For Keith Willshaw...

Title: The "Magic" background of Pearl Harbor.
Publisher: [Washington] : Dept. of Defence, U.S.A. : for sale by
the Supt. of Docs., U.S. Govt. Print. Off., [1978]
Description: 5 v. in 8 : maps (on lining paper) ; 27 cm.


Pardon me,but but by repeating official stories we cannot learn much more than
what we already know.

Kimmel and/or his descendants were given chance to defend themselves and to
challenge to official version only TWICE,one Navy investigation (There were
several Navy investigations but in only one he was allowed to defend himself
aganist charges !!!) the other was Congressional and both of them came to
conclusion that Kimmel should be exhonorated.period.
Kimmels defense were basically "FDR-Stimson-Marshall trio wanted it happen and
made it happen by witholding information that was known in Washington and
London.

All "official" facts were known to panelists but they still accepted Kimmels
version.

If one entity becomes evidence collector ,DA,police,judge,jury and executioner
the evidence that they present becomes irrelevant.

The Thurman knew it line appears to be part of the Pearl Harbor
movie plot. Presumably the system noticed it was really Dan
Aykroyd in disguise with false ID.

Military Intelligence Characters of this movie were based on real characters
moreover they and/or their relatives were interviewed by the the makers of the
movie.

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
Title: The "Magic" background of Pearl Harbor.
Publisher: [Washington] : Dept. of Defence, U.S.A. : for sale by
the Supt. of Docs., U.S. Govt. Print. Off., [1978]
Description: 5 v. in 8 : maps (on lining paper) ; 27 cm.


Pardon me,but but by repeating official stories we cannot learn much more
than
what we already know.

Kimmel and/or his descendants were given chance to defend themselves and
to
challenge to official version only TWICE,one Navy investigation (There
were
several Navy investigations but in only one he was allowed to defend
himself
aganist charges !!!) the other was Congressional and both of them came to
conclusion that Kimmel should be exhonorated.period.


No they didnt - period
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pha/congress/part_5.html

Quote
The story of Admiral Kimmel's administration of the Pacific Fleet and
supervision of the Fourteenth Naval District as well as General Short's
administration of the Hawaiian Department in the critical days before
December 7 is the epitome of worthy plans and purposes which were never
implemented. The job of an administrator is only half completed upon the
issuance of an order; it is discharged when he determines the order has
been executed.
/Quote

Keith

No they didnt - period
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pha/congress/part_5.html


Mr.Willshaw you keep offering old documents and/or monkey court archieves as
evidence.
I wonder if you are aware that US Congress passed a resolution in 1999 and
requested full exonoration of Kimmel.
You are still trying to stick old documents that were produced and used by the
establisment to cover up their activites.

But times are changed now not many are taking offical evidences given in old
documents as evidences at all.

Many things that you say "did not happen" is (like secret White House meeting
in the eve of Pearl Harbor attack and discussion of Attack) DID happen
according to sworn testimonies of the Officers.

So basically you are telling everyone "dont believe them,believe only to our
official version".Heck even Members of Congress do not buy it anymore.

Truth is Mr.Willshaw FDR promised nation not to enter WWII unless attacked and
he kept his promise.

"Denyav" wrote in message
...

I wonder if you are aware that US Congress passed a resolution in 1999 and
requested full exonoration of Kimmel.

Just to set the record straight, it wasn't a resolution.....it was in May 2000,
and it was an amendment to the 2001 Defense Bill that requested that both Adm
Kimmel and Gen. Short be advanced posthumously on the promotion list to their
highest respective grades in which they had served. It was passed unanimously,
but President Clinton declined to sign it. It was again presented the following
year, but President Bush also declined to sign it. No reason was given in both
cases.

George Z.

Just to set the record straight, it wasn't a resolution.....it was in May
2000,
and it was an amendment to the 2001 Defense Bill that requested that both Adm
Kimmel and Gen. Short be advanced posthumously on the promotion list to their

ighest respective grades in which they had served. It was passed
unanimously,
but President Clinton declined to sign it. It was again presented the
following
year, but President Bush also declined to sign it. No reason was given in
both
cases.

George Z.

Thanks for correction,I thought it was in 1999.
But as you correctly stated no president ever signed it and I think no
president will ever sign it.
Even no president gave reason for refusal,the reason is very obvious.

Denyav wrote in message ...

Firstly part of my deleted text,

There was no Pearl Harbor warning delivered to the US and the last
people to know of one would have been the army intelligence, they
were not watching the IJN.

The diplomatic cables give no warning on any of the Japanese
attacks, only that there was a high probability someone would
be attacked.

Title: The "Magic" background of Pearl Harbor.
Publisher: [Washington] : Dept. of Defence, U.S.A. : for sale by
the Supt. of Docs., U.S. Govt. Print. Off., [1978]
Description: 5 v. in 8 : maps (on lining paper) ; 27 cm.

Pardon me,but but by repeating official stories we cannot learn much more than
what we already know.

Let us see the claim what the war warning messages contained about
Pearl Harbor is deleted, along with the actual messages themselves,
since the truth destroys the claim. Now comes the decision to delete
the transcripts of the Japanese messages, since the claimed "attack
Pearl Harbor" message does not exist the actual record needs to be
deleted as well.

More deleted text,

"It contains the cables, including decode dates, the transcripts
of bugged Japan-US phone calls and state department assessments
of the various meetings.

There is a project at Purdue University to put the above books into
electronic form with an index, I am unsure about its current status.

See also

Author: Komatsu, Keiichiro.
Title: Origins of the Pacific War and the importance of 'magic'.
Publisher: New York : St. Martin's Press, 1999.

Where as part of the work the author looks at the problems with translating
Japanese into English and what sort of effects mistranslations had."

I suggest reading the messages, they tell you lots, things like the
maps of Panama that were so good a courier was to take them to
Japan. The ships in harbour messages from the other ports, not
just Hawaii and so on.

Kimmel and/or his descendants were given chance to defend themselves and to
challenge to official version only TWICE,one Navy investigation (There were
several Navy investigations but in only one he was allowed to defend himself
aganist charges !!!) the other was Congressional and both of them came to
conclusion that Kimmel should be exhonorated.period.

Try again, the Congressional investigation found against Kimmel.
The navy investigation found for him. By the way investigations
are about deciding charges, trials are for defending charges.

1) Roberts Commission, 1941/42 found against Kimmel and Short
2) Hart Inquiry in 1944, mainly evidence collecting
3) Pearl Harbor Army Board in 1944, criticised Short, Marshall and Gerow.
4) Naval Court of Inquiry, exonerated Kimmel.
5) Clausen Investigation, 1944/45, mainly evidence gathering. (He wrote
a book on it and gives Kimmel and Short the highest rankings in the
contributors to the defeat list.)
6) Hewitt Inquiry, 1945, follow on to Naval court, Kimmel denied access,
no report published.
7) Clarke Investigation, 1944/45 investigation into claims of documents
being destroyed, found this not to be the case.
8) Joint Congressional Committee, 1945/46, Hawaiian commanders guilty
of errors of judgement, not dereliction of duty.

Kimmels defense were basically "FDR-Stimson-Marshall trio wanted it
happen and made it happen by witholding information that was known in
Washington and London.

Putting words into Kimmel's mouth now I see. Kimmel's defence was
that he was deprived of information he needed, mainly messages from
the local Japanese consulate and timely warning of the time the last
Japanese message was supposed to be presented to the US. There
was nothing said about senior leaders wanting the attack to happen.

All "official" facts were known to panelists but they still accepted Kimmels
version.

If one entity becomes evidence collector ,DA,police,judge,jury and executioner
the evidence that they present becomes irrelevant.

I like this, if the one entity argument is followed then the claimed let
off for Kimmel is the rigged result, it was an all Navy affair.

The Thurman knew it line appears to be part of the Pearl Harbor
movie plot. Presumably the system noticed it was really Dan
Aykroyd in disguise with false ID.

See for example, http://www.epinions.com/content_68513926788

Military Intelligence Characters of this movie were based on real characters
moreover they and/or their relatives were interviewed by the the makers of the
movie.

I see "based on real characters", and I presume the transcripts of these
claimed conversations are available? I presume you have traced the
people the pilots and nurse were based on as well? Found the message
the plot line was based on as well? Double checked the interviews were
with people present, not relatives reporting hearsay 60 years later?

Perhaps the fundamental reality that the US Army intelligence people
did not work on IJN codes will intrude at some stage.

Alternatively Hollywood movies said to be fiction can be taken as the
truth, so the US has Luke Skywalker hiding somewhere no doubt.
John Wayne won WWII almost single-handed, serving in all branches
of the US military?

It sums up the "evidence" quite well when a Hollywood entertainment
product is the source of truth.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.

The diplomatic cables give no warning on any of the Japanese
attacks, only that there was a high probability someone would
be attacked.


Really? Now two quotas from "recent" law the requesting exonoration of Kimmel:
1)"Numerous investigations following the attack on Pearl Harbor have documented
that Adm.Kimmel and Lt.Gen.Short were not provided neccesary and critical
intelligence that was available, that was foretold of war with Japan,that
warned of imminent attack,and that would have alerted them to prepare for the
attack,including such essential communiques as the Pearl Harbor Bomb Plot
message of Sep.24,1941 and the message sent from IJ Foreign ministry to
Japanase Ambassador in US from Dec 6 to 7 1941,known as fourteen part message".
2)"On July 1997 Adm.Richardson USN (Ret) responded to Dorn report with his own
study which confirmed the findings of the Naval Court of Inquiry and and Army
Pearl Harbor Board of Investigations and established ,among other facts,that
the war effert in 1941 was undermined by a restrictive distrubution policy,and
the degree to which the commanders of US forces in Hawai were not alerted
about impending attack was directly attributable to the witholding of
intelligence from Adm.Kimmel and Gen.Short".) Roberts Commission, 1941/42
found against Kimmel and Short
2) Hart Inquiry in 1944, mainly evidence collecting
3) Pearl Harbor Army Board in 1944, criticised Short, Marshall and Gerow.
4) Naval Court of Inquiry, exonerated Kimmel.
5) Clausen Investigation, 1944/45, mainly evidence gathering. (He wrote
a book on it and gives Kimmel and Short the highest rankings in the
contributors to the defeat list.)
6) Hewitt Inquiry, 1945, follow on to Naval court, Kimmel denied access,
no report published.
7) Clarke Investigation, 1944/45 investigation into claims of documents
being destroyed, found this not to be the case.
8) Joint Congressional Committee, 1945/46, Hawaiian commanders guilty
of errors of judgement, not dereliction of duty.

In in Nr.4 of this list he was allowed to defend himself,Court exhonorated
him,BUT findings were kept secret.period.
aid to be fiction can be taken as the
truth, so the US has Luke Skywalker hiding somewhere no doubt.
John Wayne won WWII almost single-handed, serving in all branches
of the US military?

Dont underestimate Holywood,Its nations premier quasi-governmental PSYOP
organization.
For more info check out:
"Who paid the Piper? . The CIA and cultural Cold War". By Frances Saunders.

From: (Denyav)


The diplomatic cables give no warning on any of the Japanese
attacks, only that there was a high probability someone would
be attacked.


Really? Now two quotas from "recent" law the requesting exonoration of
Kimmel:

What "law?" When was it passed? Which president signed it into"law?"

To simplify it for you: a bill passed by Congress doesn't become law until it
is signed by the President.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

To simplify it for you: a bill passed by Congress doesn't become law until it
is signed by the President.


As George Z. clarified,executive Branch refused and still refuses to sign it
and will NEVER sign it (even if the president wants to sign it),which is alone
an indicator that much more than exonoration of two individuals are in the
line.

Denyav wrote in message ...

Firstly part of my deleted text,

There was no Pearl Harbor warning delivered to the US and the last
people to know of one would have been the army intelligence, they
were not watching the IJN.

The diplomatic cables give no warning on any of the Japanese
attacks, only that there was a high probability someone would
be attacked.

Really? Now two quotas from "recent" law the requesting exonoration of Kimmel:

There was no "law" there was effectively a petition. One that was
turned down. Do not worry the fact the moon was in the third house
is also proof of the conspiracy, FDR wearing his green socks the
secret sign and so on.

It is really quite simple, look below and know people are fitting the
evidence after the event. There was no "attack the US" message,
let alone attack a specific location, the 14 part message was not a
declaration of war, and the British and Dutch did not even receive
that message, let alone a declaration of war.

1)"Numerous investigations following the attack on Pearl Harbor have documented
that Adm.Kimmel and Lt.Gen.Short were not provided neccesary and critical
intelligence that was available, that was foretold of war with Japan,that
warned of imminent attack,and that would have alerted them to prepare for the
attack,including such essential communiques as the Pearl Harbor Bomb Plot
message of Sep.24,1941 and the message sent from IJ Foreign ministry to
Japanase Ambassador in US from Dec 6 to 7 1941,known as fourteen part message".

Congratulations on noting that after the event people could fit the pre
attack messages into the proven chain of events.

Now go back and note the key part of the 14 part message was about
having no point in further negotiations, not a declaration of war. The
timing of the note was an important factor, it fitted with first light in the
Midway/Guam area, and early morning in the Philippines.

Note by the way the grid message, the one that wanted the location as
well as the number of ships in harbour, was named bomb plot after the
attack, not before. In any case a bomb plot is the diagram of the fall
of the bombs, an after the attack report.

Simply put the US "knew" it could not immediately go to war to defend
European colonies in Asia. The Japanese military government "knew"
the best time for the US to declare war was at the start of fighting. The
Japanese had to make the decision. There were no resources needed
by the Japanese from the Philippines.

2)"On July 1997 Adm.Richardson USN (Ret) responded to Dorn report with his own
study which confirmed the findings of the Naval Court of Inquiry and and Army
Pearl Harbor Board of Investigations and established ,among other facts,that
the war effert in 1941 was undermined by a restrictive distrubution policy,and
the degree to which the commanders of US forces in Hawai were not alerted
about impending attack was directly attributable to the witholding of
intelligence from Adm.Kimmel and Gen.Short".

Congratulations in noting the US discovered it had short changed its
field commanders. That is completely separate to the US knowing
when and where attacks would occur, plus there is still the problem of
whether the commanders would do anything. The USN had known
for years the IJN warplan was to await the USN in the eastern
Pacific, not come for the USN.

I see the claims about what investigations did what have been deleted,
like all the other claims, once the documents are produced the claims
have to be deleted.

Deleted text,

"Try again, the Congressional investigation found against Kimmel.
The navy investigation found for him. By the way investigations
are about deciding charges, trials are for defending charges."

1) Roberts Commission, 1941/42 found against Kimmel and Short
2) Hart Inquiry in 1944, mainly evidence collecting
3) Pearl Harbor Army Board in 1944, criticised Short, Marshall and Gerow.
4) Naval Court of Inquiry, exonerated Kimmel.
5) Clausen Investigation, 1944/45, mainly evidence gathering. (He wrote
a book on it and gives Kimmel and Short the highest rankings in the
contributors to the defeat list.)
6) Hewitt Inquiry, 1945, follow on to Naval court, Kimmel denied access,
no report published.
7) Clarke Investigation, 1944/45 investigation into claims of documents
being destroyed, found this not to be the case.
8) Joint Congressional Committee, 1945/46, Hawaiian commanders guilty
of errors of judgement, not dereliction of duty.

In in Nr.4 of this list he was allowed to defend himself,Court exhonorated
him,BUT findings were kept secret.period.

This is quite funny, if the findings were kept secret period how would
anyone know Kimmel had been exonerated?

Deleted text,

"Putting words into Kimmel's mouth now I see. Kimmel's defence was
that he was deprived of information he needed, mainly messages from
the local Japanese consulate and timely warning of the time the last
Japanese message was supposed to be presented to the US. There
was nothing said about senior leaders wanting the attack to happen."

On claims the inquiries were rigged,

"I like this, if the one entity argument is followed then the claimed let
off for Kimmel is the rigged result, it was an all Navy affair."

On using Pearl Harbor the movie as a source,

"I see "based on real characters", and I presume the transcripts of these
claimed conversations are available? I presume you have traced the
people the pilots and nurse were based on as well? Found the message
the plot line was based on as well? Double checked the interviews were
with people present, not relatives reporting hearsay 60 years later?

Perhaps the fundamental reality that the US Army intelligence people
did not work on IJN codes will intrude at some stage.

Alternatively Hollywood movies said "

aid to be fiction can be taken as the
truth, so the US has Luke Skywalker hiding somewhere no doubt.
John Wayne won WWII almost single-handed, serving in all branches
of the US military?

"It sums up the "evidence" quite well when a Hollywood entertainment
product is the source of truth."

Dont underestimate Holywood,Its nations premier quasi-governmental PSYOP
organization.

This is good, presumably the "Pearl Harbor" movie talk of code
breaking is therefore psyops and needs to be ignored. Then again
given the movie is the advanced "proof" of code breaking maybe not.

Hollywood promotes US disinformation, except when the claim is
liked, then it is the truth, spoken by a fictional character in a movie
claimed to be fictional is no barrier. Just ignore the actual history.

For more info check out:
"Who paid the Piper? . The CIA and cultural Cold War". By Frances Saunders.

On sale now on paranoia street no doubt. Remember folks, lack
of evidence is proof of two conspiracies, the original and the cover up.
The lack of evidence for the cover up is proof of three conspiracies,
and so on, head for the big conspiracy sale near you, pay your money
and be told what you want to here as people make themselves rich
at your expense.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.