For Keith Willshaw...

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
Churchill, all the decoded messages placed in the public arena.
Stimson, the Japanese must fire first. Dulles a claimed quote,
Hoover no quote at all presente


Churchill:"..from the end of 1940 the Americans had pierced the vital
Japanase
ciphers and were decoding large numbers of their Military and diplomatic
telegrams"


Indeed they had penetrated Purple , the diplomatic cipher
and a number of other codes, but not JN-25

FDR:"The war starts tomorrow"
Dec.6,1941


Quite so , an attack of the Phillipines and Malaya
was expected and all Pacific commands had been
issued a war warning.

Keith

Indeed they had penetrated Purple , the diplomatic cipher
and a number of other codes, but not JN-25

But Mr.Churchill clearly stated "..military and diplomatic.." which includes
JN25 too.


Quite so , an attack of the Phillipines and Malaya
was expected and all Pacific commands had been
issued a war warning.

So called War Warning was designed not to warn Pearl Harbor but to draw
attention away from Pearl Harbor,even though US learned on Nov.25 that the
Pearl Harbor was the target.
That was the reason why Naval Court of Inqury exonarated Kimmel.

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
Indeed they had penetrated Purple , the diplomatic cipher
and a number of other codes, but not JN-25

But Mr.Churchill clearly stated "..military and diplomatic.." which
includes
JN25 too.


He didnt say 'ALL military' so it clearly does not


Quite so , an attack of the Phillipines and Malaya
was expected and all Pacific commands had been
issued a war warning.

So called War Warning was designed not to warn Pearl Harbor but to draw
attention away from Pearl Harbor,even though US learned on Nov.25 that the
Pearl Harbor was the target.

The message sent to Kimmel started thus

"This dispatch is to be considered a war warning. Negotiations with Japan
looking
toward stabilization of conditions in the Pacific have ceased and an
aggressive
move by Japan is expected within the next few days"

This cannot be construed as anything but an alert against
possible attack. The fact that it named other locations
as 'likely' targets hardly ruled out Hawaii.


That was the reason why Naval Court of Inqury exonarated Kimmel.


It didnt, rather it found that his failings were not sufficient basis for
a court martial on the grounds of dereliction of duty. In practical terms
the Naval court blamed the army.

The naval command staff were less charitable. As Admiral King
put it

" The derelictions on the part of Admiral Stark and Admiral Kimmel were
faults of omission rather than faults of commission. In the case in
question they indicate lack of the superior judgment necessary for
exercising command commensurate with their rank and their assigned
duties, rather than culpable inefficiency.

Since trial by general court martial is not warranted by the
evidence adduced, appropriate administrative action would appear to be
the relegation of both of these officers to positions in which lack of
superior judgment may not result in future errors."

In short he was fired, hardly an exoneration !

Note further that the court stated clearly that there was
NO information suggesting an attack on Hawaii

Quote
Based on Finding XII, the Court is of the opinion that, as no
information of any sort was at any time either forwarded or received
from any source which would indicate that Japanese carriers or other
Japanese ships were on their way to Hawaii during November or December,
1941, the attack of 7 December at Pearl Harbor, delivered under the
circumstances then existing, was unpreventable and that when it would
take place was unpredictable.
/Quote


Keith

But Mr.Churchill clearly stated "..military and diplomatic.." which
includes
JN25 too.


He didnt say 'ALL military' so it clearly does not

BOTH,military and diplomatic.period.

This cannot be construed as anything but an alert against
possible attack. The fact that it named other locations
as 'likely' targets hardly ruled out Hawaii.

What HM gov't would do if they received a specific terror warning for London?
1)Issue a terror alert for London
2)Issue terror alerts for Montevideo,Montreal,Athens and Cairo,but not for
London.

Which one would be the correct response?


In short he was fired, hardly an exoneration !


You forgat to mention that Naval court of inquiry decision EXONORATED Kimmel
but courts decision was OVERTURNED by Forrestal and King.

In other word overturning courts decision was a political move to save their
own asses.Note further that the court stated clearly that there was

NO information suggesting an attack on Hawaii

Court based its decision mainly on so called War Warning message and considered
it as an attempt to divert attention away from PH than warn PH.

to Hawaii during November or December,
1941, the attack of 7 December at Pearl Harbor, delivered under the
circumstances then existing, was unpreventable and that when it would

None of Crane documents were available to court or Kimmel at that time.
Even members Congress conducting a mini probe on Pearl Harbor in 1995 were
denied access to the files.
In other words Congress members were allowed to investigate Pearl Harbor
incident on behalf American Public but even they were not allowed to see Pearl
Harbor documents.
Under these circumstances Naval Courts decision to exonorate Kimmel based on
correct interpretation of so called War Warning becomes even more important.

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
But Mr.Churchill clearly stated "..military and diplomatic.." which
includes
JN25 too.


He didnt say 'ALL military' so it clearly does not

BOTH,military and diplomatic.period.


I both watched TV and listened to radio today.
This does not mean I watched all 200 TV channels
and listened to the 30 or so radio channels
available to me.

This cannot be construed as anything but an alert against
possible attack. The fact that it named other locations
as 'likely' targets hardly ruled out Hawaii.

What HM gov't would do if they received a specific terror warning for
London?
1)Issue a terror alert for London
2)Issue terror alerts for Montevideo,Montreal,Athens and Cairo,but not for
London.

Which one would be the correct response?


None of the above, they would issue the orders
necessary to counter the threat, as has been done many times


In short he was fired, hardly an exoneration !


You forgat to mention that Naval court of inquiry decision EXONORATED
Kimmel
but courts decision was OVERTURNED by Forrestal and King.


Nope, the court didnt exonerate him, they excused
his errors and blamed the army.

In other word overturning courts decision was a political move to save
their
own asses.Note further that the court stated clearly that there was

NO information suggesting an attack on Hawaii

Court based its decision mainly on so called War Warning message and
considered
it as an attempt to divert attention away from PH than warn PH.


A view that was overturned by every subsequent inquiry and
was self serving, their major interest was proving that it
wasnt the fault of the USN.

to Hawaii during November or December,
1941, the attack of 7 December at Pearl Harbor, delivered under the
circumstances then existing, was unpreventable and that when it would

None of Crane documents were available to court or Kimmel at that time.

Irrelevant

Even members Congress conducting a mini probe on Pearl Harbor in 1995 were
denied access to the files.

Not really, they reported that the BRITISH Government was unwilling to
declassify
material relevant to the Pearl Harbor intelligence issue because it was
subject to the
UK-USA Intelligence Agreement, they made no complaint about US files
being withheld

In other words Congress members were allowed to investigate Pearl Harbor
incident on behalf American Public but even they were not allowed to see
Pearl
Harbor documents.

See above

Note the so called 1995 probe was in fact an attempt to reinstate the
reputations
of Kimmel and Short at the urging of their families and was far from being
an full or impartial inquiry

http://users.erols.com/nbeach/kimmel.html

Under these circumstances Naval Courts decision to exonorate Kimmel based
on
correct interpretation of so called War Warning becomes even more
important.

Trouble is the 12 subsequent inquiries, including the extremely through
1946 congressional investigation ALL overthrew that result.

Kimmel just made too many mistakes.

Keith

What HM gov't would do if they received a specific terror warning for
London?
1)Issue a terror alert for London
2)Issue terror alerts for Montevideo,Montreal,Athens and Cairo,but not for
London.

Which one would be the correct response?


None of the above, they would issue the orders
necessary to counter the threat, as has been done many times

Nice way of dodging some questions.

A view that was overturned by every subsequent inquiry and
was self serving, their major interest was proving that it
wasnt the fault of the USN.


Only twice Kimmel and/or his kin were given opportunity to present their their
case and evidences,in Naval court of Inquiry and in 90s during Congressional
mini probe,and both panels,what a surprise,concluded that Kimmel should be
exonarated.


Irrelevant

This word seems to be the most frequenly used word by the custodians of Pearl
Harbor conspiracy when they face hard evidence.

BRITISH Government was unwilling to
declassify
material relevant to the Pearl Harbor intelligence issue because it was
subject to the
UK-USA Intelligence Agreement, they made no complaint about US files
being withheld

I was referring to Crane files not British files.Sen.Thurman and Rep.Sprnce
were denied access to these files in 90s.
In other words Mr.Willshaw,representatives of American people investigating
Pearl Harbor incident were denied access to almost 60 year old files.

Trouble is the 12 subsequent inquiries, including the extremely through
1946 congressional investigation ALL overthrew that result.

Kimmel just made too many mistakes.

Actualy Army Board of investigation report was much more damaging for
FDR-Stimson-Marshall trio than Navy version.
Marshall offered his resignation after Army report.

Arndt started this thread and made a capital mistake by implying that UK has
become a banana republic of US.
US was a banana republic for UK in 1941 also US was a UKs banana republic in
2001.

Lord Rhodas' ideas sometimes realized by using Rhodas scholars. sometimes by
using shock and awe methods.

Heck,everbody is trying to find a Straussian (Neocon),Jewish,Israeli or
Southern Baptist connection in 21st century version of PH,but nobody is
looking for an Anglo connection.

As I said before,I admire British great gaming skills.

"Denyav" wrote in message
...
What HM gov't would do if they received a specific terror warning for
London?
1)Issue a terror alert for London
2)Issue terror alerts for Montevideo,Montreal,Athens and Cairo,but not
for
London.

Which one would be the correct response?


None of the above, they would issue the orders
necessary to counter the threat, as has been done many times

Nice way of dodging some questions.


Nope its an accurate answer

A view that was overturned by every subsequent inquiry and
was self serving, their major interest was proving that it
wasnt the fault of the USN.


Only twice Kimmel and/or his kin were given opportunity to present their
their
case and evidences,in Naval court of Inquiry and in 90s during
Congressional
mini probe,and both panels,what a surprise,concluded that Kimmel should be
exonarated.


Horsefeathers, there were MANY inquiries and Kimmel testified during many
of them and the 1946 congressional inquiry contains the following paragraph

"All parties in interest have attested to the fact that they have been
afforded a full, fair, and impartial public hearing before the
committee. All witnesses who retained counsel-Admiral Stark, Admiral
Kimmel, and General Short-were given the opportunity to be examined by
their counsel if they so desired, and to submit questions to committee
counsel to be asked other witnesses."



Irrelevant

This word seems to be the most frequenly used word by the custodians of
Pearl
Harbor conspiracy when they face hard evidence.


Which is inevitable when irrelevant issues are raised.

BRITISH Government was unwilling to
declassify
material relevant to the Pearl Harbor intelligence issue because it was
subject to the
UK-USA Intelligence Agreement, they made no complaint about US files
being withheld

I was referring to Crane files not British files.Sen.Thurman and
Rep.Sprnce
were denied access to these files in 90s.

And yet Stinnet claims that they are in the bnational archive
http://www.independent.org/tii/news/021202Stinnett.html


In other words Mr.Willshaw,representatives of American people
investigating
Pearl Harbor incident were denied access to almost 60 year old files.


They stated not

Trouble is the 12 subsequent inquiries, including the extremely through
1946 congressional investigation ALL overthrew that result.

Kimmel just made too many mistakes.

Actualy Army Board of investigation report was much more damaging for
FDR-Stimson-Marshall trio than Navy version.

Hardly

Marshall offered his resignation after Army report.

Arndt started this thread and made a capital mistake by implying that UK
has
become a banana republic of US.
US was a banana republic for UK in 1941 also US was a UKs banana republic
in
2001.


No bananas here bwana, note the last thing Britain wanted in
1941 was war with Japan, it diverted massive resources
away from the war in Europe at a time when the Nazis
were only 150 miles away from London and the U-Boats
were sinling our merchant marine at an unsustainable rate.

Lord Rhodas' ideas sometimes realized by using Rhodas scholars. sometimes
by
using shock and awe methods.


That's Rhodes old boy, do try and get the name right
and he used cold hard cash to achieve his ends,
war wasnt profitable.

Heck,everbody is trying to find a Straussian (Neocon),Jewish,Israeli or
Southern Baptist connection in 21st century version of PH,but nobody is
looking for an Anglo connection.

As I said before,I admire British great gaming skills.



There arent too many southern baptists in London old son.

Keith