Am reading Gingritch's book "Pearl harbor" and in it he discusses how radio operators in Pearl suspected something was about to happen because the normal ship to ship traffic among vessels in the japanese fleet had gone silent and had been replaced with messages that seemed to be read from a script to lull listeners into thinking the fleet was still in Japan. They could not read the encoded messages but they could see that some messages were repeated as if somebody had gotten lazy in thinking up new ones. They also knew the characteristics of individual Japanese Morse Code radio senders and could tell that the normal ones were silent and had been replaced with fakes.
> They also knew the characteristics of > individual Japanese Morse Code radio senders and could tell that the > normal ones were silent and had been replaced with fakes.
But I thought it was well established that the normal fleet radio operators where left in Japan (with radios) and told to boardcast normally?
Also, even if they suspected that the Japanese Fleet was playing radio games it doesn't follow that an attack on the USA is going to happen. -- These opinions might not even be mine ... Let alone connected with my employer ...
On Nov 4, 2:04 pm, Frogwatch <ohara...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Am reading Gingritch's book "Pearl harbor" and in it he discusses how > radio operators in Pearl suspected something was about to happen > because the normal ship to ship traffic among vessels in the japanese > fleet had gone silent and had been replaced with messages that seemed > to be read from a script to lull listeners into thinking the fleet was > still in Japan. They could not read the encoded messages but they > could see that some messages were repeated as if somebody had gotten > lazy in thinking up new ones. They also knew the characteristics of > individual Japanese Morse Code radio senders and could tell that the > normal ones were silent and had been replaced with fakes.
Bullshit, the IJN transferred the radio operators from the ships in the task force to a shore base where they exchanged traffic as if the ships were still there. There is some evidence that ships in the task force sent radio messages and better evidence that Yamamoto sent message to the ships.
> Am reading Gingritch's book "Pearl harbor" and in it he discusses how > radio operators in Pearl suspected something was about to happen > because the normal ship to ship traffic among vessels in the japanese > fleet had gone silent and had been replaced with messages that seemed > to be read from a script to lull listeners into thinking the fleet was > still in Japan. They could not read the encoded messages but they > could see that some messages were repeated as if somebody had gotten > lazy in thinking up new ones. They also knew the characteristics of > individual Japanese Morse Code radio senders and could tell that the > normal ones were silent and had been replaced with fakes.
There is nothing new about this. It's been known for years that naval planners knew a major operation was brewing from Sigint and the political situation. The expected targets were the Phillipines, Dutch East Indies and Malaya. This is why a war warning was issued on Nov 26th.
On Nov 4, 2:04 pm, Frogwatch <ohara...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Am reading Gingritch's book "Pearl harbor" and in it he discusses how > radio operators in Pearl suspected something was about to happen > because the normal ship to ship traffic among vessels in the japanese > fleet had gone silent and had been replaced with messages that seemed > to be read from a script to lull listeners into thinking the fleet was > still in Japan. They could not read the encoded messages but they > could see that some messages were repeated as if somebody had gotten > lazy in thinking up new ones. They also knew the characteristics of > individual Japanese Morse Code radio senders and could tell that the > normal ones were silent and had been replaced with fakes.
I served with several of the people who manned the intercept sites in 1941. They didn't suspect anything, some others say there was traffic between the ships and Japan but offer no proof, just the sort of half- assed rumor you came up with.
> "Frogwatch" <ohara...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > news:b91c8a8d-a99e-4fae-a484-ddde07107412@a31g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > > Am reading Gingritch's book "Pearl harbor" and in it he discusses how > > radio operators in Pearl suspected something was about to happen > > because the normal ship to ship traffic among vessels in the japanese > > fleet had gone silent and had been replaced with messages that seemed > > to be read from a script to lull listeners into thinking the fleet was > > still in Japan. They could not read the encoded messages but they > > could see that some messages were repeated as if somebody had gotten > > lazy in thinking up new ones. They also knew the characteristics of > > individual Japanese Morse Code radio senders and could tell that the > > normal ones were silent and had been replaced with fakes.
> There is nothing new about this. It's been known for years that naval > planners knew a major operation was brewing from Sigint and > the political situation. The expected targets were the Phillipines, > Dutch East Indies and Malaya. This is why a war warning was issued > on Nov 26th.
> Keith
An attack was expected, that it included Hawaii was a surprise to most, well, except the revisionists that want to blame FDR. And. of course that Admiral that lead the war-game that did an attack on Peal in the 30's.
Fifty years from now four things will be true *There will be those that "know" FDR knew about the attack on Hawaii *There will be those that "know" there was a vast conspiracy to kill JFK *There will be those that "know" the US government was behind the 9/11 attacks *There will be those that "know" Obama is not a US Citizen
There will even be those that will believe all four
-- -------------------------------------------------------- Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv
> An attack was expected, that it included Hawaii was a surprise to most, > well, except the revisionists that want to blame FDR. And. of course > that Admiral that lead the war-game that did an attack on Peal in the > 30's.
> Fifty years from now four things will be true > *There will be those that "know" FDR knew about the attack on Hawaii > *There will be those that "know" there was a vast conspiracy to kill JFK > *There will be those that "know" the US government was behind the 9/11 > attacks > *There will be those that "know" Obama is not a US Citizen
> There will even be those that will believe all four
A rather feeble attempt at logical parallel there ...
If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute his critics on the matter.
> > An attack was expected, that it included Hawaii was a surprise to most, > > well, except the revisionists that want to blame FDR. And. of course > > that Admiral that lead the war-game that did an attack on Peal in the > > 30's.
> > Fifty years from now four things will be true > > *There will be those that "know" FDR knew about the attack on Hawaii > > *There will be those that "know" there was a vast conspiracy to kill JFK > > *There will be those that "know" the US government was behind the 9/11 > > attacks > > *There will be those that "know" Obama is not a US Citizen
> > There will even be those that will believe all four
> A rather feeble attempt at logical parallel there ...
> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- > form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute > his critics on the matter.
Why? If he wasn't born in Hawaii in August 4, 1961 wouldn't the Republicans dug that out? Too many people trying to cover racisim with some form of documentationalism.
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:26:51 -0800 (PST), "Scott M. Kozel"
<koze...@comcast.net> wrote: >If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >his critics on the matter.
It could be the case that there is something embarassing about his parentage that he is sensitive about. I don't think anyone has ever brought that point up. It is a wise man, etc.
Scott M. Kozel wrote: > Ralph E Lindberg <n7...@callsign.net> wrote: >> An attack was expected, that it included Hawaii was a surprise to most, >> well, except the revisionists that want to blame FDR. And. of course >> that Admiral that lead the war-game that did an attack on Peal in the >> 30's.
>> Fifty years from now four things will be true >> *There will be those that "know" FDR knew about the attack on Hawaii >> *There will be those that "know" there was a vast conspiracy to kill JFK >> *There will be those that "know" the US government was behind the 9/11 >> attacks >> *There will be those that "know" Obama is not a US Citizen
>> There will even be those that will believe all four
> A rather feeble attempt at logical parallel there ...
> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- > form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute > his critics on the matter.
Better yet, How about his application as a foreign aid student to Harvard? We paid the bill. And he did attend a private school in Hawaii, lived in a 2 million$ Grandma's house and collected food stamps. The Fucking Democrats have proven to be worse enemies then any we have ever faced on the battle field. This is the only president ever elected without America seeing his full resume.
Jack Linthicum wrote: > On Nov 5, 6:26 pm, "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote: >> Ralph E Lindberg <n7...@callsign.net> wrote:
>>> An attack was expected, that it included Hawaii was a surprise to most, >>> well, except the revisionists that want to blame FDR. And. of course >>> that Admiral that lead the war-game that did an attack on Peal in the >>> 30's. >>> Fifty years from now four things will be true >>> *There will be those that "know" FDR knew about the attack on Hawaii >>> *There will be those that "know" there was a vast conspiracy to kill JFK >>> *There will be those that "know" the US government was behind the 9/11 >>> attacks >>> *There will be those that "know" Obama is not a US Citizen >>> There will even be those that will believe all four >> A rather feeble attempt at logical parallel there ...
>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >> his critics on the matter.
> Why? If he wasn't born in Hawaii in August 4, 1961 wouldn't the > Republicans dug that out? Too many people trying to cover racisim with > some form of documentationalism.
Lyndon Baines Johnson blocked many many things from everybody. So it just happened again, thats all. Obama is not a legally elected President and thats the facts folks. The American people have been fucked by the Democrats again.
> Scott M. Kozel wrote: > > Ralph E Lindberg <n7...@callsign.net> wrote: > >> An attack was expected, that it included Hawaii was a surprise to most, > >> well, except the revisionists that want to blame FDR. And. of course > >> that Admiral that lead the war-game that did an attack on Peal in the > >> 30's.
> >> Fifty years from now four things will be true > >> *There will be those that "know" FDR knew about the attack on Hawaii > >> *There will be those that "know" there was a vast conspiracy to kill JFK > >> *There will be those that "know" the US government was behind the 9/11 > >> attacks > >> *There will be those that "know" Obama is not a US Citizen
> >> There will even be those that will believe all four
> > A rather feeble attempt at logical parallel there ...
> > If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- > > form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute > > his critics on the matter.
> Better yet, How about his application as a foreign aid student to > Harvard? We paid the bill. And he did attend a private school in Hawaii, > lived in a 2 million$ Grandma's house and collected food stamps. The > Fucking Democrats have proven to be worse enemies then any we have ever > faced on the battle field. This is the only president ever elected > without America seeing his full resume.
I believe "Grandma's house" was an apartment building. Do you have documentation equivalent to what you want from him on that "foreign aid student" application to Harvard?
William Hamblen wrote: > On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:26:51 -0800 (PST), "Scott M. Kozel" > <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >> his critics on the matter.
> It could be the case that there is something embarassing about his > parentage that he is sensitive about. I don't think anyone has ever > brought that point up. It is a wise man, etc.
> Bud
Definite embarrassment there. Obama's mother was the second "wife" and his father had not divorced the first.
>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:26:51 -0800 (PST), "Scott M. Kozel" >> <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >>> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >>> his critics on the matter.
>> It could be the case that there is something embarassing about his >> parentage that he is sensitive about. I don't think anyone has ever >> brought that point up. It is a wise man, etc.
>> Bud
> Definite embarrassment there. Obama's mother was the second "wife" > and his father had not divorced the first.
> Does the US President have to be legitimate?
Son, haven't you heard, there was a birth announcement in the newspaper when he was born, which proves he was born in the U.S.
Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. twisted the electrons to say:
> Andrew Swallow wrote: > > Does the US President have to be legitimate? > Son, haven't you heard, there was a birth announcement in the newspaper > when he was born, which proves he was born in the U.S.
What a strange definition of bastardy / legitimacy. You're legitimate if there was a newspaper announcement of your birth? Does this mean that if there wasn't a newspaper announcement you'd be a bastard?
> Where do you nuts come from... > ;-)
Where do you colonials get your strange notions from? :-) -- These opinions might not even be mine ... Let alone connected with my employer ...
>>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:26:51 -0800 (PST), "Scott M. Kozel" >>> <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >>>> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >>>> his critics on the matter.
>>> It could be the case that there is something embarassing about his >>> parentage that he is sensitive about. I don't think anyone has ever >>> brought that point up. It is a wise man, etc.
>>> Bud
>> Definite embarrassment there. Obama's mother was the second "wife" >> and his father had not divorced the first.
>> Does the US President have to be legitimate?
> Son, haven't you heard, there was a birth announcement in the newspaper > when > he was born, which proves he was born in the U.S.
You are a liar.. Produce it! Oh, thats right.. If you could, you already would have. You might also produce the entrance to Harvard as a foreign aid student. Fact is nobody really knows where Obama was born. His old Granny stated Kenya. But she conveniently died shortly thereafter. His Mother, being an American would be the key to his citizenship, unless she had renounced America at the time of birth.
<am.swal...@btopenworld.com> wrote: >William Hamblen wrote: >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:26:51 -0800 (PST), "Scott M. Kozel" >> <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >>> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >>> his critics on the matter.
>> It could be the case that there is something embarassing about his >> parentage that he is sensitive about. I don't think anyone has ever >> brought that point up. It is a wise man, etc.
>> Bud
>Definite embarrassment there. Obama's mother was the second "wife" >and his father had not divorced the first.
> > An attack was expected, that it included Hawaii was a surprise to most, > > well, except the revisionists that want to blame FDR. And. of course > > that Admiral that lead the war-game that did an attack on Peal in the > > 30's.
> > Fifty years from now four things will be true > > *There will be those that "know" FDR knew about the attack on Hawaii > > *There will be those that "know" there was a vast conspiracy to kill JFK > > *There will be those that "know" the US government was behind the 9/11 > > attacks > > *There will be those that "know" Obama is not a US Citizen
> > There will even be those that will believe all four
> A rather feeble attempt at logical parallel there ...
> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- > form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute > his critics on the matter.
Thank you for proving my point
-- -------------------------------------------------------- Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv
>>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:26:51 -0800 (PST), "Scott M. Kozel" >>> <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >>>> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >>>> his critics on the matter.
>>> It could be the case that there is something embarassing about his >>> parentage that he is sensitive about. I don't think anyone has ever >>> brought that point up. It is a wise man, etc.
>>> Bud
>> Definite embarrassment there. Obama's mother was the second "wife" >> and his father had not divorced the first.
>> Does the US President have to be legitimate?
> Son, haven't you heard, there was a birth announcement in the newspaper > when > he was born, which proves he was born in the U.S.
> Where do you nuts come from... > ;-)
>> Andrew Swallow
Get a dictionary and look up what legitimate means when applied to birth.
Andrew Swallow wrote: > William Hamblen wrote: >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:26:51 -0800 (PST), "Scott M. Kozel" >> <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >>> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >>> his critics on the matter.
>> It could be the case that there is something embarassing about his >> parentage that he is sensitive about. I don't think anyone has ever >> brought that point up. It is a wise man, etc.
>> Bud
> Definite embarrassment there. Obama's mother was the second "wife" > and his father had not divorced the first.
> Does the US President have to be legitimate?
Nothing in the Constitution says that the you're not eligible to be President if you are a bastard.
-- Pete Stickney The better the Four Wheel Drive, the further out you get stuck.
On Nov 5, 3:26 pm, "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- > form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute > his critics on the matter.
> > If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- > > form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute > > his critics on the matter.
Scott M. Kozel wrote: > Duwop <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >>> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >>> his critics on the matter. >> Kozel=birther. Good to know.
> Why won't you answer the question?
I am informed that the gentleman in question holds a full US passport and has for several years now.
The federal authorities require the production of the 'long form' birth certificate before a passport is issued,
The US authorities are notoriously strict about such things. They do not issue US passports to just anyone who asks, especially people who have what can best be described as a 'confused' background, as your president has.
So it's reasonable to assume that he has produced the appropriate document at some point and what's more, he can prove it, because he has a US passport...
-- William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat single handed with a quarterstaff.
> Scott M. Kozel wrote: > > Duwop <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- > >>> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute > >>> his critics on the matter. > >> Kozel=birther. Good to know.
> > Why won't you answer the question?
> I am informed that the gentleman in question holds a full US passport > and has for several years now.
> The federal authorities require the production of the 'long form' birth > certificate before a passport is issued,
> The US authorities are notoriously strict about such things. They do > not issue US passports to just anyone who asks, especially people who > have what can best be described as a 'confused' background, as your > president has.
> So it's reasonable to assume that he has produced the appropriate > document at some point and what's more, he can prove it, because he has > a US passport...
> -- > William Black
> "Any number under six"
> The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of > Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat > single handed with a quarterstaff.
Right, the state of Florida would not accept the nursing home that issued my first birth certificate, they wanted and got the California state version.
Jack Linthicum wrote: > On Nov 8, 2:31 pm, William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >> Scott M. Kozel wrote: >>> Duwop <tut...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> "Scott M. Kozel" <koze...@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> If Obama is a U.S. citizen, then why won't he produce the full long- >>>>> form birth certificate to prove it? It would be very simple to refute >>>>> his critics on the matter. >>>> Kozel=birther. Good to know. >>> Why won't you answer the question? >> I am informed that the gentleman in question holds a full US passport >> and has for several years now.
>> The federal authorities require the production of the 'long form' birth >> certificate before a passport is issued,
>> The US authorities are notoriously strict about such things. They do >> not issue US passports to just anyone who asks, especially people who >> have what can best be described as a 'confused' background, as your >> president has.
>> So it's reasonable to assume that he has produced the appropriate >> document at some point and what's more, he can prove it, because he has >> a US passport...
> Right, the state of Florida would not accept the nursing home that > issued my first birth certificate, they wanted and got the California > state version.
Now if a foreign national like myself knows this then why hasn't anyone else noticed?
Some black kid who lived abroad somewhere exotic and whose dad was a Kenyan who'd been a senior official and who had been sacked by the incoming government of Jomo Kenyatta isn't going to get a US passport just by filling in the forms and send them off without all the correct documentation.
Don't forget that Kenyatta was 'our guy' and Obama's dad was a professed Socialist and this the 'seventies we're talking about...
Unless his paperwork was perfect he wasn't going to get a US passport...
Why hasn't someone told your local wingnuts this?
-- William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat single handed with a quarterstaff.
|
