Day of Deceit

Scott Horton, December 07, 2005

When I first heard the accusation that FDR had deliberately allowed the attack on Pearl Harbor, on this day in 1941, I thought it impossible. That would be like saying we did it to ourselves. But it turned out that I was wrong. All that it meant was that some individuals did it to others. In this case, Roosevelt and his closest advisors, along with some cooperative officers in the US military, worked to provoke the attack and make sure that Admiral Kimmel and General Short remained in the dark. For certain, as every year around this time, we will have to put up with a bunch of crap about how “military hobbyists and crusty Roosevelt-haters are propounding far-flung theories about presidential treachery,” while in fact the man who proved the case is no Roosevelt-hater, but the furthest thing from it. His name is Robert Stinnett, he’s a veteran of the pacific war and biographer of his fellow veteran George H.W. Bush. Though he proves beyond doubt the case for Roosevelt’s treachery in his book Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor, Stinnett remarkably justifies this action as necessary to get us into the war in Europe.

For just one piece of his smoking gun evidence, take a look at the McCollum memo, which lays out the eight point plan to provoke Japan into attacking first, which was implemented step by step by Roosevelt. See #9 A-H.

US involvement in the so-called “good war,” which laid the foundations of American Empire and has served as the founding myth of the inherent right of the US government to travel around murdering people for their own good was, in fact, begun by the most despicable act of treason against the American people – an act worthy of Adolf Hitler himself.

To listen to my interviews of Mr. Stinnett, click here and here. Get the book here.

Update: Wednesday afternoon I received an email from Patrick D. Weadon, curator of the National Cryptologic Museum, disputing Mr. Stinnett’s claims, and have received a response from Mr. Stinnett to his objections:

Patrick D. Weadon:

Mr. Horton:

Please be advised that Mr. Stinett’s [sic] book is based on faulty evidence. The book claims that the Allies broke the top Japanese naval code(JN25) prior to December 7th 1941. This is nonsense. Small parts of JN25 were cracked in the early 40s but JN25-B ( the upgraded code which was used by the Japanese Navy in days and months leading up to Pearl Harbor) was not cracked until the spring of 1942. If Stinett’s theory is correct it would mean that the United States had forewarning of Japanese naval operations prior to Pearl Harbor but failed to act on the information until June of 1942. This is absurd. In the days and months after Pearl Harbor, the Imperial Army and Navy conquered over a tenth of the earth’s surface. The Allies took it on the chin in places like Wake Island, the Philippines, Singapore and Hong Kong. To think that we sat on the information for months and did nothing with it is crazy.

Stinett is right that the information was being collected prior to Pearl, but he is wrong to assert that it was being read. Some years later the JN25 intercepts were deciphered after the fact. They provided strong evidence, that had it been known at the time may have led to our being prepared for the attack.

I am not alone in pointing out just how wrong Stinett [sic] is in his assertions. Many prominent historians such as David Kahn, Stephen Budiansky, and the late Gordon Prange all agreed that the U.S. myopic focus on Japanese diplomatic traffic, along with the inability to read JN25-B and a general underestimation of Japanese capabilities were the main elements that led to the debacle at Pearl Harbor.

Patrick D. Weadon
National Cryptologic Museum

Robert Stinnett responds:

Mr. Horton:

Mr. Weadon is relying on 1950 information for his observations. I am surprised he regards the US Navy’s brilliant cryptographic reports of 1941 as “faulty evidence.” Apparently he had not read my book or even consulted the US navy crypto records.

The person putting forth the faulty evidence is Mr. Weadon himself. He quotes the JN-25-B Hoax. Neither the Japanese Navy nor the US Navy used such a code designator in the pre Pearl Harbor period of 1939 to December 1941. Japan’s Naval Operation code was known as Code Book D. Random Number Table Seven in fall of 1941; the USN used the designator “Five Number Code.” The JN-25-B designator originated sometime in early 1943.

The proper question is: When did the US Navy solve Code Book D, Table Seven? The answer is provided by Lieutenant John Lietwiler, commanding officer of Station CAST on Corregidor. Leitwiler, head of 65 naval radio cryptographers on Corregidor reported to Washington that his staff was “current in intercepting, decoding and translating” Japan’s operations code as of November 16, 1941, Manila time. On the same day (November 15 EST) in Washington, DC, General George Marshall chief of Staff of the US Army, called Washington bureau chiefs of major newspapers and magazines to his office, swore them to secrecy and revealed the US had broken the Japanese codes and expected the danger period would be the first week in December 1941.

Mr. Weadon sources are not to be trusted. David Kahn in reviewing my book, Day of Deceit for the New York Review of Books, rewrote the Hawaiian Communication Summary of November 25, 1941, which reported the Commander Carriers of the Japanese fleet was in extensive radio communications with the Japanese admirals leading the submarine attack on Hawaii and invasion forces of Wake and Guam. Mr. Kahn was attempting to cover up reports by Pulitzer Prize winner, John Toland, that the Twelfth Naval District in San Francisco also intercepted the “extensive communications’ with radio direction finders. These reports placed the Commander Carriers, north of Hawaii. Naval intelligence officers who were stationed in San Francisco in 1941, call Mr. Kahn’s report a “journalistic crime.” I have refuted Mr. Kahn’s violation of journalistic ethics in the NYROB and also the Wall Street Journal. Mr. Weadon should get into the 21st century and drop the 1950 nonsense.

Best regards,
Robert Stinnett

Anthony Gregory sends along the Independent Institute’s Pearl Harbor resources page.

Stinnett’s piece for

23 Responses to “Day of Deceit”

  1. Whether Roosevelt knew about the attack or not was irrelevant. If he did know and sent the fleet out to intercept us we would have sunk all of your ships anyway. World war 1 battle ships, cruisers, and destroyers and a couple of carriers with inferior planes were no match for the Imperial Navy. We had the best ships, the best trained pilots in the world flying the best planes, armed with the best torpedos (the long lance)the world had ever seen. If Roosevelt knew about the attack and did nothing he totally out foxed us and in so doing caused us to loose the war. If roosevelt had made any defensive move we would have known he knew the code (JN-25) and we would have changed it. As a result, the United States would have had to fought the war blind with disastrous results. Instead, you knew almost every move we were going to make in advance which led to our ultimate defeat. P.S. There would have been no Midway.

  2. I highly recommend the book _Final Secret of Pearl Harbor_ by retired Admiral Robert Theobald. It was written in 1954. He was actually there.

  3. Mr. Stinnett is less than honest by some of things he leaves out.

  4. Mr. Stinnett is less than honest by some of things he leaves out.

  5. Yes the IJN was superior to the USN in the begining of the war. However that would not have changed the end result.

  6. I feel kinda sad even reading that

  7. Stinnett only adds confusion by his semantic nitpicking over what the code in question should be called. He wastes our time not only by having us read the irrelevant second paragraph by forcing us to look up this semantic dispute.

    He does not explain the reason or significance of this name change from "Code Book D. Random Number Table Seven" to to the shorter simpler designation JN-25B. One would think as a historian he would help us here, but he apparently hopes that inattentive readers will be confused into thinking the code in question did not exist until early 1943. This is a strong sign of a dishonest argument.

  8. After reading the Day of Deceit. it is my opinion that the US had broken the code and that the US sacrificed its fleet at Pearl to gather public support to get involved in WWII..The quotes of the actual cryptographers who broke the code are proof enough for me..Kimmel and Short need to take a piece of the blame pie for sure..However the evidence is overwhelming…FDR et al..has the blood of those who died at Pearl Harbor on his hands..

  9. In memory of a day that people hardly even pay attention to anymore- Pearl Harbor Day Anniversary of 2011.

    Not a lot of vets are still alive from that era and those who are- are mortified that this day is just another day to most Americans. Did any of those lost lives mean anything?

    Since Pearl Harbor resonates so very closely( in evility and deception) to the plan behind 9/11- I also wonder, when it is 50 yrs or so in the future( if this planet still exists) will the Twin Towers also be * just another day * in September? Love your country- don't trust your govt!

  10. If you read J.Rusbridger's Betrayal at Pearl Harbor the same story is told about how the naval code (jn25b) was solved and could be read before 7th December 1941 by the British and OP 20 G. It seems probable that both Churchill and FDR knew about the attack. What amazes me most however, is that so many books that cover Pearl Harbour or intelligence in that period don't mention this Naval code at all. Why is this when it is so important? Purple is mentioned plenty of times but this only deals with diplomatic traffic.

  11. well, the day of deceit might have been so hard but we have no choice but to tell that it's really okay. Mesa Pool Cleaning

  12. The attack of the Pearl Harbor is one of the most unforgettable manmade disaster in the history of the US army.Hundred of soldiers were died.

  13. One of the reason world war 2 tension increases after the attack of the pearl harbor.

  14. Yes, salute for the soldiers who sacrifice for their life… kreepy pool cleaner

  15. máy in ?a n?ngWe talked to a lot of people – máy nghe nh?c sony the legends who work here, our customers and partners.t? l?nh toshiba We were delighted by what they said – we are a top agency delivering top creative solutions with superb technical solutions. We were very flattered and we also had the inspiration for our new name – panasonic Solutions.

  16. I have recently read "Day of Deceit"" and found it most intriguing. It is of quite a different calibre to the mad consiracy theories about the assasination of J.F.K or the 9-11 bombings. If correct, ite calls
    for re-examination of the justification of the war against Japan and of FDR*s place in history. I regard him as one of the two greatest statesmen of the twenteith century- perhaps the greatest,
    as his achievements coivered peacetime (the New Deal) as well as wartime, while Churchill*s
    achievements were solely war- his peacetime recorrd was siomewhat patchy.
    I suggest that progress would be made by applying Popperian scientific method, i.e. testing
    alternative theories by reference to their deductive implications. The two theories are the
    "conspiracy" and the "cock up". Extreme and geberally justifiied measures were taken both in Britain and the USA to conceal the fact that enemny codes were being broken. It has been
    suggested, for example, that Britain knew in advance about the invasion fo Crete in May
    1941, and also that it would be by air rather than by sea, but did not move the bulk of its
    troops away from the coast to the airfields, which would have made the German suspect their codes were being borken.
    Limitation on the circulation of decripted intellogence reports might have prevented Hawaii
    and naval commanders from being informed.
    Is it true that the warships left in Pearl Harbour were old and rather obsolete? Where was
    the rest of the US Pacific Fleet at that time, and how did these warships compare in fiirepower
    etc. with those at Pearl Harbour? I understand that two aircraft carriers, the most important
    for the Navy, were ordered to leave Pearl Harbour shortly (a week ro two?) before the attack.
    Is there information on the content and reasons for this order?
    Was there no naval or air surveillance of the ocean while the Japanese fleet was on its way –
    it left I think on November 27th and so was at sea for ten days. Is i true as Stinnett says that it did
    not maintain radio silence? If so, its location could have been detected whether or not the
    Japanese codes were bing broken
    But, if its is true that the relevant Japanese codes were not broken until after Pearl Harbour, the
    "conspiracy" theory is obviously very dubious.

  17. It's good to know about the day of deceit. What is the exactly place they are going ffor ? I didn't get the meaning.Please share more part to understand the things easily.

  18. C?n s?t giàn ph?i qu?n áo
    Không gian ch?t h?p khi?n nhi?u h? gia ?ình ph?i b?ng kho?n lo l?ng khi s?p x?p không gian nhà ? m?t cách h?p lý. gian phoi do
    ?ây c?ng là n?i lo chung c?a nhi?u ng??i trong cu?c s?ng hi?n ??i, ??c bi?t là nh?ng ai sinh s?ng trong các ?ô th?. Không ch? mang l?i ti?n ích, các s?n ph?m nh? gian phoi qu?n áo thông minh hay t? âm t??ng còn ?em l?i s? thông thoáng cho không gian gia ?ình b?n và ph?n nào tô ?i?m c?n nhà c?a b?n. V?i nhi?u ng??i Vi?t Nam, giàn ph?i thông minh còn khá xa l? nh?ng v?i nh?ng n??c phát tri?n nh? các n??c ? B?c M? và ?ông Âu thì s?n ph?m này ?ã tr? nên quen thu?c và ???c r?t nhi?u ng??i s? d?ng. giàn ph?i thông minh&

    Nh? nghiên c?u và t?n d?ng các công ngh? hi?n ??i, giàn ph?i ?? thông minh ?ã ???c ra ??i sao cho v?a hi?n ??i, v?a ti?n l?i nh?ng v?n g?n gàng và d? s? d?ng. giàn ph?i thông minh
    ?u ?i?m b?c nh?t c?a giàn ph?i ?? thông minh là ti?t ki?m không gian, ?i?u mà m?i gia ?ình trong cu?c s?ng càng ngày càng ?ông ?úc, nhà c?a càng thu h?p l?i ?ang r?t c?n. gian phoi
    Nói v? ?? ti?n d?ng thì không ai có th? ph? nh?n r?ng giàn ph?i thông minh là s?n ph?m c?n nh?t cho m?i gia ?ình hi?n nay. Không nh?ng ti?t ki?m ???c không gian s?ng, giàn ph?i còn giúp m?i ng??i thoát kh?i d? b?n lòng v? m?t m? qu?n áo ? ??ng không có ch? thông thoáng ?? ph?i móc. giàn ph?i ??
    Dân s? th? gi?i hi?n nay ?ang t?ng v?i t?c ?? nhanh và còn ti?p t?c t?ng trong nh?ng n?m s?p t?i. Chính vì v?y, c?nh ??t ch?t ng??i ?ông ?ang ngày càng tr? nên ph? bi?n, ??c bi?t là t?i các n??c ?ang phát tri?n và phát tri?n. Trong s? ?ó, t?p trung nhi?u nh?t ? các thành ph? hay khu v?c có ?i?u ki?n thu?n l?i cho kinh t? phát tri?n. Di?n tích sinh ho?t c?a ng??i dân b? thu h?p. giàn ph?i
    Không ít ng??i ph?i s?ng trong nh?ng c?n h? ch?t nít và bé tí. M?i ho?t ??ng ?? duy trì cu?c s?ng bình th??ng c?ng c?n ph?i s?p x?p không gian sao cho h?p lý và hi?u qu?. Tr??c th?c tr?ng nh? hi?n nay, giàn ph?i qu?n áo thông minh ???c thi?t k? và ra ??i ?? giúp khách hàng ti?t ki?m không gian sinh s?ng sao cho phù h?p nh?t. ?ây c?ng là m?t ch?n l?a nh?m gi?i quy?t không gian ph?i qu?n áo trong gia ?ình ?ang ???c ?ông ??o khách hàng tin dùng. gian phoi


  19. good nice post to clear things up a bit

  20. Sao y công ch?ng Gi?y CMND c?a các thành viên (c? ?ông sang l?p) và ??i di?n pháp lu?t2
    dich vu thanh lap doanh nghiep
    L?a ch?n lo?i thích h?p c?a kinh doanh là rào c?n ??u tiên làm cho các nhà ??u t? c?a chúng tôi lo l?ng . Hi?u bài vi?t mà Quang Minh, xin vui lòng cung c?p thông tin chi ti?t v? các lo?i doanh nghi?p t?i Vi?t Nam ngày hôm nay ?? t?o thu?n l?i cho các nhà ??u t? ?? l?a ch?n ?úng lo?i kinh doanh ph?i phù h?p v?i quy mô và ngu?n l?c … c?ng nh? m?t chi?n l??c kinh doanh c?a b?t k? doanh nghi?p .

    Phù h?p v?i Lu?t n?m 2005, Vi?t Nam hi?n có 4 lo?i khác nhau c?a kinh doanh ngày nay là ph? bi?n nh?t, công ty trách nhi?m h?u h?n m?t thành viên , các thành viên trách nhi?m h?u h?n c?a Công ty và c? phi?u c?a công ty. Pháp lu?t c?ng xác ??nh tính ch?t , nhi?m v?, c? ch? ho?t ??ng , c? c?u t? ch?c … c?a t?ng lo?i . ?ây Quang Minh phân tích t?m th?i , ki?n th?c so sánh v? kinh nghi?m c?a mình , hy v?ng khách hàng ph?n nào có th? hi?u ???c b?n ch?t c?a t?ng hình th?c và ??a ra quy?t ??nh khôn ngoan trong vi?c l?a ch?n các doanh nghi?p c?n thi?t

    1. Doanh nghi?p t? nhân . Phù h?p v?i các doanh nghi?p n?m 2005:

    Doanh nghi?p t? nhân hi?n ?ang thu?c s? h?u c?a ng??i ch?u trách nhi?m cho t?t c? các tài s?n cho các ho?t ??ng kinh doanh c?a mình

    Doanh nghi?p t? nhân không phát hành b?t k? ch?ng khoán.

    M?i ng??i ??u có quy?n thành l?p m?t doanh nghi?p t? nhân

    Ch? s? h?u doanh nghi?p t? nhân có th? tr?c ti?p ho?c thuê ng??i khác qu?n lý ho?t ??ng kinh doanh
    d?ch v? thành l?p công ty
    Ch? doanh nghi?p t? nhân có ng??i ??i di?n theo pháp lu?t c?a công ty

    Doanh nghi?p t? nhân là lo?i ??n gi?n nh?t c?a kinh doanh , c?u trúc nh? g?n phù h?p n?u b?n ?? l?i m?t mình v?n th? tr??ng doanh nghi?p nh?. . Doanh nghi?p t? nhân t?o ra s? tin t??ng trong khác so v?i các lo?i theo quy ??nh c?a trách nhi?m c?a khách hàng v?i t?t c? tài s?n c?a h? "

    Th? t?c thành l?p doanh nghi?p t? nhân
    d?ch v? thành l?p doanh nghi?p
    T?t c? các lo?i c?a các doanh nghi?p ???c xác ??nh theo cách t??ng t? , nh?ng trong kinh nghi?m c?a chúng tôi , nh?ng dòng sau ?ây c?a khách hàng doanh nghi?p th??ng ch?n lo?i doanh nghi?p t? nhân : D?ch v? ph? , cà phê, n??c , n??c gi?i khát , ?n u?ng, bán buôn, bán l? v?t li?u xây d?ng , bán t?p hóa , bán v?n phòng ph?m , ?? l?u ni?m , bán buôn , bán l? th?c ph?m …

  21. Không ph?i ai ? Hà N?i c?ng có th? bi?t h?t nh?ng ??a ?i?m thú v? và h?p d?n n?i b?n và c? gia ?ình có th? có nh?ng phút giây th? giãn. H?n n?a, không ph?i ??a ?i?m nào c?ng có m?c giá và ?i?u ki?n h?p lí ?úng theo ý mu?n c?a b?n. Sau ?ây là vài ??a ch? khu ngh? d??ng g?n hà n?i v?i ch?t l??ng và giá c? h?p d?n b?n có th? tham kh?o cho mùa hè s?p ??n.khu ngh? d??ng g?n hà n?i

    Ngoài ra, v?i h? th?ng ki?n trúc hi?n ??i, m?t b? su?i khoáng nóng c?c kì tinh khi?t và s?ch s? là ?i?m nh?n cho khu du l?ch ??c ?áo. V resort c?ng là m?t tòa ki?n trúc ??p, g?n g?i thiên nhiên. Bao g?m nh?ng ti?n nghi ??y ?? nh? spa, nhà sàn, hay phòng gym và t?t t?n t?t nh?ng ph??ng ti?n gi?i trí mà b?n có th? d? dàng tìm th?ykhu resort g?n hà n?i

  22. Chúng tôi l?a ch?n s? 1 cho làm sáng da trong n?m 2014 là Lux chuyên sâu. Làm sáng da tuy?t v?i này ???c th?c hi?n v?i các thành ph?n ch?t l??ng cao nh?t. Lux công trình chuyên sâu ?? thay ??i s? xu?t hi?n c?a da mà không ?nh h??ng ??n c?u trúc ho?c ch?c n?ng da
    kem d??ng da nào t?t nh?t

    .Nó ?i kèm v?i m?t ti?n 90 ngày tr? l?i ??m b?o và b?n có th? nh?n ???c m?t ngu?n cung c?p 30 ngày cho ít h?n $ 35 khi b?n mua gói giá tr?.
    kem d??ng da t?t nh?t

    H? hi?n c?ng ?ang cung c?p mi?n phí v?n chuy?n trên t?t c? các ??n ??t hàng trong n??c. Click vào ?ây ?? truy c?p vào các trang web chính th?c Lux chuyên sâu
    kem d??ng da nào t?t

  23. Dung d?ch v? sinh ph? n? Eilysie thiên nhiên dung dich ve sinh phu nu chi?t xu?t t? các thành ph?n th?o m?c t? nhiên giúp ch?m sóc và b?o v? vùng kín hi?u qu?, mang ??n s? an toàn cho ch? em ph? n?.

    S?a t?m tr?ng da nào t?t trong vô s? các s?n ph?m s?a t?m ?ang có bán t?i các siêu th?, c?a hàng bán l? hi?n nay. Làm sao ?? có th? l?a ch?n ???c lo?i t?t ?ó.