RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (6/30/2016 11:48:16 PM)

Thanks RJ....................they would have come in from the N.West and then approached the island on almost the same route as the Japanese took I would guess. Binoculars would be about as much use as tits on a bull until any airplane was virtually flying down your throat. There is still the question of radio communications though. Surely a B17 pilot would have been on the horn and letting Hickam Field know he was on his way in ? That surely should have alerted SOMEbody that they didn't. Maybe they were all hungover from Saturday night in Pearl ? *smile*. I know I was a few times.




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (6/30/2016 11:48:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Well, the first thing America did to piss them off was to send warships to FORCE them to open their ports to American traders. Then I believe America stopped selling them natural resources ( oil etc) and was claiming chunks of what was obviously asia for themselves and thus closing more of Japans traditional markets.

Are you sure about we had cut off all trade.
An enbargo, you know what the left tells us today is the way to avoid war.
We opened thier ports in the late 1800s but that was no reason to attack us in 41.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (6/30/2016 11:51:35 PM)

The Japanese have long memories Bama and they don't take insults easily. And yes, America gradually cut off Japan's access to raw materials until they were virtually being starved of anything useful to them. At the same time, Japan was gradually being taken over by a very far right-wing government who saw everything as an insult and a matter of honour. A recipe for blood and disaster.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (6/30/2016 11:54:16 PM)

Australia was the dumb bunny that sold them millions of tons of scrap iron while this was all happening. Never mind though, because we got is all back later.......................in the form of bombs, bullets and shells !!!




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (6/30/2016 11:57:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Thanks RJ....................they would have come in from the N.West and then approached the island on almost the same route as the Japanese took I would guess. Binoculars would be about as much use as tits on a bull until any airplane was virtually flying down your throat. There is still the question of radio communications though. Surely a B17 pilot would have been on the horn and letting Hickam Field know he was on his way in ? That surely should have alerted SOMEbody that they didn't. Maybe they were all hungover from Saturday night in Pearl ? *smile*. I know I was a few times.

The B-17s got close enough to contact the tower half way though the attack.
Besides the control tower wasn't included in the discussions.

remember they had court marshalled Billy Mitchell just a few years earlier for claiming, amog other things that the fleet at Pearl could be crippled by a surprise attack on a Sat or Sun coming by the exact route the Japanese.

The people in charge could not conceive of an attack like that. At that time only the Japanese understood what navel air power could do.

They even developed a special torpedo for the relatively shallow waters at Pearl.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:03:19 AM)

And strange as it seems, I was in Busan, Korea, a few years ago and the American fleet was in port at the same time and neatly lined up in rows like little ducks waiting to be shot at. Surely it couldn't happen again *LOL*. Those who don't learn from history .....................etc., etc., etc.




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:10:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

The Japanese have long memories Bama and they don't take insults easily. And yes, America gradually cut off Japan's access to raw materials until they were virtually being starved of anything useful to them. At the same time, Japan was gradually being taken over by a very far right-wing government who saw everything as an insult and a matter of honour. A recipe for blood and disaster.

Yes they do, we didn't understand the Japanese and they didn't understand they were kicking a sleeping grizzly.
We had a choice, starve them of the raw materials or facilitate their conquest of China. We pushed them as far as we could with out fighting them, Roosevelt bluffed a lot and they called his bluff.

Also, as you know they would have declared war one hour before the attacks but none of thier typists had the clearance, ever seen a diplomat type?




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:10:55 AM)

Don't get me wrong Termy. I am with you. I believe FDR knew a hell of a lot more than he ever let on and this was a way of steering the U.S. into a war the public was really not enthusiastic about. And because of the Tri-Partite pact, that automatically put the U.S. at war with Germany. Churchill must have been like a dog with two tails, a belly full of piss and a tree lined street when he heard about Pearl..........................That's if Roosevelt hadn't told him all about it previously of course.




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:11:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Australia was the dumb bunny that sold them millions of tons of scrap iron while this was all happening. Never mind though, because we got is all back later.......................in the form of bombs, bullets and shells !!!

oliticians the world over are stupid.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:12:47 AM)

A Diplomat type ?.......................one of these times, I will send you a movie of ME typing Bama !!! I call it ' Biblical Typing'....................Seek and ye shall find !!




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:13:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

And strange as it seems, I was in Busan, Korea, a few years ago and the American fleet was in port at the same time and neatly lined up in rows like little ducks waiting to be shot at. Surely it couldn't happen again *LOL*. Those who don't learn from history .....................etc., etc., etc.

Yes.




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:15:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

A Diplomat type ?.......................one of these times, I will send you a movie of ME typing Bama !!! I call it ' Biblical Typing'....................Seek and ye shall find !!

Yes you understand the problem.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:18:07 AM)

And all these baby-faced swab-jockies were strutting around with T-Shirts with the logo .........' Nuke 'em till they glow' on them. When we asked WHO they wanted to nuke, they got all confused and said " Oh anybody. anybody at all" . Navy ? Hell, I have spent more time on one wave than these kids had spent at sea.




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 12:24:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Don't get me wrong Termy. I am with you. I believe FDR knew a hell of a lot more than he ever let on and this was a way of steering the U.S. into a war the public was really not enthusiastic about. And because of the Tri-Partite pact, that automatically put the U.S. at war with Germany. Churchill must have been like a dog with two tails, a belly full of piss and a tree lined street when he heard about Pearl..........................That's if Roosevelt hadn't told him all about it previously of course.

If there was a deliberate plot to get Japan to attack the US Churchill would have been the one to come up with it.
He may well have been stiring the pot behind the scenes.
Roosevelt could not take any military action first, it wouldn't have been tolorated here.
He had U S ships escorting convoys in the Western Atlantic because it technicaly not part of the war theater. He may have wanted them to get us in the war, but he most assuredly did not want something like Pearl, as I said nobody in authority believed it was possible. The thought the Japanese would start something in the Phillipenes. You also have to remember that Germa sabatures had been operating in the U S for over a year before Pearl.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 1:49:39 AM)

It certainly sounds like one of Churchill's fuck-ups. Australia still hasn't forgiven him for Gallipolli. I believe Dieppe was one of his lesser efforts too, so the Canadians probably remember him with less than fond memories. He and Roosevelt were great buddies it is said. Now there is a terrifying thought !!!!




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 11:54:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

It certainly sounds like one of Churchill's fuck-ups. Australia still hasn't forgiven him for Gallipolli. I believe Dieppe was one of his lesser efforts too, so the Canadians probably remember him with less than fond memories. He and Roosevelt were great buddies it is said. Now there is a terrifying thought !!!!

I find it interesting that Termy linked Pearl and 9/11.
The 9/11 conspiresy theories are a rehash of the OK City theories.
The Ok theories were a rehash of the Beruit theories.
The Beruit theories were a rehash of the Bay of Pigs.
The Bay of Pigs teories were a rehash of Pearl.
And Pearl was a rehash of the Maine.
With some research I could most likely trace the origin back to ancient times.
During WWII we had a General Mark Clark who after sending the Texas NG across a river into a fortified German position as a diversion for Anzio.
After the war he avoided Texas.




Real0ne -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 5:51:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Don't get me wrong Termy. I am with you. I believe FDR knew a hell of a lot more than he ever let on and this was a way of steering the U.S. into a war the public was really not enthusiastic about. And because of the Tri-Partite pact, that automatically put the U.S. at war with Germany. Churchill must have been like a dog with two tails, a belly full of piss and a tree lined street when he heard about Pearl..........................That's if Roosevelt hadn't told him all about it previously of course.

If there was a deliberate plot to get Japan to attack the US Churchill would have been the one to come up with it.
He may well have been stiring the pot behind the scenes.
Roosevelt could not take any military action first, it wouldn't have been tolorated here.
He had U S ships escorting convoys in the Western Atlantic because it technicaly not part of the war theater. He may have wanted them to get us in the war, but he most assuredly did not want something like Pearl, as I said nobody in authority believed it was possible. The thought the Japanese would start something in the Phillipenes. You also have to remember that Germa sabatures had been operating in the U S for over a year before Pearl.


EVERY War and its reasons are manufactured, the aussies spotted the japs heading for pearl 3 days prior, rosie dick knew all about it after all they instigated it, just like 911, hell just like every other war we were ever involved in!



Monday, 07 December 2015

Pearl Harbor: Hawaii Was Surprised; FDR Was Not

Although FDR desired to directly involve the United States in the Second World War, his intentions sharply contradicted his public pronouncements. A pre-war Gallup poll showed 88 percent of Americans opposed U.S. involvement in the European war. Citizens realized that U.S. participation in World War I had not made a better world, and in a 1940 (election-year) speech, Roosevelt typically stated: "I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars."

But privately, the president planned the opposite. Roosevelt dispatched his closest advisor, Harry Hopkins, to meet British Prime Minister Winston Churchill in January 1941. Hopkins told Churchill: "The President is determined that we [the United States and England] shall win the war together. Make no mistake about it. He has sent me here to tell you that at all costs and by all means he will carry you through, no matter what happens to him — there is nothing he will not do so far as he has human power." William Stevenson noted in A Man Called Intrepid that American-British military staff talks began that same month under "utmost secrecy," which, he clarified, "meant preventing disclosure to the American public." Even Robert Sherwood, the president's friendly biographer, said: "If the isolationists had known the full extent of the secret alliance between the United States and Britain, their demands for impeachment would have rumbled like thunder throughout the land."

Background to Betrayal

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 World War II's early days, the president offered numerous provocations to Germany: freezing its assets; shipping 50 destroyers to Britain; and depth-charging U-boats. The Germans did not retaliate, however. They knew America's entry into World War I had shifted the balance of power against them, and they shunned a repeat of that scenario. FDR therefore switched his focus to Japan. Japan had signed a mutual defense pact with Germany and Italy (the Tripartite Treaty). Roosevelt knew that if Japan went to war with the United States, Germany and Italy would be compelled to declare war on America — thus entangling us in the European conflict by the back door. As Harold Ickes, secretary of the Interior, said in October 1941: "For a long time I have believed that our best entrance into the war would be by way of Japan."

Much new light has been shed on Pearl Harbor through the recent work of Robert B. Stinnett, a World War II Navy veteran. Stinnett has obtained numerous relevant documents through the Freedom of Information Act. In Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor (2000), the book so brusquely dismissed by director Bruckheimer, Stinnett reveals that Roosevelt's plan to provoke Japan began with a memorandum from Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence. The memorandum advocated eight actions predicted to lead Japan into attacking the United States. McCollum wrote: "If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better." FDR enacted all eight of McCollum's provocative steps — and more.

While no one can excuse Japan's belligerence in those days, it is also true that our government provoked that country in various ways — freezing her assets in America; closing the Panama Canal to her shipping; progressively halting vital exports to Japan until we finally joined Britain in an all-out embargo; sending a hostile note to the Japanese ambassador implying military threats if Tokyo did not alter its Pacific policies; and on November 26th — just 11 days before the Japanese attack — delivering an ultimatum that demanded, as prerequisites to resumed trade, that Japan withdraw all troops from China and Indochina, and in effect abrogate her Tripartite Treaty with Germany and Italy.

After meeting with President Roosevelt on October 16, 1941, Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote in his diary: "We face the delicate question of the diplomatic fencing to be done so as to be sure Japan is put into the wrong and makes the first bad move — overt move." On November 25, the day before the ultimatum was sent to Japan's ambassadors, Stimson wrote in his diary: "The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot...."

The bait offered Japan was our Pacific Fleet. In 1940, Admiral J.O. Richardson, the fleet's commander, flew to Washington to protest FDR's decision

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/4740-pearl-harbor-hawaii-was-surprised-fdr-was-not




“Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship…

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

– Hermann Goering (as told to Gustav Gilbert during the Nuremberg trials)



Few well place lies and coverups by politicians works every time.

Same thing with dubya and 911, johnson and nam, america and britain instigate and orchestrate nearly every war we have known, and why? Money Power Greed




well known tactics by everyone but the dumb asses that wave a flag and cant wait to either get shot up or bury their kids.




Dvr22999874 -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 6:23:54 PM)

Wasn't Mark Clark another publicity hound like Dugout Doug ? He made sure he was first into Rome, or something like that ? He could have floated in on a landing craft with the amount of blood that was shed at Cassino.




BamaD -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 7:13:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874

Wasn't Mark Clark another publicity hound like Dugout Doug ? He made sure he was first into Rome, or something like that ? He could have floated in on a landing craft with the amount of blood that was shed at Cassino.

Worse, McAurther at least won his battles without thowing his troops away.
You know why he sent the Japanese Americans in (leading them to be the most deceratied units in the war)? He had three units he could send in. The Texas unit he had alredy gotten butchered and he was afraid of what would happen if he got the chewed up again. A black unit but he was afraid people would say he was racist. And the Japanese unit and he figuered people wouldn't care how many of them died. He was a oppertunistic politician, with no values but Mark Clark. McAurther was obsessed with becoming as great as his father.

Clinton had a General Mark Clark in Bosnia who must have been related.




Wayward5oul -> RE: Why isn't no fly a denial of due process? (7/1/2016 7:30:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
I was born in the morning, but not this morning. If you fuck with people they fuck back, not like the little worms we grow here, except for the few ones with some goddamn gonads who do fight back, like Bundy. And BTW, he is still not in jail. Even the government's courts cannot rule against him BECAUSE HE IS RIGHT.

T^T

Newsflash, dude. Cliven Bundy is in jail, being held without bail, to be tried for the actions in 2012.




Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125