This document is part of a periodical (Journal of Historical Review).
Use this menu to find more documents that are part of this periodical.
For reliable information and factual accounts, I find The Journal of Historical Review most dependable. I join with other subscribers in wishing you continued success in reaching and penetrating the "public mind."
Please find enclosed a bank draft for US $100. This is for my subscription, with a small donation to help continue your good work. I would like to praise your research, intelligence and tenacity.
Word of Caution
Congratulations on the most recent [March-April 1998] issue of the Journal, which was excellent. A word of caution, though. Please assiduously avoid advertisements, even paid advertisements, like the one headed "Favored Races." An undue stress on racial issues will hamper the cause of Holocaust revisionism, I think, and could alienate some people who are otherwise sympathetic.
Hiroshima and Pearl Harbor Intrigues
I read with interest Richard Phillips' commentary [Sept.-Oct. 1997 Journal], in which he strongly defended the American atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and disagreed with the articles by Mark Weber and Greg Pavlik on this subject in the May-June  Journal. I was intrigued by Phillips' comment that he "was reading newspapers in 1945, and they were not"! Well, so was I, but that does not determine my thinking now. One subscribes to the Journal to learn the truth.
To Mr. Phillips I would like to cite two points from Mr. Weber's article. Firstly, Japanese prime minister Konoye confirmed after the war that "Fundamentally, the thing that brought about the determination to make peace was the prolonged bombing by the B29s," and, secondly, that "the American leaders decided anyway to retain the Emperor as a symbol of authority and continuity," a condition very important to the Japanese, "as a figurehead prop for their own occupation authority in postwar Japan."
I also suggest that Mr. Phillips carefully read "Pearl Harbor: Fifty Years of Controversy," an analysis of various writings on the subject in the Winter 1991-92 Journal by a specialist of diplomatic and military history.
In the booklet, War Lords of Washington [available through the IHR], the late Curtis Dall, one time son-in-law of President Roosevelt, expresses the view that the atomic bomb was dropped "to panic the nations of the world into accepting a one world super-government" under the "One World" money powers, and to intimidate any nation that "didn't bow to their self-serving demands."
The sudden Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on the morning of December 7, 1941, had the effect of suddenly shattering the widespread American opposition to involvement in World War Two. For some months prior to the attack, Churchill and Roosevelt had been maneuvering to bring the United States into the war against Germany, but were stymied by strong popular opposition to intervention.
It is well known that American authorities had deciphered the Japanese diplomatic code, which gave Washington advance knowledge of a probable Japanese attack on the US Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor. It is also known that Washington withheld vital information about a likely Japanese attack from Admiral Kimmel and General Short, the Navy and Army commanders at Pearl Harbor. [See John Weir's review of Scapegoats in the Nov.-Dec. 1997 Journal.]
For more than 50 years, since the time after the war when I was living in Malaya, I have kept a copy of the Malay Mail Supplement of Friday, February 27, 1948, which contains an interesting item from the "Official Despatches of the Malayan Campaign." This report, which was published under the headline "RAF [British Royal Air Force] Were Ordered Not to Attack Japanese Convoys at Sea," tells us that on December 6, 1941, "Reconnaissance planes sighted three convoys heading for the Gulf of Siam." It further states, however, that "The [British] Far Eastern General Headquarters concluded that this force was directed against Siam [Thailand] and ordered that offensive action against the convoys was not to be taken without authorisation."
Why was the British air force ordered not to attack those Japanese naval convoys? Did the British authorities sacrifice their military advantage in Malaya to ensure that the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor would happen without mishap?
The Allied leaders, and the powers that were egging them on, had a strong interest, amounting virtually to obsession, in smashing of Hitler's Germany. For them was the war against Japan merely a sideshow? Anyway, I have met Australians who volunteered for the Australian Air Force in 1941-42 with the intention of defending their own country against Japanese attack, but were then surprised to instead find themselves assigned to bomb cities in Germany.
Congratulations for your articles. Very good and professional work.
St. Petersburg, Russia
Here is my donation to support the excellent work of the Institute! It's not much, but I give this small donation with all my hear! Keep up the good work.
Long live the Institute.
V. de C.
Not a Dull Page
The March-April 98 Journal was the best in memory. The Spengler pieces were superb. The commentary on "Jewish power" was well-crafted and scholarly. Mark Weber and Robert Faurisson and several other authors wrote with crispness and precision. Even the letters were good. Not a dull page in the issue.
Weber's review of the book Hitler as Philosophe [Sept.-Oct. 1997 Journal] was wonderful. Unquestionably the smear campaign against Third Reich Germany of which the "Holocaust" is the centerpiece – is designed simply to demonize the ideology and legacy of Hitler's National Socialist regime. As the "New World Order" ever more clearly reveals itself for what it is, growing numbers of white Americans will doubtless embrace the idea of a state in which the government and the economic system serve the people and their cultural and racial heritage.
I am giving a Journal gift subscription to my brother, and am chipping in a donation. Where would we all be ifnot for the work and guts of a few guys like you? Historians will save the world!
Congratulations on your victories in your legal battles. You really produce a good publication, and I wish you success in the coming years. Keep up the good work.
We welcome letters from readers. We reserve the right to edit for style and space. Write: [... since defunct, don't write; ed.]
Additional information about this document
|Sources:||The Journal of Historical Review, vol. 17, no. 3 (May/June 1998), pp. 39f.|
|First posted on CODOH:||Jan. 23, 2013, 6 p.m.|