[.ca] Day Of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor (ISBN 0743201299)

From Amazon.com:
It was not long after the first Japanese bombs fell on the American naval ships at Pearl Harbor that conspiracy theories began to circulate, charging that Franklin Roosevelt and his chief military advisors knew of the impending attack well in advance. Robert Stinnett, who served in the U.S. Navy with distinction during World War II, examines recently declassified American documents and concludes that, far more than merely knowing of the Japanese plan to bomb Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt deliberately steered Japan into war with America. Stinnett's argument draws on both circumstantial evidence--the fact, for example, that in September 1940 Roosevelt signed into law a measure providing for a two-ocean navy that would number 100 aircraft carriers--and, more importantly, on American governmental documents that offer apparently incontrovertible proof that Roosevelt knowingly sacrificed American lives in order to enter the war on the side of England. Although obviously troubled by his discovery of a systematic plan of deception on the part of the American government, Stinnett does not take deep issue with its outcome. Roosevelt, he writes, faced powerful opposition from isolationist forces, and, against them, the Pearl Harbor attack was "something that had to be endured in order to stop a greater evil--the Nazi invaders in Europe who had begun the Holocaust and were poised to invade England." Sure to excite discussion, Stinnett's book offers what may be the final word on the terrible matter of Pearl Harbor. --Gregory McNamee

Slow boat to Hawaii:
Robert Stinnett's book was published in 1999 but is especially relevant today at a time when the whys and wherefores of America's entry into war and specifically the veracity of the representations made to us by our leaders to induce us to go to war are a front-and-center issue. If there is one conspiracy theory with "legs", it might be "Pearl Harbor", as Stinnett seems to have found a large number of memoranda, logs, and coded messages (supplemented by interviews with still-living cryptographers) evidencing a far-reaching effort on the part of the Roosevelt administration to antagonize Japan into making precisely the sort of attack on U.S. naval bases in Hawaii that it would end up making on December 7, 1941. More disturbing is the implication that naval personnel at Pearl Harbor were deliberately kept ignorant of the pending Japanese attack. If there were a plot to provoke an attack that would bring America into the war, would not the attack itself have served the interests of the plotters without need for the loss of life that resulted from unpreparedness on December 7? Were Roosevelt and his commanders really so indifferent to human life as to allow naval personnel to die needlessly in order to "gild the lily" that the attack itself otherwise would have provided? It looks as though the Left needs to clean its own house. It looks like they have their own "911" because Stinnett's evidence in the form of broken Japanese codes, tracking of warships, and government warnings that somehow never quite made it to the "intended" recipients at Pearl Harbor suggests that the Roosevelt administration was indeed so indifferent. But the "smoking gun" drama that Stinnett's revelations should invoke is muted in a hodge-podge of footnotes and appendices that make this book very difficult to read or evaluate. A number of characters strut and fret their way upon the historical stage that Stinnett lights without making a firm impression as to either their identities or to the role that they play on this stage. There is certainly enough information here, however, for others to examine and perhaps to present in more readable format. Actually, it really isn't even necessary to discuss Pearl Harbor when considering the issue of FDR's indifference to human life. The internment of thousands of American citizens of Japanese descent in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, pursuant to Roosevelt's executive order, is not a disputed factual issue at all and itself illustrates this indifference. Although there are yet living survivors of Pearl Harbor and of the internment, the incidents that took place over sixty years ago almost themselves fade before the issue of why Roosevelt's historical reputation is scarcely affected by what has always been known about the internment and by ongoing revelations about Pearl Harbor, just as JFK's historical reputation scarcely suffers in the eyes of historians or the general public from what is now KNOWN about his connections with the Mob. Orwell once wrote that he who controls the past controls the future, and our past seems to be controlled by liberal/Left academics that censor and rewrite history in order to maintain a liberal/Left consensus. Orwell also wrote that the prospect that the ruling classes might convince their subjects that two plus two equals something other than four frightened him more than bombs. The fact that liberal leaders with deeply-ingrained, sometimes criminal flaws, are STILL being portrayed by "history" as examples of moral uplift is an example of liberal/Left academics and weak sisters among the general public decreeing that two plus two equals five whenever it's necessary. Perhaps after 60 years, our emphasis should shift away somewhat from the possibility of government conspiracies from bygone days and should focus on the active conspiracies to control the past that are actively and openly taking place in the halls of academia.

I Strongly Disagree: Scholars Disagree.:
The claim that FDR knew about Pearl Harbor is a little far fetched. He did pressured Japan through economic sanctions, possibly provoking Japan, but he did not know about the attack. The United States had broken the diplomatic code but not the Japanese naval code broken yet. Plus, the military, government, and technology were not as well advanced organized as they are today. Probably the most scholarly account of World War II was written by Gerhard Weinberg (thousands of footnotes of scholarly research) and he states that the naval code was not broken yet.

Claims Long Proven PHONY. A Deceitful Book:
I took the advice of another reviewer and went to the web site of the Naval Cryptologic Veterans Association and read the thorough review of the evidence in this book by retired Lieutenant Commander Philip H. Jacobsen. It THOROUGHLY DISPROVES THIS BOOK and details the extensive FALSE EVIDENCE worked into the book. I think this is very disturbing that someone can write something like this. The most outrageously false evidence in the book claims that key transmissions were sent in the Japanese code the Americans had broken (the diplomatic code) when they were CLEARLY sent in the code the Americans had not yet deciphered (the naval code). The author of this book boldly LIES about this, because the transmission archives are clearly marked in black marker. The author makes another outragous lie in stating that a key Japanese transmission was sent completely uncoded, which is totally outrageous, and that it was rushed straight to FDR. It was sent in code! He also claims to have recieved new information through the Freedom of Information Act, but what he has done is to lie about very old information already thorough examined. I cannot post the whole review of the evidence by Jacobsen because it is very long and thorough, but here is part of it: "Day of Deceit" argues that... Roosevelt through his co-conspirators (who apparently include General Marshall, Admirals Stark, Ingersoll, Anderson, Captain Turner and Commander McCollum and by implication Admiral Noyes, Captain Redman, Commander Rochefort and many others), attempted to cover up his and his co-conspirators' dastardly deeds. However, through Stinnett's foresight, expertise and diligence, he was able to see through this monstrous conspiracy and its cover-up to reveal its details to us some 58 years later when all previous efforts by revisionist conspiracy theorists have failed and all the participants are dead and cannot defend themselves. Nevertheless, this book will sell well among rabid Roosevelt haters, many Kimmel and Short supporters, and dedicated conspiracy theorists... It is well established that the SRN series of Japanese naval messages in the National Archives were decrypted in 1945-46 and translated in 1946-47, but Stinnett incorrectly suggests they may only have been transcribed at those times and that these decrypts (or at least some of them) were available not only in radio intelligence centers in Washington, but Stations Hypo (Rochefort) in Hawaii and Cast on Corregidor... Although Stinnett obtained definite information from Captain Whitlock that no significant JN-25B decrypts were made by Station Cast on Corregidor during the period in question, he disputes this fact and misinterprets other documents and sources as proof that Whitlock is wrong. Some navy cryptologic veterans involved in this book have complained Stinnett gained their confidence by agreeing to tell their stories but ignored their version of events in favor of the monstrous conspiracy theory finalized in the book. Admiral Layton terminated his interview with the author, most likely when he learned where the book was going... The book misleads its readers by not revealing there were two distinct codes, the earlier JN-25A and its much more complicated successor JN-25B used during the period in question and refers to them collectively as "Code Book D" or "5-Num code." Thus, the final successes of JN-25A are improperly imputed to JN-25B which was not read to any significant extent until March 1942 when the first published decrypt is found... In an effort to give some credence to its allegation of a massive conspiracy, the book contradicts the plain meaning on the face of translations of these two decrypted messages, established Japanese naval communications practice, and standard decryption procedures. These messages were reported on long ago by Frederick D. Parker in "Cryptologia" Vol. 15 (4) p. 295... The glaring omission in the book of this vital "unavailability" information is instructive. ...Nevertheless, the book baldly claims, without any substantiation, that the words Hitokappu Wan were sent in plain language while the rest of the message was sent in code, an incredible absurdity... No one else has had the temerity to make such a ridiculous assertion when confronted with the JN-25B code designation on the face of the decrypt and no reference to a plain language insert in the decrypt. The second gross misinterpretation contained in the book is that Yamamoto's famous message of 2 December 1941 only referred to as "Climb Mount. Niitaka 1208" may have been sent in plain language... Captain Pelletier in the Naval Cryptologic Veterans Association History Book confirmed this message was sent in JN-25. To show the extreme lengths the book will go to conjure up his implication of conspiracy, it omits the fact in the narrative that this message labeled SRN 115376 by the National Archives had a cryptographer's reference below the heading clearly showing that it was encoded in JN-25B. Furthermore, Stinnett does not clearly point out to his readers that "Climb Mount Niitaka" was prefaced by the words, "This dispatch is Top Secret. This order is effective at 1730 on 2 December #10..." In conclusion, it is still clear that no U.S. official knew beforehand of the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbor or discovered that the Kido Butai was on its way to Hawaii for such an attack in spite of this latest in a series of revisionist conspiracy theory books. Official OP-20-GYP-1 reports verify that zero decrypts of JN-25B were made prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. All the early JN-25B decrypts are listed in numerical order with Station Hypo, Pearl Harbor making the first decrypt in January 1942. See Stephen Budiansky's article, "Too Late For Pearl Harbor" in the December 1999 issue of "U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings and my article, "Foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor? No!: The Story of the U.s. Navy's Efforts on JN-25B. In addition, Commander Rudolph Fabian, the Officer-in-Charge of Station C Corregidor testified before a Congressional committee about breaking JN-25B before the war. "We were in the initial stages, sir. We had established liaison with the British unit at Singapore. We were exchanging values both code and cipher, but we had not developed either to the point where we could read enemy intercepts."

It's All There!:
Since I've already wrote a review of this excellent book, I just wanted to challenge some posters who are either ignoring what is available from it, or ignoring other sources.For those that ask..."how could FDR be sure that Germany would make such a blunder and declare war on the US," the answer is clearly laid out here and in other sources. As part of the Tripartite Pact, Germany...as with each other country, had an agreement to come to the defense of the other if they were declared war upon. While no one could be certain this would happen, there was further corraboration of this on pg. 409 of the governments decoded "Diplomatic Conversations" (re: Magic). Intelligence intercepts from Germany to Japan decoded this message from Hitler: "should Japan become engaged in a war against the United States, Germany, of course, would join the war immediately."Other questions I hear asked are..."why would FDR sacrifice the Pacific Fleet and especially the lives of those stationed there. As Stinnett...and others have rightfully noted, what was left at Pearl after the weeks earlier departure of the heavy ships, was nothing more than the old WWI relics that were planned on being replaced. And while no one wants to think that FDR would sacrifice the lives of others to get us into this war, the fact is, he made a similar suggestion early in 1941 to Admiral Stark. According to Charles Beard in his book, as it is in Stinnett's, FDR "wouldn't mind losing 1 or 2 Cruisers" in Manila to get into this war. As Stinnett points out, these "pop-up" Cruisers could hold up to 900 men per ship. Ironically, it was Admiral Kimmel who objected to this procedure saying..."it is ill-advised and will result in war if we make this move." Fortunately, it was never implimented...and one of the reasons why is because there was never enough American outrage over the loss of US escort ships to German subs in the declared war zones. As many isolationists said at that time, if the US doesn't want to lose lives and ships, stay out of the war zones. This is why PH became that more important.

It proved Japan was not Aggressor.:
The magnitude of what this book has revealed is unspeakably great to anyone who researches on wartime history of Japan and to any Japanese who is desperately trying to debunk terrible false accusations Japan received from the victorious Allied Powers in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, a.k.a. Tokyo Trial after the World War 2 ended. The McCollumýfs Eight Action Proposal to ýgprovoke Japan to commit overt act of warýh suggested so-called ýgABCD Encirclementýh: Economic encirclement of Japan by America, Britain, China and Dutch. In May 1951, General Douglas MacArthur stated before the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate; ýgThere is practically nothing indigenous to Japan except the silk worm. They lack cotton, they lack wool, they lack petroleum products, they lack tin, they lack rubber, they lack a great many other things, all of which was in the Asiatic basin.ýh And most of those were being imported from abovementioned four countries. Then MacArthur concludes; ýgThey feared that if those supplies were cut off, there would be 10 to 12 million people unoccupied in Japan. Their purpose, therefore, in going to war was largely dictated by security.ýh At the court of the Tokyo Trial, the Prosecutors actually failed to prove Japanýfs evil intention to go for the war with China, the U.S.A. and the British and other Allied countries, let alone to ýgconquer the worldýh. They had to admit that the world famous forged document; Tanaka Memorial, which allegedly announced Japanýfs cunning plan of conquest of the world, was in fact a forgery. As for Japanýfs starting war against China, the defense counsels almost succeeded to prove Japan had been provoked and harassed by the Chinese Communists with Red Russia behind them, if the trialýfs final judgments of guilty verdicts on all defendants had been already fixed from the first. Japan was not Aggressor there, either. According to some judges who presented dissentient judgments to the trial, like Judge Radhabinod Pal of India and Judge Bert V.A. Roling of Holland, all the verdicts of guilty charges, including Death by Hanging to seven men, was ýgpresumed guiltyýh being against the decent law practice. With no perjury applied to the prosecutorýfs side, the trial accepted all evidences presented by the prosecutors even though most of them were in fact groundless hearsay or even mere rumors, while the evidences that would work in favour of the defendants were plainly dismissed altogether. The trial was just a ýgvictorýfs justiceýh. I have no intention to jump to the conclusion that Japan was pure innocent with all those warfare in the past, but, having seen those undeniable evidences of provocation of Japan by the U.S.A. that Stinnett has revealed before us, I think it is sensible for us all to, at least to say, re-examine whole issue of the war in the light of truly decent International Laws of War and history studies. This is about Calumny made against Japan by the Allied Powers under the name of the ýgInternational justiceýh. Does the International community recognise the responsibility towards the defamation on a country for half a century long? At least, I think, the false accusations on the Japanese individuals should be recognised and in that light true history should be re-studied to see if any other ýgtrueýh aggressors have been overlooked for the sake of the worldýfs peace seeking.