WHY WAS PEARL HARBOR
SO VULNERABLE?ecember 7, 1941, is a date
that will live in infamy
for conspiracy theorists,
mostly for the many ques-
tionable decisions made by
military leaders that day. For example:
) The aircraft in Hawaii were gathered
in groups and out in the open, where
they were most vulnerable to attack-
ing planes. Ships in the harbor were
similarly gathered, making them easy
targets for torpedoes.
) Americans had broken a Japanese
code called Purple and should have
known about any planned attacks.
) A radar station at Opana Point de-
tected the incoming strike force, but
instead of raising the alarm, Lt. Kermit
Tyler, the officer on duty, let everyone
go to breakfast.
) And the big one: One of three aircraft
carriers was supposed to be guarding
Pearl Harbor at all times, yet none was
present at the time of the attack.
All this has led some to conclude
that the military knew of the impend-
ing invasion but allowed it to happen
in order to go to war with Japan.THE FACTS: The military never consid-
ered an air strike likely. According to
a 1944 judge advocate’s report that in-
vestigated the debacle, military leaders
were more concerned about sabotage,
and the best defense against sabotage
was to group all the planes together(And, no, it wasn’t planted later. The
wreckage was visible in the live news
footage.) As for the Pentagon’s de-
fense systems, it never had any. In all
the thousands of aerial photographs
of the Pentagon, there is no indication
of rooftop defenses.
Regarding the plane’s approach, it
was indeed a wild and unusual circu-
lar descent that would have been un-
safe to perform in a large plane such
as the 757. But (a) it was still within a
757’s capabilities, and (b) the hijack-
ers never had any intention of being
safe. Moreover, missiles have no need
to circle to lose altitude; they can sim-
ply descend in a straight line. Large
planes can’t do so as easily.
As for the video of the incoming
small white streak? No tail is visible
because, in the one frame in which
the plane appears, it has not yet en-
tirely entered the field of view, so its
tail is still out of frame.
Finally, let’s consider the sheer
number of people who would have
to be in on the “truth” in order to pull
off the deception. What is the mini-
mum number of employees working
for American Airlines and the airport
who would know if a nonexistent
flight were added to their database?
Everyone from baggage handlers to
gate crews would have reported the
inconsistency up their chain of com-
mand. How many people would have
had to be paid off or killed, without a
single witness coming forward to re-
port this over almost two decades?104 may 2019
Reader’s Digest