When a Prime Minister Prays

China and Korea are throwing a tantrum again. Why is it this time? Because, in keeping with tradition, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited the Yasukuni Shrine to pray for the souls of all those who gave their lives in the service of HM the Emperor and the nation of Japan and, as we have already established, these countries do not believe anyone in Japan should have freedom of religion, the freedom to worship how and where they choose. This is a freedom they claim to give their own people (in the case of China a largely false claim) but they do not think it should be allowed in Japan. Why is this? Because, as the Chinese and Korean republics tell their own people and as most of the biased news media of the world reports it, they say that the shrine honors "war criminals". Of course, that is absurd. The shrine honors all who gave their lives, it was not built just to honor war criminals. It is true that some of those whose names are listed there among the dead are some who were convicted as war criminals by the Allied forces after World War II. But if people would educate themselves, they would see that this is not so simple. After all, we have already detailed how men like General Yamashita and General Homma were falsely executed for war crimes, blamed for atrocities they did not order or even know about and both men who fought honorably and did everything they could to treat friend and foe alike humanely. Even if one considers someone like General Hideki Tojo just consider that he was executed for the crime of "waging aggressive war" in violation of international law -except that there was no such international law at the time these events happened and if waging an aggressive war makes someone a war criminal then all of the Allied countries would be guilty as well. Those quick to take offense should also remember that many Koreans and even Chinese are also honored in the Yasukuni Shrine because they served alongside the Imperial Japanese forces in the war as well. China and Korea should stop trying to twist the facts and distort history just to encourage prejudice and bigotry against Japan. Especially in Korea, this is a time when all neighbors of Communist China are in increasing danger and should be coming together in mutual support. PM Abe has said he wants peace and has reached out to achieve it only to have his hand slapped away. As long as goodwill is met with such distortions and hostility, Japan has no other choice that to guard her own security carefully.

Christianity in Japan

Mass in Japan in the earliest days

Holy Mother, Divine Child

Japanese delegation visits Pope Gregory XIII

すべての人をうやまい、兄弟たちを愛し、神をおそれ、王を尊びなさい。

HM the Emperor, the Far-Right and the Truth

In a recent article by the ever left-leaning Japan Times, Philip Brasor editorialized on how the “liberal leanings” of HM the Emperor are at odds with the “far-right” LDP currently in power. It bemoaned how “emperor worship” is still engrained in people, much to His Majesty’s discomfort and embarrassment, pointing to the recent uproar over a breach in protocol when an activist politician handed HM a letter. This is the sort of simplistic and frankly racist idiocy that can only come from a western leftist. His are the very same people who howl the loudest about the Emperor being a purely symbolic figure, completely outside of politics, upset that any might still respect or (dare I say) even revere HM while in the very same breath insisting that, despite being totally nonpolitical, when it comes to politics, deep down HM really agrees with them and not the “far-right” that places more trust and more seriousness to the monarchy. Everyone should also be aware that the *actual* far-right has never held an ounce of political power in Japan (at least since World War II) and that what these people call “far-right”, such as the Liberal Democratic Party means a party that believes in the freedom for people to worship where they choose, to insist on past agreements being honored and which is determined to defend the country in case of attack. That is what they call “far-right”. It would be funny if so many people didn’t believe it. As for HM the Emperor holding “liberal” views, if “liberal” is defined as caring about the health of the people and country and preferring to have peaceful relations with all, then, yes, that would make HM the Emperor a liberal but the same would also apply to the vast majority of the entire population.

A good case in point recently made the news. A Japanese diplomat in Yemen was stabbed in an attempted kidnapping by Muslim terrorists. His car was stolen but thankfully his injuries are not life-threatening. By the critical double-standards of those leftists who judge Japan and the Japanese people, thinking that something should be done about this heinous crime, anything at all, is enough to earn one the label of "far-right". Allowing yourself to be victimized seems to be the only acceptable response for Japan by these people. Everyone else can act differently of course but they always apply a double-standard to Japan. It is disgusting.

Facebook Bigotry

Recently, friend of Japan Texas Daddy put a picture up on Facebook showing the Rising Sun flag of the Japanese navy side-by-side with a sun rise in Texas ("Texas Daddy" is a native of New York who lives in the Lone Star State). This was flagged as offensive and removed by Facebook, along with another photo of his and he was suspended from his account for 12 hours. The suspension came about, presumably, because of a recent video of his in which he protested against the "Comfort Women" monument recently erected in California (what California or any part of America has to do with the controversy is anybody's guess) and this provoked a great deal of anger from the Korean population -who only put the monuments up in the USA in order to spread anti-Japanese bigotry and drive a wedge between Japan and America. The issue has nothing to do with America at all. It was most likely Korean activists on Facebook as well who had the sun rise photo and flag removed because they seem to have a special hatred for the flag of the Japanese navy (for some reason). Facebook, of course, is a private institution and can do as they please but this is moral cowardice of the first order and fosters the cause of anti-Japanese bigotry. However, it doesn't matter as yours truly put up a special header on my public Facebook page and will continue to display the Rising Sun flag here and at home base.

General Homma Masaharu

General Masaharu Homma, known as "the Poet" is most remembered as the conqueror of The Philippines as commander of the Fourteenth Imperial Japanese Army. He had a long record of distinguished military service. In World War I he served in France with the British Expeditionary Force, was an aide to HIH Prince Chichibu and commanded a division in the early days of the Second Sino-Japanese War but was made commander of the Army of Taiwan after speaking out that hostilities with China should be ended as quickly as possible following the Japanese capture of the Chinese capital of Nanking. After the outbreak of war with the United States he was given command of the XIV Army and tasked with the conquest of The Philippines, landing on December 10, 1941. This military operation was a complete success and it was probably that success, more than anything else, that led to his execution after the war on trumped-up charges of "war crimes" mostly because of the mistreatment of American prisoners of war. However, it was a complete injustice as was the case with other top Japanese generals executed quickly after the war was over. There were real instances of mistreatment of prisoners but General Homma was certainly not to blame for them, he never ordered such a thing as he was clearly singled out mostly because he had been a very successful general, the man who had conquered the largest and primary American "colony" in East Asia.

Far from being cruel, General Homma gave strict orders to his men that the Filipinos were to be treated as friends rather than enemies and he did his best to take precautions against any misbehavior by his soldiers. In fact, others tried to thwart him and hurt his career because they thought he was being entirely too kind and lenient toward the enemies of Japan. Whenever he found out about this, such as a plan to assassinate a leading Filipino politician, he acted quickly to stop such activity and punish the perpetrators according to the strict regulations of the Imperial Japanese Army. As for the treatment of American prisoners, particularly the "Bataan Death March" -he had nothing to do with it. General Homma was a careful commander and one who put his troops first. He did not want to waste the lives of his men and because of this cautious approach, some in the high command thought he lacked aggression and so they effectively replaced him just after the fall of Corregidor, the last offensive that knocked out the final Filipino-American resistance. So, even though at the time the prisoners on Bataan were taken and moved, General Homma was listed still as commander of the XIV Army, in fact, he was not and he had nothing to do with the mistreatment of prisoners. In fact, all such activities were done in violation of his clear orders that surrendered troops were to be well treated.

Forced to retire in 1943, partly because of his very humanitarian policies, it was the height of injustice that, when the war was over, he was singled out for prosecution as a "war criminal". Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Frank Murphy even protested the verdict, saying that it was completely unjust and amounted to nothing more than an act of vengeance. He was prosecuted not because of anything he did wrong but because he had made the U.S. Army look bad by conquering The Philippines which they thought would be easily defended against Japan. General Douglas MacArthur had a long relationship with the Philippines and had been humiliated as "Dugout Doug" by the battle and his escape from the Philippines (on presidential order) in a submarine to escape the victorious Japanese forces under General Homma. This was the real, underlying reason for his prosecution. A number of fair-minded Americans protested the "guilty" verdict and his wife pleaded with General MacArthur to show mercy to her husband. However, this was not done, the only courtesy given to him being that he was executed by firing squad like a soldier rather than hanged like a common criminal as was usually the case. He was executed on April 3, 1946.

General Homma was certainly not a "war criminal" by any means. He was an honorable and upright commander and a very successful war hero that Japan should be proud of.

The American Double-Standard with Japan

In writing this article, first let me state that today the United States and Japan are close friends and allies and I for one am very pleased about that. For the most part, both countries have gotten beyond the events of World War II and relatively few hold any grudges about it. This demonstrates a great deal of character and goodwill on the part of both countries. Unfortunately, despite the fact that none of what I shall relate in this article is anything less than documented, established fact, a great many still seem to have a very warped view regarding the war against Japan. In spite of all the evidence known even at the time of the war and other information which has been declassified since, many people in both the United States and Japan for that matter, continue to view the start of the war as being the result of Japanese aggression against the United States and nothing more. Some have even tried to twist the facts or simply fabricate their own in order to spread anti-Japanese bigotry to as many countries as possible. It is for that reason, and because truth is to be pursued for its own sake that I address this subject. I do so because I have touched on it a number of times in the past without ever giving a full explanation and I do so today simply because I enjoy offending people who are wrong. It is certainly not my intention to fuel any bad feelings between America and Japan. I wish nothing more sincerely than for the friendship between America and Japan to continue and would prefer that America was friends rather than enemies with all monarchies.

USS Arizona at Pearl Harbor

To start at the beginning of the war, even the most extreme depths of hatred and often unbridled racism against Japan on the part of the United States in World War II is usually forgiven because of the “treacherous” surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. The problem with that scenario is the fact that Japan did not intend the attack to come without warning and indeed it was only incompetence on the part of the American government that prevented Pearl Harbor from being warned that an attack by Japan was expected. However, even that is rather disingenuous as the United States had not only planned and worked for quite some time to maneuver Japan into attacking American forces in the Far East or Pacific area but, in fact, had authorized a plan to attack Japan first. Never heard about that? It is true and has been declassified since the 1970’s, the order exists with the signature of President Roosevelt right on it. You have probably even seen at least some evidence of this, even if you do not realize it. For example, most people have probably seen the film, a Japanese and American co-production, about the attack on Pearl Harbor called, “Tora! Tora! Tora!”. If so, you will remember that on the morning of the attack the Japanese planes were picked up on radar but the officer on watch dismissed the report because it was assumed that the planes were a flight of B-17 “Flying Fortress” bombers coming in from the mainland. Those who have seen the movie will also recall the dramatic scene when these bombers arrived later, during the attack, unarmed and out of gas.

Why do I bring this up? Well, ask yourself a question; why were these land-based bombers being sent to Hawaii? They served no purpose in Hawaii but that was actually the first leg of their longer flight to U.S. bases in The Philippines. Why were they being sent to The Philippines and was that their final destination? Remember that the B-17 was a heavy, strategic bomber. Bombers are not defensive weapons, they are offensive weapons. You can defend yourself with fighter planes, you cannot defend yourself with bombers. All you can do with them is attack someone else. Who in the neighborhood of The Philippines would the United States want to attack other than Japan? Of course it was Japan and we have known since the order was declassified in the 1970’s (though it is still mostly unknown) that President Roosevelt had signed off on a plan to attach a bomber force to the American mercenary fighter group in the service of the Republic of China known as the “Flying Tigers”. The plan, JB-355, was for a first-strike against Japan by American pilots flying American bombers but under the flag of China for political cover that entailed the fire-bombing of Osaka, Tokyo and Nagasaki. It was authorized by the President five months before Pearl Harbor was attacked.

American pilot captured by Japan

It should also be kept in mind that the Roosevelt administration was breaking American neutrality laws already by funding the American forces fighting for the Chinese against Japan. They were not really mercenaries at all since they were trained, armed, equipped and even paid by the U.S. government secretly while simply being listed as volunteers of the Chinese army of Chiang Kai-shek. Still, many would and have said that all of this was justified because the Japanese were the “bad guys” and “everyone knows that”. The same sentiment is used to justify the undeniable fact that President Roosevelt had maneuvered Japan into a position in which they would be forced to attack the United States. By cutting off all trade with Japan, including the export of iron and oil, persuading the British Empire and the Dutch government-in-exile to do the same, the United States effectively delivered an ultimatum to Japan: they could do nothing and suffer the total collapse of Japanese society for lack of the vital resources all industrialized countries require (and, indeed, Japan had only 18 months of oil left, in total by December of 1941), they could effectively surrender their sovereignty to the United States by giving up the right to manage their own affairs and allow America to dictate Japanese foreign policy or the Japanese could go to war with the United States. Obviously, only one outcome was in any way remotely possible. Again, however, even amongst the relatively few who are aware of these facts (and they are plain for all to see), some still try to justify it by claiming that the Japanese were “bad guys” who would have to be fought sooner or later, one way or another. Well, why was that?

Certainly the Empire of Japan had never attacked or threatened the United States or any part of the American “empire” in the Far East. What were they doing that so outraged the Roosevelt administration that war was the only option, even if America had to be the one to start it? The standard answer, of course, is that Japan had invaded China and the United States didn’t like that. Japan had set up the Empire of Manchukuo in Manchuria and restored the last Manchu Emperor to the throne there and had then gone on to fight Chinese republican forces south of the Great Wall in China proper. There were reasons and “incidents” behind every escalation of this conflict but we do not need to go into those now. The bottom line is that Japanese forces were in China and America did not like that (even though, at that point, China had not declared war on Japan and would not until after America and Britain did). It was an invasion of a sovereign country after all. Whether one thinks it was justified (as Japan did) or not (as America did) this is a fact. The problem with America being so offended by it and compelled to act against Japan because of it arises from another question one cannot help but ask; why was America not similarly prompted to action by other invasions in the East Asia area?

Japan-Manchu solidarity

After the collapse of the Qing Empire in China both Tibet and Mongolia reasserted their independence. Mongolia had never been part of China after all. The Manchu Qing dynasty had gained control of Mongolia prior to taking over China and so, even while the Qing came to rule over all of China, Mongolia could more correctly be said to have belonged to Manchuria but never China. Besides which, it had been the United States, at least since the time of the Democrat Woodrow Wilson, that liked to talk about “self-determination” so, presumably, regardless of their prior relationship with China, the Mongolians could declare independence if they wanted to. However, in 1919 the Republic of China sent troops into Mongolia, seized power and deposed the reigning monarch; the Bogd Khan. No one seemed to care in America. The only one who did care was the rogue White Russian general Baron von Ungern-Sternberg who drove out the Chinese and restored the Bogd Khan to his throne in 1921. However, his forces were soon driven out by the Soviet Red Army that took control of Mongolia and made it a part of the Soviet Union in all but name. Again, no one in America seemed to care.

Some may be wondering what any of this has to do with the matter at hand. It matters because American security or interests were no more threatened by the invasion of Manchuria or China than the invasion of Mongolia. Why was it wrong for Japan to invade China but okay for China to invade Mongolia and then for Soviet Russia to invade Mongolia? Is it only wrong if the country is big enough? Is it only wrong if there are large populations which equate to lucrative markets for foreign businesses at risk? And if Japan was “invading China” by occupying Manchuria because Manchuria had been part of the Qing Empire, why did Roosevelt not condemn Soviet Russia for “invading China” by occupying Mongolia which had also been part of the Qing Empire or when the Soviets invaded Xinjiang in 1934 which had been part of the Qing Empire and is still part of China today? Why the blatant double-standard? Of course, one could also ask why the Soviet attack on Finland was okay or the Soviet occupation and annexation of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and eastern Poland was okay but an, as yet, undeclared war between Japan and the Republic of China demanded that America take action, freeze Japanese assets, cut of all trade with Japan, ban Japanese ships from the Panama Canal and even plan to fire-bomb three Japanese cities to start a war. Yes, I think one can very well see that the Empire of Japan was being held to a very different standard from other countries in the neighborhood.

Tokyo firebombed

It is rather interesting to just take a look at the text of both the American declaration of war against Japan and the much more lengthy Japanese declaration of war against America. The justifications put forward by the United States, that, “the Imperial Government of Japan has committed unprovoked acts of war against the Government and the people of the United States of America:” is a total lie. It has been a matter of public record since the McCollum memo was first widely publicized in 2001 that the Roosevelt administration was doing everything it could to provoke an act of war by Japan against the United States. And even if one disregards the memo, the same President who denounced the “dastardly and unprovoked attack” on Pearl Harbor was also the President who months earlier had signed off on the fire-bombing of several major Japanese cities with the stated intention of causing as much death and destruction as possible. Keep that comparison in mind; fire-bombing major, heavily populated cities versus the attack on Pearl Harbor in which great care was taken so that no civilian areas or targets were hit. Again, that is a matter of public record that has never been in dispute. For the United States to say the attack on Pearl Harbor was “unprovoked” is nothing short of an outright lie.

In comparison, the Japanese declaration of war relates a lengthy list of provocations by the United States and Great Britain (and most of what Britain did was done at the insistence of the United States, in fact going all the way back to the breaking off of the British-Japanese alliance) which are all perfectly true and, again, not in dispute. Japan mentions British and American support for the Republic of China that was waging war against Japan (which also violated U.S. neutrality laws), the build-up of American military forces in East Asia and the severance of all trade with Japan by America and Britain. All perfectly true. Just consider the situation for a moment. Prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor the U.S. President had authorized and paid for American pilots and American fighter planes to be sent to China to fight against the Japanese, the Allies were sending 10,000 tons of supplies to the Chinese every month through French Indochina and finally had frozen all Japanese assets in the United States, cut off all trade with Japan and banned Japanese ships from the Panama Canal. Would anyone call these the acts of a neutral or indifferent power?

Chinese republican troops

Also remember that, at that time, about the only sources of oil exports in the world were the United States, the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) and Malaysia and the Gulf States which were all under the control of Britain. When the U.S. cut off all oil exports to Japan and persuaded Britain and the Dutch to do the same, this cut off all oil entirely. Can anyone imagine, even with the more diverse sources of energy and greater number of oil producing countries in the world today, just what sort of social and economic collapse would befall a country like the United States if, for example, just the countries of the Middle East decided to cut off all oil exports? It would be nothing short of disastrous and this was exactly the situation that Japan was facing. Likewise, other justifications for American actions do not stand up to scrutiny either. For example, the occupation of bases in French Indochina is often cited as a reason for America to take action against Japan. The problem with that is that it was done with the consent of the French government in Vichy. Aha! I know some are already shouting that this was the terrible, collaborationist government that was pro-Nazi and completely illegitimate. Unfortunately, regardless of how good or bad the Vichy regime was, at that time, the United States itself still recognized it as the legitimate government of France. So try again. In that case, there is the accusation that Japan was simply keeping bad company by having joined the Rome-Berlin Axis with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. The problem with that argument is this; guess who was the biggest supporter of those heroic “freedom fighters” of the Republic of China prior to Japan joining the Axis? Go ahead, guess. Give up? It was Nazi Germany of course. Before the outbreak of war more than half of all armaments exported from Nazi Germany went to the nationalists of the Republic of China and Nazi Germany had, for years, been helping China industrialize and modernize their army.

FDR

So, again, we come down to a blatant double-standard concerning the Empire of Japan. If being friendly with Germany was a crime, why was it not for China? If the occupation of Manchuria was an invasion of China, why wasn’t the Soviet invasion of Mongolia and Xinjiang not treated the same? Given that America was sending military forces to aid the Chinese, diverting long-rang bombers to within striking distance of the Japanese mainland, cutting off all vital resources to Japan and funding those who were waging war against Japan, how can anyone honestly say that the attack on Pearl Harbor was “unprovoked”? And, I will repeat, none of these facts are in dispute. The sanctions against Japan can be found in any history book as can the history of the American volunteers in China. The order for the fire-bombing of Japan before the two countries were at war was declassified and is now a matter of public record. This is not, furthermore, an attempt to whitewash history. Many terrible things happened during the war that are inexcusable. However, it is a matter of fact that the undeclared war between Japan and certain factions of the Republic of China became part of a world war spreading across the whole of East Asia and the South Pacific because of the actions and desires of the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and not those of the Empire of Japan.

Is Red China So Peaceful?

I have addressed this before but it is a lie that continues to be spread around by the pro-Communist Chinese partisans in the world. Over and over again the lie is repeated that "China has never attacked anyone" or some variation on that falsehood such as, 'China never invaded a foreign country' or 'China has never fought an aggressive war' -it all comes to the same thing. This is completely ridiculous as anyone who lives in the neighborhood of China should know but many people in the rest of the world seemed to be fooled by it. This is also explained by the fact that this is not a recent fabrication but one that has been around a long time. One can actually hear it in the American propaganda films "Why We Fight" from World War II in relation to the Republic of China faction of Chiang Kai-shek. Of course, it was just as untrue then as it is untrue now in reference to the People's Republic of China. Just since the communists came to complete power on the mainland of China, their government has attacked and invaded numerous foreign countries.

After Communist North Korea invaded South Korea and was defeated, Red China sent troops in and invaded South Korea in support of the DPRK (thereafter a puppet state of Communist China). Also, in 1950, Chinese communist troops invaded Tibet which had always been an independent country even as a sovereign vassal of the Great Qing Empire and it issued a declaration of independence after the overthrow of the Qing Emperor in 1911 just to reiterate this point. In 1962 Chinese Communist forces invaded the Republic of India (and little countries that got in the way like Bhutan and formerly independent Sikkim). In 1979 Red China invaded their fellow communists in Vietnam because of Chinese support for the brutal Khmer Rouge regime of Pol Pot. They were defeated by the Vietnamese and forced to retreat back to China but still claimed some territory of Vietnam (including the Paracel Islands). Most recently Red Chinese forces have also invaded the territory of The Philippines by occupying a shoal in Filipino territory. There are even more examples that could be listed but without going into a complete history of China, this should serve to make the truth obvious to all.