[Lancey Howard]

Wow. That is some great work right there on that post.
Fantastic.

It will be interesting to contrast the Pearl Harbor Commission with the 9/11 Commission of 60 years later.

It is this phase of the investigation that is important. Recrimination and the search for a “goat” should and will play no part in it. The first and primary job now is to repair the damages of the surprise attack; reinforce and strengthen our forces and pay back the score to the Japanese with interest.

The difference between America in 1941 and America in 2011 is stark. It doesn't appear that too many Americans or political leaders were apologizing to Japan in 1941, or claiming America secretly destroyed its own military base in Hawaii and then framed Japan.

I have little doubt that both the Pearl Harbor Commission and the 9/11 Commission were political ass-covering operations, but I also have little doubt that the Pearl Harbor Commission was more serious and independent. Remember what a disgraceful laughingstock the 9/11 Commission was? How the rats made sure to appoint operatives who could cover for the Clinton administration's criminal negligence? The rats actually had the nerve to appoint Jamie Gorelick, the archiect of the CIA/FBI "wall" memo, and the woman who most clearly had the blood of 3,000 American citizens on her hands!

It will be interesting to follow the progress of the Pearl Harbor Commission. I agree that Justice Owen J. Roberts looked like a good choice to lead that Commission.

As always, thanks for the pings. You are doing truly great work on this project.

FRegards,
LH

[BroJoeK]

Lancey Howard: "I have little doubt that both the Pearl Harbor Commission and the 9/11 Commission were political ass-covering operations, but I also have little doubt that the Pearl Harbor Commission was more serious and independent."

There were nine official Pearl Harbor Investigations during the 1940s, plus at least one more in the 1990s, iirc.
In addition, dozens of authors have done their own Pearl Harbor investigations, attempting to tease out of existing data support for their favorite theories.

1. The Knox Investigation Dec. 9-14, 1941.
2. The Roberts Commission Dec. 18-January-23, 1941
3. The Hart Investigation Feb. 12-June 15, 1944
4. The Army Pearl Harbor Board Jul. 20-Oct. 20, 1944
5. The Navy Court of Inquiry Jul. 24-Oct. 19, 1944.
6. The Clarke Investigation Aug. 4-Sep 20, 1944
7. The Clausen Investigation Jan. 24-Sep. 12, 1945
8. The Hewitt Inquiry May 14-July 11, 1945
9. The Joint Congressional Committee Nov. 15, 1945-May 23, 1946

The results of all these investigations have not been 100% satisfactory to anyone -- those looking for data to support their conspiracy theories find no "smoking guns", while those wishing to prove President Roosevelt's inner circle "innocent" of all conspiracy charges have plenty that can't be 100% dismissed.

The relevant question here is: why weren't Kimmel and Short better warned?