So I'll do my best to give as comprehensive and in depth answer as possible.
I'll speak to the back half of your question first. American was neutral and I would disagree with Mr. Freeman in his assessment that America wasn't really neutral. A more nuanced way of looking at it is that America was only superficially neutral. Nothing the Americans did constituted a violation of their neutral status. However, Mr. Freeman is right to suggest that the primary instigating factor involved the embargo of a number of items to Japan most importantly rubber and oil which were crucial to the functioning of Japan's military. America also warned Japan that any attempt to seize control of Dutch East Indies and take control of their oil would provoke America into war. Without oil or rubber supplied by in some form or another Japanese reserves extended about a 6-9 months of operational capabilities. Given the ongoing war in China and a desire to expand their hegemonic influence over the East Indies and Central Pacific the American embargo meant that a war with the United States was inevitable.
With a war now all but inevitable Japan had to decide on what course of action to take. Generally it was agreed upon that a long and protracted war with the United States could only end in defeat given the U.S. industrial advantages over Japan. Given this state of affairs the Japanese High Command settled on an aggressive and extremely risky plan constructed by Isoroku Yamamoto. This plan essentially was designed to destroy and cripple as many American vessels at port as possible with secondary and tertiary goals of destroying the naval yard and oil depots. This would knock the bulk of the American navy from the war for a short time allowing Japan to seize control of the necessary oil fields in the Dutch East Indies and then consolidate in time for the inevitable American counterattack.
I have seen nothing to suggest that the Japanese had any intention of seizing Hawaii as Mr. Freeman suggests. Indeed the initial operation was purely thought of as a hit and fade attack by a carrier strike force designed to cripple the American Navy at port. No landing force was present with the fleet and the IJA (Imperial Japanese Army) was unwilling to release the necessary manpower for such an attack because it was considered unnecessary and unwise. The far more plausible reasoning behind the attack was that such a devastating defeat followed by a string of Japanese successes might allow the Japanese to negotiate an honorable peace treaty with the United States after six or eight months. That this never happened and was likely never too happen is one of the gravest strategical and political missteps of the Japanese High Command in the early part of World War Two.
TL;DR Japan needed to temporarily cripple the United States navy so they could not interfere with Japanese plans in the Pacific in the early stages of the war. Ironically this was entirely unnecessary as the United States had modified their plans and settled on a defensive rather than offensive stance in the Pacific which was part of their "Germany first" strategy.