01.01.2013 Views

Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy - Ludwig von Mises ...

Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy - Ludwig von Mises ...

Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy - Ludwig von Mises ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

422 <strong>Pearl</strong> <strong>Harbor</strong>: <strong>The</strong> <strong>Seeds</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Fruits</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Infamy</strong><br />

Japanese attack on <strong>Pearl</strong> <strong>Harbor</strong>, T.H., on 7 December 1941.” 2<br />

Th us Hart was to examine “such members <strong>of</strong> the naval forces” as<br />

were “thought to have knowledge <strong>of</strong> facts pertinent to the said<br />

surprise attack.” It was to be “a sort <strong>of</strong> one-man board to take<br />

testimony.” Hart would soon be contacting Kimmel <strong>of</strong>fi cially. 3<br />

Kimmel had reservations about Hart’s inquiry. Not only<br />

could it not be “free <strong>and</strong> open,” but it was too narrowly focused.<br />

It was to be limited to examining “members <strong>of</strong> the naval forces”<br />

concerning events “pertinent to the said surprise attack.” Kimmel<br />

pointed out that many non-Navy personnel, Army personnel <strong>and</strong><br />

civilians, should also be examined. And they should be questioned<br />

not only about events “pertinent to the said surprise attack,” but<br />

also about “events that took place some time prior to said attack<br />

<strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong> events at places not in the Hawaiian Isl<strong>and</strong>s that have an<br />

important bearing on the actual attack.” Th e testimony <strong>of</strong> such<br />

persons should also be taken <strong>and</strong> preserved. 4 Moreover, Kimmel<br />

maintained that he had a right “to be informed <strong>of</strong> the nature <strong>and</strong><br />

cause <strong>of</strong> any accusation” against him. 5<br />

Although Knox assured Kimmel that this examination<br />

would be “in no sense a trial,” <strong>and</strong> Kimmel would be “permitted<br />

to introduce matter pertinent to the examination, to cross-examine<br />

witnesses, etc.,” Kimmel still had qualms. 6 Th e legal character<br />

<strong>of</strong> the inquiry was unclear. It would have some characteristics<br />

279th Cong., 1st sess. Joint (Congressional) Committee on the Investigation<br />

<strong>of</strong> the <strong>Pearl</strong> <strong>Harbor</strong> Attack. <strong>Pearl</strong> <strong>Harbor</strong> Attack, 39 vols. (Washington, D.C.:<br />

U.S. Government Printing Offi ce, 1946), part 26, pp. 3–4.<br />

3Hart letter to Kimmel, February 15, 1944. Typed copy <strong>of</strong> original in author’s<br />

fi les.<br />

4Kimmel memor<strong>and</strong>um to Knox, March 16, 1944. Typed copy <strong>of</strong> original in<br />

author’s fi les.<br />

5Kimmel memor<strong>and</strong>um to Knox, February 29, 1944. Th erm<strong>of</strong>ax copy <strong>of</strong> original<br />

in author’s fi les.<br />

6Knox memor<strong>and</strong>um to Kimmel, March 4, 1944. Typed copy <strong>of</strong> original in<br />

author’s fi les.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!