"Austin P. So (Hae Jin)" <haejin@netinfo.ubc.ca> wrote in message
news:bcu4s7$ia4$5@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
> "USA" <USA@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:Vt%Ha.141$2h6.100@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
>
> > > Think about that and then look at the following:
> > > http://www.korea-np.co.jp/pk/153th_issue/2000122304.htm
> > >
> > Not sure what the relevance of this is to what we are discussing.
> > This is not a trial and it has nothing to do with any governmental or
> > intergovernmental authority.
> > In other words, it is a rambling of the prosection without any
> participation
> > of defense.
> > So this information could presumably be used as part of a government or
> > intergovernment
> > investigation or even a trial, but by itself it doesn't legally hang a
> > "criminal" label around anyone's neck.
>
> This was about the guilt of Hirohito.
>
> Clearly you did not carefully read this site and I wonder if you even
> understand the concept of being tried "in absentia"?
>

No I did read it and I found that as an non-governmental and
non-intergovernmental
forum it has no jurisdiction anywhere and whatever it's findings may be
carries no weight
in the real legal world. A forum which is NOT a recognized court can't "try
someone" in
absentia or otherwise. Or put more accurately, it can but no court in he
world is going to
recognize that as a conviction. BTW, did you know that the resulting
judgement from
a trial "in absentia" is nearly impossible to enforce outside the
jurisdiction of that court?

> As far as this particular commission having any legal weight, you are
right
> it does not.
>
Ok we are in agrrement on that point.

> However, Hashimoto's government found it necessary to present legal
> documents to this commission, so there was active participation by the
> Japanese government in this commission, symbolic as this trial was. And
this
> commission found Hirohito guilty of crimes against humanity.

Then I stand corrected that Defense did participate.
Was the defense represented by the Japanese government?

> And contrary to what you wish to believe, this was not a witchhunt nor was
it a plot of
> North Koreans.

You don't know what I wish to believe so I suggest you don't make such
presumptions.
As I have suggested elsewhere, I believe there are others who have claims to
greater damages
than Koreans. That doesn't mean Koreans don't, it simply means there are
others who have
greater claims.

> It was an international tribunal sanctioned by the UN to
> investigate war crimes allegations against the japanese government of WW2.
>
It's fine that it was sanctioned by the UN.
Maybe the reason that it was sanctioned was because the UN knew it would
carry no legal
weight. Who knows?

Here's one I'll throw at you....is Adolph Hitler a War Criminal?
I'm sure we all agree that he is...but do we ever call him one?
Why not?

USA