American Nuclear Deception: Why "the Port Chicago experiment" must be investigated

By Daisy B. Herndon

(Updated 08/2022) 

 

When it comes to the bomb, what we don't know could kill us. Written for ordinary readers by a concerned American citizen, American Nuclear Deception shows how the history of the bomb impacts current nuclear policy. This fresh evidence is seen through the surprising lens of the Port Chicago nuclear explosion theory (PCnet).

 

The controversial theory, introduced in The Black Scholar (Spring 1982), was denied by the U.S. government; "dissed" by traditional historians; distorted by sensational conspiracy theorists; and deleted from Wikipedia -- all without benefit of an official investigation. Peter Vogel researched his theory for 35 years, but in December 2018 the senior scholar shut down his website, withdrawing his singular ebook, The Last Wave from Port Chicago.

 

This book updates the PCnet, exposing the vital, documented connection between the Manhattan Project and the unexplained explosion that destroyed two ships at the Port Chicago Naval Ammunition Depot near San Francisco on July 17, 1944, killing 320 Americans. According to a local newspaper, most victims were 'atomized'.

 

The unprecedented blast is still listed as one of the largest non-nuclear explosions in history; but the greatest home-front disaster of World War II was upstaged by the mass mutiny trial of "the Port Chicago 50": why?

 

A Naval board ruled that the cause could never be determined -- but one of the three men on the board, Capt John Crenshaw, was related to Capt William S. Parsons, the man responsible for producing the bomb. Crenshaw was with Parsons on July 20, 1944, when he led his research team to Port Chicago to study "the effects of the detonation." 

 

A large body of wide-ranging new evidence supports the PCnet, overcoming opinion-based objections. Readers will learn

• Why it matters that Albert Einstein did not write the famous letter to FDR. (Or did he?)
• Why FDR flipflopped on integrating the Navy after authorizing the top-secret bomb project.
• How Einstein's work on torpedo design as a Navy consultant in 1943 may have supported Parsons' quest for an atomic torpedo.
• A secret reason for FDR's secret trip to the West Coast during the 1944 Democratic National Convention;
• Why FDR's flagship was in the Port Chicago area on the day of the explosion;
• Why a false press release about an explosion at an ammunition depot was used to cover up the famous Trinity test.
• How the Port Chicago explosion led to the Trinity test, the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Operation Crossroads, the Nevada Proving Ground . . . and current nuclear policy 

Experts acknowledge that false assumptions have left many questions about the bomb unanswered. Instead of Truman's decision to use the bomb, the PCnet highlights FDR's single-handed decision to create the world-changing weapon. 

 

In the end, Readers decide: The Port Chicago disaster -- was it a nuclear explosion? 

 

The Department of Defense said: ". . . ridiculous." The Navy History and Heritage Command says "hogwash." The Port Chicago National Memorial says "unlikely." In 1993, two historians, Lawrence Badash and Richard G. Hewlett, called Vogel's original article "A Story Too Good to Kill". But American Nuclear Deception shows why the Port Chicago nuclear explosion theory is too important to ignore.

• Language: English
• Publisher: The Port Chicago Witness
• Release date: Aug 29, 2022
• ISBN: 9798986053608

Daisy B. Herndon

Daisy B. Herndon, a former school librarian, was conducting research for a novel set in World War II when she stumbled upon the Port Chicago nuclear explosion theory, which sets the date of the first nuclear explosion back to July 17, 1944 at the Naval Ammunition Depot near San Francisco. Ridiculous? She thought so too, until she noticed the date on the memorandum authorizing the court martial of the Port Chicago 50. The Black sailors were found guilty of mutiny after refusing to load ammunition onto ships for fear of another unexplained explosion. But why was the trial set up on July 14th, three days before the massive blast that "atomized" their fellow sailors? Herndon currently resides somewhere in Maryland and enjoys watching birds, especially with her grandchildren.

Book preview

Person of interest

ONE OF THE THREE HISTORICAL figures of greatest interest to the Port Chicago Experiment is the obscure but powerful man best known as the Navy captain who armed the Little Boy bomb in midair as the Enola Gay flew its fateful cargo to Hiroshima on the morning of August 6, 1945.

In fact, William S. Parsons was the head of ordnance for the Manhattan Project, the man responsible for producing, testing and delivering the first atomic bombs. After the war, he went on to become the first atomic admiral. The only man to either witness or participate in seven of the first eight nuclear explosions, Parsons had a lasting influence on U.S. nuclear policy.

After reading his only biography, Target Hiroshima, Deak Parsons and the Creation of the Atomic Bomb by Al Christman, one reviewer concluded that Parsons’ career reads like an object lesson in the value and importance of engineering knowledge in scientific and technological development.

Although it borders on hero worship, Target Hiroshima is a very informative book. Christman had to acknowledge that Parsons’ life reveals both lessons and cautions concerning the use of science for military purposes. 

Christman also points out the advantage of reviewing the history of the bomb from a distance in time.

"In particular, the radiation hazards and the moral issues of the atomic bomb are seen in a more discerning light now than when still under the shadow of World War II. These issues, plus revisionist efforts to reshape nuclear history, make it all the more important to examine the circumstances that brought the atomic bomb into being and into combat use."[i] [emphasis added]

Revisionist is a derogatory term used by traditionalists to describe anyone who believes there’s more to the story than what we already know. But what’s the point of historical research if not to update the story?

As the African proverb says, until the lion tells the story, the glory goes to the hunter. In the case of the bomb, the hawkish lions became the narrative-makers. The stated purpose of their post-war propaganda was to sell the bomb to the public and to prevent people from taking a negative attitude toward the bomb:

The weapon produced by the greatest achievement of organized science in history.

The weapon by which a small group of men harnessed the basic power of the universe.

The exponential and cost-effective weapon that killed 100,000 people in one blow.

Truth, lies and consequences

HISTORY SERVES A PURPOSE. Right or wrong, true or false, history has an effect. (Where is the account that heralds love as the basic power of the universe? Where is the history that portrays the heart and soul of the people as the basic power of democracy?)

The faulty history of the atomic bomb paved the way to our current nuclear policy. Consider the utter madness of a value system based on a policy of Mutually Assured Destruction, one that prioritizes more or less useless weapons of mass destruction as the best means of national security. This is the psychological fallout that permeates a world where masses of people find it necessary to raise a slogan declaring that Black Lives Matter – something that should be a foregone conclusion, and would be if all lives mattered.

It is not insignificant that the most of the direct victims of the first 70 detonations of nuclear weapons by the United States were people of color.

An estimated 200,000 Japanese civilians died in the atomic bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945.

The people of the Marshall Islands were uprooted from their homeland when the U.S. told the people their temporary evacuation was for the good of all mankind—and went on to conduct 67 nuclear tests there between 1946 and 1968.

And, for the last few years, I have been investigating a question featured in the spring 1982 edition of The Black Scholar: The Port Chicago Disaster - was it a nuclear explosion?

A VITAL TEST

In July 1942, President Roosevelt wrote a letter to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in which he reversed his 1940 decision to maintain a segregated Navy. Rephrasing the slogan of the convention, FDR declared that Minorities are Vital to Victory. After all, there was a war on. And a world-changing weapon to be produced. And tested. Somewhere.

A present dilemma

In a 2020 book on nuclear history, The Age of Hiroshima, seventeen contributors examine the story of the nuclear revolution and contemplate the current nuclear history renaissance. These scholars agree that there are many unanswered questions in the traditional history of the bomb, which, they admit, is grounded in too many faulty assumptions. Some experts also express concern that the topic does not seem to garner sufficient interest among the general public.

Where is Bert the Turtle when we need him? We need him now!

Duck and Cover, U.S. Civil Defense campaign, early 1950s

IN THE MEANTIME, AND for a start, perhaps this book will do. After all, there’s a new nuclear age on. Can we talk?[ii]

You be the judge

In this brief introduction to the Port Chicago nuclear explosion theory (PCnet), my aim is to present the evidence as if each piece was an exhibit in a grand jury hearing. You will see, firsthand, some of the key documents that led me to the conclusion that Port Chicago was designed for nuclear explosions.

Here, I present the evidence that favors the updated theory, but you, Reader, are the judge. In the end, it is up to you decide:

Was the Port Chicago Naval Ammunition Depot designed and used as the world’s first nuclear proving ground? 

And if so, what difference does it make today?

An outlandish theory

I WAS DOING RESEARCH for a novel set in World War II when I first heard of the explosion that killed 320 Americans at the Port Chicago Naval Ammunition Depot near San Francisco, California on July 17, 1944.

Two ships were destroyed. The SS E.A. Bryan was obliterated; few pieces were found. Only 60 bodies were identifiable. A local newspaper reported that most victims had been atomized.

But nuked?

Top center: two halves of the SS Quinault Victory sit in the Suisun Bay.

Text Description automatically generated

MOST VICTIMS ATOMIZED, San Bernardino Sun, Volume 50, 19 July 1944 p 2

WHEN I BEGAN THE RESEARCH that led to this book, I just wanted to know if the theory made any sense whatsoever. Sure, the massive explosion was unprecedented; and yes, the Naval Court of Inquiry that investigated the explosion said the cause could not be determined. But why would anyone believe it was an intentional detonation, conducted by the Manhattan Project in the ‘race to build the bomb’?

I looked around for people who could help me understand the incredible conspiracy theory. Some of the articles that supported it were obviously sensationalized, a mixture of exaggerated facts and distortion. There were a few that seemed to confirm Vogel’s theory, but they did not bring much new evidence.

The few sources that opposed the theory were based on opinion and speculation, not evidence. To me, their faulty arguments strengthened Vogel’s case. The only conclusion I could draw was that before I could decide one way or another, I needed more information.

Vogel’s extensive work laid the foundation for a more thorough investigation. But most people who were aware of Vogel’s hypothesis decided it was just a conspiracy theory; taboo, untouchable, not worthy of investigation.

Well, that’s almost true. The PCnet is indeed the unproven theory of a conspiracy. And so far, other than Vogel’s thirty-five-year independent investigation, it has been an uninvestigated theory. But why?

By contrast, two government agencies researched the so-called the Philadelphia Experiment. Both concluded that it was scientifically unlikely that a ship had disappeared from the Philadelphia Navy Yard in the fall of 1943.

IT WAS POSSIBLE: THERE is nothing inherently implausible about the PCnet. It was logistically possible for the U.S. to conduct a nuclear experiment at a naval base in 1944 and to keep it a secret. After all, they built the first atomic bomb in utter secrecy.

Incredible? Yes. It’s hard to believe that the U.S. government would have conducted a nuclear experiment on American soil, using American citizens as subjects. That is, we all want to believe our government could not have done such a thing. Or conducted the Tuskegee syphilis experiment; or used American Vets as guinea pigs; or conducted human radiation experiments . . .

Today, America seems to be unraveling; and we wonder why. But, as with our individual lives, where we are today is a direct result of where we have been and what we have done in the past.

I had no idea my research would be so far-ranging. I am astonished at my findings. I learned many facts related to the bomb and to World War II that have not made it into our history books. Small wonder Americans know so little about the history of the bomb; the story was designed by the bomb-makers, to sell us on the bomb.

THE TRUE HISTORY OF the bomb is of great importance today because it still affects us in several ways.

For one thing, we spend untold billions on weapons of mass destruction everyone hopes will never be used; all the while fearing that they could be – at any moment; without warning.

We seldom talk about the great harm the bomb has already caused[iii]. In addition to the Japanese civilians who were victims of the 1945 bombing, hundreds of thousands of people—Americans as well as citizens of other nations—struggle with severe illnesses resulting from the multi-generational effects of radioactive fallout and mismanagement of nuclear wastes.

TWO OTHER ASPECTS OF our current circumstances trace back to the bomb in a less obvious way. For one thing, there is what Robert Jay Lifton and Greg Mitchell defined in Hiroshima in America as psychic numbness.[iv] As a nation, we celebrated the day the bomb was dropped. After all, it was the end of the war, and we won it, with the bomb God gave us. It was a great scientific achievement, a model government program.

But today, to understand some of the social unrest in America and around the world today, we can see our nation reflected in that one grand moment when our science and technology were so magnificent, and our racial attitudes so ingrained, that the lives of 100,000 Japanese people did not matter.

To defend our right to bear arms or to support the perceived need for military supremacy, we are apt to explain that guns don’t kill, people do. The simple fact is, whether by individuals or by nations, people are killed by people with weapons. If we are to survive the twenty-first century, we must take steps to reverse the likelihood of becoming ever more sophisticated, high-tech barbarians. One of the outstanding lessons of nuclear history is the momentum that was built into the very creation of the unprecedented weapon.

Few experts still believe in the lasting power of mutually assured deterrence as a restraint against a first nuclear strike or against all-out war among nuclear nations. Yet that MAD policy is still the only explanation, so far, for why there has not been another war involving nuclear weapons. This precarious position suggests that if we are not to be ruled by the fact that we possess thermonuclear weapons, we must reckon with the outmoded cultural attitudes of our relatively recent history. Our social attitudes must be upgraded to at least match our military capabilities.

HISTORY IS CONTINUOUS; that’s why we need to know some of the lesser-known background stories behind the bomb. For example, the people who created and promoted the total war policies of the 1940s were the same people who would have conducted a nuclear test at Port Chicago. The people who convinced Americans that the bomb was a good thing and its use was necessary are the same people who would have covered up a nuclear test at Port Chicago with the story of how the disaster led to integration of the Navy.

In September 1940, President Roosevelt suggested that the Navy might install Negro bands on ships as a way of getting around the demand for integration of the Navy.

In July 1942, President Roosevelt insisted that Minorities are vital to victory. The Navy must open its doors to Negroes, he said. BuNav could invent something for the colored sailors to do; he had a thousand ideas of his