Talk:John L. DeWitt

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John L. DeWitt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C850350%2C00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060429235144/http://www.sfmuseum.org/bio/jldewitt.html to http://www.sfmuseum.org/bio/jldewitt.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Source verification needed

In the last paragraph of section "World War II", the phrase "...the Roberts Commission report of January 25, 1942 accusing persons of Japanese ancestry of widespread espionage in Hawaii prior to Pearl Harbor..." was borrowed from the source document (see footnote 5). However, the Roberts Commission article claims that the commission's report did not make that claim. Can someone with access to the source material check that out? WCCasey (talk) 22:11, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm not confident about editing actual articles, but I did find a New York Times article (p. 30) which gives the full text of the Roberts Commission report, and it doesn't accuse "persons of Japanese ancestry of widespread espionage." In the XVI part of the report, it does assert that there were "Japanese spies on the island of Oahu" prior to the attack. "Some were Japanese consular agents and others were persons have no relations with the Japanese Foreign Service." That's about all it says regarding the identities of the fifth columnists.

It does go on to say that the FBI, Army, & Naval intelligence offices were supposed to work together to uncover espionage activities, and that there were more than 200 Japanese consular agents that hadn't registered as agents of a foreign principal as required by United States statutes. "... the Commanding General, Hawaiian Department objected to the arrest of any such persons, at least until they had been given notice and an opportunity to register, asserting that their arrest would tend to thwart the efforts which the Army had made to create friendly sentiment toward the United States on the part of Japanese aliens resident in Hawaii and Americans of Japanese descent resident in Hawaii and create unnecessary bad feeling. No action was taken against the agents."

If someone else who is more skilled at editing Wikipedia pages wants to take this on, be my guest. Nishii51 (talk) 18:56, 25 June 2022 (UTC)