On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 22:49:36 +0900, "masayuki yoshida"
<ysd_m@yahoo.co.jp> belched the alphabet and kept on going with:


>Yes, the vital issue is very relevant to jurisdictions.  Each nation has its own
>legal system.  International laws can be applied to some nations but not to
>others.  Secondly what we have to think seriously is that many war crimes in 
>question were carried out  in the previous regime of China (eg, Manchuria) by 
>the previous regime of Japan under totalitarianism.  How can you justify for the
>transferring jurisdiction.  Thirdly, why is it that contemporary Japanese have to 
>take a collective responsibility, like in feudal times, for crimes which different 
>individuals committed over 58 years ago.

I think the Hirasawa case raises a question which, if one gives it
some thought, may cause people to view the whole broad issue in a
different light:

How can one realistically expect Japanese to hold accountable their
own government for past crimes and abuses of power against the people
of other nations when they don't even hold accountable the Japanese
government for current crimes and abuses of power against themselves?





--

Michael Cash



"There was a time, Mr. Cash, when I believed you must be the most useless
thing in the world. But that was before I read a Microsoft help file."

                                Prof. Ernest T. Bass
                                Mount Pilot College


http://www.sunfield.ne.jp/~mike/