Villa, Brian, and Timothy Wilford. "Signals Intelligence and Pearl Harbor: The State of the Question." Intelligence and National Security 21, no. 4 (Aug. 2006): 520-556.
The authors examine recent writings on Pearl Harbor, challenge Philip Jacobsen's criticisms and methodology, and argue that the revisionist thesis merits further scholarly attention.
Clark comment: It is difficult to argue with the authors' point that it is the nature of history to be rewritten as new information is discovered or becomes available. To put it differently, revising our interpretations of historical events is not a loathsome sin, but the obligation of those who would call themselves historians. Regrettably, too much of the ongoing dispute between the authors (both as themselves and as stand-ins for other revisionists) and Philip Jacobsen has taken on a personal tone -- now, seemingly on both sides of the argument. Serious researchers (a status easily granted to Villa and Wilford) might better avoid the type of "personal contest" in which a portion of this article engages. As interesting and tightly argued as this article is, the main "revisionist" theories remain unproven to this follower of the debate. Nonetheless, the idea that further study remains warranted seems logical and normal.
Villa, Brian, and Timothy Wilford. "Warning at Pearl Harbor: Leslie Grogan and the Tracking of the Kido Butai." The Northern Mainer/Le Marin du nord 11, no. 2 (Apr. 2001): 1-17.
The authors argue that the pre-Pearl Harbor reports of Leslie Grogan, 2d Radio Officer aboard the SS Lurline, deserve much greater credence than they have previously been given. They believe that "it is virtually unarguable that Grogan heard the signals" of Japan's Strike Force and "communicated this information to USN intelligence in Hawaii three days prior to the Pearl Harbor attack."
Return to Ves-Vil