|
Post by EXO on Dec 20, 2012 6:58:06 GMT 8
The Public Broadcasting System, a U.S. government supported media outlet, is supporting the making of a documentary about World War 2, General Yamashita and the Japanese occupation of the Philippines. They have been in Mania recently looking for people who experienced and could recall and are willing to speak on camera about their personal experiences during October 1944 to the spring of 1945- i.e. from the time of American landings to end of battle of Manila. Ideally they have been looking for someone who can speak in the first person on camera about what happened to them or what they saw happen to others. This is to flesh out the visual background and to give the appearance of credibility to Allan A. Ryan's book “Yamashita's Ghost: War Crimes, MacArthur's Justice, and Command Accountability,” yet another reopening of the case against Yamashita to "illuminate crucial questions and controversies that have surrounded his trial and conviction, but also to deepen our understanding of broader contemporary issues - especially the limits of command accountability." Ryan, who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Byron White, was a U.S. Marine Corps judge advocate, as well as chief prosecutor of Nazis who fled to the U.S. and lied about their criminal past, has written an impressive and important book about the case in which he is unashamedly sympathetic to Yamashita and critical of the military judges and their superior, the imperious Douglas MacArthur. Ryan’s sums up the case this way: "Yamashita’s ghost lingers in the law. Born in an unprecedented and ambiguous charge by a vindictive American general, nurtured by a misbegotten trial by his subordinates, deferentially upheld by America’s highest court, shaped by two panels of American judges at Nuremberg, and incorporated into official American policy and international tribunals, it has loomed over the international law of war for too long." Now the PBS want to whitewash Yamashita, and make him a leftist hero, the sort of fellow you'd like to have dinner with, if President Obama was already unavailable for the evening. The questions that puzzle me are: why?
why is the PBS promoting Ryan now, when there are earlier treatments? (Yamashita's Ghost, is not the first book on this subject. In 1982 The Yamashita Precedent, by Richard Lael, tackled the subject of war crimes and command responsibility. The Case for Yamashita, by Frank Reel, came out in 2008. The Trials of Homma, Yamashita, MacArthur--by Lawrence Taylor in 1981; and The Tiger of Malaysia in 1953--by Aubrey St. Kenworthy.) What is it that Ryan is bringing to the party that the others have not?
[c] why is the PBS, a U.S. government supported media outlet, putting up funds for the project? Where's the money coming from?
(Addendum: The film production company is SAYBROOK PRODUCTIONS of 151 West 86th Street, Suite 6C, New York, NY 10024. At the helm of Saybrook, is Jonathan Silvers. Silvers is "committed personally and professionally to human rights and substantive journalism. With much of the world's population in urgent need of health care, food, education, and economic opportunity, television documentaries on often neglected issues can stimulate public discourse and bridge fault lines between people and nations. In the post-9/11 world, Silvers believe this awareness stimulates discourse and generates the kind of public engagement that leads to sustainable development and improvements in standards of living." The publisher of Yamashita's Ghost is the University Press of Kansas. - Registrar)
[d] Why have they been cherry-picking, discarding completely any views contrary to Ryan? Do they have an agenda?
You bet your sweet bippy they do!
|
|
|
Post by sherwino on Dec 20, 2012 8:20:44 GMT 8
They probably needed some "new" stuff to broadcast. New controversies and conspiracy theories. And it gets interesting.
|
|
|
Post by JohnEakin on Dec 20, 2012 9:36:33 GMT 8
Liberals love to rewrite history to fit their warped sense of how things should be.
This is no different than those who work for socialism, gun control or other fantasies which history has proven not to work.
|
|
|
Post by EXO on Dec 20, 2012 16:13:03 GMT 8
Agreed. Though it is a lot more serious than just a search for fresh content. PBS is a political animal. There's any number of books being written these days, so why is it that the someone within PBS has chosen “Yamashita's Ghost: War Crimes, MacArthur's Justice, and Command Accountability” on which to spend a couple of hundred thousand dollars? Politics, obviously. Because they will be using this documentary to teach us a lesson. We are in the midst of a massive revision of history in which America is to become the Evil Empire, Yamashita the honorable warrior you'd wish to have dinner with, Hirohito the quiet marine biologist, and MacArthur the evil mass murderer fired because he went postal on the peace-loving North Koreans. I've even had someone try to sell me the idea that because MacArthur hoodwinked Roosevelt into retaking the Philippines and not Taiwan (simply to satisfy his vanity), thus everything bad which happened in the Philippines was MacArthur's fault. (Gee, can't we blame George Bush in there too?) There's a bunch of people each of us know who wouldn't have been alive if the Americans had bypassed the Philippines. Maybe MacArthur should have set up a table somewhere in Pampanga, and invited Yamashita to parley over coffee and rice wine, thus arranging for Manila to be declared an open city. Don't laugh. In his appeal dissent Murphy J. of the United States Supreme Court frighteningly argued that: No one in a position of command in an army, from sergeant to general, can escape those implications. Indeed, the fate of some future President of the United States and his chief of staff and military advisers may well have been sealed by this decision. PBS sees itself as America's largest classroom, so who better to push your view that, say, in respect of innocent lives killed by drones in Pakistan, President Obama cannot be charged in the International Court of Justice under the "Yamashita Principle" because the "Yamashita Principle" comes from an evil lynchmob of a MacArthur puppet court that must be totally discredited. Who better to persuade the American public that they cannot trust the U.S. Military because WWII was not "A Good War" but instead was a Racial War. And here's an interesting one...particularly if John Kerry becomes Secretary of State - that John Kerry, under the Yamashita principle, is as responsible for civilians killed during the war in Iraq as Henry Kissinger is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians during the bombing of Laos and Cambodia. Ouch, my brain hurts!
|
|
|
Post by Registrar on Dec 20, 2012 18:44:24 GMT 8
Posted on behalf of John Rocha, who was intimately involved with the Foundation that established the Memorare-Manila 1945 monument in Intramuros:[/i] Although I was not interviewed for the NHK’s video titled “ Remembering the Battle for Manila”, I nevertheless came out several times as the editor extrapolated scenes from previous NHK interview regarding Memorare-Manila on numerous events that was held on the liberation of Manila highlighting Japanese atrocities against non-combatants. On several instances, I was quoted out of context and my name was changed. I protested to the Japanese Embassy and the local NHK representative but to no avail. This video was repeatedly shown in Manila on the History Channel. Through the use of half truths, self-serving interviews, ingenious splicing of old footage...etc.. an erroneous impression on the Battle for Manila was achieved, insinuating the Japanese were acting in self-defence against the civilian population which they alleged was heavily infiltrated by armed guerrillas and worse yet, the false allegation that US troops also committed atrocities against civilians. In reality Historical BASURA. Thanks and regards, John
|
|
|
Post by Registrar on Dec 20, 2012 18:56:59 GMT 8
In a message dated 19/12/2012 17:49:34 GMT Standard Time, ANGUS LORENZEN of BACEPOW writes:
Several years ago, the Japanese television giant NHK made a video titled, Remembering the Battle of Manila. It purports to have done research at the U.S. National Archives as a basis. It uses all of the tricks that televison has for implying authority when there is none that exisits. For instance, its claim to National Archives authority is proven by showing a sequence of someone walking through the stacks. The theme of the video is that the U.S. was totally at fault for the huge death rate of Filipino civilians. First, it states that U.S. forces surrounded Manila, preventing the Japanese forces from leaving the city, which was the reason that the Japnese had to fight there. We know that is false because the 1st Cavalry and 37th Infantry entered North Manila and did not start their effort to cross the Pasig River and move around to the east for several days, and the 11th Airborne was still well to the south and took several weeks of hard fighting to enter the Manila suburbs to complete the surrounding of the city.
The two glider regiments of the 11th Airborne Division landed on Nasgubu Beach 70 miles south of Manila on January 31, 1945, and the 511th Airborne Regiment jumped on Tagaytay Ridge on February 3. The two forces joined up and started their advance on Manila. They were delayed for several days by heavy fighting near Nichols Field and Fort McKinley, leaving the back door open for two weeks for Admiral Iwabuchi and his troops to escape Manila, had they wanted to.
[ NOTE: While other American troops were driving on Manila from the north, the 11th Airborne made an amphibious landing 60 miles south of Manila, 31 January 1945, at Nasugbu, and began to drive north. The first combat jump by an element of the division in the war, that of the 511th Parachute Infantry Regiment on Tagaytay Ridge, 3 February 1945, met no resistance. The 511th crossed the Paranaque River 5 February, and reached Manila, meeting fierce Japanese resistance. Nichols Field was taken, 12 February, and Fort McKinley was flanked, 12-16 February, and finally taken, 17 February. Throughout this period, and until 10 February, the Japanese Forces held control of corridors to the East, and could have staged a fighting withdrawal had they been ordered to. That significant forces remained in Manila was intentional, and the claim that it was an error not to allow them to stage some form of fighting withdrawal is a modern myth. Registrar.] Second, it shows the same combat film sequence several times - American troops lying on a street firing rifles over the heads of Filipinos also lying in the street. This is repeatedly described as Americans shooting AT Filipinos. Third, it admits that the Japanese were forced to kill some civilians, but only to prevent guerillas from infiltratring their defenses. Killing women, children, and babies in huge numbers somehow prevent the guerillas from infiltration? These are just a few of the egregious statements made in this Japanese video. To my knowledge, it has not been shown on U.S. television. I suspect it was primarily made for consumption in the Philippines and other Asian countries. At the time I reviewed the video, I wrote to a number of people and stated that if this video was ever shown on U.S. TV we would have to initiate a passionate campaign against it to set the record straight.
If PBS is now to pick up the cudgel for the Japanese, then it is time to start a wide ranging campaign against this distortion of history by a U.S. government supported media outlet. Cheers, Angus
|
|
|
Post by Registrar on Dec 20, 2012 19:05:11 GMT 8
On December 19, 2012, Historian DR. RICO JOSE, wrote as follows concerning this PBS Documentary:
The Yamashita people did come to see me and interviewed me on the Philippine campaign, the Battle of Manila, the war crimes trials, memory of the war etc.
I gave them the best I could, indicating particularly that the atrocities in Manila were not committed by crazed men but men following orders.
I also tried to stress to them that Iwabuchi and Yokokayama were in touch with Okochi and Yamashita respectively, although the radio communications were not perfect.
I gave them a copy of my article on the Japanese side of Manila published a couple of years ago, and also stressed that Gen. Muto told other war criminal suspects not to admit guilt and thus safeguard the reputation of the Japanese Army.
I told Allan (Ryan) that I believe Yamashita knew what had happened - I will try to find my source on this and send it to him. So I hope I have done my part.
Actually, they were referred to me by the National Historical Commission last September...(private comments deleted)...so I couldn't say no.
|
|
|
Post by Registrar on Dec 20, 2012 19:12:23 GMT 8
The following was received for publication from Mr. PETER PARSONS, War Correspondent, Author, Historian and Documentary Film Maker. Peter has done extensive research at the National Archives, locating many documents never before published or taken into account.
I was interviewed by them also.
I found them to be totally convinced already in their views of Yamashita's total innocence.
I argued a bit with them, but I sense their view is fixed and permanent and that their mission to make a video of the innocent Yamashita.
They will give token mention of atrocities just for authenticity. But they are not looking for alternate views of Yamashita; rather I think they are looking for any corroboration of their own already fixed views.
Banzai Peter
|
|
|
Post by okla on Dec 20, 2012 23:11:10 GMT 8
Hey Registrar....You mentioned that Japanese General Muto and others were concerned about the reputation of the Japanese Army. I would think that the reputation of the Japanese Army had been well established in 1937 at Nanking and "embellished" a hundredfold in the following years by their consistent, brutal behavior wherever they set foot. If not official policy, then this behavior, evidently, is ingrained in their "DNA". Just my humble.
|
|
|
Post by Registrar on Dec 21, 2012 6:20:18 GMT 8
On 21 December, Angus LORENZEN, writing for BACEPOW, invited us to publish the following:[/i] In April of 2011, I wrote an editorial for Beyond the Wire, the journal for civilian POWs in the Philippines that highlights what is happening here. There are many academics who are trying to rewrite the history of the Pacific war, pointing at the U.S. as the culprit. Here is that editorial. ____________________________________________ From the Commander The number of people with first-hand knowledge of WW II is diminishing rapidly as the GIs who fought in the battles and the POWs who suffered in captivity decline. We now see a new breed of authors writing books about their fictional personal experiences. Also, there is a new breed of academics intent on rewriting the history of the war to reflect a bias that casts us as the aggressors rather than the victims. We can start with the Japanese. There is a documentary made for the History Channel by NHK called Remembering the Battle of Manila which blames the United States for the destruction. It asserts that the battle would never have occurred if American forces hadn’t surrounded the city, preventing the Japanese troops from evacuating it, and that the killing of Filipinos was only required to prevent guerilla infiltration (80,000 murdered including women and children ). The December 23, 2010 issue of Shukan Shincho, the second largest weekly magazine in Japan, made a scurrilous attack on Bataan Death March survivor Lester Tenney, presenting outrageous lies about the Japanese treatment of American POWs. It claims that the Death March was far less rigorous than described, and was the Americans fault for destroying their own vehicles, which could have been used to transport them. And then it states that the tortures are strictly American fabrications. The Japanese are not educated about their World War II history, and are susceptible to this kind of propaganda. But when the U.S. government gets into the act with the National Endowment for the Humanities sponsoring a workshop for college professors last July at the East-West Center, University of Hawaii, titled History and Commemoration: The Legacies of the Pacific War, we have to wonder what is going on. The scholarly presentations included such subjects as: The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor should be seen from the perspective of Japan being a victim of western oppression.
The U.S. military and its veterans constitute an imperialistic, oppressive force.
War memorials, such as the Punchbowl National Memorial Cemetery are symbols of military aggression and brutality.
Conservatives and veterans in the U.S. have had an undue and corrupt influence on how WWII is remembered.
Veterans' memories of their own experiences in the war are suspect and influenced by their own self-delusion.
The US government, sponsoring academics to cast Americans as the aggressors in World War II, funded this conference. There is only one way to fight this corrosive history and that is to document our own experiences and to broadcast them. That is the purpose of this newsletter, and we encourage anyone who has a story to tell to offer it for us to publish. Please send your stories to one of the editors shown in our masthead. Furthermore, we should make our anger at this “progressive” reinterpretation of history known to our Congressmen and Senators. Eliminating funding of the National Endowment for the Humanities would be beneficial. Angus LORENZENfor BACEPOW
|
|