Posted on 12/07/2005 6:00:02 AM PST by Irontank
bump
Hmm....
On one hand we have actual documents, obtained via FOIA, that Roosevelt really WAS the scum we have suspected...
On the other, we have peyton randolph saying it's "DU Moonbat" stuff, with no refuting evidence, because there are VERY similar comparisons between what Roosevelt did, and what Klinton did with "Able Danger", and Bush abetted by continuing the coverup by squashing those revealing the program and it's data, and ordering any remaining copies of said info either hidden or destroyed. All verifiable from Col. Schaffer et al, and Congressman Curt Weldon's investigations!
Whom do YOU believe?
Methinks peyton's either a Bushbot, or is wearing Blinders!
In the Thirties, a Marine Corps Major wrote a book that accurately described to the day how the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor, including how many waves of aircraft, how many aircraft and the time of the attack on December 7, 1944.
All he got wrong was the year, and for the life of me I can't remember his name.
BTTT
I have a copy of McCollums letter from a FOI from one of my histroy professors.
Pearl Harbor was a total and complete f*ck*p from the White House through the Navy and War Departments down to Kimmel and Short. With all of the evidence that had been collected, the failure to connect the dots was inexcusable.
To claim that it was some kind of treasonous conspiracy, though, is just nonsense.
He was one of untold millions who drank the FDR Kool Aid and have blindly voted 'rat until the day they died.
Washington sent a "war warning" on November 27th; advising commanders of an imminent war with Japan. I guess DC should have just ordered Pearl to man some guns and put up a few fighters; their local commander seemed unable to do so.
Perhaps an unduly harsh assessment, FRiend. This was a close relative of mine and (unlike myself of course) he was no fool.
I would guess that FDR believed that, when 90% of the American public wanted to stay out of a war that he believed was a serious threat to American national security, only such an act of agression would galvanize the nation...the ends justify the means
What do you make of the dozens of intercepted messages from the Japanese in the weeks before December 7 that indicated they would attack Pearl Harbor? What do you make of Bill Donovan's statement that, when he met FDR on the night of the 7th...he seemed to welcome the attack
BTW...on a related subject...I will brand FDR a traitor...he took an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic...then he proceeded to enact the massive, unconstitutional, socialist welfare New Deal...what Judge Rogers-Brown of the DC Circuit has called "our own socialist revolution"
Sorry no offense meant. I had many relatives like that who would brook no criticism of Saint Franklin and the 'rat party until the party left them.
I noticed that there is no information on Stinnett at all. How do we know that he really has FOIA info? The left is becoming very adept at creating false information to push their agenda. Stinnett's subtle technique of saying he believes it was justified because FDR had no other choice is exactly what DUers are told to do to people at work and in their neighborhoods - lie about their true feelings and agree with Republicans and conservatives. Then, when you feel you have them fooled, start questioning what is going on and start spreading lies.
I'd like to see a full review of Stinnett's so called FOIA evidence and also a background on him and the people he claims back him up.
I can create my own highly readable book by stringing independent facts together with well designed lies. When there are big gaping holes in faulty reasoning, its easy to fabricate some documents and rewrite history to your own agenda.
The DNC is coming out of the woodwork with as many lies as they can spin and the MSM is tripping over themselves trying to keep up with the reporting. I file this book with the one released about Bill and Hillary - maybe some truth is in there but what's the real purpose?
We always thought so, if, for no other reason, Short and Kimmel were never court-martialed.
I didn't even think about that. The left will stop at nothing to smear conservatives and patriots. Dan Rather ring a bell?
Thank you for your reply to me. Food for thought.
A sneak attack would obviously be something that would rouse the American people, but the point is what is the reason for FDR to have wanted it to be so successful? Once we get attacked, I hardly think it matters whether the Japanese sink all our battleships or just one or two, or whether we shoot down 100 of their planes or only 2. An attack is an attack.
FDR would have been far better served politically if the Japanese attack hadn't been quite so successful. And there's certainly no reason he should have expected the confusion at the Hawaiian radar stations, etc.
The argument would be a whole lot better if FDR had done nothing. But sending out a war warning just 10 days before the attack is not nothing.
There is too much here both in the article and in the thread to address directly, but given my interest in the topic, I need to say a few things.
Those who buy in the "FDR knew about Pearl Harbor" theory tend to ignore the world situation in December of 1941.
The US was already preparing for a war that was coming. FDR and the US were engaged in a massive build up in the Phillipines. Relations with Germany were deteriorating fast, with the US engaged in an undeclared Quasi-War with the German Kreigsmarine's U-boat fleet.
In the Pacific, things were worse. Japan showed no signs of ending the war against China, and the US, strongly pushed by the "China Lobby" of missionaies and other Americans with ties to China, would not budge on the oil embargo of Japan.
By November of 1941 it was clear that war was coming to the Pacific. The only question was when and how. The "how" was getting pretty clear. Japanese forces had moved into French Indo-China to "help" Vichy keep the colony from falling into British or Free French hands. This gave Japan a base from which to strike either Malaya, the Dutch East Indies or the Phillipines.
Consequently, the US had moved to renforce all of it's outposts in the Pacific, The Phillipines, Wake, and Midway were all significantly strengthened. Also almost all US forces (The 4th Marine Regt., SubForce China and the Yangtze River Patrol) were removed from China and relocated in the Phillipines. The British, Australian and Dutch were also moving forces into the area to stop a potential Japanese attack. The senior US commanders, General Douglas MacArthur and Admiral Thomas Hart were in communication with their Dutch and Commonwealth counterparts. However, it was a race against time.
With this situation, a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was not needed. All it would take would be one bomb on any of our Pacific outposts and you would have war. And it was clear that the Japanese would not stop with one bomb.
The "When" only became clear with Pearl harbor and the landing of Japanese troops on a remote area of the Malay coast. The Japanese also struck Hong Kong, The Phillipines and the Dutch East Indies within hours of the attack in Hawaii.
The idea that a US President, knowing that war was coming fast, would sacrifice thousands of men, hundreds of desparately needed planes, and the core of the Pacific battlefleet to create an excuse for a war that was coming anyway, is beyond reason.
The only way FDR can be personally blamed for Pearl Harbor being caught with its pants down is if one also believes George W. Bush is responsible for the nonuse of the buses for evacuation of New Orleans because he didn't send a message to Nagin.
General Short had radar operating, but his command was such a disaster that there was no reaction to all of the blips on the scope. Admiral Kimmel had reports of midget submarines sunk off the Harbor -- but didn't even notify Short. Neither had any planes in the air -- not even reconnaisance.
Beating up FDR over wanting to take out Hitler and Tojo and Mussolini is stupid anyway. It's like beating up Bush for wanting to take out the Taliban and Saddam.
When the Army Pearl Harbor Board (APHB) finished its work, included in its TOP SECRET findings were:
“The War Department had the information. All they had to do was either to give it to Short or give him directions based upon it.
...
2. On November 26 there was received specific evidence of the Japanese' intentions to wage offensive war against Great Britain and the United States. (R. 87) War Department G-2 advised the Chief of Staff on November 26 that the Office of Naval Intelligence reported the [3] concentration of units of the Japanese fleet at an unknown port ready for offensive action.
3. On December 1 definite information came from three independent sources that Japan was going to attack Great Britain and the United States, but would maintain peace with Russia. (R. 87)”
Other "clues" came from the so-called Kita Messages, decoded and known in Washington in the early Fall of 1941 - Pearl Harbor broken up into grids, light signals, ..., etc.
No other US installation had this degree of survillance.
Pure hogwash. We are supposed to believe that the Navy intercepted these messages, that the Navy knew Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked, that the Navy passed all of this on to FDR but did NOT inform Admiral Kimmel in Hawaii???? That's preposterous.
Right........ he knew. Some things must be done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.