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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

784 <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 />

the night duty <strong>of</strong>fi cer at the State Department. He also said in his<br />

affi davit that the sets for the other <strong>of</strong>fi cials on Bratton’s list “were<br />

delivered the next morning, 7 December 1941, with the fourteenth<br />

part.” Bratton had said that when he saw Marshall that<br />

morning, Marshall had on his desk the 14-part message, which<br />

he “had not given him.” He could not explain how it had reached<br />

Marshall. According to Bratton,<br />

Any prior statements or testimony <strong>of</strong> mine which may be contrary<br />

to my statements here [the affi davit for Clausen] . . .<br />

should be modifi ed <strong>and</strong> considered changed in accordance with<br />

my statements herein. Th is affi davit now represents my best<br />

recollection . . . after having my memory refreshed in several<br />

ways <strong>and</strong> respects. 186<br />

By the time Bratton was fi nally called to the witness st<strong>and</strong><br />

by the Joint Congressional Committee, he had been listening for<br />

months to the sworn testimony <strong>of</strong> witnesses, some <strong>of</strong> whom had<br />

contradicted one another; some had even contradicted their own<br />

earlier testimony, <strong>and</strong> some had <strong>of</strong>f ered to shoulder the blame for<br />

Marshall’s possible delinquencies. 187 As the bewildered Bratton<br />

took the chair on February 14, 1946, suspense pervaded the<br />

packed hearing room.<br />

Delivery to Top Officials Evening <strong>of</strong> December<br />

6 <strong>of</strong> Japanese Reply to U.S. “Ultimatum”<br />

Respecting the receipt <strong>of</strong> the “Pilot Message,” Bratton contradicted<br />

the testimony <strong>of</strong> his Navy opposite, Kramer. Kramer’s<br />

“refreshed” testimony was that the message had not reached<br />

him, ready for delivery, until about 10 or 10:30 Sunday morning,<br />

December 7. 188 However, it was undoubtedly available to Navy<br />

186 Ibid., part 35, pp. 96–98, Bratton affi davit.<br />

187 Ibid., part 3, p. 1036.<br />

188 Ibid., part 9, pp. 4015, 4018–19, 4022, 4101–02.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!