Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 2, February 1956
File 052
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 2, February 1956 - File 052. 1956-02. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. June 4, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/909/show/891.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. (1956-02). Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 2, February 1956 - File 052. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/909/show/891

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 2, February 1956 - File 052, 1956-02, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed June 4, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/909/show/891.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 2, February 1956
Alternate Title Facts Forum News, Vol. V, No. 2, February 1956
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date February 1956
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 5 1956; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States: This item is in the public domain in the United States and may be used freely in the United States. The item may not be in the public domain under the copyright laws of other countries.
Item Description
Title File 052
Transcript warn /^R Book Reviews Consult your bookstore for books reviewed here — or write to publishers listed. Japanese attack. He wished to execute his own "Pearl Harbor" by a surprise sneak airplane attack on the Japanese fleet as it by-passed the Philippines on its way to the South Pacific. President Roosevelt vetoed this proposal on the ground that it would torpedo the "official record" of the administration in regard to its promise not to move without being attacked. But Stimson's proposal of a sneak attack by the United States provides a not too oblique commentary on the moral hypocrisy of Mr. Roosevelt in his remarks before Congress about "the Day of tnfamy" wtien he asked for a declaration of war the day after Pearl Harbor. Other chapters deal with Stimson's role in the disgraceful transplantation of loyal Japanese-American citizens to concentration camps remote from their homes on the Pacific Coast; his advocacy of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima after he knew that the Japanese were trying to surrender and had offered peace terms much like those accepted in August, 1945; his deplorable fantasy in helping to formulate the legal subterfuges under which Nazi "war criminals" were tried at Nuremberg; and his role in launching the United States into the Or- wellian era in which it is proclaimed that "war is peace" and vice-versa. The only weak spot in Professor Current's book lies in his treatment of the attitude of Roosevelt and his entourage in the days immediately preceding Pearl Harbor. Here he indulges in a degree of myth and fancy equal to that of writers like Robert Sherwood and Jonathan Daniels, although obviously not from the same motives or for a similar purpose. Professor Current's argument is the following. With Roosevelt's approval, we had entered into a secret agreement with the British and the Dutch at Singapore in the spring of 1941. We would make war upon Japan if her forces crossed a mystic line in the Pacific (100° East and 10" North) even though the Japanese made no attack on American forces or territory. For a brief moment, it looked as though the Japanese were not going through with their attack on Pearl Harbor, but were moving toward this arbitrary line. This so excited and alarmed Roosevelt and his associates that the\' feared the attack on Pearl Harbor would not come off, some perhaps being so distracted that they even momentarily forgot the danger there. There is no doubt that the White House and the warmongering strategists in the Cabinet were panic- stricken for a time over this possibility of having to make war without any Japanese attack — and the probable effect on the American people if Mr. Roosevelt tried to get a declaration of war without the hoped-for attack on the United States, thus violating the Democratic campaign promises and platform of 1940. But tin's alarm passed away with the receipt of the welcome news (decoded Japanese messages) which revealed, as clearly as daylight, that the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor. The Japanese government had ordered its spies in the Hawaiian Islands to make daily reports on the American military and naval situation at Pearl Harbor, but requested no such information about any other American outpost in the Pacific. By the evening of December 6th, the Japanese reply to Hull's ultimatum of November 26th convinced Roosevelt that war with Japan was about to break out. By 8:00 a.m. on the morning of December 7th. it was clear that the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor at 1:00 p.m. that day, or 7:30 a.m., Pearl Harbor time. On December 7th, as sources friendly to the White House tell us, President Roosevelt was fully relaxed over his stamp collection while Harry Hopkins fondled Fala, the President's Scotty terrier, both impatiently and expectantly awaiting the news of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Admiral Theobald has made it clear that Roosevelt had ordered that no warning should be sent to General Short or Admiral Kimmel at Pearl Harbor before noon of December 7th, thus making it certain that any information that arrived would be too late to make possible any defensive preparations that might frighten off the Japanese task force. Only one favorable tribute may be paid to the public career of Henry 1,. Stimson. He was not a physical coward. In his polities, lie may have been almost invariably "Wrong-Horse Harry." But he never asked others to do what he himself was afraid to tackle. Although he was the chief author of the draft of 1910, lie was also a volunteer in the first World War and, but for his age, he might *' have asked to fight in the second c* flict — unless he felt that he co"» serve his country better in a civil"1 role. -Harry Elmeb Ba»* .arnes, The C«* Idaho, 1953, 6"' Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace Edited by Harry Elmer Printers, Ltd., Caldwel $6.00. No less an authority than the Ji Yorfe Times recently confirmed. '"'' vertently, the thesis of this outsjj ing book. In an editorial, the '".', proclaimed, as one phase of o"r.,i " foreign policy, that theHf : is continually engag1'* partisan government a "war for peace." Well, that is e*I what revisionist historians sud}, Harry Elmer Barnes, the editor of, book, and Charles A. Beard, the* inator of its title, have contend1'1', along. That our present foreign P" — inaugurated by Roosevelt and tinned by his successors — is o" i perpetual intervention and war " the pretense of establishing pl';,l'f presented with devastating <'°c% tation. The highly publicized ver > of history — history written to and preserve Roosevelt's prestifje not hold up well under the r trating scrutiny of these authors- Now that a leading cxarnP "liberal" journalism and a violf? of revisionism has agreed xV J revisionists on what our foreign r> is, perhaps the virtues of such can be debated global meddling consume Inasmuch ■', per cent of our national expc'"-,! altieso'1, lot icy would appear to be deiiy, of re frustr Wef, Pressi 'njunc shall i The the c, histor first c mafic lace ii ■nforn "lentil their repute histori ; eocmti •epub eonch And i ally ( Preser Reput dom, bistori zest. 1 are in> cilitie, who { few ai of it. these tailed Peopl, mean The a nurr Public Politic falitar tory _ ''ng as the va ( not to mention the casualties ■ u and-a-half foreign wars), fore'." » tors () i dt'b?3 eornpi tion ol tory, i 111 one "Nol Promi] Ae Ir, five y< fealm the Vc canco subject. How we reached wh^j are might also be of interest to icans. ^ The sentiments of intervew'j liberals may have been well eXFj in another Times editorial dignantly denounced Khrushch' cent attempt to rewrite histoJj'J this new-found attitude does "" it Ii the lofty frowfl. square which the 'Times and other l". have greeted various se holafS l> is "'. Hi tempts to contest Aincric; ai,V th mot - SOl of history." But it is always get any decent recording as long as hordes of journalised '' ers, and politicians have a . ess tn than it wi Th„; dredg( tones, politicians have ■ ' interest ill the official myth<>'*| that as it may, one of the "^i poses of the writers of this vol" [j that „i combatting the body $ "atred "history" that is still being i"'1"^' ^h ii in main quarters. They have ' , Miy,-jt nii;' i,ni1" u-oI'V- too, for any sort of intel proach to contemporary p1'1 difficult, if not impossible ^ F. ACTS Page 50 Fa< is Fori \i News, Februi
File Name uhlib_1352973_v005_n002_052.jpg