Ban Facts

The North African communique of Dec. 4 had said only that “damage was done. There were a number of casualties.”

Last week, almost a fortnight later, the Washington Post broke the story of how devastating the German air raid damage at Italy’s Bari harbor really was, how high the casualties (see p. 27). Bari had been the costliest “sneak attack” since Pearl Harbor. A high Administration official told a newsman: “You’re going to hear more about that raid before you hear less.”Somebody at Bari underestimated the Nazis.

Secretary of War Stimson apparently had intended to release a few Bari details at his weekly press conference. But after the Post story, newsmen found him sizzling. His anger seemed greater than was justified by a mere premature news “leak.” He was brusque, stiff, and cut the conference short. When a reporter wanted to know if the Allies had actually been caught napping, Stimson snapped: “No! I will not comment on this thing!”

The news of Bari was bad. What was even worse was the skittishness in Washington (or London) about telling the facts. If, after four years of World War II, the people of the U.S. should come finally to believe that their leaders are unwilling to trust them to “take” bad news, that disaster would be greater than any Bari.