[Paul Ross]

Stinnet also makes clear, as you fail to appreciate, that he thinks FDR may have been RIGHT to let Pearl Harbor happen, and he really doesn't say that the attack could have been prevented, just the loss of life minimized, that nothing less would get us into the war in Europe, so overwhelming was the isolationist movement. And that was certainly true. As for your energetic, but misguided, attacks on the Stinnet thesis, and the supposed lack of evidence, I think you miss most of the actual efficacy of the FOIA documents that he has unearthed.

[LS]

Paul, get serious. I have been in contact with organizations of U.S. NAVY CRYPTOLOGISTS. You might try the official JOURNAL of U.S. Navy cryptologists, I think it is called, "Cryptologica." At any rate, there have been DEVASTATING reviews of Stinnett's book by people who actually DID the cryptology, including Commander Donaldson, not some half-baked radio assistant who decided to write a book after the fact. Of course, you will likely say that ALL these guys are involved in coverups too, and judging from the e-mails I get from Pearl Harbor Navy veterans, they would rip you apart if they ever heard you say that---even at 80 years old! :) In fact, there is a Pearl Harbor VETERANS' web ring dedicated to countering Stinnett's book---that is how outraged these CRYPTOLOGISTS are.

Let's see if you appreciate this, because you guys keep ducking this central fact about Stinnett's so called "evidence": There are FIVE steps to moving a piece of intel from a foreign radio transmission to the White House---1) interception; 2) translation; 3) decryption; 4) analysis; and 5) forwarding get thist THROUGH CHANNELS. Now, Stinnett ducks and covers, but never once, ever, even proves that #1 happened. He cannot prove that #s2-4 happened, because they didn't. The U.S. cryptologists and analysts themselves have said repeatedly that they did not decipher, nor analyze pre-Dec. 7 messages until . . . now, please get this, 1945! So #5 could not have happened. Interestingly, one of the "gotcha" documents that Stinnett purports to show that "showed" we knew where the fleet was is totally fraudulent for several reasons. Follow along now:

The "HITTOKAPU BAY" message was sent---sent mind you according to Stinnett in ENGLISH!!!! Come on. A moron knows that Japanese don't send any messages to their own fleets in English, let alone the supposedly secret rendezvous point! Second, the "HITTOKAPU BAY" message is all encrypted and in Japanese EXCEPT for the words "HITTOKAPU BAY." Suspicious? Third, there are (and please get this point before you respond with your pre-packaged defense) apparently no standard Navy insider routing codes on this message indicating that even if the Japanese were so stupid as to send a message about the location of their fleet, and do so . . . IN ENGLISH . . . it was never officially intercepted or passed on.

Now even to the most tinfoil person, this HAS to strike you as an indication of Stinnett's fraud. Do some research. Don't just chant the mantra, "He had FOIA documents." If you like, I could send you my seven-page review of his book, which is detailed in its specifics (he has, for ex, at least 23 specific places in which when he supposedly has "evidence," he only offers phrases such as "must have known," "probably knew," or, in other words DOES NOT HAVE EVIDENCE). It's sad that he has fooled so many good people and impugned so many patriots.