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

564 Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy
However, Messrs. Stimson and Forrestal made it plain that no
prosecution of any offi cer was contemplated now. 48
Press Reports Note Contradictions
Between NCI/APHB Reports and
Earlier Roberts Conclusions
Th e respected journalist Arthur Krock of the New York Times
commented on the Forrestal and Stimson releases. He pointed
to
a fundamental confl ict of fi nding between the reports on Pearl
Harbor of the commission headed by Justice Roberts and of
those composed of admirals and generals as reviewed by their
departmental superiors. If Admiral Kimmel and General Short
. . . were guilty of “dereliction of duty,” as the Roberts commission
concluded, then it cannot equally be true, as the Secretaries
of Navy and War appraised their offi cers’ inquiries, that on the
basis of available evidence no grounds exist for the courts-martial
of the area commanders or any others in the service.
“Dereliction of duty is basis for a court-martial, and the
Roberts commission imputed this to both Kimmel and Short.”
Th is fact, Krock said, when
contrasted with the negative results of the offi cial inquiries
by the Army and Navy, makes an unsatisfactory situation for
everyone concerned, including the Pearl Harbor commanders,
who were removed, reduced in rank and refused the courtsmartial
for which they repeatedly applied. 49
48Ibid. pp. 1, 5.
49Ibid., December 5, 1944, p. 22.