[okie01]

It is the nature of intelligence work that projections must be made on the basis of partial knowledge -- and that often of uncertain provenance.

Consequently, the product and resultant decisions are, by definition, less than perfect.

Hindsight, however, is not shackled by such inconvenient bindings. Its purveyors have the luxury of kibitzing history.

To my mind, the "FDR let Pearl Harbor happen" are akin to the "Truman knew he didn't need to drop the bomb" revisionists and are peddling a line of historical crap.

Executive decisions must be made in real-time with less than perfect knowledge, and always within the context of the existing situation.

By any reasonable measure, FDR did his job. Kimmel, et al, didn't.

[LS]

I agree. Moreover, I think the false claims of Japanese radio traffic are just that, false.

My point with Makasin is that HE THINKS the cryptographers colluded to conceal the "warnings" that they knew were there, and in so doing protected FDR.

I want HIM to say it, not refer to "Safford" or someone else---this is a typical media trick, ascribe to someone else what you really think.

Once he admits what he thinks, he must either conclude they are traitors or conclude that they were idiots and incompetents. There is no middle ground, given his perspective. Since I don't think they ever intercepted the stuff (which wasn't sent) in the first place, I have no problem seeing the cryptographers as honorable men who did their job to the best of their ability.