E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIt's never too late to solve a mystery, or to set the record straight. In the 70 years since the attack on Pearl Harbor, a dramatic photo of female firefighters has been published many times in magazines, history books and online as a depiction of action on Dec. 7, 1941. We published it this past week on msnbc.com. Now, with the help of our readers, we've located one of the women, who says the photo was definitely not taken on that day.
Three Lions / Getty Images
The photo as distributed by Getty Images.
She's the second from the right in the iconic photo, Katherine Lowe, still living in Hawaii at age 96, where she has great-great-grandchildren and goes bowling twice a week. She can take us back to a time and place that few remember.
Marco Garcia for msnbc.com
Katherine Lowe, 96, right, looks at the photo of firefighters at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, with her daughter Yvonne Hernandez, at their home, Sunday, Dec. 11, in Laie, Hawaii, on the island of Oahu.
Here's a photo of Lowe made at her home on Sunday.
Lowe said the wartime photo was certainly not taken on Dec. 7, 1941, the day the Imperial Japanese Navy shocked the United States into joining World War II. On that Sunday morning she was headed to church when the bombing started, and she went ahead anyway because she wasn't sure what else to do. But she and her friends from the Dole pineapple factory did soon go to work as civilian workers at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, and one of their duties was to fight fires. She said the photo was probably taken at a training exercise during the war. She said she had no idea that her photo was in history books.
So the bottom line: These women were female firefighters at Pearl Harbor, the place. To that extent the photo is authentic. But they weren't fighting a fire when this photograph was taken, and they weren't fighting any fires on Dec. 7, the day we remember every year on Pearl Harbor Day. In addition to Lowe's account, there is strong documentary evidence that this is a Navy publicity photo taken to showcase the roles of women during the war.
Here's the story of the photo and the female firefighters of Pearl Harbor.
"If only we knew more..."
This past Wednesday, on the 70th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, msnbc.com's PhotoBlog published a selection of historic photos provided by photo agencies. Many readers commented on the photo of the female firefighters, which they had not seen before. The photo came to us from Getty Images with the caption, "Women firefighters direct a hose after the Japanese attack on the US naval base at Pearl Harbor."
The photo certainly wasn't new. One can find it online on the History Channel and in several books of war photos, including Fit to Fight: Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard 1908-2008 published by the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard Association with the caption "Following the bombing of Pearl Harbor, female shipyard workers manned fire hoses to extinguish the blazes at the piers." Other examples of books containing the photo are here and here and here, all depicting the photo as if it was taken just after the bombardment. The online successor to LIFE magazine goes further, placing the women fighting the fire "during the Japanese attack."
Just days after the 70th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, a photo mystery has been solved. NBC's Brian Williams reports.
"That photo moved me to tears," wrote an msnbc.com reader with the screen name Impatient Girl. "I would love to hear about them."
"Put the picture of the women firefighters next to the famous photo of the flag being raised at Iwo Jima," wrote reader JKiff. "The resemblance is amazing. Heroism on all fronts. ... If only we knew more about the women in that photo."
Other readers raised questions. They wondered, were female firefighters really working at Pearl Harbor before the war began? Could the photo be a fake, recreated in Photoshop software?
"I agree with the few people on here who think the photo of the women is BS," wrote reader Roodles. "It looks nothing like other photos from the attack on Pearl Harbor. No smoke, no fire, no burning battleships in the background, no soot on the women and the photographer had time to get a perfect close-up."
On Wednesday evening we republished the photo on our Open Channel investigative blog at msnbc.com, asking readers to help us identify the women and to locate them or their families.
One reader, Marieange Dobresk, even speculated that the women must have worked at Jean O'Hara's brothel in the Hotel Street area of Honolulu and hurried over on the morning of the attack to help put out fires.
Finding the original
But it didn't take long to track down the real story.
One of our readers, James Collins of Washington, D.C., wrote that night to say that, although he didn't know who was in the photo, he knew who would know: Dorothea "Dee" Buckingham, a novelist and former librarian who has written extensively about the lives of women during the war. She had hoped to get a book published, but gave up and started posting her material on a free public blog instead. She's concentrating now on teaching restorative and therapeutic yoga in North Carolina, but still fields questions frequently about Hawaii and the war.
Librarians are amazing. It took Buckingham only minutes on Thursday to find the photo in the Hawaii War Records Depository, which includes a collection at the University of Hawaii of more than 2,000 photos taken by the Honolulu daily newspapers, the U.S. Army Signal Corps and the U.S. Navy between 1941 and 1946. Here's the link to this photo in the war depository.
Here's a higher-quality scan of that photo from the library's print. It's clearly the same photo, apparently made from an image closer to the original negative, because you can see detail in more areas of the photo.
U.S. Navy / University of Hawaii / Hawaii War Records Depository
A scan made last week of a Navy print of the undated photo.
And there were names! The caption: "A crew of women fire fighters, all crews having been chosen from personnel working in the immediate vicinity of the pumper stations. From left to right: Elizabeth Moku, Alice Cho, Katherine Lowe, and Hilda Van Gieson."
A second photo
As we browsed through the online photo collection, we saw there was a second photo of these same women. The caption identifies other women in the foreground (Mary Ornellas, Minnie Cooke, Dolores Himenes, Elizabeth Raymond), and in the background our familiar four, from left, Lowe, Van Gieson, Cho, and seated holding the nozzle, Moku.
U.S. Navy / University of Hawaii / Hawaii War Records Depository
The next photo in the university archive, also from the Navy, shows the same women, in the back center.
It appears to have been taken on the same day, doesn't it? The women are dressed the same, clearly posing in groups with fire hoses shooting out streams of water, as sailors and others watch casually from a distance, relaxing by their bicycles and cars.
But what happened to the women? Might any of them still be alive?
"We were rugged"
One of the public records services that we subscribe to, Accurint, includes an address for a Katherine Lowe in Hawaii, born in August 1915, which would have made her 26 at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack. The public records gave her address in Laie, about an hour's drive from Honolulu, and gave us a cell phone number that turned out to belong to her daughter, Yvonne Hernandez. We e-mailed the daughter a copy of the photo.
"Yes, that's my mother! And my Auntie Moku!" Hernandez said, referring to Elizabeth Moku, the woman at the nozzle of the fire hose. "I am overwhelmed. My mother never mentioned any of this to me. She's shocked."
She put her mother on the phone and we talked a while about the war.
In 1941, Katherine Lowe and Elizabeth Moku were best friends, both already married with children, and working together at the Dole pineapple factory in Honolulu. "I was a trimmer," Katherine said. "It was hard work."
On the morning of Dec. 7, "We were ready to go to church. We didn't know we were at war. We went to church anyway. We were looking at all the planes bombing."
Lowe remembered the nights of fear that followed. "There was a blackout. We couldn't go nowhere. No more lights. We had to blacken up our house."
With the nation at war, she applied for one of the new civilian jobs at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, in a storage facility. For fun the women played volleyball and basketball. Another photo in the archive shows Elizabeth Moku with an undefeated basketball team. "We were rugged," Lowe said. "We carried heavy stuff, oil drums, bags, anything that needed to be stored."
Fires in the storage areas were common, and could be devastating, so "they trained us for firefighting." She said she recalled at least one time when they put their skills to use at an actual fire, but she remembers it mostly for the recreation it provided. "It was a lot of fun. We'd shoot water at one another."
Lowe said she had no memory of anyone taking a photograph, but she can tell from the two photos that they're not at a fire, probably a training exercise at the Pearl Harbor shipyard.
Lowe lost a young son during the war years. While she was at work at the shipyard, and her 3-year-old Joseph Kauhi was at a babysitter's, another child kicked him in the stomach. They didn't know what had happened until it was too late, and he died during surgery.
After the war
The women stayed friends after the war. Katherine Lowe's children called Elizabeth by the name "Auntie Moku." Moku retired as a Navy commissary cashier, and died in 1986.
Lowe went on to work as a clerk in a Navy office at Pearl Harbor, moved to Okinawa with her second husband to work for the U.S. Army, and then moved back to Pearl Harbor before retiring. She had eight children altogether (her second husband died 41 years ago), and has six children surviving now, with too many grandchildren and great-grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren to count.
She lives with her daughter and a great-grandson. She walks with a cane, and has to take her blood-pressure medicine, but she's up at 4 a.m. to hitch a ride to breakfast with friends and then twice a week to her bowling league. She said her bowling average is "145, going down," and she's rolling a smaller ball these days, just 10 pounds.
When our photographer visited, she had flowers in her hair and volunteered to do a bit of a traditional hula dance.
Marco Garcia for msnbc.com
Katherine Lowe, of Hawaiian and Chinese ancestry, demonstrates a traditional hula dance at her home on Oahu.
Lowe said she doesn't know what happened to the other women in the photo, Alice Cho and Hilda Van Gieson.
Many of our readers speculated about the ancestry of the women, noting the variety of ethnicities represented in the photograph. Katherine Lowe is native Hawaiian (Polynesian) and Chinese. Her friend Elizabeth Moku was native Hawaiian and German. Judging from surnames, Cho might be Chinese or Korean, and Van Gieson might be Dutch. In any case, a typical Hawaiian potluck.
As for Cho and Van Gieson, women of the same name are listed in the Social Security Administration's public records of Americans who have died and for whom survivors collected a death benefit. The list is indelicately called the Death Master File. We can't be certain, but the listings are for women from Hawaii and of approximately the right age.
- Hilda Van Gieson, born June 12, 1915, would have been 26 at the time of the bombing. Died in 1990.
Alice Cho is a more common name. There are two possibles:
- Alice Cho, born June 6, 1923, would have been 18. Died 1987.
- Alice K. Cho, born May 28, 1913, would have been 28. Died 1999.
Or maybe it's neither. The Cho and Van Gieson in the photo might not be the same women listed in death records.
A few historical loose ends
Getty Images lists this photo as having been taken by a stringer, or freelance photographer. It's included in Getty's Hulton Archive. Edward George Hulton Archives owned Picture Post, the popular British photo magazine, whose photo archives were eventually bought by Getty. A vice president at Getty in London, Matthew Butson, said its archives have a negative of the photo, what's called a "copy negative" made from a print.
The caption in the Getty archives takes the emotion to a new high, perhaps a fantasy from a Picture Post editor: "On that fateful December 7th, 1941, these girls of Pearl Harbor helped extinguish the flames that were raging at the naval base. They were the first women defense workers of America."
At the University of Hawaii photo depository, archive technician Sherman Seki helped us out by looking at the writing on the backs of its prints of the two photos. The women's names are on the back. The photos are not dated, but they are stamped as belonging to the 14th Naval District, Office of Public Relations, Navy Department. That suggests that a Navy photographer took the photos for publicity, to show how women were doing their part in the war effort. (Not unlike the posters used by America's wartime ally, the Soviet Union.)
W.W. Norton & Company
Soviet propaganda poster: "Women workers! Take up the rifle!"
Another note of history: The researcher Dee Buckingham points out that there were firefighters from the Honolulu Fire Department at Hickam Field on the morning of Dec. 7. All were men. Three died when a Japanese bomb fell on them. Here's her blog post about their deaths and compensation for their widows.
And there were women serving in the military at Pearl Harbor at the time of the attack, including nurses. The chief nurse, Annie G. Fox, received the Purple Heart (which at that stage of World War II could be awarded for merit or bravery without wounds) and then received a Bronze Star.
And we'll end with this, anticipating some of the comments: No, Joe Rosenthal's famous photo of the flag on Iwo Jima was not staged, though the photo was taken when a second, larger flag was raised on the island's Mount Suribachi. You can, as they say, look it up.
Joe Rosenthal / AP
U.S. Marines of the 28th Regiment of the Fifth Division and a Navy corpsman raise the American flag atop Mt. Suribachi, Iwo Jima, on Feb. 23, 1945.
Leave a Comment:
Wow, she really looks exactly the same, despite the aging. Thank you for setting the record straight.
Bit by bit, little by little, the history books will be corrected to reveal the truth, rather than history the way we have been led to believe it was. With the availability of information on the internet, we now have the ability to research for ourselves, the accuracy of information.
Maybe we will find a photo of the gun man on the grassy knoll.
They already found him. He, alone, was in a window above. Lee Harvey Oswald. Case closed.
What difference does it make after all these years to know one way or the other? This country needed all the positive encouragement possible in going into a World War. Next thing we learn may be that Abraham Lincoln was a female impersonator. I guess this bs will never end.
Just a bit of a correction to the story. "Hilda Van Giesen" is a Dutch name form. "Van" is the Dutch equivalent of the German "Von" and it means "from," essentially - a surname tied to a location. Usually it's the name form of minor aristocracy.
Otherwise, this is a nice piece, and product of some good, basic research. Thanks.
Thanks, John, for the note about the Van Giesen name. I'll make a fix now.
Nice read. Even though the photo wasn't from the day, it was from the era and screams it out from corner to corner. It is one of the top 10 photos of the era in my opinion, capturing the mood of the times and the spirit of the people. Bravo to the photographer.
Very cool information. Some think it is bs. Some think it all fantastic. I think whatever we can learn about our lives and our history is worthy of note. Does it change anything? Maybe-maybe not. Does it matter. In this universe-everything matters. No man is an island. peace saltydawg.
The photo was definitely curious and seeing it for the first time on the 7th, obviously had people wondering. Really enjoyed this follow up story and glad that at least Mrs. Lowe is still around. She's a very pretty lady at her very impressive age.
Agreed, the details are of limited significance. This photo is not 'history the way we were led to believe'. Pearl Harbor was bombed on 7 December these women are real and did their part for the war effort. "Fires in the storage areas were common, and could be devastating. . ." and these women were there to contain them.
Oddly, this article and pictures moved me to tears when the commemorative article did not. Here we have names and details of the women's lives : the tragic death of Katherine's son and her enduring friendship with Elizabeth Moku.
The Soviet poster bears an uncanny likeness to Rosie the Riveter.
This kind of thing happens all of the time. I watch history shows a lot and see misrepresented video and pictures all of the time. I assume it is because the producers need filler and think people won't know any different. The picture is still a great piece of history and the information about where they are today a commentary on how the WW2 generation is passing from the present into history.
Excellent article. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and clearly up the history of the original picture. What I did find fascinating is that the one living person in the picture never even knew the picture existed even though apparently the picture has been used many times. I never saw the picture either.
I agree that Katherine at age 26, can still be seen today. To be alive in her 90s certainly does suggest she was made of tough stuff so to speak.
Again, fun story. Thanks.
dbcooper - If you believe that hogwash I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
NotAtAll - Good post! It showes the spirit of our entire great nation following this evil attack on Pearl Harbor. Much the same spirit we had after 911 however this spirit lasted for many years, even up to the Viet Nam days. The spirit after 911 faded rather rapidly and it seems that many in this country have settled back into and snuggled down in their negative attitudes. At that time people were looking for ways to help the country. Now we have too many people looking for ways for the country to help them. How sad.
Even though the picture wasn't taken on December 7, 1941, I think it still shows how women made strides during the war. Men were out on the front lines and women had to take over and do their part on the homefront. Did these women still fight fires? Yes, they did. Women then were tough and did what had to be done. That is still pretty cool to me.
Maybe one day the USA will accept the fact that FDR encouraged japan to attack the us..
They are doing an outstanding job controlling that fire hose. Those things are a bear for anybody.
Absolutely no evidence of such a conspiracy and we have looked for it for decades. If it were so then explain why the US had only 1 combat ready division at the time Pearl Harbor took place. Japan maintained some 100 combat ready divisions and Germany some 200. Also, in the days that followed people who served in FDR's cabinet said, "He feared Japan would invade the West coast and reach Chicago before an adequate defense could be brought forth to stop them. Doesn't sound like FDR was ready for a war he helped begin if you ask me or any reasonable person. We need a hell of a lot more evidence than just unsupported accusations! Thanks for sharing though!
DASVET... are you serious? What difference does that make??? We needed all the encouragment to go into war??? Gee, sounds like the fake reports of uranuim and all that other crap we heard about why we should go into Iraq.... so that didn't matter either?
We BETTER correct all the mis-information going around... no matter WHEN it was from...
Love the story, it's even more interesting as a 'correction'.
I'm glad that the story was corrected however; the women that helped with the war effort whether here or abroad, they need more recognition for their service..
John-1212691 & others - Here's some misinformation corrected. The attack on Pearl Harbor in actuality, it was not supposed to be a surprise attack. About 12 hours prior to the attack, Japan sent a message to Washington, DC/ the White House declaring war on the United States. Unfortunately the person who was in charge of translating messages from Japan was on vacation or something. There were three back up translators but all of them were also unavailable (one was sick and the others couldn't be reached). The attack happened before the declaration of war could be translated. Of course the translation was a mute point after the attack. So although they didn't say in the message we are attacking Pearl Harbor (no one announces ahead of time where they are going to attack), the Japanese planned to attack to occurs many hours after declaring war. (My son's taken AP World & US History - not everything in the books is correct)
b-58,
You need to get YOUR facts straight before you tell other people to. The Japanese declaration of war sent to the Japanese embassy in Washington was in 13 parts. The Japanese embassitor was given specific instructions in early parts of that message to deliver it at a specific time. That time was 30 minutes before the first Japanese plane were to begin bombing Pearl Habor and other targets. The message was intercepted by US and they had all but last part, but it was sent late and was not presented until after the attack had started. It was minutes. NOT hours.
Remember this was a Sunday Morning. Most government offices weren't fully staffed on weekends, just as now. The Japanese planned it that way to enable them to declare war, but not give the US time to react and thus have the effect of a Sneak Attack. Read Sun Su, and The Book of the 5 Rings.
Great story what beautiful women,showing their strength and getting the job done. No pretty little useless Hollywood fakes here.
This picture is no different than the thousands of other pictures that the liberal media uses and exploits to rewrite their own version of history. It is already enough what these women did for our country. God bless them all. There is no need to stretch the truth into blatant lies just to further a twisted sense of history. They were already heroes but that isn't/wasn't enough for the liberals. Another great example was the raising of the flag by the NYPD at ground zero on 9-11. Just by chance, the real picture was of all white firemen. That just didn't sit right with the libs, they had to doctor it up and show a black man as one of the fire fighters. There was no racial meaning in that flag raising but for the libs, they just had to bastardize everything to their favor. Everything has to be politically correct with the libs esp the media. Leave all the personally twisted wants out of reality. Reality is what it is. If they had it totally their way the flag raising at IWO would be shown as a black guy, a black lesbian woman, a transvestite, one white man and three Hispanics raising that flag. It is truly the libs that have a racial and gender inferiority complex to the point that they feel the need to always twist reality into some kind of politically correct lesson opportunity.
Correct on every level. Why do the liberals rewrite history just to tell what they think is a better story than the REAL TRUTH? Insanity, is my guess.
Thanks, Kevin. And Mrs. Lowe is a hoot to talk with. Very sharp and funny.
Thanks for the followup! Lovely details to their lives
Thank you for the most enjoyable morning coffee I've had in ages...what a great story. How nice to smile when reading the news.
Great story! I'm amazed that all that information is still out there, and accessible! Nice job.
A bit of a mistake: A Purple Heart is given for wounds but a Bronze Star is given for bravery.
Sorry, hdrider, but I do not believe you are correct about the Purple Heart, not when you're talking about the early days of World War II.
If you follow the link in that paragraph, the author explains that the chief nurse was not wounded, but received the purple heart for bravery. Then, when the Purple Heart was changed to an award specifically for those who are injured, she was given a Bronze Star.
Online histories back up this view: The Purple Heart was originally awarded for meritorious service, all the way back to the Revolutionary War, and in the early days of World War II it was awarded for both merit and for those who were wounded. This changed late in the war.
Love this article! Thanks for being honest and setting the record straight-also, Mrs. Lowe seems like an amazing woman-cute and hilarious-and still bowling twice a week at 96? Kudos to her! Thanks for highlighting the beauty and zest she maintains in her golden years.
Still love this picture as a bit of WWII-era memorabilia. I majored in history and literature in high school, and enjoy all kinds of tidbits like this one :)
The Bronze Star is given for both exceptional service and/or bravery. When given for bravery it has a V clasp. Kind of odd the nurse received two merit awards for the same act as that is kind of a no-no. It is common for someone to receive a lesser award pending approval of a higher award but the lesser award is withdrawn upon approval of the higher award. Are you certain she was not wounded? In that case the stated awards would be correct.
Read this: I thought there was something wrong with that picture. Somehow I knew it was not true. The liberals are trying to change history. They are brainwashing our children into thinking blacks and women have always been the way they are in modern times. Why avoid the truth? The truth is the truth. Not taking away from these brave women or whoever, but let's get the facts straight and present them the way it was, not the way we think it should be as in POLICTICALLY CORRECT AND SPEADING THE CREDIT! It is what it is and leave the facts alone. Kids are going to really be warped when they grow up this day and age. No patiotism, no honor, no understanding of hard work....and the liberal left is causing all of this with their politically correct yet inaccurate protrayals of history. I guess it will become Herstory.
Take a long walk off a short pier, Mike. This picture is not about liberals vs. conservatives, and it's not about feminizing history. It's about Americans working TOGETHER. If this picture was misrepresented, it was by the media, not the women firefighters themselves. And if your kids have no sense of patriotism or honor or hard work, that's YOUR fault, not anyone else's.
Oh, lighten up. Don't take every little deceit as a major conspiracy. War time moral was of great importance. Women being placed in new positions were essential. Photos such as this were abundant and necessary for the war effort. This one in particular gave women new options. I guess you would also like to disclaim the "Uncle Sam" posters as being fraudulent. It is amazing how little tidbits of trivia can give way to such angry retort. Who cares about the captions, whether in error or intentional. It was good propaganda, and to this day instills a pride in my heart to these women and women like my mother who worked at a previously "man's" job, surface grinding at Ryan Aeronautics. (she should have gotten a purple heart, she lost part of her thumb) during WW2, while her brother was serving at Pearl Harbor. Bravery and unconditional patriotism should be accepted for what it is and not dissected for minute inaccuracies.
Mike Baggett - Warped comment.
This is from the Wikipedia article on the "Purple Heart."
" The first Purple Heart was awarded to MacArthur. During the early period of American involvement in World War II (December 7, 1941 – September 22, 1943), the Purple Heart was awarded both for wounds received in action against the enemy and for meritorious performance of duty. With the establishment of the Legion of Merit, by an Act of Congress, the practice of awarding the Purple Heart for meritorious service was discontinued. By Executive Order 9277, dated December 3, 1942, the decoration was extended to be applicable to all services and the order required that regulations of the Services be uniform in application as far as practicable."
The early use of the "Purple Heart" is not what it is today. It was used as an equivelant of the now well known "Bronze Star." The uniformity, and clarity of early awards, and decorations was very inconsistent, and confusion by todays standards. Today, hdrider is correct, however, in that era, the posted information is applicable, and the person awarded would be entitled to wear either, or both medallions. There were few laws specifically related to the assignment of medals, and insignia prior to WWII. Most laws, and orders came after WWII, and during Korea, and Viet Nam.
Bill,
hdrider is CORRECT about the Purple Hart, as any veteran can tell, is awarded for wounds received "in battle", or "hostile enemy action", or such. It is NOT medal for Bravery but for "merit" and was started by Washington during Revolutionary war, but key component was being wounded. See quote below:
Note that one of the KEY criteria for earning a Purple Heart has always been being wounded in line of duty. From information from your own link in your story the head nurse origanally received the Purple Heart without being wounded. When she was awarded the Bronze Star, the Purple Hart was resended, (i.e. Revoked, as if she never received it, and thus wouldn't be authorized to ware it on her uniform), in October, 1942. January, 1942 is hardly "late in the war". Maybe you need to check the "On-line sources" you get your "facts" from.
Lastly she wasn't "GIVEN" anything, she was "awarded" or "earned" those medals. Your obviously ignorance of common terminology shows you never served in the military and like most MSNBC "journalist" don't have a clue about the military beyond your "War Mongering, Baby-killer" liberal stereotypes. I can't list the number of times Feminist professors used that photo in their diatribes.
Mike Baggett - Political correctness didn't really exist in that era. Iconic images like Rosie the Riveter existed to motivate women into patriotism, nothing more.
htd- What you posted clearly states that the reuiqrements for being awarded the Purple Heart have changed, but I feel it could have been more clear and concise. Information is missing. I wish i knew what sources the writer of your article used: I could go and find the missing details if I had a source trail to follow. "Originally the Purple Heart was awarded for meritorious service. Being wounded was one portion of consideration for merit. With the creation of the Legion of Merit in 1942, the award of the Purple Heart for meritorious service became unnecessary and was therefore discontinued." It depends on how you interpret what is written. To me, it says the Purple Heart was awarded for meritorious service. Yes, being wounded was considered, but not required. I suggest you find and talk to a WW11 vet while there are still some around. My daughter spoke to one a few years ago. She wept when he told her what they did, what it was like to be a part of that war.
jdenoyon,
The quote is from the National Purple Heart Ass. website. I don't have URL off top of my head. Simple Google Search for Purple Heart, History, or Origins should get it in you list. Other info is from Navy veteran website you likely won't have access to unless you are a registered veteran. After Roosevelt's order in 1941, the Purple Heart became solely an award for combat wounds, and every documented wounded soldier received one for each. Hence the 3 strikes, (i.e. 3 purple hearts) and your out, i.e. get a ticket home policy during Viet Nam. How else do you think John Kerry got to come home after only 3 months of his year long tour??
Just FYI, two of my Uncles were aboard ships stationed at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 and served throughout the Pacific. Other relatives also served in the Pacific and Europe. Is that good enough of a first hand source for you?? One of the ones that served in Europe was part of a unit that liberated one of the Nazi Concentration Camps, so no one better NEVER try to tell me the "Holocaust" didn't happen.
My mother tells us the story being in the yard playing after church on 12/7/1942, and my grandmother coming to the front porch door and yelling at my grandfather at the barn; "Cari, Come quick. They've bombed Pearl Harbor", and my grandfather dropping everything and running back to the house. They sat glued to the radio for the next few days.
My dad served in Korea, my older cousins in Viet Nam, and I got to play in the "sandbox" during PG-1, as well as Somalia, Bosnia, and Haiti, so I think I have a little experience when it come to military awards like the Purple Heart.
Although we now know that the picture is not as heroic as portrayed for years, the photo is another testament to the sacrifice and efforts of all those of the Greatest Generation.
I've always found it interesting that, when the "Greatest Generation" was growing up, they did not say "under god" during their 'pledge of allegiance'.
Yet, they turned out pretty well....
Not heroic? I disagree. These women were training to be firefighters; a very noble and heroic profession. It doesn't matter if this photo wasn't taken during the bombing of Pearl Harbor. What matters is these women volunteered to put their lives on the line should the need arise. I still say: Beautiful, strong, and heroic.
Sorry, but if we define the "greatest generation" as those old enough to fight in WW II, you're off by a decade or two: "Under God" was not added to the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954.
Yet, interestingly, they somehow managed to turn out pretty well without it.
Tom,
You must have misread. I wrote "they did not say "under god" during their 'pledge of allegiance'."
Shot a man::: It is YOU who can't comprehend. Tom said that the words "UNDER GOD" were not in the Pledge of Allegiance until added in 1954. So since those words were NOT added until 1954, there is no way they could have been said in WW2. I know that for certain-- I was a young one during WW2 and never said those two words when reciting the pledge.
You must be a product of the generation I had when I was a teacher's aide for GED classes.
Really guys? That is all you can gain and have to say about the article??? They didn't say under god then....grow up. Who cares what they said? No different than people who say Merry Christmas. Just because it say Christmas doesn't specifically mean they are forcing any religion on you. It can just mean they are wishing you well, enjoy the holidays, and all the other positives that go along with it. Get over it. Find something important to really worry about. God in or on things related to the government is way down the list of things items that need immediate attention. Now off my soap box.
In regards to the article. Well done. Glad to see some good research and its amazing how the Internet allows us to come together like it did in the search for the story behind this photo. I myself had never seen this photo before either. And yes it is a little disappointing that it wasn't during the attack but nevertheless shows a great example of the times and highlights how women had to assume roles that were typically occupied by men while the men were off in the war. Besides, they were training to be firefighters, not to mention doing what they could when their country needed them; that is very heroic in my book. As the saying goes, a picture is worth a 1000 words, and this one easily lived up to that.
Thank you again to all those, past and present, who have made sacrifies and/or done their part, in anyway big or small, to help defend our country and maintain our freedom. I salute you. At thank you personally to Mrs. Lowe. You are an amazing women and have earned your place in the fabric that is our American history. I wish you the best and many more years on this planet. You and yours alike are true treasures lost when your time comes and we all need to cherish you and what you have to give (direct insight to times past) before it is to late.
It is time.
Susie, not feeling good about those who you tutored since you, apparently, cannot read basic English. Here is exactly what was posted by Reno:
Note, Reno said exactly what Tom said and the opposite of what both of you incorrectly assumed he had said. You have a bad habit of incorrectly popping off your mouth about stuff caused by your own inability to read.
So Reno said that "they did not say "under god" during their pledge of allegance". And I said that those two words "under God" were NOT a part of the pledge. The "Greatest Generation" could not say those two words since they were NOT part of the pledge.
Sorry, I'm not part of the "younger generation"-- I am part of the generation that lived through WW2 and as a school girl back in those days we learned to read.
Susie-2759697 - you're the one who isn't reading right.
Susie - you said "The "Greatest Generation" could not say those two words since they were NOT part of the pledge." and that is the very same point that Reno was making. You're arguing with yourself!
Yeah, and only because the men were too busy elsewhere. Try to become a female firefighter today. As someone who knows, I will tell you in advance; please refrain from the women's rights blah blah speeches. Our rights, and our realities are two very different things. Women are not wanted in that profession, and the men already there will let you know that fact, and will do so in language that leaves no doubt to its meaning.
Michelle 1124630 I used heroic in the context of the way the picture had been captioned as occuring during the attack on Pearl Harbor, not to diminish the efforts for which I praised those that lived in those during that time.
@Susie-2759697...You still aren't getting it, old girl. Although I think I've decoded your issue with basic reading comprehension. You are under the impression that Reno and Tom were saying that "under God" was part of the Pledge during WWII but The Greatest Generation just left it out or chose not to say it. This is INCORRECT. They are saying exactly what you are, that The Greatest Generation did not say the words "under God" when reciting the Pledge because it wasn't yet part of the Pledge...something that happened in 1954.
susie - you forgot to add " shot a man ... it's YOU who can't comprehend". Sounds like popping off to me.
Apparently Susie doesn't get it.... Reno was right in the first place :)
The Greatest Generation (a tad egotistical) did not say "Under God" in the Pledge because it was not added until Boomers were in school in 1954. It was GG who added it.
I notice many are jumping on the band wagon to jump down Susie's throat. Yeah, the guys (I assume they're guys) said that "under God" wasn't said in the Pledge of Allegiance at that time. Susie elaborated and said ~why~ it wasn't said, that it actually was not of the Pledge: many of us had no idea that "under God" was added to the Pledge in the 50's. All three said the same thing, so why argue about it? By the way, realize you, one day, will be older - if you are fortunate! Chill, ok?
A Veteran, who is GG? I thought Ike had it put in the pledge. When we were so concerned about Communism.
JmB66, you're barking up the wrong tree. I spent many years in the military; I think I know a little something about being a woman trying to get along in a man's profession.
and what exactly does your career in the military have to do with my statement?
Now THAT is good reporting! Thanks!
Yes indeed. What a cool story!
Yes, it is good reporting - thorough and interesting.
The Getty caption was accurate, actually: "Women firefighters direct a hose after the Japanese attack on the US naval base at Pearl Harbor."
They were women firefighters directing a hose (in a training exercise.) It was at the naval base Pearl Harbor, and it was after the Japanese attack (quite some time after.) The same action could be photographed today, using the same caption.
mailman, it WAS after the attack, obviously, how long after is not terribly important. I resent the idea that we, as a nation, are at a loss of veracity because someone deliberately went out and provided a false photo. It was a major wartime event going on in our run up to WWII.
The war in Iraq was foisted on the American people by a terrible and borderline "evil" president, who's administration apparently utilized a variety of intense propaganda techniques and other sleights-of-hand on a relatively shell-shocked and unknowing populace. And they continued that practice for many years. That's bad.
The Navy mis-characterized a few photos during WWII for purposes of general information and morale. Not so damn bad, I'd say.
There is a time and place for "propaganda"...usually in advertising, for the most part, but sometimes in war too. In the latter case, let's just hope the war itself is justified.
JmB66
Please. I cannot tell you how many women I know that do not have the capability being in the fire service yet are still firefighters because we need to meet a "quota." There are the few women I know who absolutely can do the job, but they are generally the exception. If you are one, good on you. However, alot have some chip on their shoulder or some sense of entitlement and cannot physically hang in there. It's not a matter of equal rights, as you say. You really mean "better rights" when you talk about this matter. How come I can't play in the NHL just because I can't skate? This is the same logic you're using here. How about "best person for the job" regardless. And if you're not it, accept it. Personally, I would love a department full of Mia Hamms and other highly athletic and intelligent women. But that's not reality.
Regardless, this article is not about YOU. I know this is hard for you to understand, but this is about the women from our greatest generation. We could all learn something from them. It was not about the individual, as we try to make everything today, it was about the whole. Everybody did their part, no matter how small, and they were proud of what they were doing.
Wow, what bravery it must have taken to brace themselves as water safely gushed from hoses! LOL! It just goes to show you how easy it is to convince yourself to believe a lie.
Brian:
Prior to WWII women were seen as the weaker sex, seen as the home-maker and baby minder. WWII gave us a chance to prove that we were indeed just as strong as you men are; while this particular picture didn't show any imminent danger, they were preparing to be the defense of Pearl Harbor should the Japanese attack again. With so many of our soldiers wounded or incapacitated by the initial attack, these women understood that what they were training for was potentially the defense of our country, and, even more immediately, the saving of lives.
Everyone knows that firefighting is dangerous, and it takes a lot of courage for a woman to offer to do the job when her only previous experience with fire was the hearth in the kitchen;these women got a lot of flak from their male counterparts for their stepping out of gender roles, but defense of country and fellow American was more important than personal safety and old-fashioned notions of gender-role-appropriateness.
Would you become a firefighter, train on how to put out fires? Knowing that someday you could be called on to go into a burning structure to save lives only to lose your own? Think about the firefighters who lost their lives on 9-11; it took courage and bravery to do what they did, whether man or woman. I am not sure I would have, and I have the utmost respect for those who do.
And so should you.
Brian, you've never been near a real fire have you? It takes guts to fight a fire, men or women. You see all the protective clothing they wore? Neither do I.
Thank you, Bill for your research and great story! And, thank you Amanda - very well said!
My mom worked at North Island, in San Diego making airplane parts during that war. She loved the work and was very sad when the men came back and she lost her job. One of the things she said that I always remember, during the war years, was that Americans were all working together and that she could feel the difference emotionally. The women, many had husbands that were off fighting in the Pacific, and all the people at home worked together to manufacture all the material needed for the war effort, she said it was an amazing time. We really need that feeling back today, America is so fractured now, all the different groups fighting with each other, it's as if America is coming apart!
not a lie just a mistake
I take it you've never held onto a firehose with several hundred psi of water coming out. It is impossible to do it alone, but obviously you are smarter than the people who were actually there. Tell me, master historian, what's it like so far up there on Olympus?
Generally, the pressure on a fire hose in the Navy yards ran at about 125 PSI. (pounds per sq inch) And if your not ready for it , it can make the posterior a little sore not to mention if you let loose of the nozzle.
I took the firefighting training at PH, because on a ship the local fire dept doesnt come. So just about everyone is made to go to basic FF school.
LOL! I didn't say that it is easy to hold onto a firehose. I didn't denigrate those women. I am simply amused that *some* people jumped to the conclusion that they *must* have been heroes because they *must* have been doing something heroic. In reality, they were simply training on how to use a hose. Easy to do? I don't believe so, particularly for (most) women. But heroic? Hardly.
Amanda,
You repeated another white lie. Women are not as strong as men. That's the simple biological truth. It doesn't do anyone any good to keep repeating that lie. Women don't need to be as strong to play just as significant a role in society as men do.
Brian, you have never met my wife.
Brian - Correct, hence Women's Soccer, Women's Basketball, Women's Golf, Women's Tennis.....
I say this nearly every day at work: "Oh let me tell you all the stories they used to tell around here" is not history, it's folklore. History is the physically tangible, documentable world.
As an historian, I salute those who took the extra step to set the record straight, and divest the folklore from the history of this valiant generation who saved our world. Bravo.
And as my grandmother used to say, "What has already happened, is almost always more interesting than what some fool could make up!"
Well done, MSNBC, and Mr. Dedman.
What has "setting the record straight" accomplished in this instance? It probably was a staged event in the effort to present a positive image for all Americans in a time of dread and fear of war. It doesn't matter. Why disparage the effort at this late date? The fact that some have the time to find ways to demean our military forces is what is despicable about it..
Now, Dasvet, your hair trigger is showing. No one has disparaged their efforts, or in any way used this photo to "demean our military forces." From all we know, Mrs. Lowe served honorably as a civilian at the Navy shipyard. As the story says, she actually was trained as a firefighter, which we all know takes skill and courage.
I don't disparage YOUR effort, but why the emphasis on how the photo was a fake. That is the only thing that should not have been emphasized. Your article was well written in my opinion, except for that..
@Dasvet
You should go back to the third grade and learn to read. The picture was taken during a training exercise- the women didn't even know that their picture was being taken,
No, I'm not psycic- I read the article.
Bill, I wanted to say thank you for the piece.
Dasvet- I am thinking this was more of a way to honor those PROPERLY who have helped to aid our military at ANY time. The real story honors more than the not so real story. I am sure Mrs. Lowe would agree.
It would have been a good story without the "fake photo" emphasis.
how on earth is it demeaning to find the truth? Ms. Lowe didn't even know her picture was taken on that day... imagine the thrill of discovering that your contribution and hard work were noticed and applauded!
the only demeaning going on is from people who still believe that women aren't as capable as men, and try to prevent them from achieving, as if to prove it. the Women Army Service Pilots trained male fighter pilots during WWII, sometimes by towing targets for ~live~ ammunition, and yet women were not admitted to true military pilot training programs until 1976, and not allowed to fly combat aircraft until 1993.
Dasvet, the picture is real but it wasn't taken during the Pearl Harbor bombing of Dec. 7th, 1941. It was taken during a later occasion when these women were being trained as firefighters.
It was thought the picture was taken at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7th, 1941, but that's not the case. This has nothing to do with anything being a "fake".
Do us all a favor and stop feeling sorry for yourself. Thank you.
All work, including your excellent present investigative effort, requires some degree of skill, some jobs obviously more than others. And indeed it takes courage and endurance even to do the same regular job day after day 9to5 and be true to your family vows at the same time.
Fire-fighting under aerial bombardment is not the same as a promo-shoot; even regular fire fighting can not begin to compare with the stress potential of imminent death under aerial attack. And when the nations highest awards for courage, bravery and honor under fire, are handed out as cotton candy, we lower our standards for recognizing courage and bravery and betray those who sacrificed their all under exacting standards, and now in their graves are dishonored, demeaned, leveled to our lower expectations by such actions.
In response to the original article I was ridiculed for stating that this photo is a fake, as is the Iwo Jima one. You have made platitudes for the former and but refute the latter by stating that:
Please note the photo is described as:
You do appreciate that this statement refutes and contradicts the one you have used to explain away the fact: That...significantly this photo has always implied through the decades, and the public has always surmised and believed, that it is the iconic symbol of the hard won costly conquest of Iwo Jima - and is the real, unrehearsed one!
Insidious beguiling statements are harmful to the national psyche. They adulterate intrinsic value and the unique authenticity of truth at the alter of public correctness and hero worship. And inure us to accept sub-professional lower expectations as heroic. Please appreciate that Joe Rosenthal personally prepared for and staged that Iwo Jima photo...his work speaks for itself - Equal to a thousand words, of yours, shall we say.
Please, a re-enactment can never replace or equate the original first one. One conquest one photo, every thing else is a duplicate...Larger flag or not, the stylized artificial staging, lighting, camera angle, aperture setting, lens and film speed, all scream fake/contrived/staged - in both these photos.
The American public has become so used to the instant artificial images around them and have become so used to the counterfeit and false that Hollywood presents to them, and they live on, that they can no longer tell what reality looks like - akin to a teenager romance novel junkie who can't tell when the real thing comes along.
This artificial sanitized unreality has made it impossible to differentiate and understand that war is a brutal unholy mess. Heroes are not necessarily pretty, though serial killers often are. However, there are plenty of heros around but you don't recognize, muchless appreciate them: blind and crippled staring up into the ceiling of the night...you volunteer in the small hours and you will know what a hero looks like when the pep talk and pep pills are done.
And there are thousands more such on the other side of the world - unsung and unministered.
[PS: That Gen.MacArthur Philippines one: "I shall return". Also rehearsed. Not real. And those Hollywood 'Rambo', 'Band of Brothers' etc., types...Sorry!]
What an excellent piece of biographical research. Well Done.
This article is very important. It shows with clarity that we must get the oral histories of our remaining soldiers, and those others important to history, before it's too late.
Now if we can put the record straight on how FDR and Churchill actually KNEW that Pearl was about to happen, only to purposely let it happen so that the US could get into the WWII through the "back door" as an ally of the UK.
As they say, just look up the "McCollum memo" which was written up on 10/4/1940, where the classified Eight Action Plan actually notes an eight step program on how to get Japan "to provoke a overt act of war in the best interest of the United States."
Actually there is nothing in the McCollum memo that at all relates to the Pearl Harbor attack. The Eight Action Plan was intended to assist Great Britain and contain the Japanese in the Pacific while we prepared for, what many felt, was an inevitable conflict with Japan.
But conspiracy theories live on, hanging around by any flimsy excuse.
Ken and Mikeo76, your posts show the silliness of debating the photo's authenticity., when compared to what was important going on at the time.
Of course, someone has to use a great story as an excuse to bring up this conspiracy nonsense. Do you really think FDR needed to have almost the entire Pacific Fleet destroyed as a excuse to entire WW2? We entered WW1 with a lot less provocation. Are you aware that if the Japanese had launched a third wave and destroyed the shipyards and fuel depots at Pearl harbor, as was the plan, that the US would have had to withdraw its forces back to the West Coast, leaving Hawaii undefended. That would have virtually guaranteed a Japanese victory in the Pacific, or at the least extended the war by years. I've been hearing this garbage for years. It was nonsense then, it's nonsense now, and it'll be nonsense 100 years from now.
norm, that is important, the photo's authenticity was not important to the story of the women.
I would venture a guess that SOMEONE knew in advance-- way in advance-- that hell was going to break loose. My dad was in the military and my folks lived in the Philippine Islands-- all three of us girls were born there. The military dependents were shipped out and sent to the states in early 1941-- my dad's birthday was 5 July and we weren't allowed to wait to leave in the July ship so we didn't celebrate his birthday. I think that was the last ship to leave.
My dad-- and many others-- was captured on Corregidor and spent 39 months in Japanese POW camps. They were in Mukden, Manchuria, when the war ended and they were released.
@norm
FDR would've risked the entire Pacific Fleet and young American lives without even batting an eye. He knew his economic policies in jump-starting the US economy wasn't working, all his dumb New Deal policies of a bigger government with alphabet soup agencies weren't making Americans get out of the Great Depression.
What he needed was someway to gear American public view away from his failures to something that all Americans liberal and conservatives both alike could rally together: a focused attention on a single enemy.
Even if the entire Pacific Fleet was destroyed, it wouldn't take that much to rebuild an entire fleet if all Americans dropped their differences aside and started working together to defeat a common enemy. The only reason we really got out of the Great Depression was because union members and the corporate elites stopped bickering at each other and started working for the better of the State; to defeat the Axis Powers. Only then we were able to accomplish things like building Casablanca class escort aircraft carriers at a week's pace, building Essex class aircraft carriers at a month's pace, and even doing massive things like the Manhattan Project. Such a large scale policy would never happened under partisan bickering of "wasteful tax spending" at a time of peace. The only reason FDR was able to get that project give a go was because American public opinion was allowing it, blindly not realizing at the time that it was all a theater in which FDR allowed Japan to attack Pearl, in which the whole provocation for Japan to resort to such measures was orchestrated from the start. Do you really think FDR cared about the "atrocities" that Japan was doing in China and Manchuria? For the likes of it, he was jealous that a small island nation like Japan was grabbing the pie in Asia and that he wasn't getting anything for it. So he punished Japan by cutting off her oil, in which Japan had no other choice but to attack Pearl in desperation. This was all a plan; orchestrate Japan to attack the US, and use that excuse to bring in the US into the war and come out as the next superpower.
In all, what FDR did was nothing more different than the "Remember the Maine" theater that was done to provoke the Spanish-American War. When the economy sucks, just start a war. Nothing different from the 1890s, to the 1940s, to the 2000s.
I love this story! (and the cute old lady dancing-reminds me of my grandma)
Pick up the copy of LIFE magazine dated December 1, 1941...That is the Monday prior to the attack...I worked for a printing company that did LIFE. Runs on Sunday for the Monday News Stands with the cover date for the week.
The bulk of the issue is about "When War Comes In the Pacific", with maps and shows where the Japanese alreadu have conqured...
The American Public fully knew war was coming and had been being primed for quite a while.
Another example of how one cannot trust anything, posted on the internet, as true however interesting it may be.
ironic, Jim, considering that ~this~ well-researched piece is on the internet, whereas the not-so-true story was published in newspapers, books and well-respected archives.
Jim, remember when this was originally taken, and published. There was a war on, and EVERYBODY, down to chilkdren, were involved. All the morale boosting, and pro civilian support they could get was needed.
Unlike today, and a few decades ago, when all the civilian population was against anything military, including fighting for those same freedoms, and most people are just too da-n lazy to get up out of their chairs, or off their couch, except to scream how they are abused.
These women were doing what they considered their civic duties, covering jobs their spouses could no longer do, as they were off fighting the enemy of the time. At the same time, they were reciving a pay check to buy the necessities to feed their families, as noone knew when the soldiers were actually going to get money for their services.
It is refreshing to see that the media is willing to step up, right away, and note an error. As a college teacher, I am painfully aware of how quickly people seem to be to take, as gospel, what they see and hear on television. It is frustrating how narrow people's focus has become. Thanks for letting everyone know that the media is not perfect and that we all need to maintain our curiosity.
Sixty years ago, and that is "right away"?
The photo was buried in obscurity Dasvet. The ambiguity was cleared up by Bill Dedman's research. You really do have a hair trigger
Error or not, These were a bunch of tough chicks. They deserve our respect and admiration. This was the greatest generation. Thank You.
Very good and complete report. Kudos to all
That was an interesting and exciting read. The fact that you found one of the women pictured, after all that time, is amazing! Well done!
American heroes, the whole lot of 'em!
You must of been the kid in elementary school that couldn't wait to tell everyone that there wasn't a Santa Claus. Oh well, good investigational work.
Wait, Kevin, you mean there is no Santa? Actually, I was assigned this story. But it was fun to find Katherine Lowe and to talk with her and her family.
I applaud Bill's journalism. Too often on this site as well as others we see too many articles that are written quickly with no cohesiveness. As a journalist, his job is to report the facts, whether you like those facts or not. Kudos to Bill!
TMSTZ - to retort to my deleted comment (pun on female military staged photos that is always a joke to anyone in the military) "My mother is still mad that I have been fighting wars for the last ten years and have not been home to visit... that is how she feels about that.." That is the same way my grand mother felt about my father in Vietnam and my great grand mother felt about my grand father in WWII - we earned your freedom to call us names... You're welcome.
Mark-3180322 - Wow. What an arrogant comment.
Thank you for this wondeful story. So many contributions that the women have given to the U.S.A. in need. Also thank you for all the non-military men that also helped our military personnel. Many blessings for everyone. America will always have to stand TALL no matter what happens. That is why so many countries despised us.
DianaRose - "...everyone despised us." Is that what you meant? If so, you need to revisit history. As a kid growing up in a military family, in Europe, during the fifties, Americans were still revered. And if you visit the graveyards over there, with many American soldier's graves, you will find they are maintained better than Arlington. It is only in the last thirty years or so Americans have started to be "despised" around the world, and that is because we seem to have lost our sense of national pride, all in the name of "One World."
Those ladies in that picture were from many varied cultures, and were helping out THEIR country, in its time of need. They had every right to be proud.
As an added note, I AM PROUD of the 23 12/2 years I spent in the service of this great nation, and if I offend you, I cannot apologize.
Now, if that is NOT what you meant, then I do apologize.
That's not what she meant Frosty. She thanked everyone in her post, and you took the final comment as you did? The world despised/despises us for our freedom, and how we're prepared to fight for it.
The two photos tie everything together. One group has the other group in the background and the second picture has the groups reversed.
Bill, This is a great story. I loved reading it. Thanks.
What an amazig story. Thank you!
We owe a great deal to these women. Perhaps the world would be a better place if there were more women in charge of running our world's affairs.
I guarantee you one thing: Our world would be a more peaceful place!
Congratulations to the NBC Editorial staff for choosing to look further into this story and for a lesson in Gratitude which is sorely missing in our "Bling-Bling" society.
Well just one more example of ALL governments rewriting the history books. THe only take away from this is you can NOT rewrite the human spirit. Thanks for the great article and good research.
" Staging" is nothing new as it is widley accepted fact that Matthew Brady had staged quite a few of his civil war photos. I don't believe the intention was to mislead anyone but was to add drama and context to the scene being captured.
I think a lot of people here are assuming that the media and/or government intended to deceive the public with this photo. The more likely scenario is that they simply had this in their archives, as an undated photo of a group of firefighters at Pearl Harbor, and they mistakenly assumed it was from that specific day.
People make those kinds of honest mistakes all the time.
Kudos to you, Bill, for taking the time to research this, and in the end, giving the world another story worth sharing, and a better glimpse of our past.
Think back to the photo of the firemen on 911...remember how they tried to change the races of the people in that picture. Sorry it happened to be...happened to be mainly white men. Quit already. Look at television commericals today. Is this really the way it is in America today everywhere? It does not represent my State or town. There are perhaps 14% blacks in America but 85% on commericals on television? If I were black, I'd feel patronized by this obvious over exposure on television. Take a look at what a fool commercials make men out to be to make women look not only equal but superior...take an honest look...how about children calling or referring to their parents as "You guys." The children clearly rule the home on television and Daddy is a big blunder. Pay attention. We are being resocialized by Hollywood. Just start paying attention (I know most readers don't like this) Just pay attention.
So maybe the Pearl Harbor it just another American fake to go to war and test their nuke on Japan, just like fake holocaust. Same thing they accused Obama wasn't born in Hawaii. People will believe anything when mainstream media put out.
Except you're a white male, so instead you feel threatened. You can get meds for that, you know.
your comment shows that you need the meds.
Wow, what a great article! I, too, was curious about the photo when I first saw it on MSNBC.com... this was a really well written, informative and interesting account. Thanks so much for looking into this and publishing all the details. Loved it. Look forward to more of your articles, Bill!
Interesting. The real women's story is wonderful. But it sure makes you wonder what else was "staged".
The photo looks posed. Surprised it took so long to determine that this was not a real shot of fighting a fire on Dec 7. It takes four women to hold a fire hose? Second picture only one holding it!
If you've been lifted off the ground by a 2-and-a-half-inch fire hose, you'll know it takes more than one person, male or female. Yes, in the second photo only one person is holding a hose, but that one's not going anywhere near full strength.
Fire fighting 101 teaches both techniques that requires the same personnel male or female for each technique. Sitting is when the hose is positioned and can be controlled by one person, moving the hose while fighting the fire simultaneously requires 3 to 4 personnel depending the size of hose (diameter) and the PSI provided by the pump. More people should volunteer at their local fire house. Whatever happened to the Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts of America, those organizations alone would spare us these comments.
Back in high school, we did a drill on the USS Shreveport as a part of an NJROTC field trip. They let us do a simulated drill of a deck fire on their landing pad, and it took every bit of ten of us strapping young teenagers to keep that beast in check. Its basically throwing water out with equivalent force to a decent sized rocket, it is no joke at all.
When I was in the Navy as a fireman (well, we all were when you get right down to it), I see the photos of those women holding that hose. Reminds me of when we did that. Weeeee, those things kick like a mule. Five grown big men had to fight that BEAST!. Six men if you wanted to actually do anything. It's so powerful that the second and third man in the team actually did the aiming.
What my kid was taught about WWII in school:
I'm not sure what you are getting at.
you live in texas right?
The liberalization of history by academia is what he is getting at. That is why oral history programs like the Texas Veterans Land Board has are very important. It is also important to get the kiddos out to talk to the men and women of WWII before they are all gone. Thanks Bill Dedman for getting out and talking to Katherine Lowe, she is a treasure.
Tom do us a favor...stay in your bunker listening to Rush, Hannity and all the right wing wackos.
When I saw the picture last week, I thought there was a high probability that it was political correctness at work.
As a historian of some 30 years experience, I have never seen the photo in any book on Pearl Harbor. The "books" cited in the article are no doubt school history books. It is a well known fact that incorrect facts regarding history and other topics are handed down from one edition to another and crossing over from book to book due to poor authors not fact checking but falling prey to the "if its in this book it must be right," fallacy.
All this PC revisionism is typical of the drivel our kids get in 1-12 and even in community colleges. My wife came home with a notebook full of historical revisionism spouted out by her community college "professor" really an out of work somebody teaching part time but with a MS degree, a lot of history classes, and an agenda.
What he is getting at is kids get a load of revisionist history in school today, tailored to any number of agendas: Rape of Nanking, don't want to piss off the Japanese so we ignore one of the most heinous acts perpetrated during the war; Redtails won the war ( the black Tuskegee Airmen) actually their contribution, will laudable and exemplary was minor and took place when US air superiority was on the rise and the Luftwaffe was on the decline; The use of the atom bomb was racist, not so, it we had it earlier we would have used it on Berlin. The destruction of Hamburg and Dresden by fire bombing is evidence enough of that. The Holocaust didn't figure at all in the prosecution of the war. Everyone ignored it or chose to disbelieve what they did know as unbelievable. Final verification came in the closing days of the war. In essence it meant nothing to how the war was fought. Jews only made up 1/10 to the total civilian deaths during the war. The Allies were fighting for their own interests, not the Jews.
Kids learn nothing in school anymore. 9 our of ten could not tell you who the US fought in WWII and who was on our side. We spend more and more money on students, and they learn less and less. Thank the teacher's unions for that. I was schooled in metal quonset huts with no AC or heat and was in school from 7:30 till 4 pm. Kids probably spend the equivelent of 4-5 productive hours in class a day. Pitiful.
Is this all he was taught about WWII, or just all he retained?
You don't have to be a right-winger to know the true accounts of history.
I did two extensive research papers in college. I disagreed with the general public-and my professors-in both of them. Anyone who went to college knows that in order to get a good grade on a research paper that disagrees with your prof, you have to be ridiculously thorough and put forth a prverbial ton of evidence.
I received a A+ on both papers.
Tom's comments have nothing to do with being right-wing. They have to do with extensive research that he has chosen to base his opinions on.
Let's not make this well-written(and beautifully researched) story a political platform-right vs. left. WWII was a time when all Americans banded together and worked their hardest to keep this nation running.
Maybe we should do that now instead of hurling insults at former and current Presidents and opposing parties.
They're really not even learning revisionist history today. Basically schools are just glorified babysitters and the only real emphasis placed on learning anything is when teachers are getting students prepped for standardized tests, so that the schools can get more funding.
How silly, we would have bombed Japan even if we weren't racist.
Mudrake and Crying Shame: Revisionist History has been an issue for centuries and is not just a problem in today's schools. Text books and encyclopedias take several years to write and often contain inaccuracies that are passed down from one reference source to another. Schools have been forced to teach to the test because of programs like "No Child Left Behind" which uses standardized test scores as the only basis for measurement of effective education. It is not about getting "more" funding. It's about losing the funding that is already being reduced that they have.
This was an excellent article that corrected an error that was made when this photo was first published --when the photo caption included the words "after the attack on Pearl Harbor" an assumption was made that it was the day of the attack, not just in the time period afterwards where thousands of women took jobs that were vacated by the men who joined the military to support the war effort. That error became the truth about this photo, because it was inspirational and good for patriotic propaganda. We can go back in history and look at many inaccuracies from the Famous Ride of Paul Revere, George Washington and the Cherry Tree and Betsy Ross and the Flag --just to name a few. How many people know that Ho Chi Mihn wanted Vietnam to be a free republic with a constitution modeled after our own, but President Woodrow Wilson dismissed the idea of meeting with him because he believed Vietnam to be insignificant and didn't want to create any issues with the French? The internet is a great tool for sharing information but in as much as it can spread the truth and correct misinformation it can also do the opposite.
And IMHO the US would never have dropped the Atomic Bomb on Berlin. A country like Japan, out of the way and not a big part of the foundations of American Heritage, yes, but in the middle of Europe? The US leadership at that time would never have allowed it.