• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Pearl Harbor Conspiracy

Phil Jacobsen

Kent1 said:
A few articles I would recommend.
(I've spoken to all of these authors at one time or another. They're great guys and are very helpful)

John C. Zimmerman Pearl Harbor Revisionism: Robert Stinnett's Day of Deceit (Intelligence and National Security, Vol 17, No.2 Summer 2002)

Philip H. Jacobsen Radio Silence and Radio Deception: Secrecy Insurance for the Pearl Harbor Strike Force (Intelligence and National Security, Vol. 19, No.4 Winter 2004)

Philip H. Jacobsen Pearl Harbor: Radio Officer Leslie Grogan of the SS Lurline and his Misidentified Signals (Cryptologia April 2005)

Stephen Budiansky, Battle of Wits - The Complete Story of Codebreaking in World War II

Also if you happen to run across David Aiken at the Pearl Harbor boards
http://www.pearlharborattacked.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard312a/ikonboard.cgi

On the revisionist side you have Wiley, Stinnett, and Timothly Wilford.
Wiley the most "out there", Wilford the most grounded in something that comes close to reality.
Click to expand...

I've communicated with him in the past...very good man, very knowledgeable. His critiques have helped me get my page straight.

Highly recommended.

Budiansky's book, too. Mine is at his home, getting autographed.
 
No worries, mate...

Belz... said:
That was very informative, Kiwi. Thanks.
Click to expand...


...we're always open.

That's sort of my purpose and fate in life...to give lengthy and complete answers to all questions. I was well programmed by my schoolteachers and mother, I'm afraid. Give the full answer by "pencils down," no matter what the question.
 
VicDaring said:
But why did the Arizona sink at faster than free fall speed?
Click to expand...

The black smoke coming out of Pearl Harbor shown in the films also inidacated that the fire was oxygen starved and would put itself out soon.

You know, you can almost apply that sentence to any disaster with fire!
 
Up and down with BB-39

VicDaring said:
But why did the Arizona sink at faster than free fall speed?
Click to expand...

She didn't sink...she went up first, with the explosion!

And if you look carefully at the famous film of it, you'll see a man on a grassy knoll pointing a rifle at the ship....:D
 
I must say I do enjoy posts taking the mickey out of CTers...

But join me in a moment of silence for the U.S. servicemen and women and the civilians who died at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941...and for those who gave their lives during that and other wars.
 
Pearl Harbor was really pulled off by the Atlantis-inians from the lost city below the oceans. Everyone knows that.
 
Kiwiwriter said:
I do feel that Short and Kimmel got a harsher deal from Washington than they deserved. MacArthur lost all of his planes in Hawaii the following day, and became a hero. Short and Kimmel were not colorful characters or brilliant leaders, but they were unfairly treated when compared with MacArthur and Brereton. Their talents -- and Kimmel's were pretty considerable -- should not have been left to waste. As Prange writes, "There is enough blame to go around at Pearl Harbor."
Click to expand...

I think you mean the Phillipines.

The funny thing is that Pearl Harbor is easy to explain next to the Phillipines debacle. McArthur knew who was coming, when they were coming, what direction they were coming from, and he STILL got caught off guard. Arguably, the losses of the Phillipines was a much worse strategic loss than a few battleships, which were (unbeknownst to the navy at the time) already obsolete. So, why no conspiracy theories there?

Anyway, I look forward to visiting your site when I have a moment. Both my parents served in the military during WWII, so it's of major historical interest to me.
 
aggle-rithm said:
No. Every single post in this forum is a big, fat joke. Any post that you don't find amusing is simply over your head.

Get it? :)
Click to expand...

See this again proves my point. Everyone here seems to relish the opportunity to try and ridicule someone. It is quite a frenzy type environment. If I wanted that I would go post on some stupid gaming site.
 
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but Edwin Layton's "And I was There" is an excellent historical record of the state of military intelligence leading up to Pearl Harbor. Much of the blame can be placed on political infighting and territorialism among the big brass.
 
SBrown said:
See this again proves my point. Everyone here seems to relish the opportunity to try and ridicule someone. It is quite a frenzy type environment. If I wanted that I would go post on some stupid gaming site.
Click to expand...

Hey!

Didn't I say it was a joke? :(
 
Whoops!

aggle-rithm said:
I think you mean the Phillipines.

The funny thing is that Pearl Harbor is easy to explain next to the Phillipines debacle. McArthur knew who was coming, when they were coming, what direction they were coming from, and he STILL got caught off guard. Arguably, the losses of the Phillipines was a much worse strategic loss than a few battleships, which were (unbeknownst to the navy at the time) already obsolete. So, why no conspiracy theories there?

Anyway, I look forward to visiting your site when I have a moment. Both my parents served in the military during WWII, so it's of major historical interest to me.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant the Philippines, obviously. I did not copy-edit too closely.

Yes, you never hear conspiracy theories about the Philippine debacle, which was an even greater disaster, as it played a key role in the Bataan agony.

You also never hear any conspiracy theories about the horrible job of logistics MacArthur did. He sent empty trucks into Bataan, when freezers back in Manila were jammed with meat and sacks of rice filled up a stadium there, too. But he let refugees into the Bataan peninsula, who only ate more of his food.

Hope you enjoy my WW2 page.
 
The use of humor here

SBrown said:
See this again proves my point. Everyone here seems to relish the opportunity to try and ridicule someone. It is quite a frenzy type environment. If I wanted that I would go post on some stupid gaming site.
Click to expand...

It's just to relieve the sheer idiocy of the paranormal stuff, conspiracy theories, and bizarre ideas that we contend with. It astounds us that there are intelligent people who believe in the Loch Ness Monster, 9/11 conspiracy theories, that the Jews control the world, UFO cattle mutilations, and that John Edwards can talk to the dead -- and that they listen.
 
The bottom line to me on Pearl Harbor is that the Americans underestimated the Japanese in 1941 as funny little yellow men in buck teeth and spectacles who bowed a lot and made cheap imitation goods. We made the same mistake about a lot of funny little bearded brown men in turbans and rags who pray to Allah a lot and shout about jihad and infidels. Nobody took the Japanese seriously in 1941...even fewer took Islamic radicals seriously in 2001. The warnings were similar, and the results were the same.
Click to expand...

It has always struck me that the Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory is basically advancing the same sort of thinking: the Japanese didn't really get the jump on us. We knew about the attack all along, and it was all part of Roosevelt's master plan. Even if it appears that the Japanese planned and executed a surprise attack, we were really two steps ahead of them the whole time.

People forget that war is basically a series of blunders followed by episodes of sheer luck and occasional brilliance. We just tend to remember the luck and brilliance of wars that we win, and the blunders of the ones we lose.
 
That's about it

ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
It has always struck me that the Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory is basically advancing the same sort of thinking: the Japanese didn't really get the jump on us. We knew about the attack all along, and it was all part of Roosevelt's master plan. Even if it appears that the Japanese planned and executed a surprise attack, we were really two steps ahead of them the whole time.

People forget that war is basically a series of blunders followed by episodes of sheer luck and occasional brilliance. We just tend to remember the luck and brilliance of wars that we win, and the blunders of the ones we lose.
Click to expand...

People often forget that the other guy is as clever and smart as you are. All through history, enemy victories have been attributed to treason and trickery. "Masked batteries" caused the Union defeat at Bull Run. Mata Hari was responsible for French failures in 1917. Paratroopers dressed as nuns conquered Belgium in 1940. All rubbish. We assume that our generals are beleagured but ingenious patriots and their generals are incompetent mad dogs.

We simply have to accept that the good guys do not win every time and that history is not a series of inevitabilities in which they do. For that, I blame history textbooks, which make history boring by presenting history as just that. That's one of the reasons kids tune out in history class. If the good guys always win, then why should anyone care? Answer...they don't always win, and we don't always have the smartest guys.
 
ARubberChickenWithAPulley said:
It has always struck me that the Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory is basically advancing the same sort of thinking: the Japanese didn't really get the jump on us. We knew about the attack all along, and it was all part of Roosevelt's master plan. Even if it appears that the Japanese planned and executed a surprise attack, we were really two steps ahead of them the whole time.

People forget that war is basically a series of blunders followed by episodes of sheer luck and occasional brilliance. We just tend to remember the luck and brilliance of wars that we win, and the blunders of the ones we lose.
Click to expand...

Well said...and Pearl Harbor was by no means the last of the American blunders in the Pacific! But they got it right, eventually.
 
The most silly thing about the Pearl CT is that even if you accept its premise that FDR allowed an attack to happen in order to get an excuse to go to war, it still doesn't make sense.

Obviously, even in that situation, he would not want them to win the initial battle. All he needed for his purpose was an attack on US ground. So why not put Pearl Harbour on the alert, send most of the fleet (not just the carriers) out, and not away from the action, but into a position to strike hard at the Japanese fleet, the moment the first bomb fell over Pearl? He would have a war (he would already know that the Japanese would declare war immidiately after the attack), and he would have a first decisive strike against the enemy.

Even given evil, secret intentions, it would make no sense at all to render Pearl Harmour defenceless and unprepared.

Hans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom