Coast, and Alaska for the period Nov 26th-Dec 7th.
     
  11. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    17,432
    Likes Received:
    2,059
    Location:
    Alabama

    Aye, Clancy, you are right.
     
  12. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    11,510
    Likes Received:
    1,932
    A better question would be WHY would they make a transmission.
     
  13. rebel1222

    rebel1222 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    4

    I state that under paragragh that you quoted. I read the same review and that is where I got a portion of the paragragh. You will note the source info at the end of each explantaion of the eight action items in the McCollum mome. Most came for the PHPT transcripts.
     
  14. rebel1222

    rebel1222 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    4
    Because they were clueless that we had broken all their codes...arrogance.
     
  15. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    11,510
    Likes Received:
    1,932
    Irrelevant to radio silence. It was ordered, it was obeyed. But for reference, can you tell me which radios in the fleet DID NOT have their transmission keys removed and why?
     
  16. rebel1222

    rebel1222 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    4

    Can you prove they had their transmission keys removed?
     
  17. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    11,510
    Likes Received:
    1,932
    The officers of the Kido Butai stated so. Can you prove otherwise? And you dodge me question I see.
     
  18. rebel1222

    rebel1222 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    4


    No I don't dodge your question. How am I supposed to prove they had they keys? About like you can’t prove they didn’t. Stop picking at strings. The only response I got out of you after I posted the memo sources, is “You have really read the archives in-depth to fully understand them” Gimme a break. If it’s in the records it’s in there. Stop making excuses.



    Concerning the radio transmissions of the Japanese 1st fleet. Below is record of our people intercepting their traffic. Look up the sources and disprove it or well…

    *****
    Tokyo Naval Radio transmitted message in the 5-num code to the Japanese 1st fleet warning that they could expect a powerful winter storm in their path in the North Pacific. See RG 457, SRN 116668, MMRB, Archives II.


    Special investigator Robert Ogg, who worked under Elsworth Hosmer12th District intelligence office, is on record stating that commercial radio firms supplied Hosmer with RDF bearings placing Japanese warships in the vacant sea area of the North Pacific. Oggs oral history interview was conducted by Commander Irwin G. Newman of the Naval Security Group command and published by the US Navy as SRH 255 in RG 457, MMRB, Archives II.

    Hosmer identified the radio transmissions as Japanese, since the vessels used the unique kana telegraphic code of Japan’s navy. SRH 255, loc.cit., pp. 18, 22, 23, 25.

    Captain Richard McCullough the District Intelligence officer sent these finding in a report to the navy dept via the GUPID system. In 1946 the joint committee investigating the attack was asked to delete all reference of GUPID from the official record of the investigation by the Chief Assistant Counsel Gerhard A. Gesell. PHPT 4, p. 1911 and confirmation of their deletion by Commander John F. Baecher, the Navy’s liaison officer for the Joint Committee on 6/7/1946 in PHLO file, RG 80.

    Once in Washington, the Japanese ship locations were delivered to FDR in the White House, according to district intelligence chief McCullough. See McCullough’s comments p. 40 SRH 255, RG 457, MMRB, Archives II.

    Confirmation of Robert Ogg’s claims were confirmed by looking in Station KING at Dutch Harbor, which was a unit of Rochefort’s Mid-Pacific Direction Finder Network I 1941. Looking on the 4000-kilicycle all of Ogg’s intercept details are confirmed irrefutably. According to a secret report issued in November 1941 by Chief Radioman Robert Fox, the traffic chief for Station KING, the Akagi was heard on 4960 kilocycles in tactical communication with several merchant vessels. The records of Station H revealed that Hawaii also intercepted the Akagi on November 26 with the carrier used the 4963 kilocycles. For the RDF intercept of the Akagi using the radio call sign of 8YU NA, see Station KING, monthly report for November 1941 in RG 181, Commandant 13th Naval District, Secret a-6 files, NA Seattle, WA.
    For Station H report, “The Carriers are using secret calls on 4963kcs.,” see H Chronology p. 89 of November 26, 1941 in RG 38, Station US papers, MMRB, Archives II.

    Enough for now.
     
  19. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member Patron   WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    11,510
    Likes Received:
    1,932
    You claim they lied about not transmitting. You have to prove that.

    BTW, Budiansky took care of Ogg years ago. Gotta keep up, guy.

    So far, you've only presented recycled Stinnett, and he's been done already. Got anything new?

    And, did you miss the "Niitaka Nobore, 12-8" question or are you ignoring it because Stinnett didn't cover it?
     
  20. rebel1222

    rebel1222 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    4
    Not recylcled Stinnett, Documented info from the Archives. Does it really matter who dug it up? I think not, It's still there, perhaps it's up to you to prove that it's not. You simply cannot refute the memo sources so you attack and divert attention elsewhere. Everyone reading this thread could easily discern this.


    Documented info from the Archives.


    Whatever...
     

Share This Page