New Documents Show How the Story of the Bomb Was Suppressed
Sixty years after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, some of the first reportage of the deadly impact of radiation – before the term had come into popular use – has reemerged from behind the veil of US censorship, thanks to the uncovering of the dispatches of Chicago Daily News reporter George Weller.
  Weller evaded military censors to reach Nagasaki by rowboat and train, and documented 
  the destruction and the fate of GI prisoners, and the mysterious "Disease 
  X," or radiation sickness. But because he submitted his stories and photographs 
  to the occupation authorities for approval, they remained censored – until 
  a copy of his original dispatch was found and published by his son this year. 
  
  The rediscovery makes a fascinating comparison with the best-known early account 
  of Hiroshima by Australian war correspondent Wilfred Burchett.

Truth telling: Australian Wilfred Burchett (left) and American George Weller told the A-Bomb horror story, but one report was reviled and the other suppressed
 At the end of the Pacific War, as the entire allied press corps focused on Japan's 
  formal surrender aboard the USS Missouri, Burchett on September 2, set off on 
  a 20-hour train ride to Hiroshima, evading US military efforts to confine reporters 
  to Tokyo and away from the A-bombed cities. 
  Seated on a concrete block surrounded by devastation and typing on a Baby Hermes, 
  Burchett began his dispatch: "In Hiroshima, thirty days after the first 
  atomic bomb destroyed the city and shook the world, people are still dying, 
  mysteriously and horribly – people who were uninjured in the cataclysm 
  from an unknown something which I can only describe as an atomic plague." 
  
  He went on, "Hiroshima does not look like a bombed city. It looks as if 
  a monster steamroller had passed over it and squashed it out of existence. I 
  write these facts as dispassionately as I can in the hope that they will act 
as a warning to the world." 
 Burchett scooped the world when he eluded censors who confiscated his camera 
  but failed to stop his telex. His first account from ground zero, banner headlined 
  in the London Daily Express on September 5, 1945, told the world about the radiation 
  that was the most mysterious and terrifying consequence of the atomic bomb. 
  The report prompted damage control measures by the US, which sought to reaffirm 
  an official narrative that downplayed civilian casualties, flatly denied reports 
  of deadly radiation and its lingering effects, and accused the reporter of falling 
  for Japanese propaganda. 
  Doctors in Hiroshima had told Burchett about the major symptoms of radiation, 
  and their helplessness to treat it. "At first we treated burns as we would 
  any others, but patients just wasted away and died. Then people without a mark 
  on them, including some not even here when the Bomb exploded, fell sick and 
  died. For no apparent reason their health began to fail. They lost their appetite, 
  their hair began to fall out, bluish spots appeared on their bodies and bleeding 
  started from the nose, mouth and eyes. ... And in every case the patient dies 
  ... there is nothing we can do about it." 
  Just four days after Burchett's report appeared, Major Gen. Leslie Groves, head 
  of the Manhattan Project, invited 30 reporters to New Mexico to set the record 
  straight. William L. Laurence, the New York Times science reporter, had been 
  recruited to the Pentagon payroll by Groves in March. He witnessed the Trinity 
  test in the US and the Nagasaki bombing from a US Air Force plane. "Does 
  one feel any pity or compassion for the poor devils about to die? Not when one 
  thinks of Pearl Harbor and the Death March on Bataan," Laurence mused of 
  the annihilation of Nagasaki. Laurence, who coined the term "the nuclear 
  age," wrote most of the official US statements about the bomb, and published 
  a ten part series on the bomb in the New York Times that played down the destruction 
  of the bomb and the dangers of radiation and celebrated the triumph of US technology. 
  Most important, Laurence faithfully echoed Groves's accounts denying the deadly 
  effects of radiation.
  The Times headlined his story on September 12: "US Atom Bomb Site Belies 
  Tokyo Tales: Tests on New Mexico Range Confirm that Blast and Not Radiation 
  Took Toll." The story began by explicitly attacking "Japanese propaganda 
  that radiations [sic] were responsible for deaths even after the day of the 
  explosion." For this and other reportage hailing the technological achievement 
  and downplaying the deaths associated with the atomic bomb, Laurence would receive 
  the Pulitzer Prize. It was among the earliest and most handsome paybacks for 
  what we now call embedded journalism. 
  Weller's reports, a carbon copy of which were unearthed by his son, Anthony 
  Weller, in a Rome apartment in 2004, two years after the reporter's death at 
  the age of 95, and serialized in Japanese and English in the Mainichi Shimbun  paper and online editions in June 2005, also make disturbing reading. But some 
  of Weller's conclusions differ profoundly from those of Burchett. 
  Where Burchett warned of the dangers of nuclear war and raised disturbing questions 
  about the US bombing, Weller staunchly defended the US from charges that anything 
  was amiss in the decision to destroy the two cities with atomic bombs. "The 
  atomic bomb," his first dispatch began, "may be classified as a weapon 
  capable of being used indiscriminately, but its use in Nagasaki was selective 
  and proper and as merciful as such a gigantic force could be expected to be." 
  
  Weller echoed Truman's claim that the US attacked military targets: "[N]o 
  saboteur creeping among the war plants of death could have placed the atomic 
  bomb by hand more scrupulously. ..." It was a judgment that ignores the 
  obvious fact that in Nagasaki, as in Hiroshima, ground zero was pinpointed to 
  exact the largest possible civilian death toll. 
  Weller insisted that the atomic bomb was a bomb like any other: "The impression 
  grows that the atomic bomb is a tremendous, but not a peculiar weapon. … 
  The Japanese have heard the legend from American radio that the ground preserves 
  deadly irradiation. But hours of walking amid the ruins where the odor of decaying 
  flesh is still strong produces in this writer nausea, but no sign of burns or 
  debilitation. Nobody here in Nagasaki has yet been able to show that the bomb 
  is different than any other, except in a broader extent flash and a more powerful 
  knock-out." It was Weller's good fortune to have roamed Nagasaki not in 
  the immediate aftermath of the bombing but a month later when the effects of 
  radiation had dissipated. 
  Nevertheless, Weller, too, perhaps despite himself, came to recognize the special 
  horror of the effects of Disease X. "The atomic bomb's peculiar 'disease,' 
  uncured because it is untreated and untreated because it is not diagnosed, is 
  still snatching away lives here. Men, woman and children with no outward marks 
  of injury are dying daily in hospitals. ..." Still he insisted that the 
  bomb is no "different than any other, except in a broader extent flash 
  and a more powerful knock-out." 
  Weller proceeded in other ways to minimize the bomb's toll, reporting the Nagasaki 
  dead at 20,000, with 4,000 more expected to die shortly. We now know that by 
  the end of 1945, the bomb had taken the lives of 140,000 in Hiroshima and 70,000 
  in Nagasaki, while others would survive to reckon with the lingering effects 
  of radiation. 
  Six decades ago, two reporters broke US censorship to provide compelling accounts 
  of the impact of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. One of those, Burchett, 
  told the story to the world, eliciting US official denial of such truths as 
  the impact of radiation on its victims. The other, Weller, also documented the 
  deadly toll not only of blast and fire, but of radiation, even while steadfastly 
  denying the peculiar character of the bomb. It is his documentation of the impact 
  of the bomb, and not the reflexive patriotism that led him to defend the targeting 
  of civilians and to minimize the unique effects of radiation, that makes his 
  long-censored report worth reading today. And perhaps explains why his report, despite its fervent defense of the bombing of Nagasaki, was suppressed by U.S. 
censors.
This is a slightly expanded version of an article that appeared at YaleGlobal Online http://yaleglobal.yale.edu. It was also reprinted by Japan Focus. It is reprinted with permission of the author.
 
                        