Category: WWII

Why Has the “Official” U.S. History Overshadowed the Real Heroes? [Part 1 of 2]

Not a surprise to FDR, Pearl Harbor was a surprise to thousands of sailors that died that day! FDR’s economic policies in 1940 and into 1941 maneuvered the Japanese to strike out at Pearl Harbor while the US Navy had broken the Japanese code which Washington DC deciphered and did not pass on to sailors at Pearl Harbor.

Time and again lately, I run into a bit of history, real history, of real heroes in the United State’s past, I have NEVER heard about them, in a substantial way, in United States academia’s “official” history!

I think I am getting a bit ticked that the “great”, “free” and “exceptional” United States of American would have to twist its own history apparently to paint our government itself as exceptional, all day everyday, apparently.

A few months ago I ran across this article, promptly bookmarked, from ‘New American’ by John J. Dywer that outlines what has happened all along in this country (and other countries as well):

But the actual histories of the men suggest that “history” is often little more than propaganda that has been oft repeated. An accounting of the quality of the men’s judgments, their standards of behavior in interpersonal conflicts, and their personal accomplishments makes it logical that American history should, instead, laud Lindbergh while recoiling from Roosevelt.

There you have it. History as told by the intellectual class in academic books and in academia in a democracy ends up being a distorted version of what really happened. History is written by the victors, not just of wars, but of political struggles as well.

Enter two heroes of the early 20th century in the United States, one you will remember, the other, you may know a few passing facts.

FDR is well known as a four-term president, stories of his “fireside” chats, as well as the myth that he guided the United States out of the Great Depression with his New Deal, and that FDR, having promised peace, reluctantly guided the United States to fight Japan across the Pacific and Germany/Italy across the Atlantic to win WWII.

Lindbergh, flew solo across the Atlantic and had his son kidnapped and murdered, and later, as myth would have it, was an isolationist.

Does this fit what your high school history book or teacher taught you? My guess is that you may agree with me.

So let us tackle in “Part 1 of 2”, the hero that everyone is familiar with, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who in the beginning of his political career …:

… capitalized on the fact that his distant cousin Theodore Roosevelt was one of the most admired U.S. presidents and managed to become governor of New York. After winning two gubernatorial terms, “FDR” parlayed his own handsome visage, galvanizing charisma, and message of hope for Great Depression-ravaged America into the presidency in 1933

So far so good right? Well, it about to come off the rails if you are a fan of FDR:

Roosevelt, riding a historic wave of success and popularity, issued an executive order in early 1934 that outlawed an entire industry, private airline mail carrying. Instead, Roosevelt determined, the U.S. military would provide the air transportation for delivering air mail.

It is one thing to transition the USPS from horses to delivery vehicles, even though they STILL can’t run the monopoly with a profit, but to take on mail delivery with army pilots? Only government can come up with a decision like this, no free-market business would have been that stupid. John shares more along this line:

Brave army pilots, ill trained for their new mail-carrying mission and flying planes far inferior to the airlines’ (one commercial liner, for instance, could carry the load of six army planes) and inadequate for either the pitch black of night or the freezing, snow-blown winter, began immediately to perish.

As the body count rose to 12 and accidents to 66, masses of air mail were delayed or never delivered, and public fury mounted at the administration.

90 days later, FDR reversed his stupid decision, and one of his own shared the quick lesson learned:

Roosevelt ally Henry “Hap” Arnold, later five-star commanding general of the U.S. Army Air Forces during WWII, summarized the fiasco: “Within two weeks we were forced to realize that although the ‘will to do’ might get the job done, the price of our doing it was equal to the sacrifice of a wartime combat operation. Courage alone could not substitute for years of cross-country experience; for properly equipped airplanes; and for suitable blind flying instruments, such as the regular air-line mail pilots were using.”

A business leader making decisions like that would be sidelined to some area of the company where they might do the least damage, but not in government. Stupid is promoted and made exponential:

His famed “first hundred days,” contrary to many of his campaign promises about avoiding the centralization of government power, unleashed an unparalleled blizzard of legislation in which the federal government sought to correct the supposed failures of the capitalistic system — through the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the National Industrial Recovery Act, and many other new laws. “It is common sense to take a method and try it,” he explained. “If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.”

Letting economic lightweights take charge of the whole American economy, what can go wrong? The myth that capitalism got the country in a position where unemployment was almost 25% was enough for the masses to think that FDR could do this, just with his charisma!

So we not only have stupid government, but we have stupid people.

About government, Albert J. Nock, an avid writer in FDR’s days, wrote:

“I wonder how many such men in America would know that Communism, the New Deal, Fascism, Nazism, are merely so-many trade-names for collectivist Statism, like the trade-names for tooth-pastes which are all exactly alike except for the flavouring.”
― Albert Jay Nock

About stupid people, Albert J. Nock offered a counter-balance:

The Remnant has always existed, since the beginning of man and it survives today.  It is not possessed with extraordinary intelligence, wealth or power.  Those that comprise it are just ordinary human beings, average by—and—large and you will never recognize them for what they are when you meet them, see them or hear them. They are the builders, re—builders and redeemers of humanity.  They are the ones who sustain and regenerate society — and above all else — they persevere.  You can guess who they are or might have been but you will never know with any certainty.  They are friends of liberty though, that much I know.

It was in Nock’s writings that actually gave me hope a few years ago. Discouraged by both personal and social media attempts to help people see the truth, to research for themselves the truth, I wondered if this was just a recent phenomenon. Then I found that in Albert J. Nock’s writings that in the 1930s the masses actually believe that government could not only help, but be the savior for the USA. The wisdom he offered can be found in the following:

it is Nock’s contention that when one has something of value to say, a strong and workable principle if you will, speaking to the masses and expecting wholesale results is the incorrect approach, rather, speaking through mass—man to the ‘reachable’ few is the accurate and rewarding path to take.  In that way your message is not prostituted or diluted in any way and remains true and whole.  It reaches those ‘with ears to hear,’ who are able to understand and make use of its intelligence.

This gives me hope in the few ears that can hear in 2019! I don’t need to hear rave reviews of the articles I share, I just can rest knowing that the seeds are planted, for later comes the harvest.

To quickly summarize the balance of FDR’s “wisdom”, (as we in the US Navy would call a CF, Cluster F**k, Mr. Dwyer shares:

Though the realization gradually dawned on Roosevelt and his minions that no amount of constitutionally questionable New Deal programs and Machiavellian presidential scheming could end the Depression, Roosevelt kept his programs going full steam ahead. Near the end of Roosevelt’s second term, Secretary of Treasury Henry Morgenthau, a key New Deal architect, penned this startling confession regarding the administration’s failure: “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and now if I am wrong somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosper. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started. And enormous debt to boot.”

As nations on nearly every continent emerged from the economic cataclysm, U.S. unemployment skyrocketed back up to nine million workers in 1939 — 12 million if counting Americans employed at taxpayer-funded “make-work” jobs — a total nearly that of when Roosevelt first won the presidency, and after oceans of New Deal spending.

All that debt for nothing, nada, zero benefit. About this time the government started the habit of “cooking the books” to make it look like things were on the up and up. There are economists that have gone back to the “books” and found blatant lying on the economic stats produced in that day, that I believe persists to the present!

So what does the state do when it feels itself back in the corner economically with no good place to go inside an election cycle? It seeks war!

In September 1939 when Germany and Russia invaded Poland, precipitating WWII, Roosevelt saw his chance to eliminate U.S. unemployment. Amity Schlaes opined in her Depression chronicle The Forgotten Man: “A war … would hand to Roosevelt the thing he had always lacked — a chance, quite literally, to provide jobs to the remaining unemployed ..  Roosevelt hadn’t known what to do with the extra people in 1938, but now (1940) he did: he could make them soldiers.” Never mind that the private-sector unemployment problem was exacerbated by the economic drag caused by his costly Big Government programs — or that going to war would make government even more expensive.

So if the New Deal fiasco was not enough, why not create more debt and involve the US in a war it didn’t need to participate in? Beside trying to entice Germany to do something, anything as an excuse to mobilize for war (like what the US did with the Lusitania to get the US in WWI), Hitler refused to take the bait. So FDR turned to Japan:

The president [FDR] implemented all eight planks of the infamous McCollum memorandum. Authored by Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence, these planks advocated actions about which McCollum stated, “If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war [against the United States], so much the better.” They included a new and dramatic U.S. military presence in the Far East; the gradual choking off of all crucial manufacturing elements to Japan by America and its allies; and placement of the U.S. Pacific Fleet in Hawaii, an isolated outpost thousands of miles toward Japan from the American mainland.

Admiral James O. Richardson, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, immediately recognized the jeopardy in which this move placed the fleet and protested so strongly to Roosevelt that the president fired him.

After meeting with the president on October 16, 1941, Republican Secretary of War Henry Stimson, a staunch internationalist and member of the world-government-promoting Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in his diary: “We face the delicate question of the diplomatic fencing to be done so as to be sure Japan is put into the wrong and makes the first bad move — overt move.” A diary entry six weeks later following a meeting of the War Cabinet — less than two weeks before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor — clarifies what Stimson meant by “overt move”: “The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.” After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Stimson confessed that “my first feeling was of relief … that a crisis had come in a way which would unite all our people.” After the war, he added that, “We needed the Japanese to commit the first overt act.”

So FDR got his war, costing thousands of sailors at Pearl Harbor their lives as well as a large chunk of the Pacific Fleet. But the propaganda worked once more, the “surprise” attack was bought by 99% of Americans and suddenly, everyone was for war. Truth is indeed the first causality of war!

So enough of FDR, who I consider to be one of the five WORST presidents of the United States of American, and on to Charles Lindbergh, a true hero as you will soon see in “Part 2 of 2” to be posted soon!

Stay tuned

-SF1

“By Their Fruit You Will Recognize Them”: The 1919 Treaty of Versailles

I have a (bad?) habit. When I hear of some historical event, I look for the context and the history that preceded that event. Do I have a CSI in my DNA? I guess I just want to know the event in a holistic way so that I do not judge it by it’s appearance only. (My family knows this reference, but it works really well here)

As I pointed out in a previous post a couple of weeks ago:

My point today is that any book on any subject that has you reflecting on what you thought you knew, can launch you into doing research in and around the book reading to attempt to get at the nugget of truth that is typically obscured by an overriding narrative that the masses like to believe.

Reading a “wrong” book or a book from a different perspective from your own should never be seen as a waste of time. In fact, it is usually this kind of ‘entertaining a thought without accepting it’ is essential towards being a true CSI’er of our history.

One of the books I am reading is “Appeasement”, by Tim Bouverie. Primarily about the steps Britain took, or failed to take, with Hitler that led to a disastrous start to WWII. It is assumed in this book, written from a primarily Oxford viewpoint, that the treaty signed at the end of WWI should have kept Germany from rearming causing the British to once again cross that channel and save the day for the continent of Europe.

Well today I want to shed a little light on that treaty, which as of this past week turned 100 years old. Just today, at Lew Rockwell, a post appeared that helped me to mine this time period even more for the wisdom that can come out of understanding history, which is basically just “relationships” at a macro level.

The work by the author, Edward W. Fuller, is fascinating in that it really tells the story of the “tree” that was planted in 1919 which makes the fruit that we see in the 1930s, with Hitler’s rise to power, give us no real surprise.

I contend, that if we all really knew history well, even events that happen today might have us all asking the right questions in the search for truth. We want to be like The Who in their song “We won’t get fooled again”:

Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t want to get fooled again
No, no!
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

So let me assist in getting some major points down on the situation 100 years ago when many nations attempted to draw up a treaty to ensure that “The Great War” would not be repeated:

June 28, 2019 is the centenary of the Treaty of Versailles. The notorious treaty, signed by Germany on June 28, 1919, was the most important of the peace treaties that ended the First World War. Although each defeated nation signed its own treaty, the entire settlement is often called the Treaty of Versailles.

Yes Germany signed this treaty, however, doesn’t it really take two (or more) to actively work on hammering out a real treaty? I do think that the author of the book “Appeasement” and 95% of US citizens think and have been taught that this treaty was indeed honorable, not only in its terms but also in its inception. Mr. Fuller points out something interesting:

In early January, 1919, delegates from Britain, France, Italy, and the United States congregated in Paris. Initially, the Allies’ plan was to have a preliminary conference amongst themselves to decide on the peace terms to offer Germany. After the brief preliminary conference, the plan was to invite Germany to a full-scale peace conference to negotiate the terms.

As the Allies squabbled amongst themselves, the preliminary conference gradually developed into the full-scale conference. The Germans were not summoned to Paris until early May. And when they finally arrived, they were never allowed to negotiate the terms of the treaty. Thus, the Treaty of Versailles was a dictated treaty, not a negotiated treaty.

Whoa! While I knew that Germany got really ripped off in this treaty, I mean, it had not even entered this conflict on its own, as Eric Margolis shares:

.. Germany’s role in the conflict was no greater than the other belligerents, and perhaps less than commonly believed.  Starved into submission by Britain’s naval blockade, Germany was unfairly and foolishly saddled with total war guilt, and saw 10% of its territory and 7 million of its people torn away at Versailles by the war’s rapacious victors.

One thing that stood out to me in my read of “Appeasement” is how inadequate was my own high school and post high school history “official” education. I am so glad that at this date I can re/un-learn enough to really know what was going on and why.

Just yesterday I read that Serbia, Bosnia, Iraq, Jordan and Palestine all were relinquished by the German’s with this treaty and France and Britain would be the new overseers. Don’t tell me that this has nothing to do with the Middle East as it stands today. Something tells be there is a lot more to this story.

Eric Margolis hints at why the French and the British did not include Germany at the negotiation table when he says:

Both of these imperial powers feared Germany’s growing commercial and military power (just as the US today fears China’s rise). Germany’s vibrant social democracy with its worker’s rights and concern for the poor posed a threat to the capitalists of Britain and France. Britain’s imperialists were deeply worried by the creation of a feeble little German Empire based in Africa. At the time they controlled a quarter of the globe and all of its oceans.

One has to wonder how the world might have been if England would have acted honorably for once and put the brakes on the rush to war fever that initially was primarily a French emotion:

A total conflagration could still have been averted if Great Britain, which had been playing neutral, had boldly demanded the rush to war cease. France would have been unlikely to go to war without Britain’s supporting its left flank in Flanders.

… a coterie of anti-German officials in Britain, led by the duplicitous foreign secretary Sir Edward Grey and the ambitious, war-yearning imperialist, Winston Churchill, pushed the British Empire to war against Germany. They were joined by a cabal of German-haters in the French government. British and French industrialists, fearful of German competition, and seeing huge profits to be made, backed the war party.

Does this sound familiar or what. How much DNA was transferred to the USA when the British Empire help the American colonies get established in the 1600s?

Beyond not being an equal partner in the “negotiation” of this treaty, the obedience to the treaty’s terms were also an issue:

The military clauses of the treaty disarmed Germany. But the German disarmament was supposed to be part of general European disarmament sponsored by the League of Nations. While the Germans were disarmed by the treaty, the Allies did not fulfill their promise to disarm. This was unfair, and the Allies’ broken promise infuriated German public opinion.

Psychologically, there was more damage from this treaty to those German citizens who knew better. Consider this “feature”:

The reparations section of the treaty included Article 231 – the infamous war-guilt clause. Article 231 required Germany to accept responsibility for starting the war. This clause was unfair, because Germany was not solely responsible for the war. All the major European powers share the blame.

Anger, resentment, punishment all lead to a sense of GROSS INJUSTICE!

I, myself, am wired in a way that is incensed by injustice. Beyond injustice, is my own drive to give individuals on a micro level, and people groups on a macro level the ability to give their consent to those who would govern them, otherwise this becomes slavery even if it comes under the guise of “government” for the greater good.

.. the Allied leaders assured the world that the peace would be based on the principle of national self-determination. Their actions proved otherwise. At the conference, the Allies imperialistically carved up the world and created new but unsustainable nation states with government coercion.

Is this believable? In 2019, after a century of war with 200 million killed by governments, you just have to agree that they do lie, they all do!

So for Germany, what did this mean?

… how could a lunatic like Hitler rise to power in Germany? The answer is the First World War and the Treaty of Versailles. The German population thought the treaty was unfair, and they wanted someone to oppose it. The treaty created the platform for Hitler’s rise to power. For this reason, the Treaty of Versailles must be considered a major cause of the Second World War.

The fruit of this non-negotiated treaty was more war. Such is the wisdom of men (including woMEN) in committees … stupid is multiplied!

For the rest of the world the author concludes:

The First World War and the Paris Peace Conference led to Nazism in Germany, fascism in Italy, militarism in Japan, extremism in the Middle East, and communism in Russia, China, Korea, and Vietnam. What must be learned from the war and peace settlement? Here is the most important lesson: the free market economy is the only way to lasting world peace.

The war was caused by Europe’s imperialistic intervention in foreign trade. In the decades before the war, there was a massive drive by the European powers to expand their empires. This put the European powers on a collision course. Why the imperial expansion? The European powers did not allow other powers to trade freely in their empires. For this reason, the European powers viewed imperial expansion as the only way to gain new markets for their goods. Europe’s rejection of the principle of free trade was the fundamental cause of the First World War.

Free trade brings peace, but states love war.

Are we getting the message now?

-SF1

High School History: Appeasement and Chamberlain, What Word Do You Think of Next?

Hands clasped in friendship, Adolf Hitler and England’s Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, are shown in this historic pose at Munich on Sept. 30, 1938. This was the day when the premier of France and England signed the Munich agreement, sealing the fate of Czechoslovakia. Next to Chamberlain is Sir Neville Henderson, British Ambassador to Germany. Paul Schmidt, an Interpreter, stands next to Hitler. (AP Photo)

My word is “weak”.

From my own experiences in classrooms from 1960s to 1970s, the appeasement of Germany was an error that resulted in Germany almost taking over the world. The problem with this thinking is that since WWII there has been a revisionist effort that finally started in the 1960s using documents from all sources, from British, American and French to Russian, German and Austrian as well that challenges this common thinking.

In fact, until the early 1960s, the myth that appeasement was in error was solidly supported by all official books of that day until the magnificent work by A.J .P. Taylor, The Origins of the Second World War (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1961 — now New York: Athenaeum, 1962) was released. The beauty of this book was that Taylor had formally supported the myth in full with his previous writings. This about face in the early 1960s helped to unpack what really happened in 1938-1939 regarding appeasement.

Furthermore, Murray Rothbard summarizes what really happened in the pre-WWI, WWI, pre-WWII and WWII period:

World War I was essentially a clash between Germany and Austria vs. Russia over who would dominate Eastern Europe, with Britain, France, and U.S. meddling into the fray.

The peculiar defeat of both Germany and Russia in World War I, opened up, artificially, the path for national self-determination in Eastern Europe, a task which was terribly botched at Versailles. New injustices were created there, especially for the defeated countries.

By 1939, Germany and Russia were at peace over Eastern Europe, and yet Britain precipitated war by leaping to war over a Poland which could not exist in defiance of both its great neighbors.

Finally, as a result of Britain, and the U.S. meddling into a war over Eastern Europe which did not properly concern them and Germany’s tragic blunder in attacking Russia, the conquest of Germany naturally left Russia in virtual charge over Eastern Europe, again its sphere of influence.

What prompted me to better understand what I call the “inter-war” period from the end of WWI in 1918 to the beginning of WWII in 1939 was a book my oldest son gave me for my birthday/Father’s Day called “Appeasement” by Tim Bouverie. Written from a British perspective, Tim paints the 1938 efforts as a lost cause for keeping the world safe from Nazi expansionism. I knew I was in trouble when I read the following early on in his book:

.. while today the concept of appeasement is gaining new currency as the West struggles to respond to Russian revanchism and aggression ..

Can we take a look at who is doing the aggression?

But I digress.

Today’s post is not a review of this book that I just opened, that will occur at a later date when I have read all 512 pages. ETA = TBD

My point today is that any book on any subject that has you reflecting on what you thought you knew, can launch you into doing research in and around the book reading to attempt to get at the nugget of truth that is typically obscured by an overriding narrative that the masses like to believe.

Reading a “wrong” book or a book from a different perspective from your own should never be seen as a waste of time. In fact, it is usually this kind of ‘entertaining a thought without accepting it’ is essential towards being a true CSI’er of our history. Part of understanding the future is knowing how to sift the “news” and “events” of today and tomorrow towards understanding what is really happening, and then being prepared to adjust your own sails as a result so you do not end up like this (unless you are prepared to do so):

So get out there and read as your heart guides you. Soak up the challenge that comes from considering competing narratives, philosophies and beliefs. Be willing to go against the flow and always seek to be prepared to make the most out of difficult situations that happens in the storms of life.

Sometimes, reading what you sense to be your adversary’s view may be the best way to understand them in a way that they themselves might not understand. Savvy? True dialog can only occur when you understand what others base their thinking on and why they might think that way.

Also, happy Father’s Day to all fathers. Please understand your role in helping the next generation to question everything, even if that means you will have to admit from time to time that even you do not understand everything and that mystery in this world is a given. The dialog itself is essential for fathers and their sons and daughters, for friends and for communities to unpack life in this broken place we currently call home.

Enjoy your day!

-SF!

Would the 9/11 Cover-Up Team Use “Pearl Harbor” Reference, IF Americans Knew the Truth?

Words matter. In 2001, there were still many alive that lived through the shock of 07DEC1941 when the Japanese navy pulled off a “surprise” attack on Pearl Harbor. The vast majority of the people had either been taught in school or had read all the papers of the day, or the radio broadcasts that it was a “day in infamy” according to FDR.

Well:

“History — A lie agreed upon”  —Napoleon Bonaparte

Just because 90% or more agree on something does not make it the truth. Sure Japanese Zeros bombed helpless sailors on the various ships in Pearl Harbor, and THEY and their commanders were surprised, but Washington DC was not. From this New American article:

Comprehensive research has shown not only that Washington knew in advance of the attack, but that it deliberately withheld its foreknowledge from our commanders in Hawaii in the hope that the “surprise” attack would catapult the U.S. into World War II. Oliver Lyttleton, British Minister of Production, stated in 1944: “Japan was provoked into attacking America at Pearl Harbor. It is a travesty of history to say that America was forced into the war.”

Just a little bit of research on the chain of events will show first that FDR preferred to get a war started with Germany:

During World War II’s early days, the president offered numerous provocations to Germany: freezing its assets; shipping 50 destroyers to Britain; and depth-charging U-boats. The Germans did not retaliate, however. They knew America’s entry into World War I had shifted the balance of power against them, and they shunned a repeat of that scenario.

I can’t help but think that Russia’s patience with US provocations in 2018 is something learned from these early days of WWII.

So when FDR can’t get Hitler to “bite” …

FDR therefore switched his focus to Japan. Japan had signed a mutual defense pact with Germany and Italy (the Tripartite Treaty). Roosevelt knew that if Japan went to war with the United States, Germany and Italy would be compelled to declare war on America — thus entangling us in the European conflict by the back door. As Harold Ickes, secretary of the Interior, said in October 1941: “For a long time I have believed that our best entrance into the war would be by way of Japan.”

Basically, the strategy to entice Japan into a war with the United States that emerged, according to Gary North in this Lew Rockwell article:

In October, 1940, Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum, an Annapolis graduate who was fluent in Japanese, wrote a 5-page memorandum. He was with the Office of Naval Intelligence. He outlined an 8-point strategy on how to get Japan to attack the United States, thereby enabling the United States to defeat Japan…

McCollum was a missionary kid, knew Japan and its culture well and knew that the Japanese Empire could be goaded into this:

Over the next year, seven of the eight points were followed by the President. The sixth was already in place: keeping the Pacific Fleet in Hawaii, which the Fleet’s commander, Admiral Richardson, strongly opposed. The day after McCollum wrote his memo, Roosevelt informed Richardson that the fleet would remain at Pearl. Richardson vocally opposed the plan one more time. He was replaced by Kimmel the following February [1941] …

It was one thing to make the Japanese empire desperate by:

… freezing her [Jamap’s] assets in America; closing the Panama Canal to her shipping; progressively halting vital exports to Japan until we finally joined Britain in an all-out embargo; sending a hostile note to the Japanese ambassador implying military threats if Tokyo did not alter its Pacific policies; and on November 26th — just 11 days before the Japanese attack — delivering an ultimatum that demanded, as prerequisites to resumed trade, that Japan withdraw all troops from China and Indochina, and in effect abrogate her Tripartite Treaty with Germany and Italy.

.. it is another thing to make sure there was an “open door” to give to the Japanese navy to attack Pearl Harbor through.

First, by breaking the Japanese code in 1940 gave Washington DC (but not Pearl Harbor) the details of the buildup to war and Japanese military movements:

 

One of the most important elements in America’s foreknowledge of Japan’s intentions was our government’s success in cracking Japan’s secret diplomatic code known as “Purple.” Tokyo used it to communicate to its embassies and consulates, including those in Washington and Hawaii. The code was so complex that it was enciphered and deciphered by machine. A talented group of American cryptoanalysts broke the code in 1940 and devised a facsimile of the Japanese machine.

Second, a corridor was established:

On November 25th, approximately one hour after the Japanese attack force left port for Hawaii, the U.S. Navy issued an order forbidding U.S. and Allied shipping to travel via the North Pacific. All transpacific shipping was rerouted through the South Pacific. This order was even applied to Russian ships docked on the American west coast.

The purpose is easy to fathom. If any commercial ship accidentally stumbled on the Japanese task force, it might alert Pearl Harbor. As Rear Admiral Richmond K. Turner, the Navy’s War Plans officer in 1941, frankly stated: “We were prepared to divert traffic when we believed war was imminent. We sent the traffic down via the Torres Strait, so that the track of the Japanese task force would be clear of any traffic.”

… During the week before December 7th, naval aircraft searched more than two million square miles of the Pacific — but never saw the Japanese force. This is because Kimmel and Short had only enough planes to survey one-third of the 360-degree arc around them, and intelligence had advised (incorrectly) that they should concentrate on the Southwest.

Thirdly, all other intelligence gathered in the months leading up to the “surprise” attack on Pearl was kept away from Pearl’s commanders:

On January 27th, our ambassador to Japan, Joseph Grew, sent a message to Washington stating: “The Peruvian Minister has informed a member of my staff that he has heard from many sources, including a Japanese source, that in the event of trouble breaking out between the United States and Japan, the Japanese intended to make a surprise attack against Pearl Harbor with all their strength….”

Congressman Martin Dies would write: “Early in 1941 the Dies Committee came into possession of a strategic map which gave clear proof of the intentions of the Japanese to make an assault on Pearl Harbor. The strategic map was prepared by the Japanese Imperial Military Intelligence Department. As soon as I received the document I telephoned Secretary of State Cordell Hull and told him what I had. Secretary Hull directed me not to let anyone know about the map and stated that he would call me as soon as he talked to President Roosevelt…

Dusko Popov was a Yugoslav who worked as a double agent for both Germany and Britain. His true allegiance was to the Allies. In the summer of 1941, the Nazis ordered Popov to Hawaii to make a detailed study of Pearl Harbor and its nearby airfields. The agent deduced that the mission betokened a surprise attack by the Japanese. In August, he fully reported this to the FBI in New York. J. Edgar Hoover later bitterly recalled that he had provided warnings to FDR about Pearl Harbor, but that Roosevelt told him not to pass the information any further and to just leave it in his (the president’s) hands…

In Java, in early December, the Dutch Army decoded a dispatch from Tokyo to its Bangkok embassy, forecasting attacks on four sites including Hawaii. The Dutch passed the information to Brigadier General Elliot Thorpe, the U.S. military observer. Thorpe sent Washington a total of four warnings. The last went to General Marshall’s intelligence chief. Thorpe was ordered to send no further messages concerning the matter. The Dutch also had their Washington military attaché, Colonel Weijerman, personally warn General Marshall.

Captain Johann Ranneft, the Dutch naval attaché in Washington, who was awarded the Legion of Merit for his services to America, recorded revealing details in his diary. On December 2nd, he visited the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI). Ranneft inquired about the Pacific. An American officer, pointing to a wall map, said, “This is the Japanese Task Force proceeding East.” It was a spot midway between Japan and Hawaii. On December 6th, Ranneft returned and asked where the Japanese carriers were. He was shown a position on the map about 300-400 miles northwest of Pearl Harbor. Ranneft wrote: “I ask what is the meaning of these carriers at this location; whereupon I receive the answer that it is probably in connection with Japanese reports of eventual American action…. I myself do not think about it because I believe that everyone in Honolulu is 100 percent on the alert, just like everyone here at O.N.I.”

On November 29th, Secretary of State Cordell Hull secretly met with freelance newspaper writer Joseph Leib. Leib had formerly held several posts in the Roosevelt administration. Hull knew him and felt he was one newsman he could trust. The secretary of state handed him copies of some of the Tokyo intercepts concerning Pearl Harbor. He said the Japanese were planning to strike the base and that FDR planned to let it happen…

Even this:

I think that makes the point loud and clear. This is so very similar to how the Deep State today keeps its own “sub-agenda” to itself and plays the US military, plays the American people into a rush to “patriotism” when other nations get deceived towards a conflict with the US.

Note how the sailors at Pearl were USED as sitting ducks JUST SO the US could enter WWII “justified” and in “honor”.

However, none of this information was passed to our commanders in Hawaii, Kimmel and Short, with the exception of Ambassador Grew’s January warning, a copy of which reached Kimmel on February 1st. To allay any concerns, Lieutenant Commander McCollum — who originated the plan to incite Japan to war — wrote Kimmel: “Naval Intelligence places no credence in these rumors. Furthermore, based on known data regarding the present disposition and deployment of Japanese naval and army forces, no move against Pearl Harbor appears imminent or planned for in the foreseeable future.”

So Japan was maneuvered into this move, not unlike the Confederates were towards firing the first shot at Ft. Sumter when Lincoln tried to send ships and troops into the Charleston Harbor in April 1861:

On Sunday, December 7, 1941, Japan launched a sneak attack on the U.S. Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor, shattering the peace of a beautiful Hawaiian morning and leaving much of the fleet broken and burning. The destruction and death that the Japanese military visited upon Pearl Harbor that day — 18 naval vessels (including eight battleships) sunk or heavily damaged, 188 planes destroyed, over 2,000 servicemen killed — were exacerbated by the fact that American commanders in Hawaii were caught by surprise.

So because of the lies from WWII that have remained embedded in the American psyche for over 60 years as of 2001, these same references could be reused right after 9/11, scripted to conjure up the feelings of surprise and betrayal.

James Corbett, in this article, outlines one of the other phrases used to trigger these feelings and align the American public on the “noble” path the US government would have to take:

“Never forget.”

This is the mantra. The mantra that is repeated in the wake of every major false flag, every psychologically traumatizing incident that the deep state wishes to become a rallying cry for their next agenda item.

The ONLY way to break this multi-generational hold the Federal/US government has on the American citizens is to research for truth.

Yes it is hard work, yes it will take time and NO there is no one that will do this work for you, for your family or for your community. YOU could just stand up to the lies that have existed 7 (US is fighting ISIS), 13 (Iraq Invasion), 17 (9/11), 54 (Vietnam – Gulf of Tonkin), 55 (JFK Assassination), 77 (Pearl Harbor/WWII), 103 (RMS Lusitania/WWI), 120 (USS Maine in Havana Harbor / Spanish American War), 157 (Fort Sumter/ Southern Started Civil War), 231 (coup d’etat/US Constitution) years ago.

Be careful though:

Best book on FDR’s lies with Pearl Harbor, using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Robert Stinnett has done a service to this country and to the next generations in learning about their government.

-SF1

While Talking About Lies to Start Wars, What About Lies to End Them?

While I won’t even discuss the fact that the surrender Japan offered in May/June 1945 was identical to the surrender Japan was given AFTER the atomic bombs were dropped on civilian (not military) targets, it is what the public believed in August 1945 that ticks me off the most, that 85% approved the use of atomic weapons by Truman at that point in time. The wartime propaganda was most effective that is for sure, and truth had long been the first causality of that war from the outset.

While the support for these two atomic bombs has fallen to slightly less than the majority in recent years, a 2015 study showed:

… a clear majority of Americans would approve of using nuclear weapons first against the civilian population of a nonnuclear-armed adversary, even killing 2 million Iranian civilians, if they believed that such use would save the lives of 20,000 U.S. soldiers…

So human nature has changed very little indeed as once we are told another people group, defined by lines on a map, are bad .. we are quick to slaughter these people based on what the government/media has told us. Mark Twain said it best when he said:

Consider the thoughts that the military commanders of the day, who were either ready to retire or had retired had to say on the events 73 years ago this month:

Maj. Gen. Curtis LeMay, “The war would have been over in two weeks without the Russians entering and without the atomic bomb. The atomic bomb had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.”

Dwight Eisenhower, “I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary.”

President Truman’s Chief of Staff, Adm. William Leahy, “It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.”

So government lies to get us into wars, lies to get us out of the wars and then lies to keep their narrative intact for as long as they control the history books. We need a counter balance to this onslaught of fake news that has been around for hundreds of years, we need researchers to go to the source material to unpack the truth.

Along these lines, could Truman have been lied to as well? You might want to consider this quote:

“The World will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians..”(President Harry S. Truman in a radio speech to the Nation, August 9, 1945).

In fact, Hiroshima in 1945 had 350,000 people and was a city that had remained untouched through years of devastating air attacks on the Japanese home islands, and never figured in Bomber Command’s list of the 33 primary targets!

So in effect, the US “stalled” Japan’s surrender for months demanding “unconditional surrender”. Was this so the atomic bomb testing could still be achieved? Unconditional surrender meant to the Japanese was that the emperor, regarded by them to be divine, the direct descendant of the goddess of the sun would certainly be dethroned and probably put on trial as a war criminal and hanged, perhaps in front of his palace.

In hindsight, it was not the United States’ intention to dethrone or punish the emperor but this implicit modification of unconditional surrender was never communicated to the Japanese. In the end after Nagasaki, Washington DC acceded to the Japanese desire to keep the dynasty and even to retain Hirohito as emperor.

Could “miscommunication” have cost 200,000 people and hundreds of thousands more radiation poisoning effects for life? The US has NEVER apologized for the dropping of these two lethal bombs.