U. S. ‘EVER READY TO FIGHT AGAIN’ FOR DEMOCRACY, ROOSEVELT SAYS (5/5/41)

Microfilm-New York Times archives, Monterey Public Library | 5/5/41 | Frank L. Kluckhohn, David Anderson, Hanson W. Baldwin

[Homer_J_Simpson]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

[PzLdr]

Adolf wasn’t inspecting just U-boats.

[CougarGA7]

Here’s a couple other items for today:

The Brigg’s committee meet today to discuss the military applications of uranium with other interested parties. The progress of the American nuclear program is still being painfully slow.

Colonel Hans Krebs and Colonel Kinzel give some of the final intelligence reports on Russia prior to the invasion. In their report they estimate that the Soviets have grown to a peacetime size of 170 divisions, but many of these divisions are short of equipment, especially artillery.

[PAR35]

Plymouth - so ugly, they hide it in the ad. Compare the obscured image of the car with the Nash, Chevy, Pontiac, Lincoln, DeSoto ads. But the Chrysler one does the same thing - hide the car.

[BroJoeK]

iowamark: "Do you actually believe that the Japanese strike force headed for Pearl Harbor was foolish enough to broadcast constantly on their journey?"

Here's a small piece of what Stinnett says about it on page 208:

"So began the myth of the radio silence of the Japanese carrier force.
It is a myth that has endured for over fifty years and that continues to baffle historians...

[Kimmel's Intelligence chief, Commander Edwin] Layton's claim about the carrier command's radio silence does not hold up to scrutiny.
There were 129 Japanese naval intercepts obtained by US naval monitor stations between November 15 and December 6 that directly contradict Layton's figures.
The intercept rate can be documented from the records of Stations CAST [Philippines] and H [Hawaii].
For the 21-day period, it averaged 6.3 intercepts per day.

"All categories of Japanese carriers and carrier commands cited by Layton as on radio silence either originated radio broadcasts or received messages during the three week period, according to an analysis of the intercepts conducted by the Navy's 1941 radio traffic experts, Captain Duane Whitlock of Station CAST and Homer Kisner of Station H."

Stinnett says much more, covering many issues and claims, including the question of whether Admiral Osami Nagano's December 4 broadcast to Taiwan, naming Hawaii as the attack's target, was intercepted and decoded by US or allied intelligence.

A key point to remember is that there were many ships and transmissions involved, and not all were aircraft carriers.
We're talking about submarines, supply ships and oilers with very short-range transmitters, as well as clues from major land-based transmitters, for example, when shifting from shorter to longer-range frequencies.

[BroJoeK]

CougarGa7: " If this was presented as an academic thesis, it would be thrown back to him with instructions to correct his citation."

I take your point.
But in Stinnett's defense, let me suggest that no serious scholar, none, will ever be deterred by such problems -- slowed down a bit maybe, but certainly not stopped.
The only thing these problems you mentioned do is force a serious scholar to do what he or she should have been more than eager to do anyway: get into those files, just as Stinnett did, and read and read and read, and learn just what it was those people were saying and doing.

Anything less is not real scholarship, it's just hatchet-work.
So all Stinnett has really done here is put a few speed bumps in the paths of serious scholars, telling you, in effect, to slow-the-f**k-down and do your homework -- really do it -- before you start shooting your mouths off.

;-)

[CougarGA7]

What it tells me is that Stinnett doesn’t take his work seriously enough to do a good job. As a result I don’t take his work very seriously either.

If his intention was for this to be a serious academic work then it should be cited properly. If his intention was to just make a book for entertainment value, then that’s fine too, but then I wouldn’t expect it to be taken as a source on the subject then.

You will see an example of this in a review I am currently writing on a different book. It’s a great book. I really enjoyed reading it and I believe this guy really worked hard on his sourcing. But he decided to do an abbreviated citation. For this reason the book lost all of its academic value.

[CougarGA7]

I hadn’t really paid any attention to that until you mentioned it. You’re right. I wouldn’t know where to look, but I wonder how these different models sold this year.

[PAR35]

Production Figures for 1939			Production Figures for 1940			Production Figures for 1941
Chevrolet	577,278		Chevrolet	764,616		Chevrolet	1,008,976
Ford	487,031		Ford	541,896		Ford	691,455
Plymouth	423,850		Plymouth	430,208		Plymouth	522,080
Buick	208,259		Buick	278,784		Buick	374,196
Dodge	186,474		Dodge	225,595		Pontiac	330,061
Pontiac	144,340		Pontiac	217,001		Oldsmobile	270,040
Oldsmobile	137,249		Oldsmobile	192,692		Dodge	215,575
Studebaker	85,834		Studebaker	107,185		Chrysler	161,704

From Wikipedia. Keeping the formatting was the hard part.

Compare the increases shown by the Ford and GM products compared to the flatter growth for the Chrysler Corp products.

[iowamark]

So, apparently your answer is yes, you do believe that “the Japanese strike force headed for Pearl Harbor was foolish enough to broadcast constantly on their journey?”

Sorry, I don’t believe it. Besides the obvious implausibility, the idea that such a mass treason conspiracy could have been kept secret is unbelievable.

[BooBoo1000]

You didn't see Roosevelt, the old Fart, picking up a rifle and heading for the front..Most of his action was with his hooker friend down in the Green Brier. I guess there are worse ways to go than banging some old broad.

[BroJoeK]

iowamark: "So, apparently your answer is yes, you do believe that “the Japanese strike force headed for Pearl Harbor was foolish enough to broadcast constantly on their journey?” "

I'll quote from chapter 13's note 20 on page 374 & 375:

"For the documentation of the 129 Japanese naval intercepts involving the carriers and warships of the First Air Fleet between November 15 and December 6, 1941, see the author's compilation based on intercepts found in RG 457 in the SRN intercept series: the TESTM reports [TESTM was a secure Navy radio code] of Station CAST [Philippines]; and Station H [Hawaii] code movement reports in RG 38, MMRB, Archives H, compilation in author's file.

"The Station CAST TESTM radio direction finder reports involving the carriers were discussed with Captain Duane Whitlock, at Danville, California, in September 1993; notes, transcript, photographs, audiotape interview in author's file.

"Intercepts, code movement reports were discussed with Captain Homer Kisner, at Carlsbad, California, in April 1988 (notes, taped audio interview, transcript, and photographs in author's file), and at Sacramento in April 1998; notes, video tape, transcript and photographs in author's file).

"The author arranged the 129 intercepts into seven categories and labeled them from A to G for the purpose of analyzing them for this book:

1. Vice Admiral Chuichi Nagumo, commander-in-chief of the First Air Fleet, originated 60 transmissions in his Secret Message Series (SMS) between November 15 and December 7, 1941 (Hawaii Time): see special booklet prepared by the author and labeled "SMS series, Vol 1," in author's file.
   It is a compilation of Nagumo's SMS messages based on the SRN series in RG 38 and 457, Archives II, also in author's file;

2. for the 24 messages dispatched to various First Air Fleet vessels, see RG 38 and 457, loc. cit.;

3. for the 20 transmissions originated by six carriers, see RG 35 and 457, loc. cit.;

4. for the 12 messages originated by the Carrier Division Commanders, see RG 38 and 457, loc cit.;

5. eight warships attached to the First Air Fleet (not carriers) originated 12 messages, see RG 38 and 457, loc. cit;

6. the Midway Neutralization Unit (HIJMS Shiriya and two destroyers) originated four messages, RG 38 and 457, loc. cit.; and finally

7. there was one message addressed to Carrier Division Four.

Entire compilation based on Station US [Wash, DC] papers, RG 38, 457, Station H code movement reports, Station CAST TESTM files, Archives II, copies in author's file.;"

Seems to me that this data is critical to the entire debate.
If it is as Stinnett claims, then I don't see how anyone can reasonably argue that "FDR didn't know."

But if Stinnett has materially misrepresented this data, that would put him in the David-Irving class of historian-scoundrels who probably need to spend some serious jail time for the "crime" of being big-time jerks.

I don't think for a minute that Stinnett faked his argument.
It's too important...

[BroJoeK]

CougarGA7: "What it tells me is that Stinnett doesn’t take his work seriously enough to do a good job. As a result I don’t take his work very seriously either."

Or to put it another way: is Stinnett just another David Irving, writing whatever he thinks his audience wants to read, regardless of what serious research actually shows?

Of course I wouldn't rule out that possibility, but want to first see serious proof, if that's really what's going on here.

Nothing I've ever seen even approaches "serious proof" that Stinnett, Toland, Victor, et al are just scoundrels.

[BroJoeK]

BooBoo1000: "You didn't see Roosevelt, the old Fart, picking up a rifle and heading for the front..Most of his action was with his hooker friend down in the Green Brier. I guess there are worse ways to go than banging some old broad."

That "old broad" could be Crown Princess Martha of Norway (b1901, d1954).
During the war she was a close friend of Franklin & Elinor, whom the President sometimes spent, ah, quality time with, while Elinor was away.
But given FDR's physical, ahem, limitations, the word "banging" is probably not a correct word to describe any presidential exercises.

;-)

[RichInOC]

Save a horse, ride a Franklin?

[BroJoeK]

CougarGA7: "For this reason the book lost all of its academic value."

By the way, I want to apologize for using the expression "slow the "f**k" down".
That is a serious typing error which my internal "editor" should have caught and changed.
I suspect he must have taken the day off, or got otherwise distracted.

Anyway, the corrected expression should have been "slow the h**k down", with the two asterisks hiding an "ec".

LOL ;-)

[BroJoeK]

RichInOC: "Save a horse, ride a Franklin?"

A number of women have been mentioned as having some kind of relationship with FDR, though just how sexual any of these may have been, I doubt if anyone knows.

The Crown Princess, for example, was married, with three children, and Roosevelt's health was far from the best.
So it's easy for me to imagine that he may have simply enjoyed her company, when Eleanor was away. ;-)

And Eleanor herself had interests of her own, and especially in their later years, zero desire to care for Franklin.

[CougarGA7]

Or to put it another way: is Stinnett just another David Irving, writing whatever he thinks his audience wants to read, regardless of what serious research actually shows?

If you think so that's fine. I would think you wouldn't use him as a source though if you feel that way. Or are you trying to put words in my mouth again?

[CougarGA7]

How many of these 129 messages Stinnett claims to have did he go over in his book other than to just say they exist?

[BroJoeK]

CougarGA7: "Or are you trying to put words in my mouth again?"

Just trying to decrypt your coded language into plain ordinary english.
You could save me the trouble if you wrote that way in the first place.

;-)

[BroJoeK]

CougarGA7: "How many of these 129 messages Stinnett claims to have did he go over in his book other than to just say they exist?"

You know, I'm starting to think that the very nature of your complaints must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Stinnett is correct in his analysis.

The reason is obvious: anyone in the world can prove Stinnett wrong just by looking up those 129 messages and demonstrating how they don't say what he claimed.
And yet no one has done that, apparently.
Instead, all we see is endless carping about a lack of detail in Stinnett's book.

Stinnett tells us directly that you can save yourself tons of effort -- just contact him, and arrange to see his own files.

How hard could that be?

;-)