The following is a continuation of the previous chapter.
the omission of a middle part
Did the Asahi Shimbun collect materials against parties concerned?
The National Diet of Japan Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission listens for 1,479 hours to parties concerned with 772 people, including Mr. Yoshida.
Of those, 28 hours are listening to Mr. Yoshida.
In other words, a vast number of interviews with Mr. Yoshida and other parties concerned, and the fact that it was confirmed as 'facts' is 'Final report text' of the 448-page National Diet of Japan Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission. Everything is written.
There is not even one line is written, such as '90% of the staff has escaped against the director command'.
In response to the coverage of the Asahi Shimbun, Yotaro Hatamura, a former chairman, answered: It's a promise not to mention anything else than what it put on the report 'Everything it should put out is going to be included in the report.
Does that mean that there was no such as withdrawal from violation of order?
On the other hand, the Asahi wrote, 'The National Diet of Nuclear Accident Accident Investigation Commission the government who heard Yoshida for over 28 hours, it is incomprehensible not to mention at all in the report'.
What is incomprehensible is not 'the National Diet of Nuclear Nuclear Accident Accident Investigation Commission' but 'Asahi Shimbun.'
I wondered if the Asahi Shimbun had interviewed gathering evidence against parties concerned in the field.
I have interviewed much on-site staff at this time, in other words, parties concerned, but there was no one who 'violated' the director's command and 'take sheltered.'
All are moving to 2F in perfect order 'by the instruction.'
Mr. Yoshida himself told me about his subordinates as follows.
'I'm just an old man. Those in the field worked on that radiation silently. They reciprocated that dangerous place many times. Ｔｈｅｙ did it on flowing gently. Because they were there (The situation) I think I was able to manage it. I'm just an uncle just taking command there. There, I want you to write correctly about their site. '
Mr. Yoshida, who died now, praised his subordinates, who struggled desperately with the worst situation.
On the other hand, Asahi Shimbun disparaged such people who struggled to save Japan as being ridiculed from around the world.
I write this problem in a magazine etc. and have received a protest from the Asahi Shimbun saying 'We will consider legal measures' (note / later the Asahi apologizes to the author for his misreport).
I have no words to say that a speech agency that disparages the honor of those who struggle on the ground can cause legal action to be frightened against a legitimate 'comment.'
What exactly is the purpose of the Asahi Shimbun to disparage Japanese people?
No matter how it does, I don't understand.
('Sound Argument' August 2014 issue)
