To the Editor of the Crimson:

Until December 7, 1941, an honest and conscientious man might well disbelieve in the rearmament program, and advocate a policy of military and spiritual isolation. War was remote; it might well have seemed incredible to many that distant nations could have designs on our economic and institutional integrity. Although "unofficial" agencies in Germany, Italy and Japan lovingly described the havoc which was planned for the American nation-now agents of the world-wide German revolution had been working for years in preparation for disrupting and devastating civil war which would be ignited at an appropriate time-truly patriotic men might have preferred to believe "responsible" and "official" professions made in cordially smiling interviews that it was "absurd" that anyone should think that American security was or could be in jeopardy.

That idyllic illusion has been bloodily shattered. The German press service arrogantly boasts that Germany will repeat the beastly inhuman conduct of her ally-at Germany's convenience.

By now, no one can fail to see that the nation stands in peril. No one can refuse to see that the proudly proclaimed German-Japanese encircling alliance is a ghastly reality.

Yet today, there are those who persist in their efforts to deter and delay us. According to them, we brought the Japanese onslaught on ourselves; or that it was a British plot; or that it was the plot of Jewish international finance.

We can not help being incensed to cold fury by the hypocrisy of the Lindberghs, the Nyes, the front groups who have attempted to discourage our rearmament by whatever means, and who now seek to divert attention from ourselves by criticizing our alleged unpreparedness.

These same groups now assert-and it was clear that they would-that the outcome of the part of the United States in the Pacific phase of the world war can and must be independent of its phases in China, Russia, England, the Mediterranean; and in France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Poland and Norway. These groups justly incite distrust and suspicion against themselves-their suggestions are so outstandingly preposterous.

This suspicion is all the more lively when their suggestions are interlarded with glaring mis-representation, name-calling, outrageous distortion, and time-worn psychological tricks of an Axis hue.

In any event, we know, and the anonymous "Executive Council" of the Harvard Committee Against Military Intervention must now know that their red herring was useless-it was too transparent. John Desmond Glover 2G.