Ian Woods
Pearl Harbour: History Whitewashed?
Mon Sep 22 20:03:44 2003
67.1.155.233

Pearl Harbour: History Whitewashed?
Ian Woods - Centre for Research on Globalisation

On December 7 of last year, America 'celebrated' the Sixtieth
Anniversary of Pearl Harbor. On that date in history - often referred to
as "a day of infamy" - a surprise attack was staged by the Japanese on
the American naval base in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Heavy American
casualties were inflicted on those based on the island outpost which lay
halfway between the United States and Japan. The devastation aroused the
anger of the American people. Soon afterwards, the U.S. government
declared war on Japan and Germany and joined the Allies in World War
Two.

A Day of Infamy

According to historian, John Toland, "The events of Sunday
morning, December 7, 1941, have always been shrouded in mystery.
Japanese bombs had scarcely stopped falling on Pearl Harbor before
shocked and angry Americans were calling for an investigation of the
catastrophe, one of the most sudden and complete defeats in United
States history. Within weeks, Franklin D. Roosevelt had appointed a
blue-ribbon committee, headed by Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, to
look into the events leading up to the Japanese attack. Its judgment
placed the blame on the Hawaiian commanders, General Short and Admiral
Kimmel, in spite of much contradictory evidence. "Their disgrace aroused
a storm of controversy. Pleading a wartime need for secrecy, the
government kept a tight lid on the facts surrounding the Pearl Harbor
disaster. There were rumors of a whitewash, and knowledgeable
crypt-analysts talked of a Japanese order given in the highly classified
Purple Code (which, under extreme security wraps, the United States had
been decoding for years). The so-called "winds execute" signal, they
said, had warned Washington of imminent attack - a warning never passed
on to Hawaii. "Eight more investigations followed, during and after the
war, as partisans on both sides - field officers versus the Washington
establishment - traded sensational and sometimes incredible assertions,
accusations, and denials. Witnesses changed their testimony under
pressure; files were destroyed or 'mislaid'; and key government figures
'forgot' where they were, what they said, and what they did in the
crucial hours preceding the attack."

INFAMY, by John Toland, raises and answers some important
questions about Pearl Harbor. Was there prior knowledge? Why were
commanding officers Short and Kimmel not informed of an impending
attack? Could Roosevelt have known of the approaching carrier force and
decided not to act? Could the Americans have ambushed the Japanese and
shortened the war? According to Toland, the Roosevelt administration had
foreknowledge of Japan's military plans.


Prior Warning

"Confirmation of Dutch foreknowledge of the Japanese attack also
came from General Albert C. Wedemeyer. In 1980 he informed the author
that during a meeting in 1943, Vice Admiral Conrad E. L. Helfrich of the
Royal Netherlands Navy expressed wonder that the Americans had been
surprised at Pearl Harbor. The Dutch, Helfrich said, had broken the code
and knew that the Japanese were going to strike Pearl Harbor. "He seemed
surprised that I did not know this," recalled Wedemeyer, "and when I
explained that I doubted seriously that this information was known in
Washington prior to Pearl Harbor attack, Admiral Helfrich was skeptical
because it was his clear recollection that his government had notified
my government." (p. 317 - 318)

"Vice Admiral Conrad E. L. Helfrich of the Royal Netherlands Navy
expressed wonder that the Americans had been surprised at Pearl Harbor.
The Dutch, Helfrich said ... knew that the Japanese were going to strike
Pearl Harbor ... it was his clear recollection that his government had
notified [the U.S.] government." "By December 4, Roosevelt and a small
group of advisers, including Stimson, Knox and Marshall, were faced with
three options. They could announce to Japan and the world word of the
approaching Kido Butai [the Japanese fleet]; this would indubitably have
forced the Japanese to turn back. Second, they could inform Kimmel and
Short that Japanese carriers were northwest of Hawaii and order them to
send every available long-range patrol plane to discover this force. An
attack conceived in such secrecy would necessarily depend on complete
surprise for success, and once discovered out of range of its target,
Kido Butai would have turned back ... "A month before the Hull ultimatum
to Japan, Ickes had written in his diary: 'For a long time I have
believed that our best entrance into the war would be by way of Japan.'
The first bomb dropped on Oahu would have finally solved the problem of
getting an America - half of whose people wanted peace - into the
crusade against Hitler. And the third option would accomplish this: keep
Kimmel and Short and all but a select few in ignorance so that the
Japanese could continue to their launching point unaware of their
discovery. This would insure that the Japanese would launch their
attack. If Kimmel, Short and others had been privy to the secret, they
might possibly have reacted in such a way as to reveal to the Japanese
that their attack plan was known." (p. 318)

"One of Knox's close friends, James G. Stahlman, wrote Admiral
Kemp Tolley in 1973 that Knox had spent most of the night of December 6
at the White House with the President: All were waiting for what they
knew was coming: an attack on Pearl Harbor." (p. 320)

"There, therefore, can be no question that between the dates of
December 4 and December 6, the imminence of war on the following
Saturday and Sunday, December 6 and 7, was clear-cut and definite ...
"Up to the morning of December 7, 1941, everything that the Japanese
were planning to do was known to the United States except the final
message instructing the Japanese Embassy to present the 14th part
together with the preceding 13 parts of the long message at one o'clock
on December 7, or the very hour and minute when bombs were falling on
Pearl Harbor." (p. 108)


Cover-Up?

"A massive cover-up followed Pearl Harbor a few days later,
according to an officer close to Marshall, when the Chief of Staff
ordered a lid put on the affair. 'Gentlemen,' he told half a dozen
officers, 'this goes to the grave with us.'" (p. 321)

Three years later, after the Army Pearl Harbor Board and Navy
Inquiry announced its findings, one man from Rhode Island summed up the
feelings of the American people:"The Government's cover-up of the
responsibility for that catastrophe has done more to undermine morale
than any other single event of the past three years. The thinkers of
America, and there are millions of them, won't stand for such guff. I am
but one of the millions of Americans today who are shocked, humiliated
and indignant because of this announcement." (p. 130)

"But there was little doubt in knowledgeable Washington circles
that the navy would find it all top secret and the Pearl Harbor cover-up
would continue." (p. 109)

And the cover-up continues to this day. Witness the plethora of
Hollywood videos, history books and media coverage which say nothing of
the real story behind Pearl Harbor. But history has its own way of
painting its victims. On his death, President Roosevelt was described by
one who knew him well as "a man who never told the truth if a lie would
suffice." (p. 134) John O'Donnell in the New York Daily News wrote, "The
evidence builds up to the simple brutal fact that F.D.R., the Big Brain,
through blind stupidity ... was directly and personally responsible for
the blood and disaster." (p. 160)


Pearl Harbor ... Operation Northwoods ... September 11

Is it possible that history is repeating itself now? I only raise
the question, because there are so many questions that remain unanswered
concerning the events of September 11. In the words of philosopher and
poet George Santayana,

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

The evidence presented by John Toland suggests that Pearl Harbor
was a crisis created by the U.S. government on December 7, 1941 to
manipulate public opinion and sway the American people into going to
war.

Ian Woods is the publisher and editor of Global Outlook published
in association with the CRG. Copyright Ian Woods 2002.

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/WOO203A.html

See: Pearl Harbour: the Facts Behind the Fiction by James Perloff
www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?id=179


http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1096
--
"Having A Free Thought Is The Most Radical Act You Can Commit! "
"Expressing That Free Thought Is Your Right As A Human Being!"

• Support for War in Iraq Based on False Reasoning — I C H, Mon Sep 22 22:02
• MASKING OF OCCUPATION — Mark Bruzonsky, Mon Sep 22 21:49