A few years ago, I was in Honolulu.

Went out to see the USS Arizona. It's a very moving memorial. The thing that strikes me the most, is the oil still bubbling up from the fuel tanks.

RIP

RoyBatty -

A few years ago, I was in Honolulu.

Went out to see the USS Arizona. It's a very moving memorial. The thing that strikes me the most, is the oil still bubbling up from the fuel tanks.

You might like to revisit with this photo --

My Dad was 13 years old when Pearl Harbor happened. He told me that when he first heard about it, he thought some of our family had been attacked, as we have some relations named Harbour who live in the next county. I much rather it would have been the case.

We should have tried them all in civil courts in Honolulu.

-The 1942 Left

We should have tried them all in civil courts in Honolulu.

-The 1942 Left

Posted by The_Chapel at 2009-12-07 08:37 AM | Reply

First of all "Thanks" for making this a political tribute to the memory of the event. Such "Class" Niceville. As per Your snide comment. Terrorist acts are CRIMINAL Acts. When Nations Military attacks another then it's an Act of War. Huge difference but Your simple mind can not grasp this fact. But do carry on supporting the wrong side as usual with You and Your ilk.

Larry

Gnubsy, the poster child for the Children of Darkness, remains as willfully obtuse as ever, I'll give the ol' perv that much.

"The 1942 Left...."

No idea what you're talking about.

#6 | Posted by The_Chapel at 2009-12-07 08:37 AM | Reply | Flag: Cannot distinguish between a country like Japan and a stateless terror group.... but loves war of any sort.

I encourage all to read the recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill. Pearl Harbor was:

1.) Known of in advance
2.) Wanted - as a pretext to entering the war
3.) A direct cause of US economic actions against Japan

When will the US people stop being so stupid? Let's see, we were:

1.) Lied into the Spanish American War (sinking of the Maine)
2.) Lied into Vietnam (Gulf of Tonkin)
3.) Lied into WWI (see proof of ammunition on the Lusitania)
4.) Lied in WWII (Pearl Harbor)
5.) Lied into Iraq invasion
6.) Lied into invasion of Panama (to cover up Bush Sr. drug dealing w/ the CIA)

By the grace of god and the heroic actions of sailors, we were saved from entering into the 1967 Israel war (attempting sinking of the Liberty).

You people don't see a pattern here?

"You people don't see a pattern here?"

Not when so much of the "evidence" you present is bogus.

For example, what does the sinking of the "Lusitania" in 1915 have to do with the US going to war with Germany two years later? (Did the sinking contribute to anti-German feeling? Sure. But a direct link? Bogosity at its "finest.")

And let's see that "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" that shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor.

There has been debate among historians for years if FDR had prior warnings about Pearl Harbor, but today is not the day for that debate. Today is for remembering the people who were murdered that day, regardless of who knew.

Today is for remembering the people who were murdered that day, regardless of who knew.

I think the families of the loved ones need to understand how/why they died. Simply observing their death once a year and then sweeping everything under the carpet has not worked in exposing the truth over the last 60 years.

For example, what does the sinking of the "Lusitania" in 1915 have to do with the US going to war with Germany

If you think the 2 events were not linked, then you are a retard. The primary reason for the US entering the war were:

1.) Lusitania
2.) Zimmerman Telegram

The US would not have gone to war based on only 1.

I never said the US would've gone to war solely on the basis of the sinking of the "Lusitania," nor did it. But that event did help reinforce the idea in American public opinion of the Germans as murderers of civilians.

I said the sinking of the "Lusitania" in 1915 was linked to growing anti-German sentiment in the US leading up to World War I, which the US entered two years after its sinking. The Zimmermann Telegram was a much bigger part of the chain of events leading to war because it underscored the German practice of sinking noncombatant vessels -- yes, yes, the "Lusitania" evidently had some munitions, etc., on board, but it was hardly a Royal Navy combat ship -- a practice regarded at the time as heinous, especially when, through the telegram, the Krauts advertised the fact that they were going to sink US vessels. (Tantamount, at the time, to a declaration of war.)

I'm still waiting for your revelation of "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" that shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor.

C'mon, produce it.

"I'm still waiting for your revelation of "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" that shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor."

Hold on, Doc, a little patience here...He's trying to contact Buffaloed_Boob who has the evidence in his safe along with the photos of the factory on the moon.

The Zimmermann Telegram was a much bigger part of the chain of events leading to war because it underscored the German practice of sinking noncombatant vessels -- yes, yes, the "Lusitania" evidently had some munitions, etc., on board, but it was hardly a Royal Navy combat ship -- a practice regarded at the time as heinous

Will your ignorance never end? The Zimmerman telegraph dealt with a 'secret' deal with Mexico to attack the US should the US enter the war on the side of the Allies - that is what sparked outrage in the US, it had nothing to do with sinking noncombatant vessels which was transmitted openly in other communications directly with the US.

Further, it was not 'heinous' to sink noncombatant vessels - this was standard operating proceedure for both sides. The only reason why the Lusitania even garnered attention was the fact that it sunk so quickly - basically - it split in 2 and sunk within minutes leading to complete loss. The reason why it split in 2 and sunk - was because the ship was carring munitions (either illegally or by fact making it a combatant). This was proven in recent diving expeditions uncovering millions of rounds of British .303 shells and other explosives - this despite the Brits attepts to destroy the wreckage to hide this fact. Do you know who instructed the ship to carry munitions and take a lane in a known submarine partolled area? - no other than Churchill himself as Admiral of the British navy. He started lying people into wars early in his career (sort of like a British Dick Cheney).

As for the correspondence, go to Amazon and pick any one of the dozen of so books written on the topic. Pick one written after 1990 as the older books (written in the late 70's) only contain the originally declassified docs.

A (for all practical purposes) Holocaust-denying poster who describes himself/herself/itself as a good little Nazi -- and evidently just blew in from Wolkenkuckkucksheim -- alleges "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor but can't produce the goods?

Ach, Mein Gott in Himmel!

" -- alleges "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor but can't produce the goods?"

When ALL the evidence is revealed we're gonna discover that the REAL cause of the attack was because Roosevelt was doin' Mrs. Hirohito and he was warned that there would be an attack on Arizona if he didn't knock it off. Roosevelt fortified Phoenix because he din't realize Hirohito meant the battleship Arizona.

"recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor but can't produce the goods?

Don't be so damn lazy. Read any one of the books. Hell, even wikipedia can help give you some guidance as to which ones:

"Several writers, including journalist Robert Stinnett[1] and former United States Navy Rear Admiral Robert A. Theobald[2], have argued that various parties high in the U.S. and British governments knew of the attack in advance and may even have let it happen or encouraged it in order to force America into war via the "back door."[3] Evidence supporting this view is taken from quotations and source documents from the time[4] and the release of newer materials."

Frankly, I don't know what you are looking for me to provide. Do you want me to cut/copy/paste/plagarize directly from the above cited works? How about you actually educate yourself before making any more ignorant statements about topics you clearly no nothing about. Why don't you tell me some more about the Zimmerman telegram...retard....

-"recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" that shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor.

-various parties high in the U.S. and British governments knew of the attack in advance and may even have let it happen or encouraged it in order to force America into war via the "back door

They call you , "Stretch", do they?

"The Zimmerman telegraph dealt with a 'secret' deal with Mexico to attack the US should the US enter the war on the side of the Allies - that is what sparked outrage in the US, it had nothing to do with sinking noncombatant vessels which was transmitted openly in other communications directly with the US.
#18 | Posted by goodlittlenazi"

Are you stoned? Re-read the Zimmermann Telegram and tell me it had nothing to do with unrestricted submarine warfare. That's precisely what the Germans thought would could war with the US. It's right there in the text of the telegram, you dolt.

(Also, there was no "deal" with Mexico. The Mexican government never agreed to do what the Krauts wanted; in fact, they informed the US of what was going on.)

"Further, it was not 'heinous' to sink noncombatant vessels - this was standard operating proceedure for both sides." Oh, really? It was against international law, bumpkin. And the announcement by the Germans that they were going to start sinking American-flag vessels was, for all practical purposes, an announcement of war (in the same way mass mobilization was regarded as such in that era).

"The only reason why the Lusitania even garnered attention was the fact that it sunk so quickly - "

Riiiight, the 1500 civilian deaths (1 in 10 Americans) didn't raise an eyebrow. LOL.

On the other matter -- your idiotic contention that "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor -- well, of course I'm still waiting to see just what sort of bogus "source" you're relying on.

I'm not interested in spending the rest of my day trying to find where you get this shit. "Sources" that've misread documents? "Sources" that have invented "proof"? The bottom of a bong? Why can't you just set forth a few credible sources?

There's a simple answer, of course: There are no credible sources that reproduce "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" showing they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor.

You're not only a lazy thinker, but a piss-poor one as well.

Which will probably not prevent you from looking at the world from the corner you've gotten yourself into and making a feeble attempt to shift the goalposts, as in something along these lines: "Roosevelt and Churchill thought the US should enter the war and believed the Japanese might launch an attack." But even you should know that is light years away from "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" showing they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor.

Ball's in your court.

Most of the traitors who make the claim that Roosevelt and others allowed the attack to happen at Pearl Harbor are really sorry that the United States and its allies kicked Hitler's ass along with his buddy Hirohito. I refer to these scum bags as traitors because most would have welcomed the success of the attempted coup which Prescott Bush participated in. Old Nazis never die they just continue to pollute the world with their presence.
The world would smell better if they all went to hell which they eventually all do.

Most of the traitors who make the claim that Roosevelt and others allowed the attack to happen

Ironic coming from someone who believes Bush was aware of the 9-11 plans. I can totally see how FDR arranged for and knew about it- the total embargo on an island nation is clearly an act of war and we did it to Japan which is what led up to Pearl Harbor.

I am not going to claim it as fact, but nothing happens in a bottle and to believe a fleet the size of Japan's can sail across the Pacific in a time of war and go unnoticed is really pushing suspended belief.

-various parties high in the U.S. and British governments knew of the attack in advance and may even have let it happen or encouraged it in order to force America into war via the "back door

They call you , "Stretch", do they?

#22 | Posted by Corky

Do I need to come to your home and show you how to click a link and then read the content to you? Try any of the following (per wikipedia)

Did Roosevelt know in advance about the attack on Pearl Harbor yet say nothing? The Straight Dope, Straight Dope Science Advisory Board, February 28, 2001
The Independent Institute: Pearl Harbor Archive Mostly a Stinnett site, but also has Pearl Harbor articles, debates, interviews, transcripts, book reviews, books, and Pearl Harbor documents
The National Defense Authorization Act (where it is noted that available intelligence regarding an impending attack was not conveyed to the American commanders at Pearl Harbor; page 121, section 546).
Closing the Book on Pearl Harbor Stephen Budiansky on OP-20-G's progress breaking JN-25 from its appearance in 1939 to 12.7.41. In part a response to Stinnett's (and others') claims of major JN-25 breaks prior to the Attack.

Most of the traitors who make the claim that Roosevelt and others allowed the attack to happen at Pearl Harbor are really sorry that the United States and its allies kicked Hitler's ass along with his buddy Hirohito.
#24 | Posted by danni

GoodLittleNazi's comments on the Holocaust can be interpreted as reflective of such a view.

Great. Another John Bitch society poster.

-I encourage all to read the recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill. Pearl Harbor was:

1.) Known of in advance
2.) Wanted - as a pretext to entering the war
3.) A direct cause of US economic actions against Japan

When you imply that FDR and Winnie knew in advance and wanted Pearl Harbor, you need to be able to put forth specific evidence from the mails, which you have not, and apparently cannot do, other than to quote some vague conspiracy theories on the subject.

Let's see the mails, proving your statement as you claim.

Or not.

Is this that same lame holocaust denier that Rogers booted before?

Figures.

GoodLittleNazi's comments on the Holocaust...

...could be anticipated from that idiot's name.

Here's part of what Good Little Nazi came up with to support his contention that that "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor:

Let's see the mails, proving your statement as you claim.

Or not.

Here is the book - read it you dumb shit. Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor. 1999.

I know why you find it hard to believe, in your little warped world, all Democrats are good while all Republicans are bad - must be nice to rely on idiot's bliss your whole life.

Here is the book - read it you dumb shit. Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor. 1999.
#34 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

Oh, riiiight, the book that relies heavily on the McCollum Memo, written more than a year before the Pearl Harbor attack, in which Pearl Harbor isn't mentioned. Not even once.

And, still, you can't come up with the goods: the "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor.

You're pathetic.

Are you stoned? Re-read the Zimmermann Telegram and tell me it had nothing to do with unrestricted submarine warfare. That's precisely what the Germans thought would could war with the US. It's right there in the text of the telegram, you dolt.

This post alone should make me put you on ignore. Clearly, you are purposefully obtuse or incapable of rational though. A.) The Germans told the US openly that it was going back to a policy of unrestricted submarine warfare. There is nothing secret about this and thus that part of the Zimmerman telegraph is meaningless. B.) The telegraph offered Mexico pieces of the US after the war if they were to declare war against the US should the US declare war against Germany. This is the inflamatory bit of the telegraph - nothing to do with unrestrictred warfare WHICH WAS OPENLY COMMUNICATED TO THE US. Now, will you admit that you are a retard and wrong, or will you continue to dance around the issue?

"The only reason why the Lusitania even garnered attention was the fact that it sunk so quickly - "

Riiiight, the 1500 civilian deaths (1 in 10 Americans) didn't raise an eyebrow. LOL.

Once again, this is not even a debate on the facts, it is your lack of commonsense that is under debate. 1500 people died BECAUSE THE SHIP SANK SO QUICKLY. Had the ship not broken in 2, the people would have manned life boats and the death count would have been zero or close to it - as was done in the HUNDREDS of ships sank earlier in the war. There was nothing unusual at all about this sinking other than the fact that the ship broke in 2 while sinking causing a high death count. Get it? It is not that difficult to understand.

Oh, riiiight, the book that relies heavily on the McCollum Memo, written more than a year before the Pearl Harbor attack, in which Pearl Harbor isn't mentioned. Not even once.

You're pathetic.

Know what I find pathetic? The fact that you post the above point while acting like you actually read the book. So, let's have it - did you actually read the book? If not, I will give you a few weeks to educate yourself about ALL OF THE INFORMATION included in the book and then we can continue the debate. Until then, you have nothing but an empty head and a big mouth. So let's have it - did you read the book?

On an unrelated note:

Nazi angel of death Josef Mengele 'created twin town in Brazil' One in five pregnancies in the small Brazilian town have resulted in twins - most of them blond haired and blue eyed):

Stinnett revives another old argument: that Roosevelt knew about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and let it happen. (Even Buchanan did not stoop to this old saw.)

A persistent digger, Stinnett has uncovered some nuggets of new evidence, but his most sensational items are premised on the false belief that American intelligence had broken the Japanese naval code before the attack. In fact, it was not decrypted until after Pearl Harbor.

Aside from questioning the competence and honesty of two officers in U.S. naval intelligence (in a case concerning the Japanese fleet's radio silence and U.S. radio direction-finding), the book offers little new. Stinnett never fashions his nuggets of research into a coherent argument, much less a convincing portrait.

It is odd that an otherwise respectable publisher did not insist on such coherence before peddling this book with its sensational press release. If Roosevelt was indeed maneuvering to have a war forced on the United States, his maneuvers were aimed at Germany rather than Japan, which he and Churchill simply hoped to deter. Pearl Harbor demonstrated their misjudgments, not their shrewdness.

Pearl Harbor attack footage:

"Know what I find pathetic?"

No, Nutzi, and I'm not particularly interested until you move beyond the contentions made in your book of choice and produce the "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" that shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor.

See if you can access JSTOR through your library so you can check out the reviews by professional historians of Stinnett's book, which make it clear why his lack of training in historical methodology is so manifest in the book you evidently hold dear. Whatever his merits as a naval and sports photograher might've been, they didn't stand him in good stead when he entered and got smacked down in the historical arena.

In the meantime, Nutzi, the proof. Let's have the correspondence that clinches your argument.

You and I both know that "proof" you've blathering about doesn't exist.

No, Nutzi, and I'm not particularly interested until you move beyond the contentions made in your book of choice and produce the "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" that shows they knew in advance the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor.

Okay - so you have not read the book. Thank you for admitting that you are not equipped to debate it. Please go fill your empty head with knowledge and then we can continue this debate. The book is available for free online - I know how you lefties have problems finding 2 nickels to rub together.

The Nutzi's contention: "[R]ecently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" shows they knew in advance about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

Proof offered: Zilch.

Nutzi's credibiilty: Zero

Gee golly whiz, if this highly debunked book is available online, it's strange that Nazi Boy can't copy and paste a quote from the mails proving his "point", eh?

#42 | Posted by goodlittlenazi at 2009-12-07 01:29 PM | Reply | Flag: I've got nothing.

I have suspicions and theories, but no proof. I love a good conspiracy theory also.

Gee golly whiz, if this highly debunked book is available online, it's strange that Nazi Boy can't copy and paste a quote from the mails proving his "point", eh?

Why don't you go and actually read the book rather than acting like an ass? You have no knowledge on the subject and your unwillingness to educate yourself when given the opportunity really speaks volumes about you.

Sorry, I'm too busy reading experts that have already debunked this piece of fiction....

Roosevelt did not know the attack was coming. Best book on Pearl Harbor is "At Dawn We Slept".

Resolved QuestionShow me another
Did FDR know about Pearl Harbor in advance?

Best Answer -
There is no credible, 100% bullet proof evidence that he did. It was found after the fact that the U.S. military had intercepted and decoded several transmissions that talked about the attack, but the info was so sparse and disconnected that there was no way at the time that any of it could be taken into consideration as a credible threat.

1. The Nutzi claims: "[R]ecently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" shows they knew in advance about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. 2. In support of that contention the Nutzi cites a book that he says is available online, though he can't point to any portion of that book which supports his contention.
3. And then the Nutzi attacks posters, presumably for not taking him at his word.

ROTFLMAO!

Best Answer -
There is no credible, 100% bullet proof evidence that he did. It was found after the fact that the U.S. military had intercepted and decoded several transmissions that talked about the attack, but the info was so sparse and disconnected that there was no way at the time that any of it could be taken into consideration as a credible threat.

Well, if answers.yahoo.com says that it the case, then I guess the argument is over....

In additional to all the declassified material which paints a pretty clear picture that the US knew the attack was coming (only question was whether it would be Philippines or Hawaii) - but even that really isn't debateable once all the correspondence is read. What is more amazing is that there are still 19 of the 20 intercepted messages between the the Japanese fleet and government which the US refuses to declassify...I wonder why?

2. In support of that contention the Nutzi cites a book that he says is available online, though he can't point to any portion of that book which supports his contention.
3. And then the Nutzi attacks posters, presumably for not taking him at his word.

I posted the name of the book - it is free online to read. You were the one that pretended to have read the book when, if fact, you hadn't. I called you on it and now you are all huffy about it. Simple solution here - go read the book.

GLN,
In spite of your name, I tend to actually agree with your theory, but unlike you, I acknowledge it as theory and not fact. The Yahoo answer is not the only answer, but simply the most popular.

It was found after the fact that the U.S. military had intercepted and decoded several transmissions that talked about the attack, but the info was so sparse and disconnected that there was no way at the time that any of it could be taken into consideration as a credible threat.

This is fact and, if you honestly have read books on the subject, would know that to be true.

My grandfather fought in the Pacific. He died almost 40 years after the war (relatively young) and still very much carried a grudge against the Japanese until he died. Years after his death, when my grandmother was in Pearl Harbor, she says there were many Japanese tourists there taking pictures and she gave them dirty looks.

Now we lock our own soldiers up over fat lips and have 10% of the country claiming people who attacked us half a dozen times don't even exist.

You also forget to mention that, urban legend states that Roosevelt took the entire Fleet from Atlantic duty (where we knew the Nazis were a threat) and for some unknown reason moved them to Pearl Harbor shortly before the attack. Looks bad, but proves nothing and is Urban Legend.

I posted the name of the book - it is free online to read.
#53 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

Then I suggest you read it -- my guess is that you probably haven't -- because so far you've failed to produce the "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" that proves they knew in advance about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

If you're going to cite a (widely and expertly discredited) book, you really ought to have read it.

I posted the name of the book - it is free online to read.
#53 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

Really? At the same time publisher Simon & Schuster wants $17 for it? Where?

The current conservative position that it is OK for us to do a preemptive strike on a country we deem as a threat to us, nullifies the outrage Americans should feel towards the Japanese for doing the same thing.

The current conservative position that it is OK for us to do a preemptive strike on a country we deem as a threat to us, nullifies the outrage Americans should feel towards the Japanese for doing the same thing.

Psst...that's Obama's position too.

In my opinion, The USS Arizona Memorial is a must see for anyone who finds themself in Honolulu.

Psst...that's Obama's position too.

#60 | Posted by IraqiBukkake at 2009-12-07 04:09 PM | Reply

Oh yeah dummy? If they weren't smokestacks then what were they, super genius!

The current conservative position that it is OK for us to do a preemptive strike on a country we deem as a threat to us, nullifies the outrage Americans should feel towards the Japanese for doing the same thing.

#59 | POSTED BY BUFFALO_BOB AT 2009-12-07 04:00 PM | REPLY | FLAG

We're the good guys though Boob. Remember, red, white & blue and all that jazz. Get with the program.

Somoco-
I understand. The premise is that we are the good guys, even if we do what the bad guys were bad guys for. We are always the good guys. 'nuff said.

"Read a couple of the books..."

To evaluate whether an attack on Pearl was expected? Been there, done that.

The fact is that everyone and their dog knew the Japanese were almost certain to attack. The problem boiled down to this:

Though the US had an intellectual recognition the Japs might attack Pearl, and actually wargamed it, their psychological conviction they would do so trailed behind.

The Phillipines, yes. Dutch East Indies and Malaysia, hell yes. But Pearl?

An logical problem with Roosevelt setting the Pacific Fleet up for sneak attack is that he never needed to risk his battlewagons, ships which at the time were counted on to go on and win the war.

#65 | Posted by Zed

From my reading, you're dead on with that post.

Clearly, something was going to happen. And I've doubt whatsoever FDR wanted into the war, badly. But what target? Where? When? The US not only did not appreciate the Japanese capability, but we'd no idea where the ships in the strike fleet had gone.

When you look at the targets the Japanese did hit at that point, their audacity, skill, and capability were of the highest order.

You people don't see a pattern here?

#12 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

"Let me make the superstitions of nations & I care not who makes its laws of its songs either." Mark Twain

"Give me control over a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws." Baron MA Rothschild (1818 - 1874)

Abolish The Fed And Return Money Creation
Power To Congress

"Let me make the superstitions of nations & I care not who makes its laws or its songs either." Mark Twain

or not of:>)

You people don't see a pattern here?
#12 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

Yes, I see a pattern: Nutzi's inability to back up his statement, after volunteering the canard that there's proof FDR and Churchill knew of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor before it took place.

True historical revisionism -- like Nutzi's denial of the Holocaust -- reqires more than wishful thinking.

"Nutzi's denial of the Holocaust"

Which part? the reduction of Auschitz numbers from 4.5 million to 1.5 million in 1989 or some other lie?

"History is better than prophecy. In fact history is prophecy. And history says that whenever a weak & ignorant people possess a thing which a strong & enlightened people want, it must be yielded up peaceably." Mark Twain

"the reduction of Auschitz numbers from 4.5 million to 1.5 million"

Only a million and a half? Well...that makes it all okay, then....

Only a million and a half? Well...that makes it all okay, then....

#73 | Posted by Danforth

no it's not...but lying & inflating even those dubious hideous numbers served one new nation to be purposes & that is why it is called "history" in Mark Twain's finest sense of irony.

Later my loves. off to see a movie:>)

Denzel Washington
527,339 fans

When you look at the targets the Japanese did hit at that point, their audacity, skill, and capability were of the highest order.

#67 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-07 07:01 PM | Reply

Osama determined to strike...What target? Where? When?

"On the morning of December 7, 1941, a secret message from the Japanese government to the Japanese ambassador had been decoded in the War Department. However, the intelligence chief told Colonel Bratton that nothing could be done until Chief of Staff George Marshall arrived (only ten minutes drive away). Bratton tried reaching Marshall at home, yet was repeatedly told General Marshall was out horseback riding as was his practice on Sunday mornings. When Bratton did reach Marshall by phone, he told him of the emergency. Marshall then said he would come to the War Department, but he took 75 minutes to arrive, and didn't come to his office until 11:25am.

From August 6, 2001 PDB:

Although Bin Ladin has not succeeded, his attacks against the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks....

Al-Qa'ida members--including some who are US citizens--have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks....

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a Bin Ladin cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a [--] service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman and other US-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

From the 9/11 Commission Report:

We have found no indication of any further discussion before September 11 among the President and his top advisers of the possibility of a threat of an al Qaeda attack in the United States....

Most of the intelligence community recognized in the summer of 2001 that the number and severity of threat reports were unprecedented. Many officials told us that they knew something terrible was planned, and they were desperate to stop it. Despite their large number, the threats received contained few specifics regarding time, place, method, or target. Most suggested that attacks were planned against targets overseas; others indicated threats against unspecified "U.S. interests." We cannot say for certain whether these reports, as dramatic as they were, related to the 9/11 attacks.

Despite their large number, the threats received contained few specifics regarding time, place, method, or target. Most suggested that attacks were planned against targets overseas; others indicated threats against unspecified "U.S. interests." We cannot say for certain whether these reports, as dramatic as they were, related to the 9/11 attacks.

What target? Where? When?

The information in the PDB is years old by 2001.

I like this bit from the PDB:
The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full-field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group or bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.

So, where was the actionable intelligence? What explosives were used? What Federal Building in NY was targeted?

You cut and pastes only bolster #77, thanks.

Actually, what my cut-and-paste demonstrates is that while those in command on December 7, 1941 did respond to a threat -- although they did not know the target or targets (which, as it turned out, included not only Pearl Harbor but British Malaya, Thailand, Guam, Wake Island, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore, and the Philippines) or the means of delivery -- those in command in August 2001 did not, until attacks prompted them to do so more than a month later. In 1941 attempts ere made on the basis of very sketchy intel to take precautions against a nebulious threat; there is no evidence of any precautions being taken in the 2001 case.

Actually, what my cut-and-paste demonstrates is that while those in command on December 7, 1941 did respond to a threat...

#81 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-08 10:44 AM | Reply

Really? What cut and paste did that? Seeing as though #79 is about the 911 attacks, and #78 is about 12/7/41, I have to ask what in the fuck you're talking about.

"Bin Laden determined to attack"...yet all of the info comes from 1998 or prior. The info that doesn't states explosive attacks over-seas.
There's nothing in that PDB that is the least bit damning. Why do people reference it as if it's some type of smoking gun?

Anyway, what part of your cut and paste demonstrates what you claim?

When you hone your reading comprehension skills a bit more, read the posts and it should be clear. If that doesn't work, just move on because I really don't think anybody cares whether you grasp the points or not. I know I don't.

When you hone your reading comprehension skills a bit more, read the posts and it should be clear. If that doesn't work, just move on because I really don't think anybody cares whether you grasp the points or not. I know I don't.

#83 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-08 11:08 AM | Reply

Are you implying a phone call is considered "responding to attacks"? You're a fucking tool that got called out, and sooprise sooprise, lashed out as a result.

As was stated, and as is evident, your responses to #77 bolster the point.

Seriously, you can't possibly believe your responses did anything but make you look like an even bigger stooge.

"Bin laden determined to attack"...Hahahahaha! Dust yourself off, bitch.

Seriously, you'd do well to spend less time following the comings and goings of 10-watt celebrities, as evidenced by your intense interest in the likes of Adam Lambert, and more time following your own advice. So get yourself dusted off, waddle on over to the next sandbox, and see if you can acquit yourself as less of an uninformed, incurious, not terribly bright, and painfully defensive chump.

I love how the guy that got his face rubbed in it calls the guy that did it "not terribly bright".

Your cut and pastes did nothing but bolster my post you doddering old fool.

Furthermore, you think making a phone call is a "response" to a threat (an intercepted message). A phone call. Then they sat and waited, doing nothing. Are you really that fucking stupid? If I were you I'd run as fast as I can from that post.

Your thin skin has made you an incredibly easy target. It's translucent for fucks sake!

"On the morning of December 7, 1941, a secret message from the Japanese government to the Japanese ambassador had been decoded in the War Department.

.....

By the time the warning message was delivered in Hawaii however, the attack was already underway."

This is a great piece of whitewashing by a President and cabinet bent on war. What they fail to tell you is that the US intercepted around 80 transmissions from the Japanese fleet to the Japanese mainland. This is known now with the opening of the archives despite congressional testimony that the 'fleet sailed under radio silence' bs. What they fail to tell you is that the Americans knew exactly where the Japanese fleet was the entire time - as evidenced by the Hawaii commanders being forbidden from sending patrol boats into that area before that attack. With that said, the argument that 'we didn't know they would it hawaii' is just pure bullshit. If that is not enough, maybe the intercepted messages from the japanese consulate spy in hawaii with a coordinate chart of all the ships docked there is enough to convince even the dullest of knives (yep, that's you Doc). I know, I know, only Bush would lie us into a war....Dems would never do that!

It must be painful to be as defensive as you are, Chair. No wonder you behave like such a horse's ass.

.

www.foreignaffairs.com
-What they fail to tell you is that the US intercepted around 80 transmissions from the Japanese fleet to the Japanese mainland

"... his most sensational items are premised on the false belief that American intelligence had broken the Japanese naval code before the attack. In fact, it was not decrypted until after Pearl Harbor"

There's always a conspiracy theory for every hack like GLN out there.

#39 | Posted by Corky at 2009-12-07 01:20 PM | Reply

"... his most sensational items are premised on the false belief that American intelligence had broken the Japanese naval code before the attack. In fact, it was not decrypted until after Pearl Harbor"

First, this is an outright lie. Second, this 'opinion' is the official position of foreignaffairs.com - a publication of the Council on Foreign Relations - which should tip off any sentient being that you are not receiving the whole truth as that is the single most war mongering of all time. As a matter of fact, it was this exact organization that was trying to get FDR to antagonize the Japanese into attacking. As such, it should come as no surprise that they want the truth hidden as it would expose THEMSELVES as the group that made Pearl Harbor a tragedy.

According to Day Of Deceit, on November 25 Admiral Yamamoto sent a radio message to the Japanese fleet. Part of the message read: "The task force, keeping its movements strictly secret and maintaining close guard against submarines and aircraft, shall advance into Hawaiian waters, and upon the very opening of hostilities shall attack the main force of the United States fleet in Hawaii and deal it a mortal blow..." What's the proof that the record of that intercept exists? Did you see it yourself? Again, did Roosevelt know about it?

Stinnett: The English version of that message has been released by the United States, a government book. The Japanese versionthe raw messagehas not been released by the U.S. I have copies of the Station H radio logsa monitoring station in Hawaii. They prove that the Navy intercepted eight-three messages that Yamamoto sent between November seventeenth and twenty-fifth. I have those records, but not the raw intercepts, eighty-six percent of which have not been released by the government...As far as Roosevelt, early in November 1941 Roosevelt ordered that Japanese raw intercepts be delivered directly to him by his naval aide, Captain Beardall. Sometimes if McCollum felt a message was particularly hot he would deliver it himself to FDR.

So, FDR ordered the raw transcripts sent directly to himself but they were not able to read them....okay....that flies in someone's alternative reality I gues...

What they fail to tell you is that...
#86 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

...you still haven't produced the evidence: "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill" that shows they had advance knowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. You've said it's in a book that's online, but can't provide a link. You say the book is free, which it isn't. And you say the correspondence exists and proves what you say it proves but you just aren't able to provide a link to any credible source that supports your assertion.

Unimpressive.

About as unimpressive as Chair's idea that a "phone call" constitutes the entire US response to the threat; encrypted warnings went out as well, albeit too late (as is clearly stated in the passage he says he read but clearlyi didn't comprehend).

The difference between the Pearl Harbor disaster and 9/11, within the context of whatever conversation has gone on here, is that at least an attempt was made to do something. Too little? Yes. Too late? Yes. But according to the 9/11 Commission the Bush Administration didn't even manage to meet that low-lying bar of reactive behavior.

NaziBoy has rhetoric and conspiracy theories, Doc, not proof.

I've provided several different debunkings of his premise, based on expert opinion, not "sailor" opinion.... and there are many more available online to anyone interested in seeing this pathetic old saw about "FDR knew!" debunked time after time.

you still haven't produced the evidence: "recently declassified correspondence between Roosevelt and Churchill"

It is in the book Day of Deceit, with full citations to the government log books. For all of the information, you need to get the 2001 updated version which includes responses to critism of the first book (which were lies throw out by the Council on Foreign Relations). You can get about 80% of the book for free via preview on Google Books. You can buy it from Amazon for $16 shipped (paperback edition).

that shows they had advance knowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. You've said it's in a book that's online, but can't provide a link. You say the book is free, which it isn't. And you say the correspondence exists and proves what you say it proves but you just aren't able to provide a link to any credible source that supports your assertion.

It is in the book Day of Deceit, with full citations to the government log books. For all of the information, you need to get the 2001 updated version which includes responses to critism of the first book (which were lies throw out by the Council on Foreign Relations). You can get about 80% of the book for free via preview on Google Books. You can buy it from Amazon for $16 shipped (paperback edition).

Frankly, you are the prototypical lazy liberal. You refuse to work and require someone to give you something for which you are not willing to commit any energy whatsoever. I have given you the information you need to educate yourself - I have led the horse to water (or horse's ass in this case) but I can't make you drink. You are so firmly brainwashed into the 'Dems are great' mantra that I really don't think anything will shake you from your stupor and truly, my posts really aren't even for you. They are for the casual lurkers on this board that do have open minds, commonsense, and the ability to reason critically. Someone will be awakened by the information that I provided - that person just isn't you.

"You refuse to work...."

I've done the work on Pearl. You're full of it, not for the first, and I'm sure not for the last time.

You seem to place your faith in one book. I'm afraid if yu want the truth it is you that must stop being lazy. And the truth is, the story of Pearl Harbor is a lot more interesting than one silly conspiracy theory.

#92 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

And, yet again, no proof, no credible source.

Your thesis is destructable purely on logical grounds. If some high American official wanted an attack on Pearl to succeed, rather than having the Combined Fleet intercepted 200 miles out to sea, why set up a radar station capable of detecting it's aircraft, or why even allow that radar set to be turned on at all?

And here's the kicker---Obliging the US Pacific Fleet to intercept the Japs far out to sea before they struck Pearl would have done just as well as a causus bellum as allowing five battleships to be sunk.

You make me tired.

And here's yet another thing, Sherlock---The Japs attacked the Phillipines within one day of Pearl. There was never any need to risk the Pacific Fleet at Pearl, given the existence of any exotic conspiracy, because the Phillipines was enough for a war in and of itself.

Let me guess: Roosevelt and Churchill knew about Pearl but nothing else? Loser.

A Deceitful Book: Robert B. Stinnett's book "Day of Deceit"

By Rear Admiral Richard E. Young, USN (Ret)

Frankly, you are the prototypical lazy liberal. You refuse to work and require someone to give you something for which you are not willing to commit any energy whatsoever.
#92 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

Why would I commit any energy whatsoever in uncovering a meaningless pile of crap in the woods?

Sorry for the cut and paste, but it does a better job that my summary would. It proves that the Japanese code was broken (from NSA and statements by US Naval personnel). From Corky's link:

"... his most sensational items are premised on the false belief that American intelligence had broken the Japanese naval code before the attack. In fact, it was not decrypted until after Pearl Harbor"

As I said, this is an absolute lie (see following). Not too surprising given the source for this lie is the Council on Foreign Relations.

JN-25 - The Japanese Fleet's Cryptographic System, a.k.a. 5 number code (Sample). JN stands for Japanese Navy, introduced 1 June 1939. This was a very simple old-type code book system used by the American Army and Navy in 1898 and abandoned in 1917 because it was insecure. Version A has a dictionary of 5,600 numbers, words and phrases, each given as a five figure number. These were super-enciphered by addition to random numbers contained in a second code book. The dictionary was only changed once before PH on Dec 1, 1940, to a slightly larger version B but the random book was changed every 3 to 6 months- last on Aug 1. The Japanese blundered away the code when they introduced JN25-B by continuing to use, for 2 months, random books that had been previously solved by the Allies. That was the equivalent of handing over the JN-25B codebook. It was child's play for the Navy group OP-20-G (738 men whose primary responsibility was Japanese naval codes) to reconstruct the exposed dictionary. We recovered the whole thing immediately - in 1994 the NSA published that JN-255B was completely cracked in December 1940. In January 1941 the US gave Britain two JN-25B code books with keys and techniques for deciphering. The entire Pearl Harbor scheme was laid out in this code. The official US Navy statement on JN-25B is the NAVAL SECURITY GROUP HISTORY TO WORLD WAR II prepared by Captain J. Holtwick in June 1971 who quotes Captain Safford, the chief of OP-20-G, on page 398: "By 1 December 1941 we had the code solved to a readable extent." Churchill wrote "From the end of 1940 the Americans had pierced the vital Japanese ciphers, and were decoding large numbers of their military and diplomatic telegrams."(GRAND ALLIANCE p 598) Safford reported that during 1941 "The Navy COMINT team did a thorough job on the Japanese Navy with no help from the Army."(SRH-149) " ... many pattern messages could be read practically entire with as few as 1500 meanings." (NSA).

In 1979 the NSA released 2,413 JN-25 orders of the 26,581 intercepted by US between Sept 1 and Dec 4, 1941. The NSA says "We know now that they contained important details concerning the existence, organization, objective, and even the whereabouts of the Pearl Harbor Strike Force." (Parker p 21) Of the over thousand radio messages sent by Tokyo to the attack fleet, only 20 are in the National Archives. All messages to the attack fleet were sent several times, at least one message was sent every odd hour of the day and each had a special serial number. Starting in early November 1941 when the attack fleet assembled and started receiving radio messages, OP-20-G stayed open 24 hours a day and the "First Team" of codebreakers worked on JN-25. In November and early December 1941, OP-20-G spent 85 percent of its effort reading Japanese Navy traffic, 12 percent on Japanese diplomatic traffic and 3 percent on German naval codes. FDR was personally briefed twice a day on JN-25 traffic by his aide, Captain John Beardell, and demanded to see the original raw messages in English. The US Government refuses to identify or declassify any pre-Dec 7, 1941 decrypts of JN-25 on the basis of national security, a half-century after the war.

According to Macartney, AFIO WIN 47-99 (25 Nov. 1999), Stinnett supports "the old revisionist conspiracy theory that FDR 'encouraged' the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor because he needed to overcome isolationist pressure that was keeping the US from going to Britain's aid in the war against Hitler."

It must be painful to be as defensive as you are, Chair. No wonder you behave like such a horse's ass.

#87 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-08 12:35 PM | Reply

Oh, I see. You're attempting to take my posts directed at you about "lashing out like a wounded animal" and turn them around on me. Like a geriatric version of "I know I am but what are you"?

Look Starvis, it's apparent you lashed out because I pointed out your hypocrisy and the fact that your two cut and pastes failed. No further explanation needed.

"Of over a thousand radio messages sent by Tokyo to teh attack fleet....."

Nagumo maintained total radio silence and moved the Combined Fleet under the cover of a weather front. It was, uh, a sneak attack.

Loser.

'All messages to the attack fleet are sent several times...."

Because the Japanese thoughtfully wanted the Combined Fleet intercepted on the high seas.

Loser.

Stennitt even whined aout his book being reviewed with actual facts in mind.

David Kahn replies:

Mr. Stinnett states that "The summary [of November 25] supports the fact that the commanders of the three Japanese forces aimed at Hawaii broke radio silence and held extensive radio communications among themselves." It supports no such thing. My quotation of the originalas with much else that was condensed for the reviewomitted the last seven words of the first sentence of the Fourth Fleet section, which reads in full: "CinC, Fourth Fleet is still holding extensive communications with the Commander Submarine Fleet, the forces at Jaluit and Commander Carriers. His other communications are with the Third, Fourth and Fifth Base Forces." The force that attacked Hawaii was not that of the Commander Carriers but the First Air Fleet. US Navy codebreakers had discovered it on November 3, but they do not mention it in the November 25 or later summaries as either a sender or receiver of messages.

In his letter, Mr. Stinnett refers to the summary of December 6, but in his book he cites the summary of December 5, which, as I said in the review, mentions no messages to aircraft carriers. The summary of December 6 states, "The Commander in Chief Combined Fleet originated several messages to the Carriers, Fourth Fleet and the Major Commanders." This likewise does not refer to the First Air Fleet.

John Lietwiler's letter of November 16, 1941, to a naval cryptanalyst in Washington expresses discontent with what appears to be a mechanical aid, called the Jeep IV, for stripping the superencipherment from a code, which is not specified. It further states, "We are reading enough current traffic to keep two translators very busy, with their code recovery efforts, etc. included. In this connection, I certainly wish you could see your way clear to drop the ancient history of this cipher and work with us on each current system as it comes up." Whatever Lietwiler is discussing, it is clearly not the Imperial Japanese Navy's main, currently used naval cryptosystem, JN 25 B, and the letter in no place and in no way refers to or suggests a reference to either the First Air Fleet or Pearl Harbor.

And here's yet another thing, Sherlock---The Japs attacked the Phillipines within one day of Pearl. There was never any need to risk the Pacific Fleet at Pearl, given the existence of any exotic conspiracy, because the Phillipines was enough for a war in and of itself.

No - this is where your lack of commonsense comes into play. There is no way any American (80-90% opposed to war at the time) would have changed their opinion had the Japs attacked the Philippines. What the US needed was an attack that killed thousands of Americans on what we considered to be our home territory. Second, what the US needed was to get Germany to declare war on the US. FDR/Churchill knew that Hitler would not declare war without thinking that the American Navy had been devastated. If it were only a few ships sunk, Germany would not have declared war. After all, going to war against Germany was the goal - not Japan, which is why we immediately sent troops to fight the Nazis rather than beating the Japanese and then turning our attention to Germany.

And here's the kicker---Obliging the US Pacific Fleet to intercept the Japs far out to sea before they struck Pearl would have done just as well as a causus bellum as allowing five battleships to be sunk.

You make me tired.

#96 | Posted by Zed at 2009-12-08 01:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Then we would have been the ones starting the war. Pearl Harbor had to be attacked in order for America to enter the war. The United States had a spy network and war planners that had to know an attack was coming. Roosevelt knew that the US had to enter the war, or else the Japanese would conquer all of Asia and Australia---then consolidate their territory and control for 10-15 years and then attack the American mainland. The Roosevelt knew of the attack and welcomed it is not surprising. Had the Japanese not attacked, Roosevelt would probably have provoked an attack just like Johnson at the Gulf of Tonkin, or allowed the attack like Bush at the WTC.

The problem with goodlittlenazi is that he thinks that allowing the attack was a bad thing. It was a necessary sacrifice. Had we attacked the Japanese fleet before they attacked Pearl, the Japanese would have claimed us as the aggressors, and had the political edge. Having them attack us first gave us the advantage. After Pearl Harbor, millions lined up to join the military---had we been the aggressors, the lines would have been much shorter.

The lashing out, Chair, came from your playpen. It's obvious you either didn't read what you said you read -- in which case you lied -- or you read what you said you read but didn't understand it -- in which case you're a dolt. Man up and stop whining about it.

What a bunch of crazies we attract here, eh?

This particular one is a holocaust denier and a FDR conspiracy buff.....

prolly Jesse Ventura's new BFF.

OK, so it's a competition between BBob and NaziBoy for the title of Jesse Ventura's new BFF.

"The we would have been the ones starting the war...?"

To have intercepted the Imperial Japanese Combined Fleet as it sudenly appeared 200 miles from US territory.

No. This falls under the old (not Bush's) doctrine of preemption. You don't actually have to wait to get hit, the other fellow taking a swing at you is enough for a fight.

"If it were only a few ships sunk, Germany would not have declared war."

How do you know that? (And, please, don't come back with your silly "commonsense" assertions.)

I'm still waiting for the proof about those "recently declassified" bits that'll prove FDR and Churchill knew about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance.

I mean, you'd think if they were so clear, so obvious, so, well, real, you'd be a lot quicker out of the box getting them up here. Wouldn't you?

"Pearl Hrabor had to be attacked in order for the US to enter the war...."

Is just silly enough to be irrational. An attack on any American possession would have fitted the bill.

Yet Stinnett supplies little documentation about just how much of this key Japanese naval code -- the U.S. Navy's ability to read it was the key to the stunning American victory at Midway in June 1942 -- could be understood before Pearl Harbor; none of his sources demonstrates that more than a small fraction of the chief operational code of the Japanese fleet could be read until later. His habit of grouping facts under a blanket statement that doesn't cover all of them can't disguise that what he calls on page 73 "an example of Num-5 and SM [ship movement code] decryption" turns out to have been merely an example of SM code decryption.

Stinnett could have spared his readers a good deal of confusion and frustration by featuring more prominently a statement, buried at the bottom of a long footnote, that seems to be his clearest and most unambiguous statement on the matter:

___ "There is no reliable evidence, found by the author, that establishes how much of the 5-Num text could be deciphered, translated, and read by naval cryptographers in 1941." (p. 334, n. 18)

from the above link

About as unimpressive as Chair's idea that a "phone call" constitutes the entire US response to the threat; encrypted warnings went out as well, albeit too late (as is clearly stated in the passage he says he read but clearlyi didn't comprehend).

#90 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-08 01:07 PM | Reply

However, the intelligence chief told Colonel Bratton that nothing could be done until Chief of Staff George Marshall arrived (only ten minutes drive away). Bratton tried reaching Marshall at home, yet was repeatedly told General Marshall was out horseback riding as was his practice on Sunday mornings. When Bratton did reach Marshall by phone, he told him of the emergency. Marshall then said he would come to the War Department, but he took 75 minutes to arrive, and didn't come to his office until 11:25am.

'Every officer in Marshall's office agreed that these indicated an attack in the Pacific at about 1 p.m. EST. General Marshal concluded that Pacific Commands including Hawaii should be alerted, although the Philippines and Thailand were thought to be more likely targets. Col Bratton took Marshall's warning message, encoded it, and delivered it to the War Department Message Center, where it was sent as a telegram. By the time the warning message was delivered in Hawaii however, the attack was already underway."
en.wikipedia.org

#77 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-08 10:11 AM | Reply

It wasn't my "idea" dummy, it was in the link you provided. Or have you already forgotten, pops?
They couldn't reach him for hours, remember? Then when they did, he didn't report to the office until 75 minutes later. Encrypted warnings went out hours after the intial phone call was made. During that time they sat on their hands. Your link states as much, dummy.
Again, you have come up short.

Oh, and comparing the interception of that message to the Jap ambassador to the 8/6/2001 PDB is fucking hysterical, like you when confronted with your stupidity.

"You don't actually have to wait to get hit, the other fellow taking a swing at you is enough for a fight."

Coming up to World War I, Nicholas II's order for his forces to fully mobilize was seen by the Germans as more than enough reason to start firing.

Nagumo maintained total radio silence and moved the Combined Fleet under the cover of a weather front. It was, uh, a sneak attack.

You should really tell that to the national archives as they have published 20 messages that Nagumo sent under 'radio silence' - 20 out of 80+ that is. You really make me question your IQ when you post such obvious crap after insisting that you have 'looked' into it already.

Chair, go get a perm, paint your nails, screw your cat, take a dump in your bed, choke a rat, find a pledge you can haze. Your schtick, willful arrogance and general demeanor as a thicko are getting old.

___ "There is no reliable evidence, found by the author, that establishes how much of the 5-Num text could be deciphered, translated, and read by naval cryptographers in 1941." (p. 334, n. 18)

I see NaziBoy has no retort for Stennitt's own admission that he did not know how much of the code was broken in 1941.

"Which is why we immediately sent troops to fight the Nazis rather than the beating the Japanese...."

I regret I don't have the ability to mind-meld some useful knowledge concerning WWII into your fey brain.

You don't really want me to go into a blow-by-blow of how the debate between Japan-first versus Germany-first played out and why, do you?

"You should really tell that to teh national archives...."

You should really tell that to anyone of hundreds of serious historians who, I'm sure, never heard of the National Archives before you informed them of it.

Loser.

Your schtick, willful arrogance and general demeanor as a thicko are getting old.

#118 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-08 01:52 PM | Reply

Says the guy that didn't read and comprehend his own link.

He didn't even read the memo or give direction on what to do until he arrived at his office hours later.
A phone call was placed. They then waited hours to do anything about it. By then it was too late.

Seriously, how stupid are you?

1941
1. Brattan gets worked up about an inexact, ambiguous but ominous message.
2. Brattan's looking for Marshall.
3. Marshall eventually arrives.
4. Encrypted warning eventually goes out.

2001
1. August 6, Bush is presented with ambiguous but ominous informaton, including reference to airline hijacking.
2. Bush does absolutely nothing.
3. September 11, all hell breaks loose.

No, let's make that thousands of serious historians. I'll tell you what---If John Keegan states that Nagumo NEVER maintained radio silence on what had been planned for a year as a SURPRISE attack I might give you some credibility.

As of the moment, though, you are a loser.

"Seriously, how stupid are you?"

Definitely not as far down the blowhole as you, chump.

Chair, go get a perm, paint your nails, screw your cat, take a dump in your bed, choke a rat, find a pledge you can haze. Your schtick, willful arrogance and general demeanor as a thicko are getting old.

#118 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-08 01:52 PM | Reply | Flag: WHITE

1941
1. Intercepted minutes old message to Japanese ambassador

2006
1. Rehashed 3+ year old info about Obama wanting to attack the USA (or did you fail to read and comprehend that link as well?)

You're an idiot.

I see NaziBoy has no retort for Stennitt's own admission that he did not know how much of the code was broken in 1941.

How about you read the information that I actually posted you stupid shit?

We recovered the whole thing immediately - in 1994 the NSA published that JN-255B was completely cracked in December 1940. In January 1941 the US gave Britain two JN-25B code books with keys and techniques for deciphering. The entire Pearl Harbor scheme was laid out in this code. The official US Navy statement on JN-25B is the NAVAL SECURITY GROUP HISTORY TO WORLD WAR II prepared by Captain J. Holtwick in June 1971 who quotes Captain Safford, the chief of OP-20-G, on page 398: "By 1 December 1941 we had the code solved to a readable extent." Churchill wrote "From the end of 1940 the Americans had pierced the vital Japanese ciphers, and were decoding large numbers of their military and diplomatic telegrams."(GRAND ALLIANCE p 598) Safford reported that during 1941 "The Navy COMINT team did a thorough job on the Japanese Navy with no help from the Army."(SRH-149) " ... many pattern messages could be read practically entire with as few as 1500 meanings." (NSA).

So, we have Churchill himself, the NSA, and Captain Stafford (chief of the decipher team) all stating that the code was cracked in 1941 - even sending copies of 2 code books to the Brits. Have some common sense you stupid shit.

Definitely not as far down the blowhole as you, chump.

#125 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2009-12-08 01:57 PM |

Well that certainly explains how I'm twisting you in knots using the links you provided...

The best book I've read on Pearl Harbor is "At Dawn We Slept". It's abridged from many volumes the author, Gordon W Prange, compiled over several years based on extensive interviews with the key players on both sides (including Japanese general staff) as well as documentary evidence. It follows the chronology from planning to execution of the attack. Considered the gold standard.

"Have some common sense...."

If you had a brain you'd play with it. Why don't you apply some common sense? If you don't, I may punish you with the real significance of Japanese cryptography at the time you're fusing about.

___ "There is no reliable evidence, found by the author, that establishes how much of the 5-Num text could be deciphered, translated, and read by naval cryptographers in 1941." (p. 334, n. 18)

- Robt. Stennitt

Your reference, not mine..... stupid shit.

Thanks, CORKY. No you take a turn holding him down while I kick him.

"At Dawn We Slept".

Sorry, not rife with conspiracy theories and half-truths, so of no interest to simpleminded conspiracy hacks like NaziBoy.

"how I'm twisting you in knots"

LOL. But, y'know, pretzel boy, if it makes you feel better to tell yourself that just keep chanting your childish mantra.

"The best book I've read on Pearl Harbor is "At Dawn We Slept"."

Prange's is still the monumental work on the subject.

Frankly, I don't care which side is correct. I tend to believe the bulk of historians who say that we didn't know of any impending attack, but that is not the main issue. The bottom line is, both the Japanese and the Nazis needed to be stopped. U.S. direct involvement in the war was critical. Pearl Harbor achieved that goal. We went on to become the foremost superpower in the world. Case closed.

I don't have to tell myself. I'm telling you. You're too slow to figure it out on your own.

You were beaten with your own links. Ouch.

You should take that afghan off your lap and wrap it around your age spotted head. I think your brain is frozen.

"I don't have to tell myself."

Of course you do. We both know that.

"The best book I've read on Pearl Harbor is "At Dawn We Slept"."

Prange's is still the monumental work on the subject.

#135 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

The detail is stunning, the comprehensive interviews with everyone from Japanese general staff to General Greene, pilots and sailors - nearly everyone involved - were riveting. The way he concurrently laid out the chronology, sometimes minute by minute on both sides, made it an especially good read.

I can't recall exactly, but I believe the book was abridged from over a dozen volumes. As you say, a monumental work.

Now you're just rationalizing. It's all in print, Starvis.

Next time maybe you'll read your own links? Although even that wouldn't solve the oddity of you comparing a minutes old actionable message intercept with 3+ year old re-hashed vague intel. That kind of stupid just can not be fixed.

Seriously. They made a phone call and did nothing for hours, and you call that responding to a threat?

You're pretty thick.

#139 | Posted by Timex

Prange wrote about Pearl Harbor, Midway, lots of stuff. A real contributor to historical knowledge. How he got as much crammed into one career as he did I don't know. Although some of his work was completed by associates after he died. Not sure if "At Dawn We Slept" was one of those but it may well have been, since it was published a year after his death.

You're pretty thick.
#140 | Posted by 101Chairborne

So's the irony!

NBC Nightly News had a story last night about a 2 man Japanese mini sub they just found at the bottom of Pearl Harbor.

The single torpedo had been fired.

"NBC Nightly News had a story last night about a 2 man Japanese mini sub they just found at the bottom of Pearl Harbor."

#141 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

The multiple volumes he wrote about Pearl, etc. were, as you no doubt know, completed before his death. I'd have to find my copy to read how far along the abridged version of those ("At Dawn We Slept") was before he died. Even that was what, 500+ pages packed with detail?

Doc

Yes. There's video of it at the link I posted. NOVA is doing a special on it sometime soon.

Remember the parts in Prange's book where the sub nets at Pearl were discussed?

Is just silly enough to be irrational. An attack on any American possession would have fitted the bill.

#113 | Posted by Zed at 2009-12-08 01:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

What American possession did the japanese have the ability to attack other than the Aleutian Islands and Pearl Harbor? Pearl Harbor was the ONLY thing the Japanese could attack that would have a chance of damaging our wartime capabilities. Too bad you weren't running the Japanese military---you would have had them attacking a Yacht in San Francisco Bay.

you would have had them attacking a Yacht in San Francisco Bay - Don't bother with common sense with this lot. They have been spoonfed a history that they think is the infallible word of God.

I think Orwell sums up this situation best:

"He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future."

Ties in nicely with Churchill:
"History will be kind to me for I intend to write it."

Enjoy your history - there is a reason why it is completely illogical and can not stand up to scrutiny. Rather than examine for the truth, the Council on Foreign Affairs finds it much easier to employ the useful idiot(s) - such as Corky, Doc, etc to defend a history that they don't even understand.

Enjoy your history - there is a reason why it is completely illogical and can not stand up to scrutiny. Rather than examine for the truth, the Council on Foreign Affairs finds it much easier to employ the useful idiot(s) - such as Corky, Doc, etc to defend a history that they don't even understand.
#148 | Posted by goodlittlenazi

Eureka, a transmission picked up from the parallel universe!

TIMEX -

You've read John Toland's "Infamy" book? I haven't looked at it ages, but it seemed like a good once-over account. But I'm with you on Prange. Such an incredible collection of material and his obvious mastery of it...amazing.

-defend a history that they don't even understand

He means one we haven't made up ourselves.

If Winnie and FDR ever really needed an excuse, the idea that it would be at the loss of the Pacific Fleet is about as absurd as denying the holocaust... oh, wait....

One interesting fact I recall from Prange's book was that one major contributing factor for the Japanese attack was over access to crude oil.

If Winnie and FDR ever really needed an excuse, the idea that it would be at the loss of the Pacific Fleet is about as absurd as denying the holocaust... oh, wait....

#151 | Posted by Corky at 2009-12-08 03:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

FDR did need an excuse---the British had been fighting the Germans for almost 3 years alone. We didn't lose the Pacific Fleet. I guess you think it was just LUCK that none of our aircraft carriers were in port.

There were many at home who were against going to war against the Germans--Prescott Bush and Henry Ford were big Hitler supporters, as was Charles Lindbergh. Most of the public didn't want to go to war--they figured it was a Eurpean problem and America should stay out of the conflict. Only smething like Pearl Harbor could change that opinion. Just like the Gulf of Tonkin incident--a lie by LBJ. Just like the WTC attack allowed by Bush. The public needs something dramatic to support military action. There was no public outcry or support for any war after the attacks under Clinton---they weren't dramatic enough, and not focused on day after day by the conservative media. The Gulf of Tonkin lie was necessary for the build up in Viet Nam. The allowed attack on the WTC was necessary for the wars we are engaged in now.

Bob..... conspiracy theorists are a dime a dozen, and in your case overpriced at that.

"At Dawn We Slept" is a good read as mentioned above.

Also, NaziBoys revisionist old saw about "FDR knew!" is debunked by the facts in links above.

But hey, I get it. You've never met a conspiracy theory you didn't like, which is quite normal for delusional paranoiacs and I don't think it's anything for you to worry about.

quite normal for delusional paranoiacs

#154 | Posted by Corky at 2009-12-08 04:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Says the guy who believes in Sky Fairies and thinks the Devil is out to get him. lol

Nothing was debunked. The facts I listed are history---the Pacific Fleet was not lost at Pearl Harbor---there were no Aircraft Carriers at Pearl Harbor---LBJ lied about the Gulf of Tonkin incident---Bush wanted no investigation into 911---Bush was warned about the attacks and allowed them to happen, taking absolutely no action to thwart any attacks after having been given numerous warnings from several different credible sources.

---Bush was warned about the attacks and allowed them to happen, taking absolutely no action to thwart any attacks after having been given numerous warnings from several different credible sources.

#155 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2009-12-08 04:48 PM | Reply

Read the PDB, stupid. Maybe you'll quit spewing such stupidity, but I doubt it.

#155 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2009-12-08 04:48 PM | Reply | Flag: Thinks Smoking Martian with car antenna out to get him

OK, Bob. NaziBoy failed to prove his ridiculous statement, so go ahead and prove your thesis that FDR was in on the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor..... you might try using a different debunked book than he did though.

Oh, what's that you say? You have no proof? Just another asinine opinion?

Got it.

so go ahead and prove your thesis that FDR was in on the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor..... you might try using a different debunked

#157 | Posted by Corky at 2009-12-08 05:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

I never said he was in on the attack at Pearl Harbor. I said he allowed it to happen.

America had broken the Japanese code in 1940 and must have known about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

"The Pacific Fleet was not lost at Pearl...."

Of course it was. America was placed on the stratgic defensive for at least six months. The Phillipines could not be relieved secondary to insufficient naval forces to do the job.

Prior to Pearl Harbor, almost everything about what a fleet aircraft carrier could do was unknown. The sole data point was Taranto, which teh Japanese studied assiduously.

Prior to Pearl, both the Japanese and the Americans thought battleships would be vital to any new war, hence their immense investments in this kind of ship.

FDR didn't "allow" Pearl to happen. You suffer from a history insufficiency. I only know one cure for that.

"I guess you think it was just LUCK none of our aircraft carriers were in port...?"

Yup.

Logic is sorely lacking here. If there were a conspiracy to allow an attack on Pearl Harbor, none of the battleships needed to be in port, either. The sinking of the target ship Vestal was more than enough for that.

"What American possession did the Japanese have the ability to attaqck other than the Aleutian Islands and Pearl Harbor....?"

Well, let's see---The Phillipines count? Samoa? Guam? Wake? All were in fact attacked and occupied.

BOB, you don't understand aircraft carriers. In 1941 people still had an excuse not to. I'm not sure what your explanation is.

Well, let's see---The Phillipines count? Samoa? Guam? Wake? All were in fact attacked and occupied.

No, they don't count. They would not have diminished our ability to counterstrike, which was essential to the Japanese plan. You simply didn't read the link. I understand---it was a whole page long.

#161 | Posted by Zed at 2009-12-08 08:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

"They would have not diminished our ability to counter-strike...."

Sigh. They would have caused a war just as readily as Pearl, BOB.

"You simply didn't read the link...."

You've taken one page from the encylcopedia and decided you can decode Western civilization. Your theory is worse than wrong, it's uninteresting.

Sigh. They would have caused a war just as readily as Pearl, BOB.

#163 | Posted by Zed at 2009-12-08 11:30 PM | Reply | Flag

Sigh--the Japanese wanted to win--if they were going to start a war with the US, knocking out counterstrike capability was crucial. This was explained in the link. Their hope was to knock out counterstike capablity. I can't help your lack of intelligence. Facts are facts--boring or not. You still didn't read the link.

It would be like starting a fight with someone much bigger than you---a fight you had to fight because they threatened your home and family. You could spit in their face and start the fight, or hit them in the throat--which tactic would you choose? Are you bright enough to choose correctly?

BOB---

We're not communicating. Of course the Japs wanted to win. And of course Yamamoto had the idea taking out the Pacific Fleet in one strike was the best way to do this.

You're actually taking up my argument. The stakes on the Jap side were so high they wouldn't risk them by gabbing on the radio to Tokyo for 3,000 miles, as stated by NAZIS.

This debate is about whether FDR would have to or want to sacrifice Pearl to get into a war. The answer is, and always has been, of course not.

ZED

You still didn't read the link, so you need to just STFU. You are a waste of time.

Says the guy that hasn't read the PDB that he talks about repeatedly.

Says the guy that hasn't read the PDB that he talks about repeatedly.

"You are a waste of time...."

I can suggest some reading for you. Unfortunately, it will require effort on your part.

OK, so it's a competition between BBob and NaziBoy for the title of Jesse Ventura's new BFF.

#110 | Posted by Corky

interesting stuff here...

haarp by Jesse

I can suggest some reading for you. Unfortunately, it will require effort on your part.

#169 | Posted by Zed

& thinking on yours?

"There were were many at home who were against going to war against the Germans--Prescott Bush and Henry Ford were big Hitler supporters, as was Charles Lindbergh."

but there is no proof of this!...lol