Eddie Bravo is a paranoid stoner quote this if you are down

[Fitz]

Off Topic: You know I looked at your style field, read your statement, and laughed pretty hard.

I know, it basically runs "Cool. Huh? WTF!!!"

But you can't got back and undo your life. You just keep moving forward.

[Gypsy Jazz]

I'm not sure I have the patience to watch this thing. I've seen clips of the religion thing, and while I like the agenda of debunking the idea of Christ being the first "Christ figure" I've read elsewhere (from sources I trust) that they got a lot of this shit wrong. I think they had some conflicting info from "The God Who Wasn't There" which had actually put names and faces up and explained things to you, rather than "Holy crap illusions!" Granted I probably stopped after 5 to 10 minutes so I could've missed out on that.

At any rate, I have a feeling this thing follows a trend of being vaguely right about some issues, but provides no solid proof about it. This is indeed painting in a broad stroke, but I think all conspiracy theories should be examined AT LEAST as skeptically as the things they're questioning to begin with. I know this forum is filled with skeptics in one way or another (why I love it), but listen to yourselves too. Don't be a sheep and follow what people are saying, in regards to the norm OR the norm they're trying to debunk.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - Carl Sagan

[Necroth]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

Best list of theories and sites to find them concerning only the 9/11 aspect, as well as debunking sites that debunk the theories. Much of this is mumbo jumbo BS, but the Loose Change video ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_Change_%28video%29 ) was the best I'd seen concerning the specific video of and explanation of the molten metal, thermate/thermite, and "pancake" theories surrounding how all three buildings fell. As for the bankers, it's the International Bankers theory of today, involving the descendants of the Warburg and Rothschild/Rockefeller theories of old.

What I come away with after ANY of these theories is just this: Pearl harbor papers have been released. They stated that the gov't overlooked and encouraged the attacks. They gave no warning to Pearl Harbor itself, even though they had a memo from trusted gov't intelligence officials stating that intercepted communications had been deciphered stating the intentions of the Japanese to attack PH at least 3 days before the attack happened. It is not that hard for me to put all of the conflicting evidence together (they were running multiple tests that day, the gov't has admitted it; not scrambling jets for 80 minutes after the first deviation fo flight plan is laughable at best; the WTCs, at any time prior to 9/11, would have had huge stores of gold in it's underground area, as well as certain vital documents and other moneys which would have been destroyed, but had been moved only a few days before this, as was touched on by the very owner of said building after the attack; the list could go on forever of ciscumstantial evidence) and conclude that, at best, our own gov't yet again ignored warnings from "trusted" individuals...and at worst, helped with the attack itself. Regardless, there is little I can do about it since the gov't will continue to roll along and do what it wants until such time as a majority of it's people come to terms with the continued lies that any gov't is based on and decide to change said gov't.

To paraphrase Gypsy: Do your own investigation with the resources you have at your disposal and figure out your own theory.

[NoMan]

What I come away with after ANY of these theories is just this: Pearl harbor papers have been released. They stated that the gov't overlooked and encouraged the attacks.

What you're quoting is garbage. The Pearl Harbor Papers, (no actual Pearl Harbor Papers exists), come from a book called "Day of Deceit", written by Robert D. Stinnet. Stinnet alleges that FDR received hundreds of intercepted messages about the attack on Pearl Harbor. What he doesn't mention is that the Japanese maintained radio silence in route to the attack. Thus, how these messages were intercepted can only be guessed as divine intervention.

Stinnet says that there were 129 intercept reports. But he doesn't quote them. Which makes them useless. So, another researcher Stephen Budiansky, looked into the claims. He found them fraudulent.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/proceedi...r+Pearl+Harbor

By him, there were the first codes cracked that were JN-25-A Codes. These were produced in the Fall of 1940. The Japanese then switch to the Jn-25-B code in December of 1940, which the U.S. and British work on cracking. They get some of the code done, but the Japs switched in the Summer. The final version gets worked, which is mostly numerals. There's one last piece that conspiracy theorists cling onto at this point. They say intercepted intelligence three days prior to the attack shows that we knew about it in advance. But, according to the experts:

http://web.archive.org/web/200107251.../msg00289.html

"It is important to note that JN-25 (i.e. AN) traffic for the period before
Pearl Harbor was finally decrypted in 1945 and 1946, and many of these
signals do contain hints of a planned Japanese ambush of U.S. capital
ships.It became a joke at the Archives to see how many people would rush to
show John Taylor, the national security archivist, their "discovery" that
the U.S. was reading JN-25 before Pearl Harbor when they came across this
decrypt file; John would point to the date of decryption at the bottom of
the sheets and watch the researcher's face fall."

Sworded.

You can get both sides debate on it here:

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=445

Put simply, every expert disagrees with Stinnet, who can't provide proof of his charges, which to him, is proof that the government is part of the conspiracy, (they removed my files, that's why I can't cite them! Yes, he uses that claim), and that every expert disagreeing is further proof of the conspiracy. So don't cite it as a "trusted source" when it's little more than the ranting of a neo-con against Roosevelt, the same dude that as already posted, top businessmen plotted against in his own day to overthrow him. (And from the ranting, frothing pages of neo-cons, not really much has changed since.) Unfortunately for him, the documents in question were reprinted in 1994, so how they suppressed it is interesting. (You can read them in "Pearl Harbor Revisited:
United States Navy Communications Intelligence, 1924-1941").

And let's not mention that Stinnet's other book is "George Bush: His World War II Years", an epitaph to George Bush's excellence. I'll let you figure out his reliability as an unbiased source.

But then there's other pesky questions to answer. Why did FDR allow Pearl Harbor to attack when it ruined the Pacific Fleet, set the U.S. back two years on the Pacific War? The most common debate tactic of the "FDR KNEW!" crowd is that the U.S. didn't want to go to war. This is not backed up by the research.

"Hitler's total disregard for the Munich Agreement and his invasion of Poland in September, 1939 helped weaken the isolationist sentiment in America. A Gallup poll taken after the fall of Poland indicated that 84 percent of the American people wanted an Allied victory and 76 percent, despite an overwhelming desire to remain at peace, expected America to become involved in the war sooner or later."

http://www.jmu.edu/madison/center/ma...lum/chap12.htm

Another source gives that a September 1941 poll said 2/3 of Americans favored war against Japan.

And we also know that Admiral Stark recognized that the Japanese were planning to attack somewhere, but told his subordinates it would be "against either the Philippines, Thai, or Kra Peninsula or possibly Borneo." No one thought the Japs would take it all the way home to the U.S.

This is why I don't like conspiracy theories. When you take the time to actually sift through most of it, you realize it's just crap.

[jsampras3]

You conveniently forget to mention that the 3 American aircraft carriers that were part of that fleet that were supposed to be in Pearl Harbor were not there during the attacks. The capital ships could be replaced, but the aircraft carriers were irreplaceable at that point. Losing them would have given Japan free reign over the pacific for years and years, and American victories like Midway would not have been possible.

The Pacific Theater was always the less important theater in WWII. Even with the loss of a good deal of the Pacific fleet the US was never in danger of being invaded by Japan, and Japan could inflict damage on the continental US. Even the Japanese did not believe they could win a long war against the US.

Pearl Harbor (and Germany's subsequent declaration of war against the US) convinced America to enter WWII in the European theater. Without Pearl Harbor it's concievable we never would have became fully involved in the war in Europe aside from lend lease etc., or if we did it would have been at a much later date.

So please, don't act like there's no reason we would allow this to happen.

That being said, I have no idea what happened on 9/11, and you don't either because all independent investigations have been stonewalled. So lets have an independent investigation and see what we come up with, shall we?

[Artful Diablo]

Nothing is happeing, go back to yor blogs and tv...

Yeah nothing is happening at all. Habus Corpus still exists...RFID chips are not real...Chemtrails do not exist...Jet fuel can completely Pulverize steel and concrete...WTC7???...both trade towers fell in 10 sec, into the path of most resistance, in freefall time...and WTC7???...not hit by any plane....right... Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonken...Operation Gladdio...MK Ultra...the tuskegee experiment...and Bin Laden WAS a CIA paid operative...nothings real. i can't recall, is the modern day mantra. Watch Mind Control with Darren Brown, learn about hypnotisim and NLP. research for yourself. take the time. NLP in religious texts. the disclosure project. Morgellans disease. the modern eugenics movement. HAARP Project. the mass consciousness project. the elegant universe. M-theory. Bohemian Grove. Bilderberg. The Truth Movement. None of this exists.

[Gypsy Jazz]

Yeah nothing is happening at all. Habus Corpus still exists...RFID chips are not real...Chemtrails do not exist...Jet fuel can completely Pulverize steel and concrete...WTC7???...both trade towers fell in 10 sec, into the path of most resistance, in freefall time...and WTC7???...not hit by any plane....right... Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonken...Operation Gladdio...MK Ultra...the tuskegee experiment...and Bin Laden WAS a CIA paid operative...nothings real. i can't recall, is the modern day mantra. Watch Mind Control with Darren Brown, learn about hypnotisim and NLP. research for yourself. take the time. NLP in religious texts. the disclosure project. Morgellans disease. the modern eugenics movement. HAARP Project. the mass consciousness project. the elegant universe. M-theory. Bohemian Grove. Bilderberg. The Truth Movement. None of this exists.

I am almost tempted to watch this thing just because of how excited you are. Then again I checked out the JREF forums for a quick peek what they had to say about the "9/11 truth" stuff and it seemed pretty overwhelmingly against much of, if any conspiracy.
If I find some time to waste maybe I'll check it out, but purely on first glance I will always trust die-hard skeptics over sensationalism.

I have yet to actually make any judgement for myself yet, but it seems kind of odd to me that anyone on this forum holds different standards for arguments than martial arts. Claims of chi-blasts and claims of conspiracy need to be held to the exact same standard. Have solid empircal proof that does not fall prey to any of many logical fallacies? Congrats, advance a step. No? Return to Go, do not collect $200.

I know this won't settle shit, but the James Randi doll on my desk is compelling me to rant.

[RobT]

I always think of one thing about conspiracy theories...

How many people knew about Watergate? I think it was 3? They didn't do a very good job of keeping that covered up.

How many people are meant to know about these massive world-wide conspiracies? and 9/11? Thousands? Millions? Wow, someone is doing a good job of keeping them all quiet.

[test1234]

...M-theory...

hahah that counts as a conspiracy theory now?

[NoMan]

You conveniently forget to mention that the 3 American aircraft carriers that were part of that fleet that were supposed to be in Pearl Harbor were not there during the attacks. The capital ships could be replaced, but the aircraft carriers were irreplaceable at that point. Losing them would have given Japan free reign over the pacific for years and years, and American victories like Midway would not have been possible.

That's grasping for straws, and ignorant of history. The capital ships were tried and tested technology that the U.S. thought indispensable, the aircraft carriers were not. Thes capital ships were still used in most of the Pacific War. And the Japanese did the same thing at Savo Island, on August 8/9, 1942. By Gordon Brown's account, "At Dawn We Slept":

"At the time, carrier operations were entirely new, and very few nations had mastered them. Not even the Japanese conceded the seas to carriers...the plan for Midway six months later called for the coup de grace to be delivered not by Nagumo's carriers, but by Yamamoto's powerful battleship division, led by the Yamato."

This is the sort of ex post facto knowledge that conspiracy theorists have that no one at the time have.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_s...n_Pearl_Harbor

Of the more than 90 ships at anchor in Pearl Harbor, the primary targets were the eight battleships anchored there. seven were moored on Battleship Row along the southeast shore of Ford Island while the USS Pennsylvania (BB-38) lay in drydock across the channel. Within the first minutes of the attack all the battleships adjacent to Ford Island had taken bomb and or torpedo hits.

and then:

Even with the loss of a good deal of the Pacific fleet the US was never in danger of being invaded by Japan, and Japan could inflict damage on the continental US. Even the Japanese did not believe they could win a long war against the US.

You're displaying a lot of naivete' about Japan's options during WWII. Japan had extremely limited natural resources, particularly oil, at a time period when America supplied some 90% of the World's oil, (Middle East about 8% at that time), and had no capacity for waging a war on the Continental U.S. The estimate given by the top Japanese Admiral was that unless the U.S. reverses its oil embargo, the Japanese fleet would die at sea in 18 months, "Sitting in its harbor, unable to move."

The areas of operation they concentrated on were in the Pacific, the Phillipines, Borneo, China, etc. The goal was to stop the oil embargo, of which we have testimony from all the generals of the Japanese military. You can read it in Niall Ferguson's "War of the World".

Without Pearl Harbor it's concievable we never would have became fully involved in the war in Europe aside from lend lease etc., or if we did it would have been at a much later date.

Could/Would/mighta/shoulda/woulda/ but that's not supported by any number of polls during the era. From "America Faces the War: Shifts in Opinion." By: Cantril, Hadley; Rugg, Donald; Williams, Frederick. Public Opinion Quarterly, 12/1/40, Vol. 4 Issue 4, p651-656.

The poll divides people into three groups, isolationists, (no war no matter what, stay out of Europe), sympathetic, (help England but try not to get involved in war), and inteventionist, (go to war and help out England). The interventionists hold a 59% polling with the sympathetic at a 24% polling. Roughly 73% in favor of war-pursuing policies.

And another source for the next year.

"Gallup and Fortune Polls", Public Opinion Quarterly, Win41, Vol. 5 Issue 4, p666-687:

Another poll conducted in the Winter of 1941, it showed that America favored a "Keep out of war" party by a paltry 16% total. In a follow-up to that question, 22.4% of Americans said that the government was pursuing policies that were leading it to war, but that we should "support in full the government program". 41.3% said, "While at first it looks like this was not our war, it looks now like we should back England until Hitler is beaten back." And 12.4% said, "It's our war and England's, and we should have been fighting well before this." Pro-war sentiment ran at 75.1% of the American vote prior to Pearl Harbor, which is close to the same level it was at in the 1940 poll.

So please, don't act like there's no reason we would allow this to happen.

What I'm saying is that the people who say FDR knew about Pearl Harbor prior to it happening are nutters who don't know much about history. If you can refute anything I've said, feel free to try.

[new2bjj]

I never understand what the goals of these supposed mega-govts (composed of the mega-rich) would be.

I mean, these people are already amongst the richest people in the world. They have enough money that they can do whatever they want etc. So why do they apparently want to do something which could realistically cause mass uprisings?

We are already controlled by these people (they are the govt.!), they are already in control of the wealth and natural resources, they already comprise the "elite" of the human population (in wealth terms)... etc... etc... What more do they want?!

It's never enough for guys like that. That's how they got rich in the first place, by hoarding. First they want money for the kids, then the grandkids, then they want a "dynasty" then immortality, etc. And they are also scared they'll lose it, so they have to make sure that any element of risk disappears. All that Adam smith shit is crap- they don't want competition, they want to remove competition. To them, what's the fun in being rich if everyone else, or at least a middle class is having a decent time. They want to be kings and the rest of us serfs, wallowing in poverty and disease. They wont be happy until everyone is walking around in rags or in the army protecting their assets.

[NoMan]

To them, what's the fun in being rich if everyone else, or at least a middle class is having a decent time. They want to be kings and the rest of us serfs, wallowing in poverty and disease. They wont be happy until everyone is walking around in rags or in the army protecting their assets.

Psychological surveys show that people don't care about people they consider lower than themselves in station. Does the fact that people in Africa die of starvation by the millions make you any more grateful that you have food and a computer? No. You compare yourself to those in your same social situation, other middle class families. If the Johnson's get a new car, the Adamson's, the Jamesson's, and every family usually gets one as well. For the uber-rich, they compare themselves to the other uber-rich, and frantically try to get even richer than each other. My favorite example of this is when William Walker conquered Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Costa Rica, (1856 - 1860). He turned the countries into slave-empires, until he was taken out by the Vanderbilts. His seiziure of the countries cut off trade routes, crippling other merchants. Talk about a geographical monopoly.

All that Adam smith shit is crap

Adam Smith said that in order to ensure monopolies on products, groups would form guilds that would require long periods of time to complete to ensure that a small group could control the production. There's nothing in the Wealth of Nations that says entrepreneurs want competition, they don't. You can keep the profit margins high if you don't have competition. But competition happens anyway because when people see an area they can go into to make money, they do. Thus monopolies rely upon the government to help them achieve it via import taxes, trade barriers, regulations about who can enter an industry, subsidies, etc. His argument was about removing the barriers to free trade, not about how they would mystically disappear because capitalists love competition. You might be thinking of Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", in which the feminist railroad operator says that she would love competition, because she could beat the other companies, but fairly.

Rockefellar, for one, used his contacts to get his stuff shipped across state lines easier, making his products always lower in price than others and driving people out. By my accord, the U.S. right now looks amazingly close to the "Gilded Age" and Robber Baron era of American history. Even the trends on real wages and production mirror the Gilded Age.

[AMH]

Hey OP,
There are government employees who use this forum, including myself.
It would be awful if one day you just sort of disappeared.
Wouldn't it?

[RobT]

It's never enough for guys like that. That's how they got rich in the first place, by hoarding. First they want money for the kids, then the grandkids, then they want a "dynasty" then immortality, etc. And they are also scared they'll lose it, so they have to make sure that any element of risk disappears. All that Adam smith shit is crap- they don't want competition, they want to remove competition. To them, what's the fun in being rich if everyone else, or at least a middle class is having a decent time. They want to be kings and the rest of us serfs, wallowing in poverty and disease. They wont be happy until everyone is walking around in rags or in the army protecting their assets.

Yeah, but the top 5% consistently increase their wealth more than the rest of the world every year.

What do you really think is a more advantageous position for them;

i) Keep everything as it is now. Capitalist economies dominate the world, which gives the real power to the average citizen but through use of advertising and manipulation of markets and governments produces massive wealth for only a small %age. These people are massively wealthy and already have influence over govt.'s. To lose their wealth, even over a dozen generations, would take considerable effort (even beyond total incompetence).

ii) Go on some crazy drive for total domination of entire populations. Force people to do exactly what they're told. Drastically cut down personal freedoms for all but a select few and maintain control through force.


The current position is obviously better for the most wealthy. Most people simply want to earn an average wage, buy a house and a car and have some kids. For as long as that is true, there will be no need for any sort of evil totalitarian regime.

[Necroth]

Stimson's Embarrassing Diary Entry
On November 25, 1941, President Roosevelt met with Secretary of Sate Hull, Navy Secretary Frank Knox, Secretary of War Henry Stimson, General Marshall and Admiral Stark. Relations with the Japanese was the main topic discussed. FDR observed that the Japanese had launched surprise attacks at the outset of previous wars and that the U.S. might be under attack by the following Monday. Stimson was keeping a diary at this time and the defenders of Roosevelt's innocence have long been frustrated over the following entry from his diary, dealing with the conference of the 25th:

The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves. It was a difficult pro-position.

After discussing the matter, Roosevelt and his closest advisers agreed that:

In spite of the risk involved, however, in letting the Japanese fire the first shot, we realized that in order to have the full support of the American people it was desirable to make sure that the Japanese were the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt in anyone's mind as to who were the aggressors.

Richard N. Current, a professor of history at the University of North Carolina, came up with an inventive explanation for this remarkable bit of evidence that was made public during the Joint Congressional Hearings. In Secretary Stimson: A Study in Statecraft (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1954), Dr. Current conceded that was no denying that Stimson, et al. were anticipating an attack. But he claimed not on United States, rather on Dutch or British, territory. Roosevelt's challenge was how to make a Japanese attack on Dutch or British territory appear to be an attack on America. I leave it to the reader to consider whether or not this is a convincing exposition.

And:

Anyone familiar with the Roosevelt record can see the flaw in their conclusion, even if they are correct that the JN-25 code had been broken by the early fall of 1939. The authors completely misread Roosevelt's position. They make no mention of his commitments to the British and Dutch, and the dilemma he was placed in when the Dutch called on the U.S. to own up to its part of the bargain four days before the attack on Pearl Harbor. There is no reference to Roosevelt's "live bait" ploy of sending three little ships out of manila on a "defensive information patrol" the week before Pearl Harbor. Greaves, and others, long ago argued that while FDR may not have welcomed the loss of life at Pearl Harbor, that after the failure of his "three little ships" gambit, and with the Dutch and British invoking their agreements that went into went effect after the Japanese crossed the imaginary line in Southeast Asia, the attack on Pearl Harbor solved Roosevelt's most pressing problem.

Rusbridger and Nave have undoubtedly uncovered additional parts of the mystery. With the reservations I have out lined, their book is of interest to students of this episode.

And then:

Admiral Layton's Memoirs
On December 7, 1941, Edwin T. Layton was intelligence of ficer for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, an assignment he retained throughout the war. Like his superior, Admiral Kimmel, he was indeed surprised when the Japanese bombers hit the base. But he was not cashiered in the aftermath.

Following his retirement in 1962, Layton was encouraged by many people, in and out of the military, to write his own ac count of what had happened. Over the following years, Rear Admiral Layton collected material and wrote articles and reviews for the U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings. The publication of At Dawn We Slept provoked him to complete the work he had begun almost twenty years earlier. He found the book riddled with misstatements and distortions of fact, and was outraged that Prange, Goldstein, and Dillon had blamed Kimmel and Short for the disaster, while absolving Washington.

At the time he suffered a fatal stroke in April 1984, Layton had largely completed the first draft of his manuscript, which recounted his version of events up to the Battle of Midway. Captain Roger Pineau, who had assisted Samuel Eliot Morison with his multi-volume History of United States Naval Operations in World War II, and John Costello both knew Layton, and were retained to complete his book, which appeared in 1985 as "And I Was There": Pearl Harbor and Midway- Breaking the Secrets" (New York: William Morrow, 596 pp., ISBN: 0-688-04883-8).

Naturally, the question arises as to just how much of this is really Layton and how much may have been "edited" by Pineau and Costello. As David Irving reminds us, the published versions of many "memoirs" often differ greatly from the original manuscripts. With that reservation in mind, this reviewer can report that Layton's central thesis is that he and Kimmel were "short changed" of intelligence information by Washington. He confirms that Admiral Richmond Kelly Turner, Chief of the War Plans Division, failed to relay vital intelligence to Kimmel:

It should now be indisputable that the information that might have averted the disaster had been received by the Navy Department by 6 December 1941 -- the bomb plot message, or even the eleventh-hour "lights code" message, could have alerted Pearl Harbor to the threat.

Layton thus reconfirms what Kimmel and Theobald wrote in their accounts. Other insights found in this volume include evidence that Stalin had very precise knowledge about when the Japanese were going to launch their strikes, and another report confirming that a council-of-war convened at the White House the night of December 6th.

As well as plenty more on the same site. The essay itself is a compendium of MANY different books about the ordeal, from right after the event all the way to the 90's (from what I saw within). So your assumption that I was referencing the single book was very wrong.

Also:

In 1979 the NSA released 2,413 JN-25 orders of the 26,581 intercepted by US between Sept 1 and Dec 4, 1941. The NSA says "We know now that they contained important details concerning the existence, organization, objective, and even the whereabouts of the Pearl Harbor Strike Force." (Parker p 21) Of the over thousand radio messages sent by Tokyo to the attack fleet, only 20 are in the National Archives. All messages to the attack fleet were sent several times, at least one message was sent every odd hour of the day and each had a special serial number. Starting in early November 1941 when the attack fleet assembled and started receiving radio messages, OP-20-G stayed open 24 hours a day and the "First Team" of codebreakers worked on JN-25. In November and early December 1941, OP-20-G spent 85 percent of its effort reading Japanese Navy traffic, 12 percent on Japanese diplomatic traffic and 3 percent on German naval codes. FDR was personally briefed twice a day on JN-25 traffic by his aide, Captain John Beardell, and demanded to see the original raw messages in English. The US Government refuses to identify or declassify any pre-Dec 7, 1941 decrypts of JN-25 on the basis of national security, a half-century after the war.

And:

5 Dec. - At a Cabinet meeting, Secretary of the Navy Knox said, "Well, you know Mr. President, we know where the Japanese fleet is?" "Yes, I know" said FDR. " I think we ought to tell everybody just how ticklish the situation is. We have information as Knox just mentioned...Well, you tell them what it is, Frank." Knox became very excited and said, "Well, we have very secret information that the Japanese fleet is out at sea. Our information is..." and then a scowling FDR cut him off. (Infamy, Toland, 1982, ch 14 sec 5)

You'll note the source is cited after this piece specifically, so no need to go hunt that source down in the Biblio of the page.

The information is astounding and fighting against PH being known about by the gov't prior to said attack is silly. Now, as for helping it along, that I can't comment on because there was no specific thing which screams that our gov't did anything more than _ignore_ what it felt was a) not going to happen, b) not going to be serious if it did, or c) could very easily have been misinformation on a grand scale. Now, that is reaching in some ways, but our gov't isn't very smart. Look at the number of names on the initial hijacker listing per gov't release forms to the AP and match that today with deatinee records and one will note that there are names on said list which are not detained currently. So, our gov't releases information, ignores information, and largely can't tell it's ass from it's head most of the time. But the information is there to be found and read. I'm most apalled by the fact that many of the Navy personnel referenced in the many books about PH have written their own books, and many of those books are quite clear that information they were given ahead of time leads one to believe our gov't did not notify PH of the danger.