FDR Pearl Harbor Conspiracy

[Galileo]

FDR Pearl Harbor Conspiracy

film investigates theorys on pearl harbor and possible conspiracy(s) there has been much debate as to how and why the United States had been caught unaware, and how much and when American officials knew of Japanese plans and related topics. Some argue that various parties knew of the attack in advance and may even have let it happen or encouraged it in order to force America into war. film includes issues of The Pearl Harbor advance-knowledge debate and others. tags keywords include conspiracy theorys, FDR, ww2, World War two, prior knowlege, 911, september 11, december 7th 1941, history channel

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7736750907069936394&ei=SiXySci7MJXc-QGmuZGxAQ&q=pearl+harbor+lihop&hl=en

OK, this is from the history channel. They would not show it on the history channel, if it weren't true.

[LightinDarkness]

OK, this is from the history channel. They would not show it on the history channel, if it weren't true.

Nice try at an appeal to authority fallacy.

The History Channel has been catering woo for some time. They know the sad truth - wild unfounded CT woo gets ratings, history doesn't.

[defaultdotxbe]

OK, this is from the history channel. They would not show it on the history channel, if it weren't true.
history channel also airs monsterquest and ufo hunters

although i enjoy both those shows, it doesnt make them true either

[Galileo]

Nice try at an appeal to authority fallacy.

The History Channel has been catering woo for some time. They know the sad truth - wild unfounded CT woo gets ratings, history doesn't.

wrong, most people prefer real history, rather than false conspiracy theroies.

[WildCat]

wrong, most people prefer real history, rather than false conspiracy theroies.
Thus the unpopularity of the "truth" movement.

[Galileo]

history channel also airs monsterquest and ufo hunters

although i enjoy both those shows, it doesnt make them true either

Do you think it was a conspiracy when FDR threw all the "japs" into concentration camps?

How many were involved in this conspiracy?

Isn't the government too inefficient to pull off something this vast?

Wouldn't someone have talked?

[LightinDarkness]

wrong, most people prefer real history, rather than false conspiracy theroies.

Indeed, which is why most people prefer real history and not the woo catered by the history channel. Thats why they have to cater to people like you to get their ratings up.

[SmartyPants]

False conspiracy theories is kind of redundant.

Anyway, the History Channel is not exactly an authoritative source of information. In fact, the extent of their history goes to JFK, Hitler and UFOs.

But since you apparently think that the HC is authoritative, perhaps you can tell us what you thought of "The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy."

[SmartyPants]

Do you think it was a conspiracy when FDR threw all the "japs" into concentration camps?

How many were involved in this conspiracy?

Isn't the government too inefficient to pull off something this vast?

Wouldn't someone have talked?


Internment camps were pretty well out in the open, so I don't see how those were part of a conspiracy. The government doesn't need much help to pull that off.

Next.

[Drudgewire]

film investigates theorys...


Improper spelling aside, "investigating theories" is not the same thing as "exposing falsehoods" at all. http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/eng101.gif


OK, this is from the history channel. They would not show it on the history channel, if it weren't true.


OK, now I know you're pulling our leg. After all, they're the evil NWO front who broadcast this diabolical hit piece (http://shop.history.com/detail.php?a=103790).

[dudalb]

This should be merged with the ongoing Pearl Harbor Conspiracy thread we have.

[dudalb]

OK, this is from the history channel. They would not show it on the history channel, if it weren't true.

Never saw some of the History CHannel's shows on Nostradumbass..excuse em, Nostradamus...have you?

[ktesibios]

OK, this is from the history channel. They would not show it on the history channel, if it weren't true.

[Porky Pig mode] ableeba ableeba ableeba...[/Porky Pig mode]

Seriously, I'm truly at a loss here. Would some kind soul please create a laughing dog + facepalm smiley so that I can do this wonderful contention justice?

[Caustic Logic]

[B]
OK, this is from the history channel. They would not show it on the history channel, if it weren't true.

That one line gets you more comments... it's a channel about historical subjects, more for ratings than careful historicism. The history in question, since it's from their conspiracy theories program, is the PH CTs. And it is indeed true that these exist, as they have about other events through history. The show will not seek to clear anything up.

It's new to me, and maybe some interesting stuff. The first face we see is Robert Stinnett, who has been show bogus on almost all fronts. Not good for 12/7 Truth either way. I'll watch the whole thing later, but it asks at the beginning "Did President Roosevelt know in advance?" From my investigation (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=136679), the answer seems to be no. But if he did know, IMO, he would have tried to forget and still allow the attack. So maybe he did. No evidence tho.

[Gawdzilla]

That one line gets you more comments... it's a channel about historical subjects, more for ratings than careful historicism. The history in question, since it's from their conspiracy theories program, is the PH CTs. And it is indeed true that these exist, as they have about other events through history. The show will not seek to clear anything up.

It's new to me, and maybe some interesting stuff. The first face we see is Robert Stinnett, who has been show bogus on almost all fronts. Not good for 12/7 Truth either way. I'll watch the whole thing later, but it asks at the beginning "Did President Roosevelt know in advance?" From my investigation the answer seems to be no. But if he did know, IMO, he would have tried to forget and still allow the attack. So maybe he did. No evidence tho.

Imagine two scenarios:

"Dear America, we got caught with our pants down."

"Dear America, the Japanese were tracked to the point where they launched their planes. The planes were met with the full strength of the Army and Navy who had guns manned and ready and fully supplied with ammo. The Japanese carriers were attacked by two of our carriers, in concert with twenty-two of our submarines. No shots were fired at the Japanese until they entered Hawaiian air space in a clear unannounced attack on the US."

Which one would be the choice for someone who knows the attack is coming?

[Almo]

wrong, most people prefer real history, rather than false conspiracy theroies.

I don't believe you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods%3F

If people preferred real history, this book would have languished on the shelves instead of selling pretty well.

[JoeyDonuts]

OK, this is from the history channel. They would not show it on the history channel, if it weren't true.

You owe me a new monitor/keyboard.

[Piggy]

All you have to do is consider the options. If FDR wanted to get us into the war, would there be some other way to do that besides intentionally sacrificing the fleet at PH?

Well, yeah.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I don't believe you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariots_of_the_Gods%3F

If people preferred real history, this book would have languished on the shelves instead of selling pretty well.

You know this is asking for trouble when dealing with this guy... don't you?

[Caustic Logic]

All you have to do is consider the options. If FDR wanted to get us into the war, would there be some other way to do that besides intentionally sacrificing the fleet at PH?

Well, yeah.

Sure, but would they have worked in such style? (http://12-7-9-11.blogspot.com/2009/02/battle-of-pearl-harbor-alternate.html)

Ohnoes, I didn't think of that argument - lose ships bad! :D

BTW: By sheer number, the fleet was cut fully in half between its fateful relocation to Hawaii and the attack. The most valuable half (newer, faster) was sloughed off in phases, the carriers and many escorts spared last, saved by *inexact scheduling* and only a few obsolete battleships were truly lost, plus some personnel, innocence, and any reasonable opposition to wholehearted war, not Gulf of Tonkin technicality police action war.

But hey, horse, water, etc...

[Gawdzilla]

Sure, but would they have worked in such style?

Ohnoes, I didn't think of that argument - lose ships bad! :D

BTW: By sheer number, the fleet was cut fully in half between its fateful relocation to Hawaii and the attack. The most valuable half (newer, faster) was sloughed off in phases, the carriers and many escorts spared last, saved by *inexact scheduling* and only a few obsolete battleships were truly lost, plus some personnel, innocence, and any reasonable opposition to wholehearted war, not Gulf of Tonkin technicality police action war.

But hey, horse, water, etc...
Caustic, the carriers weren't saved by "inexact scheduling", they were sortied by Kimmel's orders. Washington told him to reinforce the aircraft on Wake and Midway. They did not tell him how to do it. You might also note that Enterprise should have been back in port on Saturday, but was slow due to difficulty in refueling the escorting destroyers. Her crew really wanted to be in on Sunday, they had a big baseball game scheduled against Arizona.

You might also consider that it was Halsey and Brown who insisted the BBs stay in port and not escort the carriers. "If we have to run, we don't want to be slowed down by 21-knot ships."

So, carriers not in port: Kimmel's decision. Battleships in port: Kimmel's okay. Washington was not informed of the movements of the carriers or battleships, such information was "housekeeping" and not required from 14th ND.

Any other questions?

BTW, I am in the process of putting all forty volumes of the Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings online. URLs will be provided after I prove I"m not a spammer.

[Gawdzilla]

All you have to do is consider the options. If FDR wanted to get us into the war, would there be some other way to do that besides intentionally sacrificing the fleet at PH?

Well, yeah.

"Lusitania" and "Reuben James" come to mind. FDR's "short of war" policy could be interpreted as "prodding the dragon". I certainly see it as such. But the Gallup poles show that Americans were aware that we would "have to do something about Hitler" in the near future (~68% in Nov. '41, IIRC.)

[kookbreaker]

BTW, I am in the process of putting all forty volumes of the Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings online. URLs will be provided after I prove I"m not a spammer.

Excuse me while I say "Wow!" :eye-poppi

[Gawdzilla]

Excuse me while I say "Wow!" :eye-poppi

I have to have a few more posts before I can post URLs. When that happens I'll post here, unless some veteran poster wants to post them for me. ;)

[kookbreaker]

I have to have a few more posts before I can post URLs. When that happens I'll post here, unless some veteran poster wants to post them for me. ;)

You can just put the URLs up without the 'www' and someone will repair them in a quoted post. We do that all the time.

[Gawdzilla]

You can just put the URLs up without the 'www' and someone will repair them in a quoted post. We do that all the time.

ibiblio.org/pha/congress
The Congressional Investigation into the Attack on Pearl Harbor, PDF files.

That's the PDF versions, and I need to get 21, 32, and 38 before it's complete.

As for the mythology, check this out:

ibiblio.org/pha/myths
The Myths of Pearl Harbor

If you go here you'll find, among other things, the complete "Magic" Background to Pearl Harbor, all eight volumes.
ibiblio.org/pha/pha
Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings

Let's see how that works, then.

[kookbreaker]

http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/congress
The Congressional Investigation into the Attack on Pearl Harbor, PDF files.

That's the PDF versions, and I need to get 21, 32, and 38 before it's complete.

As for the mythology, check this out:

http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/myths
The Myths of Pearl Harbor

If you go here you'll find, among other things, the complete "Magic" Background to Pearl Harbor, all eight volumes.
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pha
Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings

Let's see how that works, then.

Fixed (I think)

[Gawdzilla]

Fixed (I think)

Yeah, they all check out. Thanks.

The "List of Additional Documents" in the Hearings page is for things that have the most relevance to the conspiracy theories, like J.O. Richardson's memos on the stationing of the fleet at Pearl (and his thoughts on the danger of attack) and the memos discussing the use of anti-torpedo nets for the major units.

[dudalb]

I am a WW2 buff, and I had no idea the Pearl Harbor Hearings were available on line.
As for the Pearl Harbor CTs, they are nonsense.

[Gawdzilla]

I am a WW2 buff, and I had no idea the Pearl Harbor Hearings were available on line.
As for the Pearl Harbor CTs, they are nonsense.

I just located PDF copies and put them on my site recently. The copies came from http://www.archive.org/index.php, except the ones that I have to track down. I put HTML copies online starting in 1992. The missing volumes have been tracked all but one of them located. Within the next few month I should have all of them except Pt. 21 online. And I have leads on that one.

[Gawdzilla]

I am a WW2 buff, and I had no idea the Pearl Harbor Hearings were available on line.
As for the Pearl Harbor CTs, they are nonsense.

If you are interested in WW2, check these sites out:

Hyperwar (http://www.ibiblio.net/hyperwar/)

World War II Resources. (http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/)

[tsig]

If you are interested in WW2, check these sites out:

Hyperwar (http://www.ibiblio.net/hyperwar/)

World War II Resources. (http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/)

Thanks for the links.

[Eyeron]

Most people don't care about history, period. It means nothing to them.

[Gawdzilla]

Most people don't care about history, period. It means nothing to them.

Hence the popularity of "American Idol." However, those people can be, generally, ignored. The sites I listed above get about 60K hits a month, on the front pages, more than that on the "hotter" items. For document sites that is :jaw-dropp numbers. So those are the people I work for, and the people that matter.

[kookbreaker]

I have to say that we have had a couple of folks bring up Pearl Harbor around here. Most are just listing it as a 'false flag' to fit their petty truther worldview. The occasional one has read, or at least read about Stinnett's book. Sadly, Stinnett does a good job of making it look like he did research when he actually is badly misrepresenting the materials listed in his endnotes.

IIRC, he got confronted on this on his message board by assorted code buffs and history buffs and had to shut it down. Were you among them Gawdzilla?

[Gawdzilla]

I have to say that we have had a couple of folks bring up Pearl Harbor around here. Most are just listing it as a 'false flag' to fit their petty truther worldview. The occasional one has read, or at least read about Stinnett's book. Sadly, Stinnett does a good job of making it look like he did research when he actually is badly misrepresenting the materials listed in his endnotes.

IIRC, he got confronted on this on his message board by assorted code buffs and history buffs and had to shut it down. Were you among them Gawdzilla?

Myself and David Aiken slammed Stinnett pretty hard there. I can't believe he was stupid enough to give us a chance at all. "Comments are disabled for this Youtube" would have been his smartest move. I think ALZ played a part in that whole book, if you get my meaning.

BTW, the "JN-25" messages he claims were decoded prior to the attack were taken vebatim from Homer Wallin's book on Pearl Harbor salvage. Wallin took them from the Pearl Harbor Attack hearings. Congress sent a list of question to the Shogun MacArthur for the surviving people involved and the messages were part of the reply.

If you want to mess with a CTwit on Pearl Harbor, ask them when "Niitake Nobore, 12-8" was intercepted and decoded.

[Caustic Logic]

Caustic, the carriers weren't saved by "inexact scheduling", they were sortied by Kimmel's orders. Washington told him to reinforce the aircraft on Wake and Midway. They did not tell him how to do it. You might also note that Enterprise should have been back in port on Saturday, but was slow due to difficulty in refueling the escorting destroyers. Her crew really wanted to be in on Sunday, they had a big baseball game scheduled against Arizona.

Kimmell was indeed ordered to send two task forces out to get more planes to Wake and Midway (IIRC). It was probably up to the task force commanders (Adm. Halsey and another) to set their schedules. Now it seems that Kimmel's aim was to keep one carrier in port at all or most times. Halsey's ETA back was Saturday afternoon, 12/6 and it would perhaps be this that made Kimmel feel close enough sending the second task force out 24 hours ahead of this, leaving no carriers for a day. Instead that day stretched into Sunday morning and thus the carriers were both spared.

Reasons for this delay of Halsey's first task force: a storm, and something else. Could these have been predicted better than they were?
“Enterprise was doing her best to get back into Pearl. Her first ETA was Saturday evening, but a storm delayed her. The next time set was 7 AM, 55 minutes before the attack started, but that proved too optimistic as well.”
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/myths/

Also, was the Yorktown really needed in the Atlantic? Was the Saratoga's retrofitting on or behind schedule? The Hornet's shakedown and deployment - delayed at all? Of five carriers that might have been there, zero were on 12/7, as it happened. I'm just not satisfied that's all coincidence.

You might also consider that it was Halsey and Brown who insisted the BBs stay in port and not escort the carriers. "If we have to run, we don't want to be slowed down by 21-knot ships."

Yeah they were trying to run, but they still wound up too slow, eh? The other thing is the BBs were obsolete and less valuable as well. Right? They took instead, collectively, 20 faster warships with them (3 Heavy Cruisers with each carrier, and 14 destroyers split 9/5, leaving only 46 war ships (mostly battleships) and 55 auxiliary ships (minesweepers, submarines, tenders, etc). So yeah, that helps my point.

So, carriers not in port: Kimmel's decision.
Spurred by the Navy's orders, based on Halsey's math and a little brinksmanship, and serving to soften the blow a bit when it came.

Battleships in port: Kimmel's okay. Washington was not informed of the movements of the carriers or battleships, such information was "housekeeping" and not required from 14th ND.

Any other questions?

Yeah. Considering the scale and gravity and relative necessity of taking the first hit, have you considered motives on anyone's part - even subconscious - that may have led to the situation there that morning? Roosevelt, Stimson, Knox (IIRC), Kimmel, Halsey, have you wondered if anyone made any bad moves because of this strange attractor event from the future? IF so, how did you dispell these concerns, and if not why not?

BTW, I am in the process of putting all forty volumes of the Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings online. URLs will be provided after I prove I"m not a spammer.

I read the final JCC report, but this is the raw stuff behind that, actual Q and A? That would be interesting, and kudos for getting that together. I won't have the time; earlier this year was the time for that, now I'm on the Lockerbie beat and it's too hard to switch gears or even keep up with that one as is. (Just got the trial transcripts, actual Q and A, otherwise unseen on the nets and a lot to digest)

Alright, godspeed to you in your studies good sir.

[Gawdzilla]

"Now it seems that Kimmel's aim was to keep one carrier in port at all or most times. Halsey's ETA back was Saturday afternoon, 12/6 and it would perhaps be this that made Kimmel feel close enough sending the second task force out 24 hours ahead of this, leaving no carriers for a day. Instead that day stretched into Sunday morning and thus the carriers were both spared."

"it seems"? Please explain where you got "it seems" from. The deployment schedules for the fleet are available on my website. True using facts rather than innuendos. It will ruin your theories but improve your credibility.

[Gawdzilla]

"Yeah. Considering the scale and gravity and relative necessity of taking the first hit, have you considered motives on anyone's part - even subconscious - that may have led to the situation there that morning? Roosevelt, Stimson, Knox (IIRC), Kimmel, Halsey, have you wondered if anyone made any bad moves because of this strange attractor event from the future? IF so, how did you dispell these concerns, and if not why not?"

The people involved were not, by any stretch of the imagination, trying to bait an attack on Pearl Harbor. They didn't need to provoke the Japanese, they KNEW they were going to go to war sooner or later. Just days before the attack Marshall and King sent a note to FDR begging him to do his best to hold off the start of war for six months so they could continue to prepare. Strange thing for someone to say if they knew the Kido Butai was at sea and heading east.

[Gawdzilla]

"Also, was the Yorktown really needed in the Atlantic? Was the Saratoga's retrofitting on or behind schedule? The Hornet's shakedown and deployment - delayed at all? Of five carriers that might have been there, zero were on 12/7, as it happened. I'm just not satisfied that's all coincidence."

Yeah, Yorktown was needed there, because there was a shooting war going on there. Saratoga's refit had been scheduled about a year earlier and was schedule. Hornet's shakedown was on an expedited schedule, 24/7 in some cases. (Night carrier quals are a good way to join the "Wet Diaper Club.")

[Foolmewunz]

Hey, Gawdzilla - I didn't get a chance to welcome you aboard in the Welcome Thread, and I suspect you may be hanging out in one of these Pearl Harbor threads more often....

So Welcome Aboard. (We've got another former squid JimBenArm from MO - Kansas City - aboard, also.)

Would you possibly know David Lippman's site http://worldwar2plus55.com/index.htm ?

It's something of a work in progress but it's pretty decent for what appears to be a one-man effort. He has a real job to report to, though, so I think he's going to be a web version of Will Durant - it may take him his lifetime to complete. (And he's also former Navy, plus a member here, albeit inactive, under the nom de plume of "Kiwiwriter".) I read through his site quite often, and never hesitate to give him a plug when I can.


ETA: Eeek! You're in a Galileo thread!!?? Galileo has never met a conspiracy theory he doesn't like. He's sort of our vanilla all-purpose conspiradroid and troll. He'll argue the contrarian point of view on any topic. (And he apparently is driven by the artistic conceit that he believes he's the reincarnation of THE Galileo - we hardly even mention it any longer.)

[Gawdzilla]

Hey, Gawdzilla - I didn't get a chance to welcome you aboard in the Welcome Thread, and I suspect you may be hanging out in one of these Pearl Harbor threads more often....

So Welcome Aboard. (We've got another former squid JimBenArm from MO - Kansas City - aboard, also.)

Would you possibly know David Lippman's site http://worldwar2plus55.com/index.htm ?

It's something of a work in progress but it's pretty decent for what appears to be a one-man effort. He has a real job to report to, though, so I think he's going to be a web version of Will Durant - it may take him his lifetime to complete. (And he's also former Navy, plus a member here, albeit inactive, under the nom de plume of "Kiwiwriter".) I read through his site quite often, and never hesitate to give him a plug when I can.


ETA: Eeek! You're in a Galileo thread!!?? Galileo has never met a conspiracy theory he doesn't like. He's sort of our vanilla all-purpose conspiradroid and troll. He'll argue the contrarian point of view on any topic. (And he apparently is driven by the artistic conceit that he believes he's the reincarnation of THE Galileo - we hardly even mention it any longer.)

Thanks, I'll check that out.

I've been playing with conspiracy buffs for a loooonnnnggggg time. In 1964 a neighbor of mine, a man I much respected, gave me his set of the Pearl Harbor Hearings, all FORTY volumes. "There's proof in there somewhere that FDR set the whole thing up, and you can find it." I was a history nut even then, so this challenge was perfect for me. It took me two years to read that thing, and when I was done I had to tell him I couldn't find anything that supported his claim. He was really upset.

I later found out that he was a veteran. He used to tell people about his service with George Washington at Valley Forge.

[kookbreaker]

I later found out that he was a veteran. He used to tell people about his service with George Washington at Valley Forge.

Did he show you the Ninja Sword Washington personally presented to him? :p

[Gawdzilla]

Did he show you the Ninja Sword Washington personally presented to him? :p

Looking back on that time I have wondered why he was allowed to even have kids in his house. I sometimes think I dodged a bullet way back then. Maybe I wasn't crazy enough (then) for him.

In the 40+ years since I started studying WWII I met him many times, or at least his spiritual brothers. (Is it true men are over-represented as CTwits?)

[kookbreaker]

Looking back on that time I have wondered why he was allowed to even have kids in his house. I sometimes think I dodged a bullet way back then. Maybe I wasn't crazy enough (then) for him.

In the 40+ years since I started studying WWII I met him many times, or at least his spiritual brothers. (Is it true men are over-represented as CTwits?)

Hard to tell. Rebecca Watson of skepchick did a presentation on what women believers believe. and they pretty much scored higher than men across the board. But I think when it comes to conspiracies men are louder and more 'active' than women in this matter.

[Gawdzilla]

Hard to tell. Rebecca Watson of skepchick did a presentation on what women believers believe. and they pretty much scored higher than men across the board. But I think when it comes to conspiracies men are louder and more 'active' than women in this matter.

They're certainly the flag-wavers. Mark Wiley comes to mind. But then so does Kent Hovind.