WEDNESDAY’S LETTERS: Nuclear Reaction to Hiroshima Cover-up Article

RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Visit Us
LinkedIn

By: E&P Staff

Several readers felt compelled to share their (sometimes nuclear) reactions to Greg Mitchell’s special report, Hiroshima Film Cover-up Exposed. A few of the comments, both pro and con, follow:

***

While in the USAF Medical Corps during the early ’60s. part of our training on Nuclear Warfare consisted of viewing film clips of ground zero, prints of individuals on walls and the blast effects on those who survived. It was interesting to hear the instructors state they hoped we never had to use the weapons again.

It was and is my feelings the entire world should see the films and know what awaits humanity if Nuclear Warheads are allowed in the hands of psychopathic leaders.

Charles Kidd

***

Your article seems to be another masked left wing try to vilify the U.S. government?s actions during World War II. The last thirteen words of the quote below is most revealing:

?The 50th anniversary of the bombing drew extensive print and television coverage — and wide use of excerpts from the McGovern/Sussan footage — but no strong shift in American attitudes on the use of the bomb.?

No doubt attempts such as yours to revise history will likely be more successful when all of us who lived through World War II have been placed in graveyards.

Those of you who have no memory of the war seem to have very little real concept of the horrible devastation experienced by millions all over the world. Although exact casualty figures from the war will never be known, it has been estimated that some 60 million people died. Ruin was common in many places.

President Truman?s decision to use the bombs likely saved a million, more or less, additional casualties, Japanese and Allied. At the time, I think most Americans whole-heartedly supported the president. We understood the consequences. Today, probably most of us continue to do so.

After the war, I don?t recall any particular efforts by anyone to stifle information about the bomb or the devastation to the Japanese cities. If anything, I felt, at the time, that too much information was disseminated about the matter.

Why don?t you try promoting this country instead of attacking it? It?s a good nation.

Bill Davenport

***

I liked your story on the Hiroshima coverup. I wish you had mentioned that the New York Times received a Pulitizer Prize for stories they did on the bomb denying much of what appeared in the press on the devastation caused by the bomb. I would like to see them give back the prize based upon lies.

Ken Hundzinski
Playa del Rey, Calif.

Ed’s Note: For more on the Times’ reporting on the bombings and the work of Times reporter WIlliam L. Laurence, who doubled as a U.S. government propagandist, see this special report.

***

It makes me sick that this article is totally unbalanced. Mention of the Bataan Death march, the executuion of American soldiers by retreating Japanese, the Kamikazi, etc, etc to balance your opinion of the facts.

Facts are facts, fine. Opinion expressed one sidedly is not fact. Facts on both sides of an argument is balance. Facts on one side and opinion is not balanced.

Don Wenschhof

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *