Who started both World Wars?

Status
Not open for further replies.
This stuff by nature did not apply to the Phillipines:
and the degree to which the commanders of the United States forces in Hawaii were not alerted about the impending attack on Hawaii was directly attributable to the withholding of intelligence from Admiral Kimmel and Lieutenant General Short.

You have problems reading, don't you?
They did not know that Hawaii was the target.
They are talking, in that quote, about an impending attack that we now know was the attack on Hawaii.
They thought it was more likely the Phillipines...and the Phillipines didn't get that info either.

And, do you know when the Phillipines were attacked?
 
I take this as an admission that you lied. The Americans did not know about any plans to attack PH in January.

I think you like to call people liars for no reason at all. That's because you people like to smear. Sure sign of second hand character.

I got it from people more knowledgeble than you:

The centerpiece—the Pearl Harbor attack—was leaked to the U.S. in January 1941. During the next 11 months, the White House followed the Japanese war plans through the intercepted and decoded diplomatic and military communications intelligence.

Concerning your 'beliefs':

The Americans expected the Philippines to be attacked first. They thought the Japanese did not have the capability to attack multiple targets at the same time, and it's necessary to take the Philippines before moving on to their main target, the Dutch East Indies.

Any documented proof for that assertion?

Since Japan had invaded China and French Indochina, and even skirmished against the USSR before the oil embargo, it's pretty obvious that the Japanese wanted war. The Americans could either keep supplying all the oil they needed to continue their conquests and implicitly support the Japanese conquests, or cut off the oil supply and hope they would pull back. Yes, I'm sure Roosevelt knew this risked war, but objectively and morally it was the correct choice.

Interesting, it was the US which opened up isolationist Japan somewhere around 1853, I believe (Perry). Under the other Roosevelt Japan was even encouraged at some point to invade Manchuria. It is just like with Saddam, first he shakes hands with Rumsfeld, next they hang him. Sure, the rape of NanKing was a crime (30,000) but it dwarfs as to what the US did (on a pretext) in Iraq and Afghanistan (hundreds of thousand killed)

Now America has military bases in more than 100 countries (not for long btw) just like the soviets, now defunct. I think it is the morally correct thing to kick you out of these places? We will remember that.
 
Last edited:
You have problems reading, don't you?
They did not know that Hawaii was the target.
They are talking, in that quote, about an impending attack that we now know was the attack on Hawaii.
They thought it was more likely the Phillipines...and the Phillipines didn't get that info either.

And, do you know when the Phillipines were attacked?

Again I have to explain an Anglo his own language. Congress/2000 says:

and the degree to which the commanders of the United States forces in Hawaii were not alerted about the impending attack on Hawaii was directly attributable to the withholding of intelligence from Admiral Kimmel and Lieutenant General Short.

According to you the Americans had no clue about anything. Then explain to me: what intelligence was withheld from Kimmel?!

Answer: that the Japanese fleet was approaching.
 
It's all over the record. The record, you know, the information about the situation? You should read it.

When Stark was handed the message "Air Raid Pearl Harbor This Is No Drill" his reaction was "This can't be right, they must mean the Philippines."

Links please.
 
Last edited:
I think you like to call people liars for no reason at all. That's because you eople like to smear.

You are called a liar 9/11 because that is what you do on a regular basis. When you lie you will be called a liar.

You 9/11 are a LIAR
 
About Stinnett:

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2005/12/07/day-of-deceit/

When I first heard the accusation that FDR had deliberately allowed the attack on Pearl Harbor, on this day in 1941, I thought it impossible. That would be like saying we did it to ourselves. But it turned out that I was wrong. All that it meant was that some individuals did it to others. In this case, Roosevelt and his closest advisors, along with some cooperative officers in the US military, worked to provoke the attack and make sure that Admiral Kimmel and General Short remained in the dark. For certain, as every year around this time, we will have to put up with a bunch of crap about how “military hobbyists and crusty Roosevelt-haters are propounding far-flung theories about presidential treachery,” while in fact the man who proved the case is no Roosevelt-hater, but the furthest thing from it. His name is Robert Stinnett, he’s a veteran of the pacific war and biographer of his fellow veteran George H.W. Bush. Though he proves beyond doubt the case for Roosevelt’s treachery in his book Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor, Stinnett remarkably justifies this action as necessary to get us into the war in Europe.

From the same article:

The proper question is: When did the US Navy solve Code Book D, Table Seven? The answer is provided by Lieutenant John Lietwiler, commanding officer of Station CAST on Corregidor. Leitwiler, head of 65 naval radio cryptographers on Corregidor reported to Washington that his staff was “current in intercepting, decoding and translating” Japan’s operations code as of November 16, 1941, Manila time. On the same day (November 15 EST) in Washington, DC, General George Marshall chief of Staff of the US Army, called Washington bureau chiefs of major newspapers and magazines to his office, swore them to secrecy and revealed the US had broken the Japanese codes and expected the danger period would be the first week in December 1941.

Nice nightcap, audio interviews with Stinnett:

http://www.philipdru.com/audio/stinnett.mp3
http://weekendinterviewshow.com/audio/stinnett2.mp3

Large PH resource: http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=1431

While listening to this total Roosevelt groupie Stinnett, he utters all the same ******** like you guys do, ignoring any context or links with Versailles.
 
Last edited:
It's all over the record. The record, you know, the information about the situation? You should read it.

When Stark was handed the message "Air Raid Pearl Harbor This Is No Drill" his reaction was "This can't be right, they must mean the Philippines."

Links please.

Gawdzilla seems to have been slightly incorrect. It wasn't Admiral Stark, the Chief of Naval Operations who said that, but Frank Knox, the Secretary of the Navy.

If Pearl Harbor had been asleep, the American forces in the Philippines under General Douglas MacArthur had been comatose. The Philippines had been everyone's bet for where the Japanese blow would fall. When Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox was delivered the news of Pearl Harbor he exclaimed, "My God, this can't be true, this must mean the Philippines!" The Japanese would oblige soon enough. MacArthur received word of the Pearl Harbor attack just as it was ending, at 3:00 A.M. on December 8, Manila time. In the preceding weeks MacArthur had confidently assured Washington that with enough air power he could drive the Japanese back into the sea if they dared to come ashore. On that assurance he had been shipped dozens of top-of-the-line B-17 long-range bombers. When the decisive moment came, MacArthur, apparently frozen in indecision, barricaded himself in his penthouse suite in a downtown Manila hotel and did nothing. Nine hours later Japanese bombers and Zeros appeared over Clark Field; instead of meeting the swarm of enemy fighters they fully expected, the Japanese pilots looked down and rubbed their eyes in disbelief at the sixty neatly parked planes on the field below. That evening, Roosevelt kept a long-scheduled appointment with newsman Edward R. Murrow. FDR pounded his fist on the table in frustration: The American planes had been destroyed "on the ground, by God, on the ground!" he exclaimed.

Quoted from Stephen Budiansky's book "Battle of Wits: The Complete Story of Codebreaking in World War II", available from Amazon.com.
 
Last edited:
About Stinnett and his book.

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/Articles/01spring/spr-rev.htm

The end result is an apparently damning indictment of FDR and his Cabinet, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, many naval officers above and below Admiral Kimmel, and the military intelligence community. Unfortunately the author failed to do much basic secondary historical research and has a tendency to leap to conclusions based on questionable or erroneous interpretations of evidence. This is a dangerous book that will dupe unsuspecting readers who misinterpret the author's earnestness and technical explanations as signs of balance and accuracy, and it will perpetuate myths that should have long been forgotten.

Many of Stinnett's arguments are based on hindsight; for him any mistake or oversight that contributed to the surprise attack becomes part of the plot that victimized Kimmel and Short.

A look at the McCollum memorandum in Appendix A of the book reveals more flaws in Stinnett's analysis. The author admits that he can link FDR's actions to only six of the eight items on the list, and fails to explain that those that were actually executed occurred because of Japanese provocations or from understandable diplomatic or military motivations. Stinnett would have benefited greatly from secondary research in the standard works on FDR's foreign policy. Moreover, the McCollum proposal itself was designed to prevent war, not provoke it. A close reading shows that its recommendations were supposed to deter and contain Japan, while better preparing the United States for a future conflict in the Pacific. There is an offhand remark that an overt Japanese act of war would make it easier to garner public support for actions against Japan, but the document's intent was not to ensure that event happened.

Stinnett's technical explanations of the intricacies and revelations from code-breaking appear persuasive to those of us unfamiliar with the field, but he has not fooled the experts. Edward Drea, one of the most notable authorities on codes and code-breaking in the Pacific, recently savaged this book in the April 2000 Journal of Military History. In a detailed critique, Drea points out that Stinnett misrepresented messages decoded in 1945 as being available in 1941, erroneously assumed that just because a message was intercepted it could be and was deciphered, erred in his explanation about when the Americans broke key Japanese codes, and misquoted or distorted many messages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_Deceit

[Stinnett] concocted this theory pretty much from whole cloth. Those who have been able to check his alleged sources also are unanimous in their condemnation of his methodology. Basically, the author has made up his sources; when he does not make up the source, he lies about what the source says.[2]
 
Article by Stinnett from 2003:

http://www.antiwar.com/orig2/stinnett1.html

During the 60 years, the truthful answers were secreted in bomb-proof vaults, withheld from two congressional Pearl Harbor investigations and from the American people. As recently as 1995, the Joint Congressional Investigation conducted by Sen. Strom Thurmond and Rep. Floyd Spence, was denied access to a naval storage vault in Crane, Indiana, containing documents that could settle the questions.

Americans were told of U.S. cryptographers' success in cracking pre–Pearl Harbor Japanese diplomatic codes, but not a word has been officially uttered about their success in cracking Japanese military codes...

It took me a year to evaluate the records. The information revealed in the files was astonishing. It disclosed a Pearl Harbor story hidden from the public.

About detractors:

About 30 percent of the reviews have discounted the book's revelations. The leaders of the dispute include Stephen Budiansky, Edward Drea, and David Kahn, all of whom have authored books or articles on code breaking. To bolster their pre-Pearl Harbor theories, the trio violated journalistic ethics and distorted the U.S. Navy's pre-Pearl Harbor paper trail. Their efforts cannot be ignored. The trio has close ties to the National Security Agency, the overseer of U.S. naval communications files.

I have a sort of intuition about the backgrounds of these 3 gentlemen. Read the article what this Kahn fella did to try to distort the record. I doubt that Kahn is of Norwegian extraction.

About 1,000 intercepted Japanese naval radio messages formed the basis of each Daily Summary written by Rochefort and his staff. The Japanese communication intelligence data contained in the messages was summarized and delivered daily to Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific Fleet. Rochefort's summary of November 25, 1941 (Hawaii time) was not to Kahn's liking. It revealed the Commander Carriers of the Imperial Japanese Navy were not observing radio silence but were in "extensive communications" with other Japanese naval forces whose admirals directly commanded the forces involved in the Pearl Harbor attack. Because of the International Dateline, the "extensive communications" mentioned in the summary took place on November 26, 1941, Japan time, the exact day the Japanese carrier force began its journey to Hawaii.
 
Google has online:

Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor

Here a 2002 interview with Stinnett:
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=408
Why do you think the information in your book is important?

Stinnett: It’s important because it reveals the lengths that some people in the American government will go to deceive the American public, and to keep this vital information—in our land of the First Amendment—from the people. And that’s against everything I believe in.

Very good mr Stinnett, we know that all too well, post-9/11!
 
I missed out on some good 9/11 luls ignoring him for a day. Now normally, I wouldn't derail a thread that has already moved to another topic but....this is 9/11.

Shangrila resents to be described as a 1:7 lilliputian and insists to be described as 1:6 or even 1:5 lilliputian.

Strange, why do you continue making up numbers when the actual numbers have already been given?

The answer of course is that like you don't nuke kindergarten, you don't nuke Japanese. Shangrila refuses to comment the fact that America only had 300,000 casualties where the Soviets had 50 times as much. Reason: Japanese are no serious fighting force, children basically as compared to the German SS.

You mean like these SS, right? Or these SS?

The difference is racial, but that is a forbidden topic in the NWO.

Indeed. So we have from the highest source, Adolf Hitler, that the Japanese were Aryan, but the Soviets were subhuman. So we count the Japanese but not the Russians. Nor, of course, can we count the Jews, or blacks making up such a large part of the population of the WAllies and the colonial populations are right out, mere savages, right? And if we can discount the Italians, surely we can discount the Italian-Americans, Russian-Americans, Polish-Americans, etc. But we can count the Dutch, the other WEuropeans, the Finns, etc, who were surely eager allies for their liberators from Jewish Bolshevism.

So the terribly outnumbered "Anglos," under the inept strategic guidance of their Jewish Masters, still crushed the Aryan Axis on their home turf and did so at at entirely lopsided casualty ratio. So, 1 Anglo is worth what, 2, 3 Aryans? But the Jewish leadership surely at least halved their fighting prowess. So an Anglo is worth 4-6 Aryans. But then, the German-Americans, the single largest American ethnic group, surely cannot be superior to the original Germans, being descended from the worthless huddled masses, right? So actual Anglos are worth...10 Aryans? More? Now, we truly know who are the real Master Race.
 
Last edited:
So, what is the different between a reliable source and an unreliable source, 9/11? You appear to put all of your eggs in this Stinnett basket.
 
Last edited:
Again I have to explain an Anglo his own language. Congress/2000 says:



According to you the Americans had no clue about anything. Then explain to me: what intelligence was withheld from Kimmel?!

Answer: that the Japanese fleet was approaching.

The information withheld from Kimmel did not indicate that Pearl Harbor would be attacked. However, the people who wrote that are just like 9/11, to lazy to check the information.

I invited sane people to see what was withheld. The "Magic" Background to Pearl Harbor, all eight volumes, PDF and HTML
 
BS article.

The author keeps on babbling about "secondary research".
And he uses Drea to refute Stinnett findings, but Drea is dealt here with by Stinnett himself:

http://www.antiwar.com/orig2/stinnett1.html

Stinnett claims the message in his book were decoded from JN-25.

He gives the source for the messages, Homer Wallin's book.

Wallin gives the source for the messages as the questionnaire sent to the MacArthur Shogunate by Congress during the Hearings. The answers to the questions included reconstructions of those messages. They were not intercepted and decoded.

Stinnett lied.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom