Eiffle

[BrandNewRock05]

Way to fix a large world problem

[NOFXdesendents5]

i got a better idea....

[BrandNewRock05]

both work for me

[evil zach]

you are both retards. If a government dosn't agree with your why dose that make them worng? Isn't one of the key aspects of demoracy, a system so religously advocated by the US, feedom of choice, or dose that only apply when we choose to agree with the bush administration?

[BrandNewRock05]

Originally posted by evil zach
you are both retards. If a government dosn't agree with your why dose that make them worng? Isn't one of the key aspects of demoracy, a system so religously advocated by the US, feedom of choice, or dose that only apply when we choose to agree with the bush administration?
first off, humor. it keeps the world spinning. it was a joke. second, its not that they dont agree with the us, its that i think they are dumb for not helping the us liberate a country after all we have done for france. my opinion, i am not retarded for making that comment, it is very valid. france hates the us. I am an American, I take offense to someone hating my country. I hate France. Thats that

[evil zach]

all yo have done for them? Your country wouldn't exist if it wasn;t for them. Face it, the colonies didn't have the man power to defat the british military. You owe them more then they will ever owe you.

[EmoMoose86]

Making funnies about France... Is a lot like making funnies about Bush... Its just all humour.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by evil zach
all yo have done for them? Your country wouldn't exist if it wasn;t for them. Face it, the colonies didn't have the man power to defat the british military. You owe them more then they will ever owe you.

i agree that the french turned the revolutionary war in our favor, but can you seriously say that we owe them more than they owe us? we supported their revolution, we protected them during the first world war, and liberated their country in the second world war. not only that, but we gave them billions of dollars to rebuild that country...

[yeat182]

also, the french bitch about the US being imperialistic, but their "space program" is located in their former colony in south america. lucky for them they've got those colonies.

[amishman]

Originally posted by evil zach
all yo have done for them? Your country wouldn't exist if it wasn;t for them. Face it, the colonies didn't have the man power to defat the british military. You owe them more then they will ever owe you.

We may have once owed them, but we have payed them back in full, and then some. France would be speaking German if it wasn't for us.

[evil zach]

hate to alarm you, but there were other countries that fought in the second world war. Most of them fought during the first couple years of the war too.

[amishman]

Originally posted by evil zach
hate to alarm you, but there were other countries that fought in the second world war. Most of them fought during the first couple years of the war too.

Seriously? I did not know that...it was called WORLD War. I did know that other countries were involved; however, the US was one of the strongest countries involved in the war.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by evil zach
hate to alarm you, but there were other countries that fought in the second world war. Most of them fought during the first couple years of the war too.

yes, but the US led the invasion of normandy, along with england, canada and australia, which was actually the begining of the liberation of france...

[NOFXdesendents5]

Originally posted by evil zach
all yo have done for them? Your country wouldn't exist if it wasn;t for them. Face it, the colonies didn't have the man power to defat the british military. You owe them more then they will ever owe you.

dude. im not saying they didnt help, because they did help a lot, but they contributed very little and were only involved in one battle. we went to war for them in 5 wars. and for that we actually saved their country three times.

but they cant just call us evil and expansionists, when they spent 1000 years conquering and invading and starving nations across the globe.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by evil zach
hate to alarm you, but there were other countries that fought in the second world war. Most of them fought during the first couple years of the war too.

im not one to question your knowledge of history, but with out us coming in the war, at least the western front, would have been won by germany, NO one can question that,

Also we supported England (and to a point russia) with military supplies from about the begining of the war.

[evil zach]

I realize that the US helped out alot in the war, and probably made victory possible, but I often get the impresson the people forget that other countries were involved too.
Also we supported England (and to a point russia) with military supplies from about the begining of the war.
I remeber hearing that the US also sent supplies to germany during the beiging of the war. FDR would als have continued to do so if germany hadn't declared war on the US when they declared war on japan. I'm not too sure about my sources on that one though, so I'll have to a bit of reaserch.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by evil zach
I realize that the US helped out alot in the war, and probably made victory possible, but I often get the impresson the people forget that other countries were involved too.

I remeber hearing that the US also sent supplies to germany during the beiging of the war. FDR would als have continued to do so if germany hadn't declared war on the US when they declared war on japan. I'm not too sure about my sources on that one though, so I'll have to a bit of reaserch.

i think that was true up until they attacked poland. FDR institued the Lend-Lease Act, that was supplying England, and it would have been counter-productive to supply germany as well. on the other had, private buissnesses may have been selling things to the germans, but that wouldn't have anything to do with FDR.

[evil zach]

LIke i said, I'll have to reserch it.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by evil zach
LIke i said, I'll have to reserch it.

I think you should because from day one FDR knew we would go into the war on the British side, he was just waiting for a cause, which is why he let Pearl Harbor happen.

[yeat182]

he didn't "let" pearl harbor happen...

[NOFXdesendents5]

Originally posted by evil zach
LIke i said, I'll have to reserch it.

actually, the truth is, that at the begining of the war (1937-1940), the United States did not send supplies to either country. America did not want to take sides and FDR didnt want another WWI where soldiers starved in trenches (although it was a completely different war in this one with fast attack tanks and planes). Germany and America never really had a huge grudge against each other while fighting, they wanted to leave if anything. Most hate was felt against the Japanese, as some Americans were German and few were Japanese. Germans and Americans treated each other with respect in POW camps. its not like they hugged and kissed each other but the they didnt torcher for the most part. the Japs on the otherhand, torched and murdered thousands of American POWs.

Hitler's biggest mistake was allying with Japan. He knew that the Americans would have vast armies and supplies because of their resources, factories and cities.

[evil zach]

to say that he let it hapen is just retared

[NOFXdesendents5]

whoever said he let it happen is a dumbass.

yeah, im sure the president would let thousands of americans die, almost all of americas island forts be destroyed, and its entire pacific fleet be destroyed.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
he didn't "let" pearl harbor happen...

actually he probably did. He knew that americans would never go to war with out a big disater.

Also it was known in addvance that planes and ships had left japan and the surrounding islands but yet nothing was done.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by NOFXdesendents5
whoever said he let it happen is a dumbass.

yeah, im sure the president would let thousands of americans die, almost all of americas island forts be destroyed, and its entire pacific fleet be destroyed.

Im not a dumbass i just have learned more about history then you.

And the entire pacific fleet wasn't lost, and i didn't say he knew it would be as bad as it was, but he knew it was coming.

[NOFXdesendents5]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
actually he probably did. He knew that americans would never go to war with out a big disater.

Also it was known in addvance that planes and ships had left japan and the surrounding islands but yet nothing was done.

i just lost all respect for you in that one post. the americans heard about the news of the attack 6 FUCKING HOURS after it happend! He was an isolationist by the way and did not want a war for fear of political rejection.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
actually he probably did. He knew that americans would never go to war with out a big disater.

Also it was known in addvance that planes and ships had left japan and the surrounding islands but yet nothing was done.


the president wouldn't purposely let nearly all the pacific fleet, all that stood between japan and america, be destroyed so he could enter the war, that doesn't even make sense. it was projected that the japanese, should they invade pearl harbor and then attack the mainland, could advance as far as chicago before the US mount any serious defense. you really think the president would put the country in jeopardy like this on purpose, just to enter the war? if he wanted to enter the war that badly, it would have made much more tactical and strategic sense to pre-emptively attack japan, and spare the pacific fleet.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by NOFXdesendents5
i just lost all respect for you in that one post. the americans heard about the news of the attack 6 FUCKING HOURS after it happend! He was an isolationist by the way and did not want a war for fear of political rejection.

Know actually they knew days in advance, and actually he wanted to join the allies from the start of the war because he knew France and Britian couldn't defeat hitler.

Political rejection? There was no one in either parties that could have opposed him.

So now should i say i have lost respect for you too? Thats two that you got 100 percent wrong, and the other one is an opinion that can go either way, i feel that he knew because there was no way to miss the planes and ships, and warnings coming from Tokyo, and the fact that Americans wouldn't enter the war with out an attack first and that FDR was desperate to enter a war that England had effectively lost with out us.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
the president wouldn't purposely let nearly all the pacific fleet, all that stood between japan and america, be destroyed so he could enter the war, that doesn't even make sense. it was projected that the japanese, should they invade pearl harbor and then attack the mainland, could advance as far as chicago before the US mount any serious defense. you really think the president would put the country in jeopardy like this on purpose, just to enter the war? if he wanted to enter the war that badly, it would have made much more tactical and strategic sense to pre-emptively attack japan, and spare the pacific fleet.

Again i didn't say he knew it would be as bad has it was, although it really wasn't as crippling as school history books make it out to be.

Also He knew americans wouldn't have gone to war without something BIG, so maybe it does make sense.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by evil zach
to say that he let it hapen is just retared

i thought you were above using personal differences as insults, ***.

(i hope you got the point.)

[evil zach]

I wasn't launching a personal insult on you. I was saying that the idea itself is retarded. There is a diference. I'm sorry if you felt that way, but I wasn't trying to insult you.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by evil zach
I wasn't launching a personal insult on you. I was saying that the idea itself is retarded. There is a diference. I'm sorry if you felt that way, but I wasn't trying to insult you.


why is the idea (opinion) retarded? Prove me wrong.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
Again i didn't say he knew it would be as bad has it was, although it really wasn't as crippling as school history books make it out to be.

Also He knew americans wouldn't have gone to war without something BIG, so maybe it does make sense.


actually, it was as crippling as it was portrayed. the only thing that saved us was that our entire carrier fleet was out to sea at the time. there were intelligence reports days and weeks before the attack, but they weren't acurate enough to predict the strike on peal harbor. no one suspected an all out air assault, and after it happened every one assumed that an invasion of the island was imminent. also, at the time, the Japanese diplomats were lying to the americans say that they were looking to sign a non-agression act, thus making us let down our guard, since we had no reason to expect an attack with out a formal declaration of war...

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
actually, it was as crippling as it was portrayed. the only thing that saved us was that our entire carrier fleet was out to sea at the time. there were intelligence reports days and weeks before the attack, but they weren't acurate enough to predict the strike on peal harbor. no one suspected an all out air assault, and after it happened every one assumed that an invasion of the island was imminent. also, at the time, the Japanese diplomats were lying to the americans say that they were looking to sign a non-agression act, thus making us let down our guard, since we had no reason to expect an attack with out a formal declaration of war...

The thing that would have crippled us the most would have been the lose of the oil reserves on the island (harbor) and those were missed.

Also did you ever wonder why the Carrier fleet was abcent?

[Safetyin#]

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html

WHY SACRIFICE OLD, SLOW SHIPS?
FDR had to do it to get into the war, as he himself later told Stalin. He needed massive public outrage and that required big sacrifice.
Would he do it? Did he "love the Navy too much?" He was sacrificing ships in the Atlantic for the same purpose. Of course he would do it - he was doing it.
He saved all the important elements of the fleet. In the spring he had sent many ships to the Atlantic. He kept the aircraft carrier Saratoga on the West Coast. And his sending of the two carrier groups out of harbor meant that not only they but also their fast escort ships would be saved - all the new ships stationed at Pearl Harbor were saved. Only WWI junk was left in harbor. Here is a list of all the ships saved - Ships saved at Pearl December 7
FDR's attitude is best summed up by co-conspirator Admiral Bloch's testimony to Congress, "The Japanese only destroyed a lot of old hardware. In a sense they did us a favor."
This was obviously FDR's view as well, because on 7 December at 2:15 PM, minutes after hearing of the attack and before any damage reports were in, FDR called Lord Halifax at the British Embassy and told him "Most of the fleet was at sea...none of their newer ships were in harbour." He had protected the new ships, the important elements of the fleet, and that fact was at the forefront of his mind in relation to the attack. First, it means FDR didn't care about the old ships. Secondly, it means he knew before the attack that only old ships were in harbor for the attack. Therefore, Pearl Harbor was "the first shot without too much danger to ourselves" he sought. FDR was the architect of the attack plot from the oil embargo to the ultimatum to the final touches of deciding who would live and who would die.


"Very late on a cold, dark night in December, a British emissary was driven through the dreary streets of Washington. Inside his diplomatic pouch he carried a secret message marked Most Urgent Personal and Secret to the President. It was a triple priority message from the British Admiralty in London that the United States of America was going to be attacked at Pearl Harbor on December 7th. Lord Halifax was swiftly shown in to the White House and conferred with Franklin Roosevelt. Roosevelt's hopes soared; his long-laid plans were about to be fulfilled. It was December 5th, 1941."
From the Introduction


After the attack, on the Sunday evening of December 7, 1941, Roosevelt had a brief meeting in the White House with Edward R. Murrow, the famed journalist, and William Donovan, the founder of the Office of Strategic Services. Later Donovan told an assistant the he believed FDR welcomed the attack and didn't seem surprised. The only thing Roosevelt seemed to care about, Donovan felt, was if the public would now support a declaration of war


Don C. Smith, who directed the War Service for the Red Cross before World War II and was deputy administrator of services to the armed forces from 1942 to 1946, when he became administrator, apparently knew about the timing of the Pearl Harbor attack in advance. Unfortunately, Smith died in 1990 at age 98. But when his daughter, Helen E. Hamman, saw news coverage of efforts by the families of Husband Kimmel and Walter Short to restore the two Pearl Harbor commanders posthumously to what the families contend to be their deserved ranks, she wrote a letter to President Bill Clinton on 5 September 1995. Recalling a conversation with her father, Hamman wrote:


. . . Shortly before the attack in 1941 President Roosevelt called him [Smith] to the White House for a meeting concerning a Top Secret matter. At this meeting the President advised my father that his intelligence staff had informed him of a pending attack on Pearl Harbor, by the Japanese. He anticipated many casualties and much loss, he instructed my father to send workers and supplies to a holding area at a P.O.E. [port of entry] on the West Coast where they would await further orders to ship out, no destination was to be revealed. He left no doubt in my father's mind that none of the Naval and Military officials in Hawaii were to be informed and he was not to advise the Red Cross officers who were already stationed in the area. When he protested to the President, President Roosevelt told him that the American people would never agree to enter the war in Europe unless they were attack [sic] within their own borders.

. . . He [Smith] was privy to Top Secret operations and worked directly with all of our outstanding leaders. He followed the orders of his President and spent many later years contemplating this action which he considered ethically and morally wrong.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
actually, it was as crippling as it was portrayed. the only thing that saved us was that our entire carrier fleet was out to sea at the time. there were intelligence reports days and weeks before the attack, but they weren't acurate enough to predict the strike on peal harbor. no one suspected an all out air assault, and after it happened every one assumed that an invasion of the island was imminent. also, at the time, the Japanese diplomats were lying to the americans say that they were looking to sign a non-agression act, thus making us let down our guard, since we had no reason to expect an attack with out a formal declaration of war...

You can basically believe what you want, i personally believe that he did sacrifice american lives to promote his own goals, you must remimber what an unmoral man he was, i mean look at what he did to the japanesse and jews (holocaust), so i wouldn't put it against him to kill a few soliders.

But to each there own, there are facts that prove either view, although more and more are coming out favoring me, but you must remimber the spin that has been put out on FDR making him to be a much better person then he really was, like Zach said history favors those that wrote it not the truth, and the truth wouldn't favor his administration.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html




this is a review of that book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/cm/member-reviews/-/A1TCLFTZHJK9HX/1/ref%3Dcm%5Fcr%5Fauth/104-6149688-0413567)

"Mark's book simply fuels the fantasy world of conspiracy "fans". He routinely takes quotes out of context, ignores inconvenient facts and distorts information to promote his own program, that of hate for FDR. Compare this book with Gordon Prange's works. It's easy to tell which person did the work and gives a rational view of the events surrounding this sad day in US history. If you want to see where Wiley has distorted the original information, check out www.ibiblio.org/pha, where thousands of pages of text await the person who doesn't want to be lead by the nose."

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#

Also did you ever wonder why the Carrier fleet was abcent?


two of the carriers were delivering fighters to Midway and Wake Island.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
this is a review of that book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/cm/member-reviews/-/A1TCLFTZHJK9HX/1/ref%3Dcm%5Fcr%5Fauth/104-6149688-0413567)

"Mark's book simply fuels the fantasy world of conspiracy "fans". He routinely takes quotes out of context, ignores inconvenient facts and distorts information to promote his own program, that of hate for FDR. Compare this book with Gordon Prange's works. It's easy to tell which person did the work and gives a rational view of the events surrounding this sad day in US history. If you want to see where Wiley has distorted the original information, check out www.ibiblio.org/pha, where thousands of pages of text await the person who doesn't want to be lead by the nose."

WOW, you actually found a book that makes fdr look good! Of course there are two sides to the story, but your side is promoted in every stage of eductation, and what im saying is that what is taught in school isn't always that truth.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
WOW, you actually found a book that makes fdr look good! Of course there are two sides to the story, but your side is promoted in every stage of eductation, and what im saying is that what is taught in school isn't always that truth.


conspiracy theories aren't always the truth (if ever)

[Safetyin#]

Churchill wrote in his Nobel Prize winning series on WWII that FDR knew about the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbor. The following is from pages 602-603 of THE GRAND ALLIANCE, c1950. Churchill makes these points about his good friend and colleague FDR, accusing him of treason while knowing that the facts would eventually come out:

Hawaii's commanders did not get proper warning.
Churchill was not going to judge what FDR did at Pearl Harbor.
FDR and he were very afraid that the US could not come into the war unless Japan attacked the U.S.
Pearl Harbor was worth the price.
FDR "knew the full and immediate purpose" of the Japanese at Pearl Harbor.
FDR welcomed the attack.
And this amazing statement: "Nor must we allow the account in detail of diplomatic interchanges to portray Japan as an injured innocent..." That is an admission, granted forced by the facts, that Japan WAS the injured innocent, maneuvered into firing the first shot, as Secretary of War Stimson put it. Cabinet Minister Sir Oliver Lyttelton, expressed the same point on June 20, 1944, to the American Chamber of Commerce: "Japan was provoked into attacking the Americans at Pearl Harbor. It is a travesty on history ever to say that America was forced into the war. Everyone knows where American sympathies were. It is incorrect to say that America was ever truly neutral even before America came into the war on a fighting basis." - See PH VERDICT OF HISTORY, Prange, pp 39-40.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
conspiracy theories aren't always the truth (if ever)

Not every thing that you don't believe in is a conspiracy theory, i choice the site i did because it was the longest and caused the least amount of cut/pasting. Also the quotes are all from different sites not just htat one.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
Churchill wrote in his Nobel Prize winning series on WWII that FDR knew about the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbor. The following is from pages 602-603 of THE GRAND ALLIANCE, c1950. Churchill makes these points about his good friend and colleague FDR, accusing him of treason while knowing that the facts would eventually come out:

Hawaii's commanders did not get proper warning.
Churchill was not going to judge what FDR did at Pearl Harbor.
FDR and he were very afraid that the US could not come into the war unless Japan attacked the U.S.
Pearl Harbor was worth the price.
FDR "knew the full and immediate purpose" of the Japanese at Pearl Harbor.
FDR welcomed the attack.
And this amazing statement: "Nor must we allow the account in detail of diplomatic interchanges to portray Japan as an injured innocent..." That is an admission, granted forced by the facts, that Japan WAS the injured innocent, maneuvered into firing the first shot, as Secretary of War Stimson put it. Cabinet Minister Sir Oliver Lyttelton, expressed the same point on June 20, 1944, to the American Chamber of Commerce: "Japan was provoked into attacking the Americans at Pearl Harbor. It is a travesty on history ever to say that America was forced into the war. Everyone knows where American sympathies were. It is incorrect to say that America was ever truly neutral even before America came into the war on a fighting basis." - See PH VERDICT OF HISTORY, Prange, pp 39-40.


first of all, why don't you post the actually words written by Churchill rather than someone's (who you don't even list as an author) intereptation of it? secondly, the last part is bullshit, saying that Japan was provoked into war, and therefor, FDR wanted them to attack Pearl Harbor. That is like saying we provoked Al-qaeda so the attack on 9/11 is Bush or Clinton's fault. It never mentions how we provoked them, simply that we did and so it is our own fault. and even if that were true, that doesn't mean that FDR wanted them to attack us.


http://www.ibiblio.org/pha , this site will have the facts you chose to ignore.

[Safetyin#]

CHURCHILL:
"A prodigious Congressional Inquiry published its findings in 1946 in which every detail was exposed ofthe events leading up to the war between the United States and Japan and of the failure to send positive "Alert" orders through the military departments to their fleets and garrisons in exposed situations. Every detail, including the decoding of secret Japanese telegrams and their actual texts, has been exposed to the world in forty volumes. The strength of the United States was sufficient to enable them to sustain this hard ordeal required by the spirit of the American Constitution.
I do not intend in these pages to attempt to pronounce judgment upon this tremendous episode in American history. We know that all the great Americans round the President and in his confidence felt, as acutely as I did, the awful danger that Japan would attack British or Dutch possessions in the Far East, and it would carefully avoid the United States, and that in consequence Congress would not sanction an American declaration of war...The President and his trusted friends had long realized the grave risks of United States neutrality in the war against Hitler and what he stood for, and had writhed under the restraints of a Congress whose House of Representatives had a few months before passed by only a single vote the necessary renewal of compulsory military service, without which their Army would have been almost disbanded in the midst of the world convulsion. Roosevelt, Hull, Stimson, Knox, General Marshall, Admiral Stark, and, as a link between them all, Harry Hopkins, had but one mind...

A Japanese attack upon the United States was a vast simplicfication of their problems and their duty. How can we wonder that they regarded the actual form of the attack, or even its scale, as incomparably less important than the fact that the whole American nation would be united for its own safety in a rightous cause as never before? To them, as to me, it seemed that for Japan to attack and make war upon the United States would be an act of suicide. Moreover, they knew, earlier than we in Britain could know, the full and immediate purpose of their enemy. We remember how Cromwell exclaimed when he watched the Scottish army descending from the heights over Dunbar, "The Lord hath delivered them into our hands."

"Nor must we allow the account in detail of diplomatic interchanges to portray Japan as an injured innocent seeking only a reasonable measure of expansion or booty from the European war, and now confronted by the United States with propositions which her people, fanatically aroused and fully prepared, could not be expected to accept. For long years Japan had been torturing China by her wicked invasions and subjugations. Now by her seizure of Indo-China she had in fact, as well as formally by the Tripartite Pact, thrown her lot with the Axis Powers. Let her do what she dared and take the consequences.

"It had seemed impossible that Japan would court destruction by war with Britain and United States, and probably Russia in the end. A declaration of war by Japan could not be reconciled with reason. I felt sure she would be ruined for a generation by such a plunge, and this proved true. But governments and people do not always take rational decisions. Sometimes they take mad decisions, or one set of people get control who compel all others to obey and aid them in folly..."

[yeat182]

no where in that essay does it ever state that FDR let pearl harbor happen. it only says that the only way the US people would support a war is if they were attacked.

[yeat182]

show me in this document where it says FDR "let" pearl harbor happen... (http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pha/congress/part_0.html)

[Safetyin#]

UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1946

every thing that i have been proposing came about following 1975 with the Freedom Of Information Act.

and congressional finds don't always mean the truth, remimber JFK and the magical bullet.

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1946

every thing that i have been proposing came about following 1975 with the Freedom Of Information Act.

and congressional finds don't always mean the truth, remimber JFK and the magical bullet.


i agree, but i think this is at least as credible as your conspiracy theorists...

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1946

every thing that i have been proposing came about following 1975 with the Freedom Of Information Act.

and congressional finds don't always mean the truth, remimber JFK and the magical bullet.


also, i'm fairly certain that this document was made public after FOIA, not before.

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
also, i'm fairly certain that this document was made public after FOIA, not before.

Oh, i don't know about that, normally congressional finds are made public with a yr or two following the trial (for lack of better word).

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
i agree, but i think this is at least as credible as your conspiracy theorists...

I would go as far to say that its more credible, but it also needs to be seen from the point in time when it was written, and at that point no one would bad mouth FDR or any thing he had done, also he had just died 2 yrs prior and was much loved by the public.

[yeat182]

yeah, like i said, i'm not sure, but they also didn't have to make them public before FOIA, so maybe it wasn't...?

[yeat182]

Originally posted by Safetyin#
I would go as far to say that its more credible, but it also needs to be seen from the point in time when it was written, and at that point no one would bad mouth FDR or any thing he had done, also he had just died 2 yrs prior and was much loved by the public.

thats true

[Safetyin#]

Originally posted by yeat182
thats true

well this has been fun! what you want to do next.

[NOFXdesendents5]

F D R =


Fucking
Dumbass
Retard

I dont like him at all, but I doubt he knew of the attacks