Ken Burns Roosevelt Documentary

[Discombobulated]

My point is that if FDR had not started to build the military defense industry to help Britain and the Soviets, we would have been unable to respond to Pearl Harbor in any effective way. It takes years to ramp that industry up, and change auto factories into tank factories, etc.

Even with the buildup, it was a close war. Japan and Germany were not paper tigers.

It took only WEEKS to bend the sheet metal into different shapes in Detroit. You're a rude idiot posing as some kind of authority on subjects you know nothing about.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Sheet metal? Are you fucking kidding or what? Is an M-1 rifle made out of sheet metal? How about a Sherman Tank? Did Ford start producing B-24s on December 8th?

Hey dickhead....Detroit wasn't building the M-1...what about the Sherman Tank? Do you have any idea how a tank is armored? Do you think nobody was building bombers before 1942? Fact of the matter is you don't know your pecker from your pinky.....idiot leftist twit.

This is a subject on which I can crush you any time.......you don't know anything about anything. And by the way dummy, Sherman tanks were constructed from welded castings.

There ain't a subject in this UNIVERSE you could "crush" me on, ya little runt. Ever worked in a Detroit car plant? I have. Got any relatives who fought in WW2....I do; my dad and uncle. Ever served in combat? I did a tour in the RVN, '67-'68 during the Tet Offensive (both parts). I do sheet-metal work in a full machine shop as a hobby.....I doubt you could work a pair of tin snips. You don't know your ass from a hole in your sock and I can prove it any time you like.

Oh well that's different then. Based on your wide scope of knowledge and indisputable expertise I don't see how anyone could possibly question your half ass theories about building a defense industrial infrastructure in a few weeks.

 

[Discombobulated]

Is there absolutely not bottom to your ignorance????

Not only do you know nothing and appear proud of same....
...but you will simply make things up!!!!

There was no Roosevelt 'military buildup' in the 1930s.



FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone.

Typical PoliticalChic misinformed and distorted ideas. She knows less than nothing about the topics and ideas she attempts to promote.

I just produced a fact.....

And you replied with.......


......nothing.




It should be clear as to which of us know about the 'topics.'

You base your assertion on a comment made by Marshall. He made that comment you use as your fact, but he made it knowing FDR had prepared the nation by developing and readying the production of the most sophisticated and technologically advanced weapons in the world. After developing them he produced limited numbers of them, but enough so that the producers were ready to swing into mass production as soon as funding became available. Marshall didn't have to deal with that facet of building up the military.

All three Yorktown Class carriers were built under FDR's administration, Yorktown CV 5, Enterprise CV 6 and Hornet CV 8. Not satisfied with these new carriers, FDR put the Navy to work in development of the Essex Class carrier and began producing them. Three would be built, the last, the would be started only six days before Pearl harbor. The important thing about this is that the ship building yards were ready to swing into production after having built the first ones. As soon as the funds became available the began producing more of them, 19 more to be exact. They are what gave us control of the Pacific.

Cruisers were advanced and the development of the New Orleans Class cruisers were added to the fleet. Seven of them were built under FDR ready for the War. Add to this the Farragut Class destroyers. Six of them were produced. Once again, the importance of producing these warships was secondary to getting the ship yards prepared to mass produce them.

Apparently building six modern aircraft carriers, seven modern cruisers and six modern destroyers is doing "nothing" to some. How convenient it must be to be able to omit and disregard facts when attempting to rewrite history.

FDR prepared for war and created a military doctrine that is used to this very day. Develop and produce the most sophisticated and technologically advanced weaponry in the world. When you send your forces off to war, send them with the best weapons and support possible. Send them with weapons that out class and out shoot the enemy.

FDR did the same advanced development and limited production method of preparing with everything from the Sherman Tank to the M-1 Garand. The B-17's and B-24's and B-26 as well as the fighters like the P 38 and P 51 and the Navy/Marine F4U Corsair all went through FDR's method of development, limited production and eventual mass production
with industry prepared to meet the challenge of arming the nation as soon as they were asked to do so. And they did.

"You base your assertion on a comment made by Marshall."

1. So....the quote is accurate..."George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country"...

Well....either Marshall knew what he was talking about....or you do.

And you, being regularly revealed to be a Roosevelt boot-licking dunce....leaves little in the way of puzzlement.



2. Once the veracity of Marshall's statement is seen.....the absurdity of your attempt to shield Roosevelt from well deserved vituperation is risible.

Your claim is that, yes, Marshall said it...but FDR was already taking care of business.
No...he wasn't....that's why Marshall said that to him....you dope.

I love how these people draw dim wit conclusions based on out of context misrepresentations.

 

[Camp]

Is there absolutely not bottom to your ignorance????

Not only do you know nothing and appear proud of same....
...but you will simply make things up!!!!

There was no Roosevelt 'military buildup' in the 1930s.



FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone.

Typical PoliticalChic misinformed and distorted ideas. She knows less than nothing about the topics and ideas she attempts to promote.

I just produced a fact.....

And you replied with.......


......nothing.




It should be clear as to which of us know about the 'topics.'

You base your assertion on a comment made by Marshall. He made that comment you use as your fact, but he made it knowing FDR had prepared the nation by developing and readying the production of the most sophisticated and technologically advanced weapons in the world. After developing them he produced limited numbers of them, but enough so that the producers were ready to swing into mass production as soon as funding became available. Marshall didn't have to deal with that facet of building up the military.

All three Yorktown Class carriers were built under FDR's administration, Yorktown CV 5, Enterprise CV 6 and Hornet CV 8. Not satisfied with these new carriers, FDR put the Navy to work in development of the Essex Class carrier and began producing them. Three would be built, the last, the would be started only six days before Pearl harbor. The important thing about this is that the ship building yards were ready to swing into production after having built the first ones. As soon as the funds became available the began producing more of them, 19 more to be exact. They are what gave us control of the Pacific.

Cruisers were advanced and the development of the New Orleans Class cruisers were added to the fleet. Seven of them were built under FDR ready for the War. Add to this the Farragut Class destroyers. Six of them were produced. Once again, the importance of producing these warships was secondary to getting the ship yards prepared to mass produce them.

Apparently building six modern aircraft carriers, seven modern cruisers and six modern destroyers is doing "nothing" to some. How convenient it must be to be able to omit and disregard facts when attempting to rewrite history.

FDR prepared for war and created a military doctrine that is used to this very day. Develop and produce the most sophisticated and technologically advanced weaponry in the world. When you send your forces off to war, send them with the best weapons and support possible. Send them with weapons that out class and out shoot the enemy.

FDR did the same advanced development and limited production method of preparing with everything from the Sherman Tank to the M-1 Garand. The B-17's and B-24's and B-26 as well as the fighters like the P 38 and P 51 and the Navy/Marine F4U Corsair all went through FDR's method of development, limited production and eventual mass production
with industry prepared to meet the challenge of arming the nation as soon as they were asked to do so. And they did.

"You base your assertion on a comment made by Marshall."

1. So....the quote is accurate..."George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country"...

Well....either Marshall knew what he was talking about....or you do.

And you, being regularly revealed to be a Roosevelt boot-licking dunce....leaves little in the way of puzzlement.



2. Once the veracity of Marshall's statement is seen.....the absurdity of your attempt to shield Roosevelt from well deserved vituperation is risible.

Your claim is that, yes, Marshall said it...but FDR was already taking care of business.
No...he wasn't....that's why Marshall said that to him....you dope.

Marshall made his statement in May of 1940 and FDR finally got congress to approve over a billion dollars to fund the military at the same time. Over a billion dollars was being appropriated to prepare for the war and Marshall wanted a say in how it would be spent. He wanted it to build US forces in specific ways, and not to be used assisting the British with aircraft and equipment. FDR took his advice. In addition he accomplished what most thought was impossible, he got the draft approved by Congress four months later.
You use the Marshall comment to seem like he was asking for funds and action and FDR was ignoring him. Marshall's comment and the funding as well as FDR's implementation of measures to grow the military all came at the same time.

 

[Synthaholic]

If she is correct - on any of this - why isn't it taught in universities...

You should really keep quiet. You're just revealing your 'limitations.'

Wow...

^^^ Another wingnut who can't simply answer a direct question, and opts for speaking in riddles.

 

[Synthaholic]

There was no Roosevelt 'military buildup' in the 1930s.

1939
January: FDR's State of the Union address requests nearly $1.5B for defense (in national budget of $9B) and says arms embargo is unfair and must be reformed: "the frontiers of the United States are on the Rhine," he tells a Senate committee, to "stony silence."

I just LOVE it when you contradict yourself!

You imbecile....that was some one else's post.


Foot in your mouth again, huh?

It's not from one of your links?

 

[Synthaholic]

Is there absolutely not bottom to your ignorance????

Not only do you know nothing and appear proud of same....
...but you will simply make things up!!!!

There was no Roosevelt 'military buildup' in the 1930s.



FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone.

Typical PoliticalChic misinformed and distorted ideas. She knows less than nothing about the topics and ideas she attempts to promote.

Then how does she manage to make a fool of you every time?

By quoting history deniers and Right-Wing revisionists?

If she is correct - on any of this - why isn't it taught in universities, and why does she only have single sources, none corroborated?

"....why isn't it taught in universities,....."


You know so little that it hardly surprises that you are unaware that Liberals run the universities.....and indoctrinate, rather than teach.

You, of course, are a case in point.

Ahh, so the "Liberal Media" has kept YOUR version of history quiet for 75 years?

I'd call you a dingbat, but that would insult Edith Bunker.

 

[Synthaholic]

Is there absolutely not bottom to your ignorance????

Not only do you know nothing and appear proud of same....
...but you will simply make things up!!!!

There was no Roosevelt 'military buildup' in the 1930s.



FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone.

Typical PoliticalChic misinformed and distorted ideas. She knows less than nothing about the topics and ideas she attempts to promote.

Then how does she manage to make a fool of you every time?

By quoting history deniers and Right-Wing revisionists?

If she is correct - on any of this - why isn't it taught in universities, and why does she only have single sources, none corroborated?

"....why isn't it taught in universities,....."


You know so little that it hardly surprises that you are unaware that Liberals run the universities.....and indoctrinate, rather than teach.

You, of course, are a case in point.

Who runs the colleges?

We all knew she would get around to the "Liberal Media" nonsense sooner or later. It's the last grasp at the straws when wingnuts are getting their asses kicked with facts.

 

[Synthaholic]

There are two basic types of FDR-hater loon.

There are the more common "Commies still make me piss myself!" types, which are the majority of the loons on this thread.

And there are the "I hate FDR for not allying the USA with the Nazis" types, representing the lowest forms of life on the planet. PC would be the example there. It's always amusing to ask her about that topic, just to see her run again. Like this.

PC, do you think the USA should have allied with the Nazis in WWII?

OOH!!! I haven't heard her make that argument yet.

No wonder she reveres Nazi newspapers.

 

[Moonglow]

Typical PoliticalChic misinformed and distorted ideas. She knows less than nothing about the topics and ideas she attempts to promote.

Then how does she manage to make a fool of you every time?

By quoting history deniers and Right-Wing revisionists?

If she is correct - on any of this - why isn't it taught in universities, and why does she only have single sources, none corroborated?

"....why isn't it taught in universities,....."


You know so little that it hardly surprises that you are unaware that Liberals run the universities.....and indoctrinate, rather than teach.

You, of course, are a case in point.

Who runs the colleges?

We all knew she would get around to the "Liberal Media" nonsense sooner or later. It's the last grasp at the straws when wingnuts are getting their asses kicked with facts.

I am guessing where she supposedly went to college it was a conservative or religious one...

 

[Synthaholic]

'There is no doubt whatsoever that it would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'

We could have either backed the USSR against Germany or backed Germany against the USSR.

Since Germany was the one that was invading peaceful democratic countries and killing their people, not the USSR, I think we made the correct choice.

And BTW - before we got involved, the USSR was fighting Germany, yet Germany was still invading those countries and bombing England. So "the world's two great dictatorships" fighting each other wasn't solving a thing.

And it's very telling that you are quite willing to use the New York Times as your source when you think they are championing your cause.

 

[Ibentoken]

The USA pretty much armed England and Russia. The Nazis had a map of the USA with a name of one of Hitler's henchmen on each state who would be governor.

 

[Unkotare]

If she is correct - on any of this - why isn't it taught in universities...

You should really keep quiet. You're just revealing your 'limitations.'

Wow...

^^^ Another wingnut who can't simply answer a direct question, and opts for speaking in riddles.

It's only a "riddle" you, genius.

 

[regent]

My point is that if FDR had not started to build the military defense industry to help Britain and the Soviets, we would have been unable to respond to Pearl Harbor in any effective way. It takes years to ramp that industry up, and change auto factories into tank factories, etc.

Even with the buildup, it was a close war. Japan and Germany were not paper tigers.

It took only WEEKS to bend the sheet metal into different shapes in Detroit. You're a rude idiot posing as some kind of authority on subjects you know nothing about.

It took only weeks to transition from building 1930s automobiles to building tanks?

I remember well that period, in fact was involved in the building of the Dodge plant in Clearing Illinois that would build the Engines for the B29's. This was 1942. I also remember the building at the same time of the Studebaker plant in clearing, said to be for tanks. United Airlines at Midway Airport drawing up plans to convert DC3's to troop carriers. The nation was gearing for war big time. The newly drafted army was drilling with sticks and learning to salute. I think a lot of those plans had been worked out even before Pearl Harbor.

Damn! How old are you, sir?

I've been to Warm Springs, and who but the worst cynic wouldn't admire or even love President Roosevelt? He was a great icon in American history. Whatever happened to men like him, Truman, and Kennedy? That was the Democratic Party of old. Today we get America-hating shitbags like Clinton and Obama. We get Marxists who want to destroy America. Roosevelt must be spinning in his grave.

The people who love or admire FDR are the uninformed and the indoctrinated....same with Truman and Obama.

The People that admire FDR are the top historians in the nation, hardly the uninformed, and indoctrinated, and that admiration has been going on since 1948. Another group of people that admired FDR are the American people that voted for FDR four times, a record that will probably be around for some years to come, even after you and I are gone. Someday another president will be America's greatest president but we will have to wait, maybe even a century or so for that to happen.

 

[MisterBeale]

The USA pretty much armed England and Russia. The Nazis had a map of the USA with a name of one of Hitler's henchmen on each state who would be governor.

Source please?

 

[MisterBeale]

The blood of those airmen and sailors is on the hands of FDR. He could have negotiated with Japan. He refused.

Pearl Harbour memo shows US warned of Japanese attack
Pearl Harbour memo shows US warned of Japanese attack - Telegraph

Now, on the 70th anniversary of Japan's devastating bombardment of the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbour, Hawaii, evidence has emerged showing that President Franklin D.Roosevelt was warned three days before the attack that the Japanese empire was eyeing up Hawaii with a view to "open conflict."

The information, contained in a declassified memorandum from the Office of Naval Intelligence, adds to proof that Washington dismissed red flags signalling that mass bloodshed was looming and war was imminent.

"In anticipation of possible open conflict with this country, Japan is vigorously utilizing every available agency to secure military, naval and commercial information, paying particular attention to the West Coast, the Panama Canal and the Territory of Hawaii," stated the 26-page memo.

Dated December 4, 1941, marked as confidential, and entitled "Japanese intelligence and propaganda in the United States," it flagged up Japan's surveillance of Hawaii under a section headlined "Methods of Operation and Points of Attack."

Of course, FDR knew it was coming. This revelation has been known for some time. However the FDR cultists refuse to accept it.

FDR has the blood of millions on his hands.

You evidently have hate blinding you to the truth...

Sunday, December 7 - Washington D.C. - The last part of the Japanese message, stating that diplomatic relations with the U.S. are to be broken off, reaches Washington in the morning and is decoded at approximately 9 a.m. About an hour later, another Japanese message is intercepted. It instructs the Japanese embassy to deliver the main message to the Americans at 1 p.m. The Americans realize this time corresponds with early morning time in Pearl Harbor, which is several hours behind. The U.S. War Department then sends out an alert but uses a commercial telegraph because radio contact with Hawaii is temporarily broken. Delays prevent the alert from arriving at headquarters in Oahu until noontime (Hawaii time) four hours after the attack has already begun..

The History Place - World War II in Europe Timeline December 7 1941 - Japanese Bomb Pearl Harbor

Pfft. I don't have hate blinding me. You have years and years of indoctrination and cognitive dissonance blocking your willingness to consider any other facts. YES, I have heard the official government narrative.

But the FACTS are something quite different. Professional historians have since uncovered and unearthed NEW facts. You have heard of something called the freedom of information act? Did you know that there are even STILL some documents from that time period, that FOIA not withstanding, they STILL won't declassify because of how they are afraid it will tarnish the government's, the presidents, and US's legacy of that time period? But we have enough facts now to KNOW that the official story we all learned as kids IS WRONG. They tell us half truths, it's called misinformation, so that when we discuss and argue like this, people who WANT so badly to believe our hero stories, can believe that the truth isn't what it actually is. Calling something a "conspiracy theory," ignoring the documented facts, keeping your illusions, and moving on with your life is so much easier. That way you can justify you jingoism while our armies and corporations pillage and steal the world's resources. Isn't that nice now?

That documented facts are, the Japanese were manipulated into attacking Pearly Harbor, and the US establishment knew when and where it was going to come. They also knew that they had the resources and man power to beat them, or else they wouldn't have lured them into the attack. The war was over before it began. STOP BEING SO OBTUSE. Stop spreading disinformation. Your piece of evidence comes close to the truth, but it leaves A LOT of very important details and relevant facts out of the picture. That's the beauty of misinformation, isn't it?

Pearl Harbor: Hawaii Was Surprised; FDR Was Not
Pearl Harbor Hawaii Was Surprised FDR Was Not

Roosevelt's intentions were nearly exposed in 1940 when Tyler Kent, a code clerk at the U.S. embassy in London, discovered secret dispatches between Roosevelt and Churchill. These revealed that FDR — despite contrary campaign promises — was determined to engage America in the war. Kent smuggled some of the documents out of the embassy, hoping to alert the American public — but was caught. With U.S. government approval, he was tried in a secret British court and confined to a British prison until the war's end. . . .

. . . . During subsequent Pearl Harbor investigations, both General Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, and Admiral Stark, Chief of Naval Operations, denied any recollection of where they had been on the evening of December 6th — despite Marshall's reputation for a photographic memory. But James G. Stahlman, a close friend of Navy Secretary Frank Knox, said Knox told him FDR convened a high-level meeting at the White House that evening. Knox, Marshall, Stark, and War Secretary Stimson attended. Indeed, with the nation on war's threshold, such a conference only made sense. That same evening, the Navy Department received a request from Stimson for a list of the whereabouts of all ships in the Pacific.

On the morning of December 7th, the final portion of Japan's lengthy message to the U.S. government was decoded. Tokyo added two special directives to its ambassadors. The first directive, which the message called "very important," was to deliver the statement at 1 p.m. The second directive ordered that the last copy of code, and the machine that went with it, be destroyed. The gravity of this was immediately recognized in the Navy Department: Japan had a long history of synchronizing attacks with breaks in relations; Sunday was an abnormal day to deliver diplomatic messages — but the best for trying to catch U.S. armed forces at low vigilance; and 1 p.m. in Washington was shortly after dawn in Hawaii!

Admiral Stark arrived at his office at 9:25 a.m. He was shown the message and the important delivery time. One junior officer pointed out the possibility of an attack on Hawaii; another urged that Kimmel be notified. But Stark refused; he did nothing all morning. Years later, he told the press that his conscience was clear concerning Pearl Harbor because all his actions had been dictated by a "higher authority." As Chief of Naval Operations, Stark had only one higher authority: Roosevelt.

 

[Flopper]

There are two basic types of FDR-hater loon.

There are the more common "Commies still make me piss myself!" types, which are the majority of the loons on this thread.

And there are the "I hate FDR for not allying the USA with the Nazis" types, representing the lowest forms of life on the planet. PC would be the example there. It's always amusing to ask her about that topic, just to see her run again. Like this.

PC, do you think the USA should have allied with the Nazis in WWII?

Democrats point to FDR as one of our greater presidents and every major presidential ranking survey agrees. None ranked FDR lower than 5th and most rank him either 1st or 3rd. No president that followed him, democrat or republican accomplished what Roosevelt accomplished. Look at the republican presidents that followed him and it becomes clear why republicans are so intent on smearing FDR.

• Eisenhower - the war hero with probably the highest ranking but it was never higher 7th
• Nixon - a criminal who was impeached and ranked no higher than 23. Most surveys rank him among our worst presidents.
• Gerald Ford - who could never keep his foot out of his mouth. His highest ranking was 22 and was ranked in the 3rd or 4th quadrille by all surveys.
• Ronald Reagan - was worshiped by republican conservatives, however that opinion wasn't shared by the public, political analysts, or historians. Reagan's highest rating was 8th
• H.W. Bush- whose greatest accomplish seemed to be starting a war and leaving it unfinished. His highest ranking was 18th.
• G.W. Bush - best know for looking stupid and proving that looks aren't deceiving.. His highest ranking was 19th to a low 34.[/QUOTE]

.Now I'm not saying all Republicans that followed him were that bad, but overall their accomplishments did not come close to FDR.

Historical rankings of Presidents of the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[MisterBeale]

Nope, wrong. Your ignorance is glaring. See, you need to STOP watching propaganda, and then stop parroting the lies.

This article is very long, and VERY specific about what they knew. It clearly shows that FDR not only knew, he BAITED THEM. He knew where, when, and with how much strength they would attack. They had broken the Japanese code already. They had intelligence they were not going to let the American people be privy to, because the administration and it's imperialist Keynesian banking allies WANTED war. Blood for debt, the will of the American people be damned. The American corporate imperial elites wanted to open up territory to plunder and gain economic influence over. Asia was ripe for dominance, Japan was in the way.

It's a story as old as man, and the elites are still playing it in the middle east. The story they write for the unwashed masses on the television is a laugh. Small snippet, the article tells all.

That's Ken Burns propaganda is just that, Propaganda.
Pearl Harbor: Hawaii Was Surprised; FDR Was Not
Pearl Harbor Hawaii Was Surprised FDR Was Not

......and then bigfoot landed on earth by way of UFO, he tried to tell FDR about JFKs assassination but he ignored the warnings. Damn that FDR.

Hmmm. That's a funny way of saying you're sorry and admitting you were wrong, but I'll take it. Bet you were surprised by all those facts and history, huh?

Now stop your hero worship, and quit spreading those lies. Teach your children and grandchildren the truth. Investigate what is REALLY going on in the Middle East right now. The lies and misinformation are being repeated once again for the benefit of those who rule, generation after generation at the expense of all mankind.

Only peace, freedom, free markets, and a government not involved in banking or commerce will keep the people from being slaves. Anything else inevitably leads to a monoply on violence and war.

No, you misunderstand my meaning in much the same way as you misinterpret history to fit an extremely narrow point of view.

My point of view isn't narrow. It is yours that is narrow. My mind is freed. Did you even bother to read my evidence? Did you even bother to try to post something that refutes it? NO.

You have been bested. Historical FACTS are on my side. All you have is a tantrum and saying NO NO NO.

Sorry your cognitive dissonance is so strong. But it is time to face the truth. You have been schooled.

You seem to be confusing facts with speculation and opinion.

Non-Sense. It's based on the fact based research of historians. One of them won a Pulitzer Prize for his history of World War II-era Japanese history.

Go check out the reviews of their books on Google. They generally garnered positive reviews from readers and non-establishment critics.

Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor (Google eBook)

Pearl Harbor was not an accident, a mere failure of American intelligence, or a brilliant Japanese military coup. It was the result of a carefully orchestrated design, initiated at the highest levels of our government. According to a key memorandum eight steps were taken to make sure we would enter the war by this means. Pearl Harbor was the only way, leading officials felt, to galvanize the reluctant American public into action.
This great question of Pearl Harbor--what did we know and when did we know it?--has been argued for years. At first, a panel created by FDR concluded that we had no advance warning and should blame only the local commanders for lack of preparedness. More recently, historians such as John Toland and Edward Beach have concluded that some intelligence was intercepted. Finally, just months ago, the Senate voted to exonerate Hawaii commanders Admiral Kimmel and Lieutenant General Short, after the Pentagon officially declared that blame should be "broadly shared." But no investigator has ever been able to prove that fore-knowledge of the attack existed at the highest levels.
Until now. After decades of Freedom of Information Act requests, Robert B. Stinnett has gathered the long-hidden evidence that shatters every shibboleth of Pearl Harbor. It shows that not only was the attack expected, it was deliberately provoked through an eight-step program devised by the Navy. Whereas previous investigators have claimed that our government did not crack Japan's military codes before December 7, 1941, Stinnett offers cable after cable of decryptions. He proves that a Japanese spy on the island transmitted information--including a map of bombing targets--beginning on August 21, and that government intelligence knew all about it. He reveals that Admiral Kimmel was prevented from conducting a routine training exercise at the eleventh hour that would have uncovered the location of the oncoming Japanese fleet. And contrary to previous claims, he shows that the Japanese fleet did not maintain radio silence as it approached Hawaii. Its many coded cables were intercepted and decoded by American cryptographers in Stations on Hawaii and in Seattle.
The evidence is overwhelming. At the highest levels--on FDR's desk--America had ample warning of the pending attack. At those same levels, it was understood that the isolationist American public would not support a declaration of war unless we were attacked first. The result was a plan to anger Japan, to keep the loyal officers responsible for Pearl Harbor in the dark, and thus to drag America into the greatest war of her existence.
Yet even having found what he calls the "terrible truth," Stinnett is still inclined to forgive. "I sympathize with the agonizing dilemma faced by President Roosevelt," he writes. "He was forced to find circuitous means to persuade an isolationist America to join in a fight for freedom....It is easier to take a critical view of this policy a half century removed than to understand fully what went on in Roosevelt's mind in the year prior to Pearl Harbor."
Day of Deceit is the definitive final chapter on America's greatest secret and our worst military disaster.

And of course, the other book, by master historian and Pulitzer prize winner, John Toland,

Yeah, I know, books. Yuck. TV documentaries and the stuff they told you in government schools, now that's a reality we can handle. Much more reliable than independent investigations. Whatever.



But you know, when you got nothing else in a debate, the last refuge of the desperate is to attack the other sides sources, right?



And that's really what my whole beef was about from the very beginning getting into this thread.

Ken Burns is a propagandist. He's out to do two things. Spread disinformation for the elites that run the system, and make a tidy profit doing so.

What a sell out.

 

[Old Rocks]

Like Lincoln, FDR faced challenges not faced by Presidents before or since. Each rose to the challenge, and made this a better nation. Had Eisenhower had these kinds of challenges, I believe he had the character to also became one of the very great Presidents.

 

[Pogo]

The taxpayer funded PBS station plays it over and over. I can't imagine Americans swooning over the legacy of a president who was so arrogant that he disregarded the long standing gentlemans agreement by every president since the 1700's not to run for more than two terms and forced an Amendment to the Constitution. I can't imagine support for the legacy of a freaking president who incarcerated American citizens on the basis of their ethnic appearance. If Japanese Americans were really a threat to the United States during war with Japan why didn't he lock them all up? Why didn't the government lock up all the Japanese in Hawaii which was a hot bed of espionage? The sleazy answer might be about democrat real estate speculators who pounced on confiscated Japanese American property. Was Roosevelt even in his right mind during WW2? His medical records disappeared from a locked safe after he died. Indications are that he was the victim of several strokes before he finally died.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting budget is about $445 million dollars. That’s less than $1.50 per person per year — or about one one-hundredth of one percent of the federal budget.
Five Things That Cost Taxpayers More Than PBS

And that's for the entire CPB, not just what it allows to PBS, but other radio and TV stations, local community stations, Indian tribe stations, etc.

 

[MisterBeale]

Hmmm. That's a funny way of saying you're sorry and admitting you were wrong, but I'll take it. Bet you were surprised by all those facts and history, huh?

Now stop your hero worship, and quit spreading those lies. Teach your children and grandchildren the truth. Investigate what is REALLY going on in the Middle East right now. The lies and misinformation are being repeated once again for the benefit of those who rule, generation after generation at the expense of all mankind.

Only peace, freedom, free markets, and a government not involved in banking or commerce will keep the people from being slaves. Anything else inevitably leads to a monoply on violence and war.

So now you support ISIS and other extreme terrorist groups....Peace and free markets ain't worth shit if you have disruptions in the whole system by those that seek to destroy it..

Where did you get THAT from?

No, if you bothered to read any of the information I posted, you would see that the political elites always manipulate events so that the desired outcome always favors US commerce, industry, banking and trade on Wall street. It has absolutely nothing to do with "national security."

One would have to be obtuse to believe that ISIS poses any significant threat to America. Just as one would have to be daft to believe that either the Germans or Japanese posed any serious threat to America. The intelligence services would have known long before they would have had sufficient navel power to invade either the East or West coast. Hell, Germany didn't have the Navel power to invade England. It sure as hell didn't have what it would have taken to get across the Atlantic.

And Japan? Forget about it.

By the time either Axis nation even came close to getting up the strength to invade, the US would've been prepared.

As far as ISIS? The US, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar MADE ISIS. With out help from the CIA and Turkey, and with out the cooperation of the global markets? ISIS would wither away and die next month. ISIS was created to help achieve a goal. The US and it's allies are playing both sides.

Just as it FDR played the Americans to get them into WWII, OBAMA is playing them to get them to fund an effort to redraw the whole middle east to make it more suitable for American corporations to develop and create American proxy governments friendly to Israel and Western business interests.

Google: Project for a New Middle East, if you don't understand yet.

WWII was the Anglo-American world bankers plan to set up the UN and international financial markets, the middle East game is about a global rearrangement of the energy deck chairs.

If you can't see the bigger picture? Don't come whining to me.