2015年02月28日 09時53分24秒 | Weblog
投稿日: 2015年02月27日 16時04分 JST 更新: 2015年02月27日 16時04分 JST


I am japanese - 僕は日本人だ

2015年02月28日 09時24分03秒 | Weblog
I am japanese - 僕は日本人だ 動画

宗教が解き放つ怒りと暴力ーー 聖なる暴力と名誉・祝福

2015年02月28日 03時52分31秒 | Weblog
SATURDAY, JAN 17, 2015 10:00 PM +0900
Why religion unleashes humanity’s most violent impulses
Terrorism can't be blamed on religion alone, but murder and brutality are elemental to almost every major faith








Ultimately, rage won out—righteous, sanctified rage—which came to matter more than any value he as a healer placed on his own life or the lives of his colleagues and clients.

Islam, in other words, probably contributed to their inability to merge into French culture and then sanctified and channeled their anger.

 怒りの感情を神聖化して”正義”感 あるいは、正義のための暴力に転換してしまう、機能があるわけですね。





"We need to rejoice, Maranatha , His day is at hand.” 終末論にふける人々




2015年02月28日 03時52分09秒 | Weblog
ISIS: Christians Worse Than Murderers

聖典の解釈など、どんな宗教でもいろいろありえるわけだが、shirkとは、アッラー以外の神、ないし神々を信仰すること mushrikunはそうした信仰を持つ人々をいうらしいが、

4-48. 本当にアッラーは,(何ものをも)かれに配することを赦されない。それ以外のことに就いては,御心に適う者を赦される。アッラーに(何ものかを)配する者は,まさに大罪を犯す者である。


But the brutal targeting of Christians highlights a deeper theological issue among Muslims: interpreting what qualifies as shirk, or the belief of equating any being with God. Various translations define shirk as “paganism,” “idolatry” and “polytheism,” and the people who practice shirk are mushrikun. It’s a historical reference to the pre-Islamic, polytheistic religious practices in 7th-century Mecca, before the prophet Muhammad started preaching belief in one God—tawhid in Arabic. The young men in the Islamic State propaganda videos flash a gang sign of one finger pointed skyward to represent monotheism, something ordinary Muslims also do.

Mushrikun is a slur word like “Witch!” during the Salem, Massachusetts, witch trials of 17th-century America. A Muslim detractor first called me a mushrikun in 2005 after I organized a mixed-gender Friday prayer led by a woman imam, or imama. It’s code for “enemy of Islam.”

The Quran (4:48) spells out that shirk is a “major sin,” stating: “And he who practices shirk has certainly fabricated a tremendous sin.” In one hadith, shirk is worse than murder. While most Muslims cast Christians and Jews as ahl-e-kitab, or “people of the book,” several elements of Christian practice—the deification of Christ, with belief in the “Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost,” the veneration of saints and the iconography of Mary and Jesus—make Christians a target for extremists like those in the Islamic State as mushrikun.

But for liberal Muslims, like me, who believe in the Quranic message, “There is no compulsion in religion,” shirk is actually the metaphorical sin of worshiping negative vices in this world, like violence and power.

ところが、イスラム教徒でも、リベラルは、Shirk というのを、暴力や権力などの悪徳信仰といった比喩と解釈しており、悪徳に身を任せるものは大罪を犯している、みたいな意味にとる、ということでしょうね。


But he goes on to equate shirk with fitna, which means “conflict” or “discord” within the Muslim community, and which Islamic scholars of all persuasions say the Quran forbids.

For many of us, fitna and mushrikun are loaded words in Islam, meant to discredit, silence and even put a target on someone’s back, including another Muslim.

Since the 9/11 attacks, some Muslim organizations and leaders have promoted the idea that Christians, Jews, and Muslims are respected by Muslims as “people of the Book.” But sadly, translations of the Quran by the government of Saudi Arabia has fed hatred of Jews and Christians. A translation of the first chapter, al Fatiha, “The Opening,” by a moderate translator, Yousuf Ali, reads, “Show us the straight way, the way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray.”

A translation by the government of Saudi Arabia reads, “Guide us on the Straight Way, the Way of those whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), and not of those who went astray (such as the Christians).” The parenthetical phrases are explicitly added by the government.  

6. わたしたちを正しい道に導きたまえ,






無神論と多神教の中間あたりの日本人の私からすると 要するに、ユダヤ人とキリスト教徒が大嫌いということじゃないの?と聞きたくなる。


‘When I mentioned the UK to him he had a scowl on his face. ’

2015年02月28日 02時07分17秒 | Weblog


Speaking anonymously to ITV, they said the killer was unmarried and was probably picked for the executioner poster boy role because of the way he handled difficult situations.
Describing him as an 'adrenaline junkie', they said he went to fight for the al-Nusra front, an Al Qaeda-linked jihadist group in Syria, before moving to ISIS to further his ambitions.
His attitude was revealed when he was stopped at a checkpoint by Free Syrian Army fighters.
One said: 'He was at a checkpoint, from what I heard, and the people manning the checkpoint stopped him and forced him to get out.
'From what I understand they were trying to rob him and, for a man with several weapons pointing at his face, he responded by pulling out his own weapon and pointing it at one of their faces'.
Another said: ‘He seems like someone with not a lot to lose. There has been incidents where he has run into checkpoints and he dealt with people in a careless, gung-ho manner with disregard for his own safety.

‘He was chosen most likely for his fearless mentality and he’s got nothing to lose. He obviously didn’t want to go back to the UK and he believed passionately in this cause and he believed that killing these people was the right thing to do.
‘I remember he was quiet - not reserved quiet, he had a lot of friends and was social. In Syria he seemed to be a very busy man, he was always ready for war in safe areas.’
They also said Emwazi seemed wealthy, adding: ‘All of his kit was expensive. Even the guns he had were extremely expensive and rare to find in that part of the world.’
Asked if he disliked Britain, they said: ‘When I mentioned the UK to him he had a scowl on his face.
‘He had no intention of returning and never identified himself as British, he said Kuwaiti or Yemeni. His jihadi name was Abu Muharib al Yemeni. He had no link to Britain unless you asked him are you British and he would say, "Kind of. I lived there for a long time".'



Is this Abe’s planned War Statement ? "We owe China no debt because the destruction was mutual"

2015年02月27日 20時11分40秒 | Weblog
WEDNESDAY, FEB 15, 2012 01:08 AM +0900
The hysterical American decline
As America tries to cling to world dominance, we can learn important lessons from Vietnam and Iraq








The destruction was mutual. We went to Vietnam without any desire to capture territory or impose American will on other people. I don't feel that we ought to apologize or castigate ourselves or to assume the status of culpability.




We owe China no debt because the destruction was mutual.




At the moment, we are failing to commemorate the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy’s decision to launch the most destructive and murderous act of aggression of the post-World War II period: the invasion of South Vietnam, later all of Indochina, leaving millions dead and four countries devastated, with casualties still mounting from the long-term effects of drenching South Vietnam with some of the most lethal carcinogens known, undertaken to destroy ground cover and food crops.

When the war ended eight horrendous years later, mainstream opinion was divided between those who described the war as a “noble cause” that could have been won with more dedication, and at the opposite extreme, the critics, to whom it was “a mistake” that proved too costly. By 1977, President Carter aroused little notice when he explained that we owe Vietnam “no debt” because “the destruction was mutual.”

There are important lessons in all this for today, even apart from another reminder that only the weak and defeated are called to account for their crimes. One lesson is that to understand what is happening we should attend not only to critical events of the real world, often dismissed from history, but also to what leaders and elite opinion believe, however tinged with fantasy. Another lesson is that alongside the flights of fancy concocted to terrify and mobilize the public (and perhaps believed by some who are trapped in their own rhetoric), there is also geostrategic planning based on principles that are rational and stable over long periods because they are rooted in stable institutions and their concerns.

The Iraq war is an instructive case.

Later, as the scale of the U.S. defeat in Iraq was becoming difficult to suppress, the government quietly conceded what had been clear all along. In 2007-2008, the administration officially announced that a final settlement must grant the U.S. military bases and the right of combat operations, and must privilege U.S. investors in the rich energy system — demands later reluctantly abandoned in the face of Iraqi resistance. And all well kept from the general population.

he plans that Kennan helped formulate and implement took for granted that the U.S. would control the Western Hemisphere, the Far East, the former British empire (including the incomparable energy resources of the Middle East), and as much of Eurasia as possible, crucially its commercial and industrial centers. These were not unrealistic objectives, given the distribution of power. But decline set in at once.

In 1949, China declared independence, an event known in Western discourse as “the loss of China” — in the U.S., with bitter recriminations and conflict over who was responsible for that loss. The terminology is revealing. It is only possible to lose something that one owns. The tacit assumption was that the U.S. owned China, by right, along with most of the rest of the world, much as postwar planners assumed.

The “loss of China” was the first major step in “America’s decline.” It had major policy consequences. One was the immediate decision to support France’s effort to reconquer its former colony of Indochina, so that it, too, would not be “lost.”

Indochina itself was not a major concern, despite claims about its rich resources by President Eisenhower and others. Rather, the concern was the “domino theory,” which is often ridiculed when dominoes don’t fall, but remains a leading principle of policy because it is quite rational. To adopt Henry Kissinger’s version, a region that falls out of control can become a “virus” that will “spread contagion,” inducing others to follow the same path.

In the case of Vietnam, the concern was that the virus of independent development might infect Indonesia, which really does have rich resources. And that might lead Japan — the “superdomino” as it was called by the prominent Asia historian John Dower — to “accommodate” to an independent Asia as its technological and industrial center in a system that would escape the reach of U.S. power. That would mean, in effect, that the U.S. had lost the Pacific phase of World War II, fought to prevent Japan’s attempt to establish such a New Order in Asia.

The way to deal with such a problem is clear: destroy the virus and “inoculate” those who might be infected. In the Vietnam case, the rational choice was to destroy any hope of successful independent development and to impose brutal dictatorships in the surrounding regions. Those tasks were successfully carried out — though history has its own cunning, and something similar to what was feared has since been developing in East Asia, much to Washington’s dismay.

The most important victory of the Indochina wars was in 1965, when a U.S.-backed military coup in Indonesia led by General Suharto carried out massive crimes that were compared by the CIA to those of Hitler, Stalin and Mao. The “staggering mass slaughter,” as the New York Times described it, was reported accurately across the mainstream, and with unrestrained euphoria.

It was “a gleam of light in Asia,” as the noted liberal commentator James Reston wrote in the Times. The coup ended the threat of democracy by demolishing the mass-based political party of the poor, established a dictatorship that went on to compile one of the worst human rights records in the world, and threw the riches of the country open to western investors. Small wonder that, after many other horrors, including the near-genocidal invasion of East Timor, Suharto was welcomed by the Clinton administration in 1995 as “our kind of guy.”

Noam Chomsky: The Decline of American Empire (Part 2)
The principles of imperial domination have undergone little change, but the capacity to implement them has markedly declined.
By Noam Chomsky / TomDispatch.com February 15, 2012

Even more serious would be the loss of the MENA countries -- Middle East/North Africa -- which have been regarded by planners since the 1940s as “a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.” Control of MENA energy reserves would yield “substantial control of the world,” in the words of the influential Roosevelt advisor A.A. Berle.

The Arab Spring, another development of historic importance, might portend at least a partial “loss” of MENA. The US and its allies have tried hard to prevent that outcome -- so far, with considerable success. Their policy towards the popular uprisings has kept closely to the standard guidelines: support the forces most amenable to U.S. influence and control.

Favored dictators are supported as long as they can maintain control (as in the major oil states). When that is no longer possible, then discard them and try to restore the old regime as fully as possible (as in Tunisia and Egypt). The general pattern is familiar: Somoza, Marcos, Duvalier, Mobutu, Suharto, and many others. In one case, Libya, the three traditional imperial powers intervened by force to participate in a rebellion to overthrow a mercurial and unreliable dictator, opening the way, it is expected, to more efficient control over Libya’s rich resources (oil primarily, but also water, of particular interest to French corporations), to a possible base for the U.S. Africa Command (so far restricted to Germany), and to the reversal of growing Chinese penetration. As far as policy goes, there have been few surprises.

It is quite in accord with the general and unsurprising principle recognized by mainstream scholarship: the U.S. supports democracy if, and only if, the outcomes accord with its strategic and economic objectives,

It is understandable that Palestinian rights should be marginalized in U.S. policy and discourse. Palestinians have no wealth or power. They offer virtually nothing to U.S. policy concerns; in fact, they have negative value, as a nuisance that stirs up “the Arab street.”

Israel, in contrast, is a valuable ally. It is a rich society with a sophisticated, largely militarized high-tech industry.

Apart from such elementary considerations of great power politics as these, there are cultural factors that should not be ignored. Christian Zionism in Britain and the U.S. long preceded Jewish Zionism, and has been a significant elite phenomenon with clear policy implications (including the Balfour Declaration, which drew from it). When General Allenby conquered Jerusalem during World War I, he was hailed in the American press as Richard the Lion-Hearted, who had at last won the Crusades and driven the pagans out of the Holy Land.

The next step was for the Chosen People to return to the land promised to them by the Lord. Articulating a common elite view, President Franklin Roosevelt’s Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes described Jewish colonization of Palestine as an achievement “without comparison in the history of the human race.” Such attitudes find their place easily within the Providentialist doctrines that have been a strong element in popular and elite culture since the country’s origins: the belief that God has a plan for the world and the U.S. is carrying it forward under divine guidance, as articulated by a long list of leading figures.

Moreover, evangelical Christianity is a major popular force in the U.S. Further toward the extremes, End Times evangelical Christianity also has enormous popular outreach, invigorated by the establishment of Israel in 1948, revitalized even more by the conquest of the rest of Palestine in 1967 -- all signs that End Times and the Second Coming are approaching.

Why exactly is Iran regarded as such a colossal threat? The question is rarely discussed, but it is not hard to find a serious answer -- though not, as usual, in the fevered pronouncements. The most authoritative answer is provided by the Pentagon and the intelligence services in their regular reports to Congress on global security. They report that Iran does not pose a military threat. Its military spending is very low even by the standards of the region, minuscule of course in comparison with the U.S.

The regime is doubtless a serious threat to much of its own population -- and regrettably, is hardly unique on that score. But the primary threat to the U.S. and Israel is that Iran might deter their free exercise of violence. A further threat is that the Iranians clearly seek to extend their influence to neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan, and beyond as well. Those “illegitimate” acts are called “destabilizing” (or worse). In contrast, forceful imposition of U.S. influence halfway around the world contributes to “stability” and order, in accord with traditional doctrine about who owns the world.

Revealing how little fundamental assumptions have changed, U.S. strategic analysts describe the result of China’s military programs as a “classic 'security dilemma,' whereby military programs and national strategies deemed defensive by their planners are viewed as threatening by the other side,” writes Paul Godwin of the Foreign Policy Research Institute. The security dilemma arises over control of the seas off China’s coasts. The U.S. regards its policies of controlling these waters as “defensive,” while China regards them as threatening; correspondingly, China regards its actions in nearby areas as “defensive” while the U.S. regards them as threatening. No such debate is even imaginable concerning U.S. coastal waters. This “classic security dilemma” makes sense, again, on the assumption that the U.S. has a right to control most of the world, and that U.S. security requires something approaching absolute global control.




というのは注目しておくべきですね。 イスラエルの地理的重要性、そして、軍事技術的重要性と共に、アメリカがイスラエルを支持する理由の一つなわけですね。


They hold all men are created equal but twelve of American presidents owned slaves.

2015年02月27日 16時28分46秒 | Weblog
buvery @buvery · 4時間 4時間前 


United States Declaration of Independence

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal



So twelve of our presidents owned slaves and eight of them owned slaves while serving as president





2015年02月27日 09時55分51秒 | Weblog




2015年02月27日 08時47分40秒 | Weblog


The university has since been linked with several proponents of radical Islam, and Emwazi appeared to have fallen under their sway.

He began attending different mosques and was known to associate with Bilal el-Berjawi, who was killed by a drone strike in Somalia three years ago.

In August 2009, after his graduation, Emwazi flew to Tanzania in East Africa with friends and told authorities they were going on a wildlife safari.

But the group was refused entry and put on a plane to the Netherlands, where Emwazi later claimed he was questioned by an MI5 agent called Nick.

The British officer accused him of planning to travel to Somalia to join the militant group Al Shabaab, he said, and said MI5 had been watching him.

Emwazi denied the accusation – bragging that he would not take a designer Rocawear sweater in his luggage if he was planning to join Somalian rebels.

In emails to the campaign group Cage, Emwazi said: ‘He [Nick] knew everything about me; where I lived, what I did, the people I hanged around with.’

‘Nick’ then tried to recruit the 21-year-old, Emwazi claimed, and threatened him when he refused to cooperate.

Emwazi said the officer told him: ‘You’re going to have a lot of trouble…You’re going to be known…You’re going to be followed…Life will be harder for you.’

On his return to Britain, Emwazi said his family told him they had been ‘visited’, and he claimed a woman he had been planning to marry broke off their engagement because her family had also been contacted and were scared.

According to Emwazi, his family then began planning for him to travel to Kuwait to get him away from the ‘harassment’ he had suffered in Britain and he went to work for a computer programming company in the emirate.

In his account to Cage, he said security officers continued to visit his family and he decided to make a ‘new life’ in Kuwait, where he was once again planning to marry.

But following a visit back to Britain in 2010 he said he was stopped at Heathrow Airport and barred from flying back to Kuwait, and claimed that he was interrogated by an aggressive officer who threw him against a wall, grabbed his beard and strangled him.

Emwazi made an official complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission, saying he had been assaulted by the officer.

But court documents show he was also arrested himself later that year and charged with possessing five stolen bicycles, although he was later acquitted at court.

Incensed by the decision to stop him returning to Kuwait, Emwazi told Cage he felt ‘like a prisoner’ in London.

He said he was ‘a person imprisoned and controlled by security service men, stopping me from living my new life in my birthplace and country, Kuwait.’

Friends told the Washington Post he was already talking wildly about travelling to Syria, where the uprising against Bashar al Assad was beginning in earnest.

But he also applied for work in Saudi Arabia, taking a course to teach English and applying for work at language centres in the kingdom.

Rejected by those, his father suggested he change his name in a bid to avoid any block from British authorities, and Cage said he changed his name by deed poll in 2013 to become Mohammed al-Ayan.

He made one more attempt to fly back to Kuwait that year but was barred from leaving Britain again and disappeared from his parents’ home a week later.  

The Jihadi John apologists: Islamic campaigner who today defended ISIS executioner as a 'beautiful, kind young man' was filmed calling for jihad outside U.S Embassy

He said: 'When are we going to finally learn that when we treat people as if they're outsiders, they are going to feel like outsiders and they will look for belonging elsewhere.'

In the wake of Emwazi's unmasking as the world's most wanted man, CAGE yesterday released a statement entitled 'Jihadi John: 'Radicalised' By Britain'

Qureshi then used the statement to criticise the British security services, arguing that counter-terror measures turned young Muslims into extremists.
Haras Rafiq, managing director of the anti-radicalisation think-tank the Quilliam Foundation, told Newsweek that CAGE's accusation that Britain was to blame for Emwazi's radicalisation was 'rubbish'.
He said: 'It is not anybody else's fault. It's not the British or Kuwaitis fault. It is his fault and the people who radicalised him. He is a cold-hearted killer.'

Hostages who have survived being held by ISIS in Syria and Iraq have said that Jihadi John is a man 'obsessed' with Somalia and would make them watch Al-Shabaab videos while in captivity. 


 大学でのイデオロギーの影響もあるが、だいたいにおいて、 過激に走る動機ー貧困・失業より、無視・蔑視・差別・虐待・不公正に対する怒り という点では他の過激派に走るケースと共通点がある。


FBIのテロ支援計画  FBI manufacturing its own plot to Aid ISIS’ Fight

2015年02月27日 07時59分33秒 | Weblog
3 Brooklyn Men Accused of Plot to Aid ISIS’ Fight

Two young men living in Brooklyn were arrested on Wednesday and charged with plotting to travel thousands of miles to fight under the banner of the Islamic State, the terrorist organization that has seized a wide expanse of Syria and Iraq.

Why Does the FBI Have to Manufacture its Own Plots if Terrorism and ISIS Are Such Grave Threats?
By Glenn Greenwald







Is there a chilling atmosphere that discourage American media to ......

2015年02月27日 05時15分33秒 | Weblog
2015年 02月 25日 19:11 JST 記事を印刷する | ブックマーク | 1ページに表示 [-] 文字サイズ [+]


アングル:安倍政権への批判後退か、メディアの自粛ムード強まる | Reuters http://jp.reuters.com/article/topNews/idJPKBN0LT0US20150225 … NHKの籾井会長の発言は領土問題に関したものだし、元プロデューサーは慰安婦問題のドキュメンタリーで辞職した人なので、この記事はフェアではないと思われ。





”テンプル大学日本校でアジア問題を研究するジェフリー・キングストン教授は指摘。「いまはメディアに自粛を促すような、ぞっとする雰囲気がある」と懸念を示す” とあるが、それは具体的になんなのか。朝日新聞の問題は安倍に責任があるのではなく、自社がヘタを打っただけの話だ。



返信 リツイート お気に入りに登録

RPT-Japanese media self-censorship grows in PM Abe's reign
Tue Feb 24, 2015 9:00pm GMT

But if you are reading Japanese newspaper and magazine , it is obvious that Japanese media rightly or wrongly criticize Abe government everyday.

Rather I want to ask, is there a chilling atmosphere that discourage American media to cover the story of Korean Sex Slaves for U.S. military?

Mainstream English media is just like Japanese Nanking massacre deniers

2015年02月27日 04時23分00秒 | Weblog


Deny the British empire's crimes? No, we ignore them | George Monbiot http://j.mp/17Bcaaz

The story of benign imperialism, whose overriding purpose was not to seize land, labour and commodities but to teach the natives English, table manners and double-entry book-keeping, is a myth that has been carefully propagated by the rightwing press. But it draws its power from a remarkable national ability to airbrush and disregard our past.

Last week's revelations, that the British government systematically destroyed the documents detailing mistreatment of its colonial subjects, and that the Foreign Office then lied about a secret cache of files containing lesser revelations, is by any standards a big story. But it was either ignored or consigned to a footnote by most of the British press. I was unable to find any mention of the secret archive on the Telegraph's website. The Mail's only coverage, as far as I can determine, was an opinion piece by a historian called Lawrence James, who used the occasion to insist that any deficiencies in the management of the colonies were the work of "a sprinkling of misfits, incompetents and bullies", while everyone else was "dedicated, loyal and disciplined".

The British government's suppression of evidence was scarcely necessary. Even when the documentation of great crimes is abundant, it is not denied but simply ignored. In an article for the Daily Mail in 2010, for example, the historian Dominic Sandbrook announced that "Britain's empire stands out as a beacon of tolerance, decency and the rule of law … Nor did Britain countenance anything like the dreadful tortures committed in French Algeria." Could he really have been unaware of the history he is disavowing?

Caroline Elkins, a professor at Harvard, spent nearly 10 years compiling the evidence contained in her book Britain's Gulag: the Brutal End of Empire in Kenya. She started her research with the belief that the British account of the suppression of the Kikuyu's Mau Mau revolt in the 1950s was largely accurate. Then she discovered that most of the documentation had been destroyed. She worked through the remaining archives, and conducted 600 hours of interviews with Kikuyu survivors – rebels and loyalists – and British guards, settlers and officials. Her book is fully and thoroughly documented. It won the Pulitzer prize. But as far as Sandbrook, James and other imperial apologists are concerned, it might as well never have been written.

Elkins reveals that the British detained not 80,000 Kikuyu, as the official histories maintain, but almost the entire population of one and a half million people, in camps and fortified villages. There, thousands were beaten to death or died from malnutrition, typhoid, tuberculosis and dysentery. In some camps almost all the children died.

The inmates were used as slave labour. Above the gates were edifying slogans, such as "Labour and freedom" and "He who helps himself will also be helped". Loudspeakers broadcast the national anthem and patriotic exhortations. People deemed to have disobeyed the rules were killed in front of the others. The survivors were forced to dig mass graves, which were quickly filled. Unless you have a strong stomach I advise you to skip the next paragraph.

Interrogation under torture was widespread. Many of the men were anally raped, using knives, broken bottles, rifle barrels, snakes and scorpions. A favourite technique was to hold a man upside down, his head in a bucket of water, while sand was rammed into his rectum with a stick. Women were gang-raped by the guards. People were mauled by dogs and electrocuted. The British devised a special tool which they used for first crushing and then ripping off testicles. They used pliers to mutilate women's breasts. They cut off inmates' ears and fingers and gouged out their eyes. They dragged people behind Land Rovers until their bodies disintegrated. Men were rolled up in barbed wire and kicked around the compound

No matter. Even those who acknowledge that something happened write as if Elkins and her work did not exist. In the Telegraph, Daniel Hannan maintains that just eleven people were beaten to death. Apart from that, "1,090 terrorists were hanged and as many as 71,000 detained without due process".

The British did not do body counts, and most victims were buried in unmarked graves. But it is clear that tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of Kikuyu died in the camps and during the round-ups. Hannan's is one of the most blatant examples of revisionism I have ever encountered.

Without explaining what this means, Lawrence James concedes that "harsh measures" were sometimes used, but he maintains that "while the Mau Mau were terrorising the Kikuyu, veterinary surgeons in the Colonial Service were teaching tribesmen how to deal with cattle plagues."

They sure whitewash history just like Japanese right wingers but unlike Japanese media, British media more or less disregard the sanitizing their history.



2015年02月27日 04時12分37秒 | Weblog


これは右翼団体が正しい。合衆国憲法で奴隷の所有権を認めた米国人が日本の「性奴隷」を批判する資格はない。道義的責任に時効はないのだ。|朝日を提訴した右翼団体が外国特派員協会で暴言!「奴隷制があった国から性奴隷とか何とか言われたくない」 http://ow.ly/JGu3t









If the expats in Japan really love Japan and don't want to degrade the image of Japan....

2015年02月27日 03時02分14秒 | Weblog
フジテレビに「Blackface(ブラックフェイス)」のグループの出演に関する署名について  動画

I agree that Japanese people should know American media make a big deal out of cultural and racial adoption by members of a different group.

However, if the expats in Japan really love Japan and don't want to degrade the image of Japan, why not educate the Americans that black is beautiful and there is nothing wrong with painting one's face black as long as it is done beautifully to pay tribute to black people and tell the African Americans to leave behind the idea that black is ugly and acting and making up like black people always means mocking black people.

Suppose a white guy perfectly transform himself into a black guy by high-tech make-up and nobody can tell the difference between him and native black people. If he is mocking black people, then black people are mocking themselves. But that is not the case. Therefore, there are cases where people other than black people can paint himself as black with no offence.

It's American skewed history of mocking black people by black face and their bias that black is ugly that makes them assume that making up like black people always means racism.

Why do you think that the West---or rather U.S.A. in this case--- has the right to impose their idea without dialogue with the local people?

If you don't like the way they make up, be specific.

via mozu

Asians angered by Apple's 'racist' yellow emoji

For instance, say, the skin color is too deep or too crude  to the point of mocking people or something like that.

And don't tell me that a foreigner loves Japan when (s)he can't communicate in Japanese and does not learn history of Japan (---and Japan is just a place to make money and exploit women.)

Japanese people are getting sick and tired of foreigners who just want attention from their homeland by acting as if (s)he was an expert on Japan.

Integrate by communicating and discussing with Japanese people IN JAPANESE. Japan is not a colony of U.S.A.----no?.


Perhaps Tabuchi さん 公認  "Je Suis Rats & Star" against African-American-PC industrial complex


An artist was arrested scattering flyers lampooning ・・・・Abe or Park?

2015年02月27日 00時11分28秒 | Weblog

There is no English article of it, but it seems arresting people for spreading flyers lampooning President is not uncommon in Korea.

Pop artist caught spreading flyers mocking Park
2014/10/20 18:24

SEOUL, Oct. 20 (Yonhap) -- A local pop artist was caught scattering flyers lampooning President Park Geun-hye from the rooftop of a building in downtown Seoul on Monday, police said.

Lee Ha, 46, was arrested after a police officer found a leaflet near a building not far from Seoul's iconic Gwanghwamun Square around noon. An official at the Jongno Police Station said Lee was apprehended on charges of trespassing, not for spreading flyers.

"We found his entering a private property without permission problematic, and that's why we arrested him," the official said, adding the owner of the building hadn't reported him to the police.