If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
"Denyav" wrote in message ... 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. I see,"deny everything" and "stick to official version",seem to be only ways to find the truths. It worked in 1861,it worked in 1898,it worked in 1941, so,why not in 2001 or 2004?. Again, listing dates does not equal proving conspiracy. |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
I didn't realize Lincoln had caused the 30 or 40 years of build up to the
secession and the told The Confederates they should shoot first and Sumter was a nice target. http://www.tulane.edu/~latner/FinalO...rder_intro.htm Read "Truth of war conspiracy of 1861" by Johnstone. BTW Author of this book based his case solely on official records published by US War department. Wow, I think you are right. The Navy blew up their own boat in Havana Harbour in 1898 because the Spanish wouldn't cooperate and do it for them. http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq71-1.htm So whats your point? In 1898 new empire was in need of colonies so motto was: "Evil Spanians destroyed Maine,REMEMBER MAINE,teach evil Spanians a lesson" Rest is history (Of course Spanians nothing to do with Maine sinking) Kimmel was trying to simply improve his image in the history books. For FDR&Co much more than improving their standing in history books was in stake. Now, denyev, you have proved your point [editor's note: the shovel broke] when and where will the next trumped up attack occur? Unfortunately,unlike previous three cases,this time it looks like that politicians and military failed to capitalize on success of PSYOP at the start. If whole operation crumles it does not matter if you execute a PSYOP succesfully or not.Morever if whole operation fails the planners of such PSYOPs are usually first to go. Let me clarify this, for example if US had lost Spanish -American war,the masterminds of Maine incident would be the first ones to go,not Generals or Admirals who lost actual battles. BTW I hope some recent high profile resignations helps you to understand what I mean. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Again, listing dates does not equal proving conspiracy.
If you did not understand 1861,you cannot understand 1941. If you did not know what happened in 1898,you cannot understand what happened in 2001. Its an 150 years old tradition of US government. |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
"Denyav" wrote in message ... 1)Ft.Sumter 2)USS Maine 3)Pearl Harbor 4)9/11 Relisting them does not equal proving them. but feel to relist them a few more times. It establishes the existence of a pattern or govenment culture. It does no such thing, note the dates - they are different govts, composed of different people from markedly different backgrounds. Its always easier to get an Arson suspect with prior Arson convictions convicted than an Arson suspect without any prior convictions. Except your "suspect" isn't the same person you loon. Relist the dates again. you'll feel better. |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
It does no such thing, note the dates - they are different govts, composed
of different people from markedly different backgrounds. You make me laugh,succesful operations set patterns. Nobody wants to repeat failures but eveybody wants to use proven methods.(at least till first failure), Ourcome of 1861 operation was good,the ourcome of 1898 operation very good,the outcome of 1941 operation was excellent. So why not stick to proven methods Except your "suspect" isn't the same person you loon. Maybe not same "person" but definitely the same "entity" |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Denyav twisted the electrons to say:
So, if we where to accept your premise that the White House knew not only that the Japanese where coming but also the day they would be "arriving", why not warn Pearl Harbour? Good Question,but I think Kimmel gave a very clear answer to this question during interview in 1958. You "think", but you're not sufficiently sure to actually tell us what it was he might have said? After all, if you're planning on joining a war it's generally considered an advantage not to lose large amounts of men and equipment on day 1! Amounts of men and equipment lost in Pearl Harbor is very insignificant in comparison with manpower and production resources of US,as the later developments in war proved. How many fewer trained, and available for service, men did the USN have through to say the beginning of February the next year? Saying that it was insignificant next to the size of the USN in late 1944 is hardly relevant as it would take the USN 3 years to get to that size ... No need to sortie the fleet if you still want a "sneak attack", just get them placed on alert - ie: all anti-aircraft guns manned and ready and a decent CAP (with the rest of the fighters on +5/+15) overhead. Pearl Harbors shortcomings were well known,in fact during pre-attack meetings Kimmel always maintained that only viable defense would be the keeping the fleet in open sea and his views shared by everybody. Maybe, but if you're the government and for some reason you want a sneak attack to occur then you'll make sure that such a viewpoint is ignored. Afterall, Pearl Harbour is only 40 feet deep and has reasonably narrow and twisted entrances which coupled with netting should deal with the threat from torpedo bombers and/or submarines. High-level and/or dive bombing can thwarted by a combination of a waiting CAP followed by anti-aircraft fire. -- These opinions might not even be mine ... Let alone connected with my employer ... |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Care to provide the ISBN? No sign of such a book on Amazon.
Original book by H.W.Johnstone was published in 1921. I heard they they were going to reprint it,but I don know if its reprinted. If not, only way to find this book is either to buy an used old one or find it in a library. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
You "think", but you're not sufficiently sure to actually tell us what it
was he might have said? Here exactly what he said during 1958 interview: "My belief is that Gen.Short and I were not given information available in Washington and were not informed of the impending attack because it was feared that the action in Hawai might deter the Japanese from making the attack.Our president had repeatedly assured the American People that the US would not enter the war unless we were attacked.The Japanese attack on the Fleet would put United States in the war with full support of the American Public". Thats exactly what he said in 1958 interview. I dont know what he said in Naval court that exonarated him,as the trancripts and actual findings of this court were not released,only the conclusions of Court were released,but its safe to assume his defense based was he said in 1958. The decision of this court,only panel that Kimmel was allowed to present his case and defend himself,was overturned by Forrestal and King. If you want to learn what Kimmels relatives and experts said in more recent Congressional hearings which paved way for the passage of a Bill exhonorating Kimmel you might want to check out: Http://www.ukans.edu/carrie/docs/texts/kimmel.htm |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Videos: Su-37 Superflanker vs F-22 Raptor | Alejandro Magno | Military Aviation | 20 | January 10th 04 05:19 PM |