Path: ccsf.homeunix.org!ccsf.homeunix.org!news1.wakwak.com!nf1.xephion.ne.jp!onion.ish.org!news.daionet.gr.jp!news.yamada.gr.jp!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!newshub.sdsu.edu!postnews.google.com!l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "John W." Newsgroups: fj.life.in-japan Subject: Re: Nanjing Massacre conclusively exagerrated (real article) Date: 21 Apr 2005 05:47:18 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 64 Message-ID: <1114087638.300792.164490@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> References: <1113554805.035616.106700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <4266C116.6DFBDBDD@wta.att.ne.jp> <42670B8A.4000905@yahoo.comm> <1gvdhqv.19bm2fg18l7hmoN%dame_zumari@yahoo.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.32.36.230 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1114087642 7840 127.0.0.1 (21 Apr 2005 12:47:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:47:22 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: User-Agent: G2/0.2 Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=67.32.36.230; posting-account=IGBrEwwAAABPCeBilOMHVky8YEHrk0Ub Xref: ccsf.homeunix.org fj.life.in-japan:26741 Ernest Schaal wrote: > in article 1gvdhqv.19bm2fg18l7hmoN%dame_zumari@yahoo.com, Louise Bremner at > dame_zumari@yahoo.com wrote on 4/21/05 2:35 PM: > > > Ernest Schaal wrote: > > > >> in article 42670B8A.4000905@yahoo.comm, John W. at worthj1970@yahoo.comm > >> wrote on 4/21/05 11:10 AM: > >> > >>> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote: > >>>> In fj.life.in-japan Prophet of the Way wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I found this site by a group of historians that call themselves 'liberal' > >>>>> (jiyuu > >>>>> shugi shikan): > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Iris Chang's Errors in 'The Rape of Nanking > >>>>> looking for truths in the sea of war-time propaganda > >>>>> http://www.jiyuu-shikan.org/nanjing/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> The problem I have with books like Chang's is that it gives ammo to > >>>> those who would refute the whole idea of a massacre. Ie, if a sufficient > >>>> number of errors in a particular work can be found, then the whole > >>>> focus of the book will be called into question. > >>>> > >>> Yep. By focusing on the particulars people get away from the fact that > >>> regardless of how many people were killed it's still an atrocity. > >>> > >>> John W. > >> > >> I saw one news story saying that the atrocities ONLY numbered a 150,000 > >> people, which meant it wasn't important. > > > > Haven't the publishers of the Guiness Book of Records stated that they > > have no intention of having a World's Greatest Massacre category? > > > > So there's no need to get caught up in the numbers involved--just in the > > event itself. > > I think the reasoning is that if they could show that the Chinese > over-estimated the extent of the atrocities then they could pretend that no > atrocities took place. Personally, I find that reasoning flawed. I've always thought it was more of a we-want-to-argue mentality. But unfortunately it seems to be very one sided. I kinda wish China would follow Korea's example. John W.