Malaysia shuts down Saudi-backed anti-terrorism centre

Malaysia shuts down Saudi-backed anti-terrorism centre
The centre was supposed to attract Islamic scholars interested in combatting extremist views and promoting tolerance
Malaysia’s new government has closed a Saudi-backed anti-terrorism centre, just over a year after it was launched by the kingdom’s ruling monarch during a visit.

Defence Minister Mohamad Sabu said in a written reply to a question in parliament on Monday that the King Salman Centre for International Peace will cease operation immediately and that its function will be absorbed by the Malaysian Institute of Defence and Security.

He did not give a reason for the closure.

The centre, which aims to draw Islamic scholars to combat extremist views and promote tolerance, was announced in March last year during King Salman’s visit to Malaysia under former Malaysian leader Najib Razak. It has a temporary office in Kuala Lumpur while awaiting the construction of a permanent building in Malaysia’s administrative capital of Putrajaya.
Najib suffered a shocking defeat in May’s national polls and is now facing corruption charges.

Opposition lawmaker Hishammuddin Hussein, who was formerly defence minister, said on Tuesday that the move to close the centre was a loss to the nation amid growing terrorism in the Muslim world. He said the centre was aimed at putting predominantly Muslim Malaysia at the forefront of the fight against violent extremism and ideologies together with Saudi Arabia.

There have been concerns in recent years that under Najib, Saudi Arabia’s ultraconservative interpretation of Islam has gained an expanded foothold in Malaysia. The kingdom has built mosques and schools across the region and offers scholarships to Malaysians and other Southeast Asian Muslims who want to study in Saudi Arabia.

posted by ZUKUNASHI at 23:21| Comment(0) | 国際・政治

Jon Letman: The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima, Nagasaki "Morally Indefensible

Jon Letman: The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima, Nagasaki "Morally Indefensible
TEHRAN (FNA)- The US government gives the impression of a dishonest political actor to those who believe it should not demand other countries to abandon their nuclear programs while possessing a large stockpile of atomic weapons itself.

The United States was the first nation to use nuclear weapons during wartime, and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945 prompted a massive humanitarian disaster in which more than 220,000 people were killed and hundreds of others were affected with radiations and the consequences of nuclear explosions for several years.

An American journalist based in Hawaii says the United States is not well-suited to advise other countries on nuclear non-proliferation as long as it maintains a huge nuclear arsenal.

“... America cannot preach about the danger of nuclear proliferation while at the same time continuing to develop, build, test, store and use its own nuclear weapons as a tool of fear and intimidation,” said Jon Letman in an interview he gave to Fars News Agency.

Commenting on the US nuclear policies, Letman added, “operating under ‘double standards’ is so thoroughly ingrained in the American social and political psyche that a huge segment of the American public simply accepts it as a given that certain rules apply to certain parties, while those same rules may not apply to another party – fairness and consistency be damned.”

Letman, whose writings have appeared on Al Jazeera English, Truthout, Inter Press Service and Christian Science Monitor, believes the nuclear bombing of the two Japanese cities were “morally indefensible” and unnecessary, as opposed to what some observers say was an impetus for forcing Japan into surrender.

“It’s important to remember that even after the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, air assaults on an already devastated Japan continued with an estimated 15,000 more Japanese dying before Japan’s surrender,” he asserted.

Jon Letman is an independent freelance journalist and photographer from the Hawaiian island of Kauai. He writes on Asia-Pacific politics and environment.

Before taking part in the interview with FNA on the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Jon Letman asked us to clarify that he is not an authority on nuclear energy and foreign policy. However, he responded to our questions elaborately and provided an insight into the nuclear policies of the US government and the “militarization” of US foreign policy.

“America can’t expect to be fully respected as long as it wags its finger at other countries, speaking down to them like a parent scolding a naughty child,” Letman told FNA.

Q: The use of atomic bombs against Japan by the United States in August 1945 turned a dark chapter in the contemporary history of military conflicts. It was said at that time that without the nuclear bombings following the Japanese empire’s military strike against the US naval base in Pearl Harbor, the war would have spiraled out of control and massive killings would have taken place, but the atomic bombings averted that, saved lives and forced Japan into surrender. Do you agree with this conviction?

A: In the United States we frequently hear how the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki “saved lives.” The question is: whose lives? Certainly it didn’t save the lives of tens of thousands of Japanese civilians who were roasted in their homes nor did it save the lives of the countless hibakusha or atomic bombing survivors, who lived and died with unspeakable pain after their world was destroyed.

There is no shortage of thoughtful, fact-based analysis that debunks the idea that two atomic bombs or even one was necessary to end the war. One of the best recent books to explore these questions in detail is Joseph Gerson’s Empire and the Bomb. “The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus” also has plenty of well-researched articles that consider the question of the atomic bombings of August 1945.

It’s important to remember that even after the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, air assaults on an already devastated Japan continued with an estimated 15,000 more Japanese dying before Japan’s surrender. In Gerson’s book he points out that the US was prepared to employ as many as seven atomic bombs against Japan by the end of October 1945.

Another important point [on] the question of proportionality is considered in Errol Morris’ 2003 film The Fog of War in which former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara reflects on the America’s relentless firebombing of Japan even before August 1945.

My own view is that Japanese civilians were used as guinea pigs by the US government and military in its attempt to test its awesome new weapon and to send the world, especially the Soviet Union, a strong message. Not only were the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki not “necessary,” they are morally indefensible.

Q: The United States has been criticized by many academicians and people with some influence over the public opinion for what’s being considered to be its nuclear double standards. It has pressured Iran for over 12 years through harsh economic sanctions over its non-existent nuclear weapons, and at the same time, ignored the possession of atomic warheads and nuclear bombs by Israel, India and Pakistan. What could be the sources of this inconsistency?

A: Operating under “double standards” is so thoroughly ingrained in the American social and political psyche that a huge segment of the American public simply accepts it as a given that certain rules apply to certain parties, while those same rules may not apply to another party – fairness and consistency be damned.

If asked, most Americans would probably say they’d prefer India and especially Pakistan to be free of nuclear weapons and yet the US accepts and lives with both as nuclear states. However, neither India nor Pakistan has been demonized to the extent Iran has. For more than 35 years, Americans have heard an oversimplified and incomplete but consistent narrative that “Iran is evil, Iran is dangerous” and so it stands to reason. Americans find the idea of a nuclear-armed Iran, no matter how close or far that idea may be from reality, is enough to send politicians and the public into fits of hysteria.

Israel, on the other hand, is treated as though it is a bastion of freedom and democracy in a region beset by anti-American hostility and so our “closest ally” in the Middle East – sorry Saudi Arabia! – gets a pass on its undeclared nuclear weapons. That said, in general, Israeli nuclear weapons are shrouded in a sort of cloak of immunity for serious debate in the US; think of the three monkeys covering their eyes, ears and mouths.

And then there is the largely ignored question of America’s own nuclear weapons. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, as of January 2015 the US has a nuclear weapons stockpile in excess of 7,200, second only to Russia with 7,500. Furthermore, according to the Ploughshares Fund and other nuclear experts, the US may invest as much as $1 trillion on “upgrading” or “modernizing” its nuclear weapons.

Somehow, these issues almost never come up in the discussion of the purported “threat” of a nuclear Iran. The American corporate media, in particular, is largely negligent in holding American politicians and policy makers to account. Usually most big US media is too afraid to jeopardize its access to politicians to pursue the issue of double standards and, in many cases it is complicit in parroting the willful deception that is central to American nuclear narratives.

Q: As we’re talking, the Japanese people have just commemorated the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. There are three key issues here: the moral grounds, the legal basis and the necessity of deploying atomic bombs. Was the nuclear bombing of the two Japanese cities morally defensible, legally justifiable and necessary?

A: I don’t know what kind of moral standards one could claim to have if they were arguing that roasting 200,000 men, women and children in three days with atomic weapons was “morally defensible.” I can’t tell you if such a bombing was “legal” or not but if one was to say it was, what would that say about our laws?

Q: You raised an interesting point. The US government considers its large nuclear arsenal an instrument of deterrence against those who might harbor ill wishes against its security and sovereignty. Why should the United States, which spends on its military and defense projects more than the seven next biggest world countries combined, be fearful about its security and respond to this anxiety by possessing nuclear weapons?

A: In the US we talk a lot about “national security” when we should probably be discussing “national insecurity.” Fear is fostered and fed on many levels in the US – everything from our education system to our domestic law enforcement to our foreign policy and even our recreation and entertainment industries are steeped in fear and insecurity.

In spite of the enormous military spending of the US, and despite the well-documented record arms sales conducted between the US and a multitude of Middle East and other nations under President Obama, he is still targeted by critics especially in Congress for “eviscerating” the military. If you listen to many Republican candidates in the 2016 race, they still talk about the need for a bigger, stronger, more powerful military and are roundly applauded when they do so.

Q: Right. So, I only have a couple of more questions. The former US ambassador to Afghanistan and retired United States Army Lieutenant General Karl W. Eikenberry argued in a speech that the US foreign policy, over the course of past few decades, has become excessively militarized and dependent on hard power. This is specifically evident in the decisions made by the US administration under President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama following the beginning of the project of the War on Terror. What could be the reasons for the expansion of the military dimension of the US foreign policy?

A: There are many reasons but to name two obvious ones. First, a lack of imagination and patience. As we see with the P5+1 talks with Iran, real diplomacy takes time and requires a lot of hard work. It involves understanding the other side on a level deeper than simply good or bad. It requires patience, planning and both an understanding of history and the ability to foresee possible future consequences. Diplomacy requires cooperation, compromise, trust and humility.

A commitment to diplomacy also requires striving to effort understand the other side’s position – not only their means and aspirations, but their sense of spirit and their sources of fear and pride. This sort of approach to foreign policy takes a lot of time and effort. It’s much easier to just be loud and brash and make wild declarations like “you’re either for us or you’re against us” or “they are an evil nation,” and such. It’s easier to hit than it is to talk.

The other big reason, I think, is money. War is very, very profitable for defense contractors and the business of promoting conflict, instability and fear, has been the oil that has lubricated the American machine for a long time.

Q: And my concluding question. As the first nation to have produced and the only nation to have used nuclear weapons in warfare, what should the United States do in order to improve its global image and standing in the eyes of public and those who consider its nuclear policies insincere?

A: I think if the US wants to be respected and not just feared, it needs to fundamentally restructure how it engages with the rest of the world. The first thing that needs to go is this notion of “American exceptionalism” – the idea that America is imbued with God-given qualities that make it a special nation above all others.

America can’t expect to be fully respected as long as it wags its finger at other countries, speaking down to them like a parent scolding a naughty child.

America cannot continue to treat every country and every corner of the world as if it is vital to its own “national interests,” a term that is so often used as a pretext for America doing whatever it wants.

And lastly, specific to the question of nuclear weapons, America cannot preach about the danger of nuclear proliferation while at the same time continuing to develop, build, test, store and use its own nuclear weapons as a tool of fear and intimidation.

posted by ZUKUNASHI at 23:10| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故

広島長崎の核爆弾破裂後の画像 被爆者の体験

Hiroshima: Heartbreaking Photos from Aftermath

Real Footage: US Nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki

73th Anniversary of US-A-Bombings in Hiroshima & Nagasaki

Hiroshima Survivor: "Faceless Body Belonged to My Sister"
TEHRAN (FNA)- Blackened bodies, mothers who couldn’t recognize their charred children and those still alive screaming with pains which are horrific details the survivors of nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who recall ahead of 70th anniversary of the tragedy.

The US was the first nation to use nuclear weapons against an enemy target when they dropped atomic bombs on Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II on August 6 and 9, 1945.

More than 80,000 civilians died immediately as a result of the Hiroshima bomb, a device nicknamed ‘Little Boy’ by the US Air Force, and other 80,000 were believed killed in the Nagasaki attack by ‘Fat Man’. Thousands died from radiation sickness in the months and years following the blasts.

As of August 2014 the memorials in Hiroshima and Nagasaki list the names of more than 450,000 people who died in the tragedy: 292,325 in Hiroshima and 165,409 in Nagasaki.

Chiyoko Kuwabara, a survivor of Hiroshima atomic bombing, told RT that she was only 13 years old when the tragedy happened but the moments that changed her life forever still “linger in her memory.”

“There were corpses all over the place and when a mother would walk looking for her kids she sometimes would hear cries calling ‘mom…mom…’ But even if they look at their children’s faces they couldn`t recognize them. It was the children who recognize their mothers,” Kuwabara said with tears in her eyes.

People like Kuwabara are called Hibakusha in Japan, a term for those who were exposed to radiation from the nuclear bombings.

Kuwabara led RT team to Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum which displays the horrors of the atomic bombing of the city: the damages caused by the bomb as well as photos of dying or dead people.

“It makes me suffer to look at these pictures…Poor people…I think they all died,” she says, looking at the photos.

Kuwabara told RT that she feels disappointed by the current US administration of President Barack Obama.

"He [Obama] said he will reduce the nuclear weapons. Instead he is increasing it. Whatever beautiful words or acts he does I think America is not acting with sincerity. At least he should come to Hiroshima and Nagasaki and pay respects.”

RT also spoke to a survivor of atomic bombing of Nagasaki, Sumiteru Taniguchi, who back in August 9, 1945 was delivering mail when a bomb fell on the city.

“I was 16 years old. Two kilometers from the epicenter I was walking and got the blast from behind. I could see it was from behind the light I was thrown,” Taniguchi told RT.

The heat from the blast melted the skin on his back and left arm. The footage of his horrific injuries has become iconic and Taniguchi is now a living symbol of the suffering caused by the bombs.

The 86-year-old said that after the explosion he stayed in hospital three years and seven months and during his first year and nine months he was lying on his chest.

“My back was completely burned to the bones. And parts of my body hardened and the ribs got into my heart and lungs. It is very painful still today.”

One more survivor of the Nagasaki bombings, Sanae Ikeda, 82, recalls how he lost his brothers and a sister in the tragedy.

“The explosion took away the skin of my hand and I started to bleed. The light was green and then I couldn't see anything.”

In the middle of the road Ikeda saw someone – “a charred human being walking,” he described to RT. He even couldn't figure out if it was a man or woman.

“Survivors who were badly hurt had no place to escape so everyone went to soak into a narrow stream of water running in the nearby.”

Ikeda recalls horrible moment he saw the body of his sister which was completely deformed by the explosion.

“I found this body completely black, charred. I held it with my hands and it had no face Then I found that the string or ribbon of the waist of her pants. The outer part was all burned by the explosion, but inside the ribbon it was fine. I saw the little flowers and I could tell that this was the body of my little sister.”

The bombings were approved by then US President Harry S Truman, who repeatedly stated that attacking Japan had saved lives on both sides.

“I think that the bombs were believed at the time to be necessary. as General [George] Marshall, who was head of the US military during the war said after the war, ‘we didn’t want to have to invade Japan,’” Richard Rhodes, an American historian, journalist and author who won a Pulitzer Prize for his book ‘The Making of the Atomic Bomb’, told RT.

“We knew we would kill many Japanese, and many Americans would die as well,” he added.

But according to Peter Kuznick, professor of History and Director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, the atomic bomb “wasn’t necessary at all” to end the World War II.

“I think you can’t come to any other conclusion than the bomb wasn’t necessary, the Soviet invasion was going to end the war, and the US invasion was not going to begin till November first, so we dropped the bomb on August 6 and 9 to avoid an invasion that was not going to take place for three more months. Why do we do it? Well you have to conclude that we wanted to do it.”

He added that if you look at the comments of US leaders at that time, “in fact, six or seven 5-star admirals and generals who got their fifth star during the war [WWII] are on record as saying that the bomb was either militarily unnecessary morally reprehensible or both.”

‘Faceless body belonged to my sister’: Hiroshima, Nagasaki nuke survivors recall horrors 70 years on

US will never apologize for Hiroshima, Nagasaki - President Truman’s grandson
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 22:53| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故





posted by ZUKUNASHI at 20:53| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故








posted by ZUKUNASHI at 20:27| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故


NATO fighter jet ‘accidentally’ fires live missile near Russian border
Spanish fighter jets taking part in a NATO Air policing mission over Estonia have been temporarily suspended from completing their duties, after one of the pilots erroneously fired an armed missile during a training flight.

A group of two Spanish Eurofighter Typhoon 2000 jets and two French Mirage 2000 jets were taking part in a training exercise over southwestern Estonia on Tuesday when one of the Spanish planes accidentally launched an air-to-air missile, the Spanish Defense Ministry said in a statement, adding that the projectile “did not hit any aircraft.”

All the jets then safely returned to their Saiuliai air base in Lithuania, the ministry said, adding that it has opened an investigation into the incident. Meanwhile, the Estonian authorities decided to ban the Spanish aircraft from taking part in the air policing missions over its territory for a while.

“I have ordered a suspension of all military sorties [by the Spanish jets] until the situation is resolved,” the Estonian Defense Minister Juri Luik said, as cited by the national ERR broadcaster. He added that “the NATO air mission will continue, though.” ERR reports that the Portuguese Air Force will take Spain’s place as part of the mission for the time being.

“The most important thing is to ensure safety and find out what happened, together with our allies,” Luik said, commenting on his decision. The missile fired by the jet should have self-destructed but apparently failed to do so.

The projectile in question is an AMRAAM-type air-to-air missile with a firing range of 100 kilometers that carries a warhead fitted with explosives of up to 10 kilograms. It was last located some 40 kilometers north of Estonia’s city of Tartu, where it might have landed on the ground, according to Estonian media.

The Estonian Air Force launched a search operation on Tuesday evening. The authorities also asked the locals to be wary and notify the military or the emergency services in case they find the missile or its parts.

The Estonian Prime Minister Juri Ratas called the incident “horrible” and “regrettable.” However, he nevertheless praised the NATO mission as a “very important and necessary part of ensuring Estonia’s security.”

posted by ZUKUNASHI at 14:38| Comment(0) | 国際・政治

米連邦保健当局職員 発がんと放射性廃棄物との関係がありうることを認める セントルイス

Federal health officials agree radioactive waste in St. Louis area may be linked to cancer

The federal government confirms some people in the St. Louis area may have a higher risk of getting cancer. A recent health report found some residents who grew up in areas contaminated by radioactive waste decades ago may have increased risk for bone and lung cancers, among other types of the disease. The assessment was conducted by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a branch of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

As CBS News correspondent Anna Werner reports, the situation is not unique to St. Louis because it's connected to America's development of its nuclear weapons program decades ago. Radioactive wastes persist in soils, and many believe that's why they or a loved one developed cancer. Now for the first time, federal health officials agree, on the record, that's a real possibility.

"You'll never forget the moment they tell you, 'We found lesions on your lung and your liver,'" Mary Oscko told CBS News three years ago.

She had been diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer in 2013, despite never touching a cigarette. She's now on the last drug her doctors can offer, to hold her cancer at bay.

"I'm not ready to die yet," she said. "I have things to contribute to society."

Oscko and her husband Gerard are just two of many who believe their families' cancers were caused by decades-old radioactive contamination. In the 1940's and 1950's, St. Louis was key to America's nuclear weapons program. The government hired the Mallinckrodt Chemical Company to process uranium used to make the atomic bombs dropped in Japan in World War II.

The radioactive wastes from that processing were then stored at sites in North County. Tens of thousands of barrels, many stacked and left open to the elements, contaminated the soil and nearby Coldwater Creek. It's the creek that sometimes flooded the park next to the Oscko's house.

The Army Corps of Engineers has cleaned up two major sites and has spent years testing hundreds of properties along Coldwater Creek.

"The testing and sampling itself is extremely complicated," said Bruce Munholand, the project manager.

He says trucking activities caused some of the contamination.

"They did not practice very good techniques as far as hauling, the trucks were uncovered and things were just allowed to proceed sloppily so all along the whole route debris would just fall off the trucks," Munholand said.

That means figuring out precise health risks was a challenge for federal scientists, like Jill Dyken.

"Trying to get a good estimate of what the contamination may have been in the past was one of the tougher questions that we had to deal with," she said.

Despite that, Dyken and her colleagues did find distinct potential risks. For children who grew up near Coldwater Creek, or lived in its flood plain for many years in the 1960s to the 1990s, the risk of some cancers may be higher, in particular for bone and lung cancers.

The agency gave its results at community meetings in June. Still, many residents were left with unanswered questions. But activist Kim Visintine says the report marks progress.

"We would like to see additional areas testing and that study gave us that opportunity," Visintine said.

Her Facebook group began tracking suspicious cancers in 2012, and has pushed for health studies. But for Visintine, whose 6-year-old son died from a brain tumor 12 years ago, the report gives much-needed confirmation.

"For them to acknowledge that it is a possibility is a huge deal," Visintine said.

Three years ago, the Army Corps of Engineers found low-level radiation in the park next to the Oscko's home. It's cleaned up now, but they live with the knowledge that their children grew up playing there.

"We didn't know that or we wouldn't have bought this house," Oscko said.

"If I would've known, I could've done something and left," she said.

Some residents, including the Osckos, are suing Mallinckrodt and other companies that handled uranium and radioactive waste.

In a statement, Mallinckrodt said in part: "At all times, the company worked under the direction of the U.S. Government, as did other contractors, and at no time did Mallinckrodt own any uranium or its byproducts. The U.S. Government owned all the uranium raw materials, in-process product, byproducts and residues and determined site locations where work was performed. Further, for decades, the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have been responsible for and are handling all clean-up efforts on these sites."
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 12:34| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故



Sameera Khan認証済みアカウント @SameeraKhan氏の2018/3/3のツイート
#JeSuisRT: US Censorship of #RT
1) US intel blames RT for #Trump
2) #Google & #Twitter ban RT ads
3) #DOJ forces RT to register as #ForeignAgent under #FARA
4) #Congress revokes RT’s credentials
5) #NDAA passes − allowing cable to cancel contracts w/ RT
6) #StateDept dismisses RT



posted by ZUKUNASHI at 11:21| Comment(0) | 国際・政治

ゼンテイカ ニッコウキスゲ

a lily that bears large yellow, red, or orange flowers, each flower lasting only one day.

Jules #Photographer @PicturedImage氏の2018/8/のツイート
My little #video - Heather flowering in Northumberland #NationalPark @NlandNP. @uknationalparks
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 11:07| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故



※ 自然なものを。 @ryota332211氏の2018/8/7のツイート

※ 白鳥沙羅bot @yo_kopyua氏の2018/8/6のツイート

※ ロイロイ @Roy1358氏の17:58 - 2018年8月7日のツイート
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 09:36| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故


※ かまたまる @kamata_erai氏の2018/8/6のツイート

※ 是々非々 @asahihakokuzoku氏の21:20 - 2018年8月7日 のツイート

※ かまたまる @kamata_erai氏の2018/8/8のツイート


posted by ZUKUNASHI at 09:26| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故


※ 八木明々 @nrg34331氏の2018/8/7のツイート

※ 桑ちゃん @namiekuwabara氏の21:13 - 2018年8月6日のツイート

※ kotan @SwersKotan氏の2018/8/6のツイート

posted by ZUKUNASHI at 09:15| Comment(1) | 福島原発事故

木々と知り合う ムクゲ

道のべの木槿は馬に食はれけり  芭蕉



posted by ZUKUNASHI at 09:04| Comment(0) | 木々と知り合う


※ TV視る人 @tvmiruto氏の22:30 - 2018年8月7日のツイート
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 08:58| Comment(0) | 国際・政治




昆虫がいなくなったら花の色が変わらなくなる? どこかで起きているかも。


posted by ZUKUNASHI at 08:48| Comment(0) | 木々と知り合う

Yuki Oikawa: Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Was a Human Experiment for Developing Nukes

Yuki Oikawa: Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Was a Human Experiment for Developing Nukes

TEHRAN (FNA)- The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 is still generating serious discussion globally seven decades after more than 200,000 Japanese citizens were killed during the US nuking of the two cities.

The mantra that the bombings were conducted to force Japan into surrender and prevent further killing and destruction, and that it was a proportionate response to the Imperial Japanese Navy’s attack on Pearl Harbor is being disputed, and many strong arguments are being made in denial of that credence.

A Japanese political consultant tells Fars News Agency that the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a “human experiment to gather scientific data.”

“It was a human experiment to gather scientific data. It aimed to make mass experiments of the uranium bomb on Hiroshima and the plutonium bomb on Nagasaki to test humans and to obtain data for the development of nuclear weapons,” said Yuki Oikawa in an interview with Fars News Agency.

Mr. Oikawa believes that the Japanese were ready to surrender before the nuclear attacks took place, and historical evidence shows the American leaders were aware of Japan’s readiness to admit defeat unconditionally.

A political consultant and commentator, Yuki Oikawa has had a distinguished career with appointments in diverse financial, religious and political positions. He has commented and written on the Japanese politics, Japanese-American relations, China’s politics and human rights and environmental issues. He was recently named head of the Institute for Research in Human History (IRH), a think tank of modern history research.

He also serves as director of foreign affairs for the Happiness Realization Party (HRP) of Japan.

Q: Mr. Oikawa; as a political consultant, and more importantly, as a Japanese citizen, what’s your feeling towards what happened about 70 years ago to thousands of your fellow citizens? About 220,000 Japanese civilians were killed during the first use of atomic weapons in thehistory of warfare. How did that terrible incident affect the Japanese society, the psyche of the Japanese people and the mentality of the future generation?

A: Japan was occupied by the allied and US from 1945 to 1952. During the period, Japanese people were educated the history that Japan made a war of aggression and killed so many, and then the allied [and] US dropped the atomic bombs in order to stop the war; otherwise, much more Japanese would have died. This is what we learned at school. And this education created a biased mentality, which is called the “masochistic view of the own history.”

The masochistic view lost the love for the country and faith in God. In other words, people in this country became negative on Japan’s future. Instead, they focused on seeking the individual success.

Prime Minister Yoshida, at the time of the occupation of Japan, made a decision on simply developing the economy and totally depending upon US for protecting Japan. His policy led to the formation of one of the largest world’s economies.

However, because the people have been keeping a negative mentality on Japan’s future, they had not enjoyed the success of the economy. As Japan lost the success in the 1990s, the people are still suffering from more than 20 years of recession. It is said that Japanese people’s mentality is manifested in the form of a failure of economy.

Prior to the 70th anniversary of the World War II, the public was gradually realizing that the Japanese people had been brainwashed by the education system that was set up at the occupation, making them to be conservative.

Q: There have been many documents and memos confirming the unfair treatment of the Japanese soldiers and civilians by the invading American forces, including the raping of women, killing citizens and selling their skull for about $35 among merchant marines, verbally offending the children and adolescents being taken as captives, etc. The US Army General Jacob H. Smith ordered his soldiers upon the start of the Philippines War, “kill everyone over 10 years old.” Why did the American forces take such an attitude and treat the Japanese, Koreans, Filipinos and Vietnamese as second-rate creatures?

A: I have the experience of researching the troubles and accidents caused by the members of the US occupation army. It is true that as you said, there were much evidence of their brutal actions. I found that not all were real, and the Japanese left-wings such as socialists and communists fabricated them. But still there are many civilian victims who suffered from American’s violence.

I think that the Americans acted in these unacceptable ways in the Asian countries based on the Western idea of racial discrimination, and this is the underlying reason why Japan began the war against Europeans and Americans.

It is impossible for the advanced nations to order “kill them all,” because most of the Westerners are Christians. But it is possible if they accept the idea of white supremacy. That’s why US developed the first atomic bombs and then used them in Japan, not in Germany.

And I think that the Americans were very much afraid of the Japanese because they experienced the fiercest battle in their history against Japan.

Q: Some conservative American pundits and experts opine that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary, and the killing of some 220,000 Japanese citizens was not something significant, because far more citizens were killed during such attacks as the US bombing of the German city of Dresden. Is it really that civilian lives are sometimes undervalued and taken too lightly by the US government during the wartime?

A: I am not the right person to answer this question because I am not the specialist of US politics but I can confirm that US government conducted a human experiment by using people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki for the purpose of the further development of the nuclear weapons.

Let me explain how the Japanese people view and understand US atomic bombing in Hiroshima and Nagasaki 70 years ago. Most of the Japanese people believe that the purpose of the atomic bombings is to force Japan to surrender, and US-Japan War – the Pacific War, was a bad war. Japan committed many war crimes during the war period. Japan must reflect on its own behaviors.

However, now as of the 70th anniversary, people ask themselves, “did the US need to drop atomic bombs on Japan?” The questions that remain, and can never be resolved, are whether the bombings were necessary or not. The new issue is whether the use of the bomb was necessary to force Japanese into surrender.

Since the new evidence of the history has become available, it’s clear that Japan was ready to surrender before the bombs were dropped. Japan had long ago decided to surrender unconditionally – and the Americans knew that. On July 20, 1945, General Eisenhower reported this to President Truman. It means that the US and Allied powers had some motivations behind the dropping of atomic bombs.

It was a human experiment to gather scientific data. It aimed to make mass experiments of the uranium bomb on Hiroshima and the plutonium bomb on Nagasaki to test humans and to obtain data for the development of nuclear weapons.

And, killing over 200,000 civilians, mainly elderly people, women and children, must be a war crime and a serious violation of international law. It wasn’t the atomic bombs which caused Japan to surrender. From the recent studies in Japan, one can say that it was the Soviet Union’s invasion of Japan that caused it.

Q: According to a Detroit Free Press survey, 85% of the American citizens in 1945 approved of the use of nuclear weapons against Japan. 60 years later, in 2005, a survey by the Pew Research Center indicated that this figure had declined sharply as 57% of the American citizens endorsed the use of atomic bombs. Is it that the mentality of the American public has shifted regarding what their government and army did to Japan at the final stages of the World War II and its legal and moral justifiability?

A: I just experienced what you said in this question in my joining US radio shows in this month. I talked with the radio show hosts in twelve radio stations just after the 70th anniversary of atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I made the comments in my answer to one of your previous questions in the shows and all hosts agreed. That was not my expectation. And I felt that they no longer kept closing their eyes to the historical facts even if it is not convenient for them.

I emphasized that we should avoid the emotional arguments and calmly analyze the facts of history in the radio shows and all of the hosts strongly agreed.

Q: There are conventions and treaties which ban the possession and deployment of chemical and biological weapons; however, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty doesn’t have any stipulation on disarmament, nor does it expressly ban the use of nuclear weapons. There are currently 9 countries that possess nuclear weapons, including four states that never ratified or signed the NPT. Is it possible to devise any legally binding framework to compel these nations to abandon their nuclear weapons?

A: As an individual of the only nation which experienced atomic bombing, the current legal frameworks of banning the nuclear weapons are not real.

US President Obama insisted “world without nuclear weapons” is not real. What his statement stands for is “world with less nuclear weapons,” and it is still not real. I don’t think it is possible.

My desire is that not only a legal framework, but a spiritual framework can pave the way for the decreasing of the nuclear weapons naturally by sharing the common values beyond nationalism, racism, and religion. I mean I cannot find any other ways, because the legal, political and social efforts have already failed.
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 01:03| Comment(0) | 国際・政治

Arab Analyst: Trump to Fail in Anti-Iran Measures

Arab Analyst: Trump to Fail in Anti-Iran Measures
TEHRAN (FNA)- Abdel Bari Atwan, the editor-in-chief of Rai al-Youm newspaper, underlined that US President Donald Trump will fail in his anti-Iran measures which have recently been intensified by reimposition of sanctions.

"This means declaration of war and will lead to chaos at the international level because many countries, headed by the EU, India, China and Turkey, have officially announced defiance of these sanctions (against Iran)," Atwan wrote on Tuesday.

This means that Iran is not alone and Trump will fail, he added, expressing the hope that this failure would end his presidency.

Washington intensified pressure on Iran on Monday with the reimposition of a series of tough economic sanctions. Trump confirmed he would reinstate sanctions on Tehran that had been waived as part of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal from which he withdrew the US in May.

The sanctions, which take effect on Tuesday, prohibit Iran from using US currency. They also bar trading in cars and metals and minerals that include gold, steel, coal and aluminium. Iran will also be barred from buying US and European aircraft.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani told state television on Monday night that Iran had no intention of negotiating a new deal with the United States.

"If you're an enemy and you stab the other person with a knife, and then you say you want negotiations, then the first thing you have to do is remove the knife," he said. "They want to launch psychological warfare against the Iranian nation. Negotiations with sanctions doesn't make sense."

Trump said on July 30 that he would “certainly meet” Iranian president Hassan Rouhani without preconditions, a move that was later rejected by Trump’s own administration.

Speaking during a joint news conference with Italy’s prime minister, Giuseppe Conte, Trump said he would meet Iran “anytime they want to”. “I’ll meet with anybody,” he said. “There’s nothing wrong with meeting.”

Asked whether he would set any preconditions, Trump was clear. “No preconditions, no. If they want to meet, I’ll meet any time they want,” he said. “Good for the country, good for them, good for us and good for the world. No preconditions. If they want to meet, I’ll meet.”

After the comment, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo appeared to contradict Trump, listing preconditions that had to be met first.

He told CNBC that “if the Iranians demonstrate a commitment to make fundamental changes in how they treat their own people, reduce their malign behavior, can agree that it’s worthwhile to enter in a nuclear agreement that actually prevents proliferation, then the president said he’s prepared to sit down and have a conversation with him".

Also, Garrett Marquis, a spokesman for the president’s National Security Council, later said in a statement the US would not lift any sanctions or re-establish diplomatic and commercial relations until “there are tangible, demonstrated, and sustained shifts in Tehran’s policies”.

“Until then,” he said, “the sting of sanctions will only grow more painful if the regime does not change course.”

Hamid Aboutalebi, one of Rouhani’s advisers, set his own conditions for any meeting with Trump, saying “respect for the great nation of Iran”, returning to the nuclear deal and a reduction in hostilities were needed first.

Also, Commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari dismissed Trump's call for negotiations with Tehran, reminding him that Iran is totally different from North Korea.

"Mr. Trump! Iran is not North Korea to give a positive response to your demand for a meeting. You should know that the Iranian nation…will never allow their officials to negotiate and meet with the Great Satan," Jafari wrote in a letter.

He described Trump as an unskilled president in politics, and said, "The former US presidents who were either military men or politicians knew much better than you or they learned that Iran and the Iranian people cannot be threatened and rather grow united and single-hearted against any threat and pressure by foreigners."

"You will take this wish to the grave to see the day when the Islamic Republic of Iran demands for a meeting with you or is allowed by the nation to meet you. You will never see that day," General Jafari said, addressing Trump.

He underlined that the next US presidents will not see another day when the Iranian officials sit to the negotiating table with them either.

General Jafari said that the Iranian nation will resist until it achieves final victory and inflicts ultimate defeat on the arrogant powers by withstanding the cruel and inhumane sanctions thanks to the divine promises, huge internal resources and the leadership of a wise leader.

Trump announced on May 8 that Washington would no longer remain part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and promised to re-impose the highest level of economic sanctions against Iran.

The sanctions reinstated on Iran on May 8 included boycott of Iran's crude supplies and bans on transfer of its crude revenues. There is a 180 days interval before these sanctions come into effect. Other US secondary sanctions are reinstated this month.

After Trump's declaration, the Iranian government issued a statement, calling the US withdrawal as "unlawful". The statement underlined Iran's prerequisites for continuing the deal with the five world powers. These conditions that were reiterated later by Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei later mainly included Iran's guaranteed crude sales and transfer of its revenues back home.

Two months later, the other five powers party to the nuclear deal have failed to satisfy Iran. President Hassan Rouhani voiced his disappointment over a recent package of incentives proposed by the European Union countries to Tehran, and said that the Islamic Republic expected a much better, clearer and explicit stance by the EU.

"Unfortunately, the EU’s package of proposals lacked an operational solution and a specific method for cooperation, and featured just a set of general commitments like the previous statements by the European Union," President Rouhani said in a telephone conversation with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on July 5.

President Rouhani pointed to US' unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal, and said, "After the US withdrawal from the JCPOA, Iran has been dealing with economic issues and problems in banking relations and oil, and foreign companies that have invested in Iran are skeptical about continuing their business."

The Iranian president, however, said that the package proposed by the three European countries (the UK, Germany, and France) on how they are going to live up to their commitments and cooperation under the JCPOA was “disappointing”.

President Rouhani reiterated that the JCPOA was a mutual commitment, and said, "Iran had expected a clear plan from the three European countries after the two months’ time they have been given to come up with solid guarantees to ensure Iran’s economic interests would continue to be met despite US pullout and reinstatement of sanctions."

The Iranian president, however, said that Tehran would continue cooperation with Europe if the outcome of the July 6 Vienna talks would be promising.

“If the process of the European foreign ministers’ meeting in Vienna, which is aimed at encouraging Iran to cooperate, is promising, we will continue our cooperation with Europe,” Rouhani added.

But the Vienna talks on July 6 among foreign ministers from Iran and the five world powers (Russia, China, Germany, France and Britain) failed to satisfy Iran with senior officials in Tehran complaining that the Europeans had offered nothing new to ensure Iran’s continued merits under the deal.

On July 8, the Iranian parliament's research center has readied a comprehensive plan that includes a detailed list of policies and moves to fight off sanctions as Washington sped up attempts to rally international support for intensified pressures on Tehran.

The comprehensive "active anti-sanctions plan" that has been compiled at the parliament research center after long studies and consultations with experts from Iranian research and academic centers, traders and entrepreneurs is now under study by senior Judiciary, Parliament and Government officials for a final editing.

The program that mainly aims to make the country "unsanctionable" has been developed in contrast to the US sanctions program and has reportedly been edited seven times so far, several MPs told FNA.

Information obtained by FNA reveals the program offers a package that also involves social and cultural measures to reinvigorate the country's economy and infrastructure against the US sanctions that come into effect from 90 to 180 days after their re-imposition and seek to wear off Iran's economy step-by-step.

The plan also entails specific time-based nuclear, security and political leverages that would be enforced in reprisal for enemy threats, while it also envisages transient waivers that could be extended, halted or annulled based on relevant decisions by authorities.

The plan to make Iran sanction-proof includes detailed measures in two 90-120 days and 180-210 days periods in various areas of monetary, banking and currency sector, liquidity management and deterring middlemen disruption and negative interference, optimized forex reserves management, facilitated money transfer in the international market, reduction of intermediary currency role, strategic commodities, budget resources and use, energy, business, trade, structures, culture, society, media and legal affairs.

Meantime, several other plans have also been compiled by university and research centers for improving economy through reinvigoration of national potentials to make the country sanctions-proof.

posted by ZUKUNASHI at 00:58| Comment(0) | 国際・政治




posted by ZUKUNASHI at 00:07| Comment(0) | 福島原発事故