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!newsfeed.mesh.ad.jp!news-sv.sinet!ns04b.ous.ac.jp!nd-os001.ocn.ad.jp!dojima-n0.hi-ho.ne.jp!not-for-mail From: Ernest Schaal Newsgroups: fj.life.in-japan Subject: Re: Politicians block comic over 'fake' Nanjing Massacre tale Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:50:03 +0900 Organization: hi-ho Internet. Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: <73fde4f0.0410141040.6f70a6c4@posting.google.com> <73fde4f0.0410141415.1c2658f6@posting.google.com> <2tbirjF1tlj10U1@uni-berlin.de> <2tf2ecF1v20j3U1@uni-berlin.de> <2tfb4mF1uhk7mU1@uni-berlin.de> <41727888.E5AB9CBC@yahoo.co.jp> <2tfcogF1tpa1iU1@uni-berlin.de> <41728233.6387EFD5@yahoo.co.jp> <2th60mF1vti7qU1@uni-berlin.de> <2tk61aF20tkidU1@uni-berlin.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: gif3-p211.flets.hi-ho.ne.jp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dojima-n0.hi-ho.ne.jp 1098258680 37684 219.126.220.211 (20 Oct 2004 07:51:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: dojima-n0.hi-ho.ne.jp NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:51:20 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.1.5.030814.0 Xref: ccsf.homeunix.org fj.life.in-japan:19741 in article cl5552$msp$1@newsflood.tokyo.att.ne.jp, Scott Reynolds at sar@gol.com wrote on 10/20/04 4:46 PM: > On 10/20/2004 4:32 PM, Ernest Schaal wrote: >> in article cl53u1$lse$2@newsflood.tokyo.att.ne.jp, Scott Reynolds at >> sar@gol.com wrote on 10/20/04 4:26 PM: > >>> It occurred to me that you might say he was whitewashing Japan's crimes >>> in WW2. >> >> Why would I say that? > > Because he prefers to read books about Salamis than about the Rape of > Nanking. Actually, I don't like reading about WWII that much. I tend to read about earlier history. Your assumptions to the contrary, and the insulting assumption that I would assume that someone interested in earlier history is whitewashing Japan's crimes says a lot about you, and it isn't favorable. > >> Can't you tell the difference between someone silent on a particular matter >> and someone who says something didn't happen? > > I'm glad to hear that you think that people who are silent about > something are not necessarily claiming it didn't happen. I am surprised that your would think that I would assume that silent about something are claiming it didn't happen.