The Hiroshima Cover-Up

A Story that the U.S. government hoped would never see the light of day finally has been published, 60 years after it was spiked by military censors. The discovery of reporter George Weller's firsthand account of conditions in post-nuclear Nagasaki sheds light on one of the great journalistic betrayals of the last century: the cover-up of the effects of the atomic bombing on Japan.

On Aug. 6, 1945, the U.S. dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima; three days later, Nagasaki was hit. Gen. Douglas MacArthur promptly declared southern Japan off-limits, barring the news media. A month after the bombings, two reporters defied General MacArthur and struck out on their own. Mr. Weller, of the Chicago Daily News, took row boats and trains to reach devastated Nagasaki. Independent journalist Wilfred Burchett rode a train for 30 hours and walked into the charred remains of Hiroshima.

Mr. Burchett's article, headlined "The Atomic Plague," was published Sept. 5, 1945, in the London Daily Express. The story caused a worldwide sensation and was a public relations fiasco for the U.S. military. The official U.S. narrative of the atomic bombings downplayed civilian casualties and categorically dismissed as "Japanese propaganda" reports of the deadly lingering effects of radiation.

So when Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter George Weller's 25,000-word story on the horror that he encountered in Nagasaki was submitted to military censors, General MacArthur ordered the story killed, and the manuscript was never returned. As Mr. Weller later summarized his experience with General MacArthur's censors, "They won."

After killing Mr. Weller's reports, U.S. authorities tried to counter Mr. Burchett's articles by attacking the messenger. General MacArthur ordered Mr. Burchett expelled from Japan (the order was later rescinded), his camera mysteriously vanished while he was in a Tokyo hospital and U.S. officials accused him of being influenced by Japanese propaganda.

Recently, Mr. Weller's son, Anthony, discovered a carbon copy of the suppressed dispatches among his father's papers (George Weller died in 2002). Unable to find an interested American publisher, Anthony Weller sold the account to Mainichi Shimbun, a big Japanese newspaper. Now, on the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombings, Mr. Weller's account can finally be read.

Sixty years late, Mr. Weller's censored account stands as a searing indictment not only of the inhumanity of the atomic bomb but also of the danger of journalists embedding with the government to deceive the world.

Source:
Baltimore Sun

Today on the 60th Anniverary of Hiroshima Atom Bomb, I think it's FAIR to finally know the Truth and to see how the Army Reacts to the Truth - especially to the Truth coming out to the Public.

Apaprently this Article has alot Parallels with the World Today, the Wars and the Journalism that Reports it. You can just imagine what kind of News we are being served Today form the Army's Point of View.

Has really Much changed since 1945?

What's the Date Today - 2005 or 1984?

Well it took 60 years for the Truth to come out - better late then never!

[edit on 6/8/05 by Souljah]

I think you should see this thread also if you haven't already, the case was made very well in my opinion.....the old rumor of Truman saying "Drop the son of a bitch" makes more sense now. The Japanese people should be thankful their emperor stepped up to the plate and overruled his generals and pursued peace. Even though we had no more left, but they didn't know this.


The Hiroshima debate, emotionalism vrs history...

Souljah-

I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on the Bataan Death March. Also, have you researched the chemical and biological weapons testing on innocent civilians by the Japanese in Manchuria?

It just seems to me like you're always digging deep to rip the US. You'd have some credibility if you actually investigated both sides of every issue, and reported on them without bias. Why do I never see you writing about modern-day human rights violations in places like China and Russia?

And by the way... as horrible as the result of it was, I still support the decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It's my opinion, and the opinion of countless military experts and historians ever since, that over a million lives or more were saved as a result. If we had to invade mainland Japan with troops, like we did in Normandy, the losses on both sides would have been enormous. Without the surrender by their Emperor, we would have had to fight and kill virtually every last Japanese citizen before ultimate victory could be declared.

Instead, we chose to drop the bombs and Japan ultimately surrendered unconditionally. Our efforts in post-war Japan showed what separates the United States from every other world Super Power before it. We spent billions of dollars and decades of work to rebuild Japan, alongside the Japanese citizens, into the economic power and peaceful nation that it is today. We certainly weren't required to do any of that.

I fully Understand the meaning of the Atom Bomb being dropped on Imperial Japan during the WWII - it quickly ended the Final Agony of defeat and saved countless of lives, Japanese and American. I have no problem with that.

The Hiroshima and Nagasaki stand tall in the History books as a Bitter Reminder what an atom bomb actually does and the effect it leaves on the buildings, land and most important: the People.

The real problem is the Radiation Sickness which probably killed more people then the bomb blast itself. And according to these two reporters and their stories from the places of impact - the ARMY ofcourse denied everything and tried to keep the lid on it for a long, long time. Truth is that they wanted to see what the effect would be on the Urban Area and the Population. Why didn't they drop the bomb on a Military target? Like a Military Port full of Ships? That's the Question that was always in my head, since I have heard for Hiroshima and Nagasaki A-Bombs.

Not sure what the agenda is or was for the Baltimore Sun article, and after reading it, it appears they have some valid points, but to label the article or this topic as The Hiroshima Cover-up is absolutely misleading and unfounded, no offence to you, Souljah.

There are a number of independent, military historical, and academic historical references to be had that would discount such an assertion as Hiroshima being covered-up.

One main source that counters this was done by the United States Strategic Bombing Survey, compiled and printed in 1946.
The Effects of Atomic Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagaski






seekerof

[edit on 6-8-2005 by Seekerof]

The real problem is the Radiation Sickness which probably killed more people then the bomb blast itself. And according to these two reporters and their stories from the places of impact - the ARMY ofcourse denied everything and tried to keep the lid on it for a long, long time. Truth is that they wanted to see what the effect would be on the Urban Area and the Population. Why didn't they drop the bomb on a Military target? Like a Military Port full of Ships? That's the Question that was always in my head, since I have heard for Hiroshima and Nagasaki A-Bombs.

I have to disagree with you somewhat. Hiroshima was nicknamed "The City of Soldiers" by the Japanese, as there were constantly soldiers there everywhere you looked. The port was always busy loading and unloading troops at Hiroshima. It was a major military industrial complex as well. Every citizen who lived there knew that it was only a matter of time before their city was bombed. Granted, they had no idea regarding an atomic bomb, but they knew their day was coming. By the time the first bomb was dropped, every citizen in Hiroshima, and most of Japan for that matter, had begun training for an invasion. Schoolgirls were given sharpened bamboo sticks and trained to attack soldiers. Young men and hospital orderlies were trained to wrap themselves with explosives and lay under aproaching tanks as suicide bombers. Men, women and children of all ages were training to do battle against US troops. That doesn't necessarily make them a "military" target. but Hiroshima was about as close to a military city as you can get.

I, of course, wish that those bombs never would have had to been dropped. I wish that Japan didn't attack Pearl Harbor. I wish that Japan wasn't responsible for the death of 17 million Asians from 1937 until Pearl Harbor, most of them civilians. The sad part is that its history and there is nothing we can do about it. I don't blame the military for keeping the press out of those cities either. There was absolutely no benefit of letting the press in and having them report on the resulting carnage. After fighting a major world war, the last thing we needed was to create more enemies and more resentment against the United States. Every nation and every military engages in propaganda, especially during times of war. It's part of warfare. It's part of deception. And it will never go away.

Originally posted by Souljah
Why didn't they drop the bomb on a Military target? Like a Military Port full of Ships? That's the Question that was always in my head, since I have heard for Hiroshima and Nagasaki A-Bombs.

Simply, it was a different day and age (such as in the firebombing of Dresden). Bombing metropolitan areas was really nothing new during the era and given the accuracy of bombers heavy civilian casualties was an inevitability even if a ‘military target’ was on the agenda. I do not believe targeting either Hiroshima or Nagasaki turned many allied heads during the theater period.


.

Truth is that they wanted to see what the effect would be on the Urban Area and the Population.

At the time radiation was new to the world. We really didnt know much about it, even if we understood radiation. Theirs nothing we could do to help the japanese.

Why didn't they drop the bomb on a Military target? Like a Military Port full of Ships? That's the Question that was always in my head, since I have heard for Hiroshima and Nagasaki A-Bombs.

Hiroshima was a main "must hit" target, Nagasaki was just a secondary.

Hiroshima wasn't military, but it was going to. The mainland invasion of Japan would happen at Hiroshima or thats where the most effects were going to focus on.

The atom bombs did two things.
Save lives and stopped the flow of communism to Japan.
The SU had rampaged through Manchuria and North Korea, basicly transforming it into communism. We needed something that would stop the war before the Soviet Union reached Japan. The Atom BOMB

It worked, and after the war we helped Japan and Europe (Martial Plan) back on its feet. Today Japan has the third largest GDP in the world.

The Soviet Union had forced some enemies to pay up.
The United Nations were then formed to prevent major wars from happening. Obviously the League of Nations didn't help any in the past.

Here is a better link for the story about the cover-up.

www.editorandpublisher.com...

They said some of the film will be airing on the sundance channel. Do we have any tivo fans here with access to the sundance channel who want to copy it for the rest of us?

Fun to live in the land of pretend. Why do I never see a thread called " Pearl Harbor Cover Up " ? Maybe one day we can get around to the fullscale rape of China by the oh so sobby Japan as well too eh ? I doubt it.

This thread is just another example of the liberal agendas. The US is terrible for using atom bombs!just more america slaming, since america is the only country to use a nuclear weapon in war time. Im surprised we havent been accused of imperialist agendas We witnessed 60 years ago both the wonders and horrors of science. The bombs dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki are firecrackers compared to the nuclear weapons of today. Hopefully Hiroshima and nagasaki will serve as reminders to the effects of nuclear warfare. It should also serve as a reminder and a warning as to the threat of nuclear terrorism. We should remember and try to prevent nuclear arms falling into the hands of terrorists.

OK I guess I understand Your Points and Opinions so far. But if you ask me for my Opinion, these two bombs were all about "Flexing Muscles". I know that the Invasion of Japan would be a Years Long Bloody Massacre and that probably ALL Cities would have been turned into Fortresses, so it's undestandable that you're responses are pro a-bomb being dropped. I belive that there were many other Factors that caused these bombs being dropped. Facts are that Japan was already completly Surrounded, with Russians Invading on the Mainland Chinese Territory, in Range of American B-29 Bombers and Completly Blocked by Naval Blockade. Germany - their only and their last ally - already Surrendered, so they were basicly One against Many. Against two major military superpowers: America and Russia, and with Great Britain in the back. So, what to do?

I agree that the Emperors "Uncoditional Surrender" did not help the Peaceful Ending ot this Conflict, but still the A-Bomb being dropped on Japan had several other meanings, and not just a swift ending of WWII in the Pacific Theatre. A new Treat was Rising - this time a Big Red Bear that was closing in on the Korea and soon the A-Bomb was dropped as a Warning also to the Russians, saying: "Look what we Have, and you don't!" and quickly pushed the Russians back in the Race of Military Supremacy. And to show the entire World, who was the First to Nuke some Urban Targets and who will be the Number One Nuclear and Military Superpower for the next decades.

Interesting Article:

Hiroshima: Was it Neccesary?



As Far as the "Pearl Harbor Cover Up" is Concerned.....:

Pearl Harbor - the Mother of All Conspiracies

Pearl Harbor Conspiracy?

1. In the summer of 1940 Roosevelt ordered the Pacific to relocate from the West Coast to Hawaii. When its commander, Admiral Richardson, protested that Pearl Harbor offered inadequate protection from air and torpedo attack he was replaced.

2. On October 7 1940 Navy IQ analyst McCollum wrote an eight-point memo for Roosevelt on how to force Japan into war with U.S., including an American oil embargo against Japan. All of them were eventually accomplished.

3. On 23 June 1941 - one day after Hitler's attack on Russia - Secretary of the Interior and FDR's Advisor Harold Ickes wrote a memo for the President in which he pointed out that "there might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into this war in an effective way. And if we should thus indirectly be brought in, we would avoid the criticism that we had gone in as an ally of communistic Russia."

4. On 18 October Ickes noted in his diary: "For a long time I have believed that our best entrance into the war would be by way of Japan."

5. The U.S. had cracked key Japanese codes before the attack. FDR received "raw" translations of all key messages. On 24 September 1941 Washington deciphered a message from the Naval Intelligence HQ in Tokyo to Japan's consul-general in Honolulu, requesting grid of exact locations of U.S. Navy ships in the harbor. Commanders in Hawaii were not warned.

6. Sixty years later the U.S. Government still refuses to identify or declassify many pre-attack decrypts on the grounds of "national security"!

7. On November 25 Secretary of War Stimson wrote in his diary that FDR said an attack was likely within days, and asked "how we should maneuver them into the position of firing the first shot without too much danger to ourselves. In spite of the risk involved, however, in letting the Japanese fire the first shot, we realized that in order to have the full support of the American people it was desirable to make sure that the Japanese be the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt in anyone's mind as to who were the aggressors."

8. On November 25 FDR received a "positive war warning" from Churchill that the Japanese would strike against America at the end of the first week in December. This warning caused the President to do an abrupt about-face on plans for a time-buying modus vivendi with Japan and it resulted in Secretary of State Hull's deliberately provocative ultimatum of 26 November 1941 that guaranteed war.

9. On November 26 Washington ordered both US aircraft carriers, the Enterprise and the Lexington, out of Pearl Harbor "as soon as possible". This order included stripping Pearl of 50 planes or 40 percent of its already inadequate fighter protection. On the same day Cordell Hull issued his ultimatum demanding full Japanese withdrawal from Indochina and all China. U.S. Ambassador to Japan called this "The document that touched the button that started the war."

10. On November 29 Hull told United Press reporter Joe Leib that Pearl Harbor would be attacked on December 7. The New York Times reported on December 8 ("Attack Was Expected," p. 13) that the U.S. knew of the attack a week earlier.

11. On December 1 Office of Naval Intelligence, ONI, 12th Naval District in San Francisco found the missing Japanese fleet by correlating reports from the four wireless news services and several shipping companies that they were getting signals west of Hawaii.

12. On 5 December FDR wrote to the Australian Prime Minister, "There is always the Japanese to consider. Perhaps the next four or five days will decide the matters."

Just for some background information. The following link takes to you a declassified minutes of the "Targeting Committee" that met May 10th, 1945

Topics discussed were:

Height of Detonation
B: Report on Weather and Operations
C: Gadget Jettisoning and Landing
D: Status of Targets
E: Psychological Factors in Target Selection
F: Use Against Military Objectives
G: Radiological Effects
H: Coordinated Air Operations
I: Rehearsals
J: Operating Requirements for Safety of Airplanes
K: Coordination with 21st Program


Of note is the discussion of targets which included the cities of:

Kyoto
Hiroshima
Yokohama
Kokura Arsenal
Niigata (secondary target)

The priority was listed int he above order. More than one was selected because of weather concerns etc. Im not sure when Nagasaki was added to the list.

www.dannen.com...

Originally posted by FredT
Kyoto
Hiroshima
Yokohama
Kokura Arsenal
Niigata (secondary target)

I have read in the Article linked in my post that Kyoto was removed from this list in last minutes, since Kyoto is a former capital of Japan and full of Temples and Holy Sites. Yokohama is too close to Tokyo. Maybe Kokoura Arsenal would be a better target - but in any case Hundreds of Thousands Civilian Lives would be lost, if you pick ANY of those Targets. Niigata was probably too North for the Target. I find it interesing that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki are located on the Southern part of the Island of Japan.

So are you still on the pity-pod bus ? Why don't you do some simple research on the nightmare scenarios Japan created within China ? Thousands murdered for no reason, woman raped and on and on it went. American POW's treated like crap ( death marches ) and even beheaded for no reason. Remind you of somebody ? You won't a tear out of me for a war that was instigated by Japan. And please don't be racist by pretending that it was because of the Anglo Saxon that Japan decided to murder thousands Chinese citizens. This world we now live in is the conclusion of Germany, Italy and Japan. All 3 now seem to be fine and dandy these day's.

Originally posted by BLUBBER
So are you still on the pity-pod bus ? Why don't you do some simple research on the nightmare scenarios Japan created within China ? Thousands murdered for no reason, woman raped and on and on it went. American POW's treated like crap ( death marches ) and even beheaded for no reason. Remind you of somebody ? You won't a tear out of me for a war that was instigated by Japan. And please don't be racist by pretending that it was because of the Anglo Saxon that Japan decided to murder thousands Chinese citizens. This world we now live in is the conclusion of Germany, Italy and Japan. All 3 now seem to be fine and dandy these day's.

The numbers are more in the millions than thousands.
What the Japanese did in China is as worse as the concentration camps.
Cannablism, rape, murder, torture, ect. basicly any type of method known to man was present in its region.

You can ask any POW during the pacific theater (whether it be Australian, Noway, British or American). Ask them if the atom bomb was necessary, I can bet that the majority of them will say yes.

Here is a article about a woman who witnessed the bombing.

www.nydailynews.com...

Some More of the Topic on this Links:

Hiroshima Cover-up: Stripping the War Department's Timesman of His Pulitzer

Hiroshima Cover-up: How the War Department's Timesman Won a Pulitzer

[edit on 7/8/05 by Souljah]

I dont know about elsewhere but here in the States, the discovery channel has been plastering the airwaves with program after program of how "everyone" knows that the Japanese were ready to surrender and how the ruthless Americans were out for revenge and we wouldnt let them surrender.


They showed interview after interview of people stating that Japan was ready to surrender to any terms, but that President Truman was ignoring all these overtures prior to and after Potsdam.

Then they aired one program (after midnight of course) that showed different parts of the same interviews with the people saying that Japan would never surrender and that they were preparing their civilians for war.

These programs never mentioned the terrible atrocities the Japanese committed on POW's or chinese civilians. To me this is the real cover-up.

Originally posted by Souljah
OK I guess I understand Your Points and Opinions so far. But if you ask me for my Opinion, these two bombs were all about "Flexing Muscles".

Wars are about flexing muscle, no?

Originally posted by Souljah
I know that the Invasion of Japan would be a Years Long Bloody Massacre and that probably ALL Cities would have been turned into Fortresses, so it's undestandable that you're responses are pro a-bomb being dropped. I belive that there were many other Factors that caused these bombs being dropped. Facts are that Japan was already completly Surrounded, with Russians Invading on the Mainland Chinese Territory, in Range of American B-29 Bombers and Completly Blocked by Naval Blockade

The ‘Japanese’ culture (pre and WWII era) has been underestimated or only touched upon in the above mentioned statements and those which follow, the cultural ethnocentricisms are lost. All Japanese and Allied actions combined with the absolute hatred (understatement) the United States, Australia, China and Great Briton had for Japan (considering the treatment of prisoners, ROE, civilian cruelties perpetrated by the Japanese Imperial forces etc, etc,) all are bad mixtures which created the eventual making of a point: ‘Give-up completely or we’ll continue to wipe you out, period’. Understanable for the era and the ‘a-bomb’.

As far as making an international point with the Russians, the a-bomb was simply a weapon of war given the period, more so then than now. Nuclear weapons are understood differently today and vast arsenals have thus far sat unused for sixty years (although used politically), perhaps because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Just maybe the early limited use has prevented later uses and far more casualties because the world knows the destruction contained within first-hand and is not so willing to use nuclear force without conscience and forseeability.



.