Charter 08 – 零八宪章

English Version:

I. Foreword

A hundred years have passed since the writing of China’s first constitution. 2008 also marks the sixtieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the thirtieth anniversary of the appearance of Democracy Wall in Beijing, and the tenth of China’s signing of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We are approaching the twentieth anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre of pro-democracy student protesters. The Chinese people, who have endured human rights disasters and uncountable struggles across these same years, now include many who see clearly that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values.

By departing from these values, the Chinese government’s approach to “modernization” has proven disastrous. It has stripped people of their rights, destroyed their dignity, and corrupted normal human intercourse. So we ask: Where is China headed in the twenty-first century? Will it continue with “modernization” under authoritarian rule, or will it embrace universal human values, join the mainstream of civilized nations, and build a democratic system? There can be no avoiding these questions.

The shock of the Western impact upon China in the nineteenth century laid bare a decadent authoritarian system and marked the beginning of what is often called “the greatest changes in thousands of years” for China. A “self-strengthening movement” followed, but this aimed simply at appropriating the technology to build gunboats and other Western material objects. China’s humiliating naval defeat at the hands of Japan in 1895 only confirmed the obsolescence of China’s system of government. The first attempts at modern political change came with the ill-fated summer of reforms in 1898, but these were cruelly crushed by ultraconservatives at China’s imperial court. With the revolution of 1911, which inaugurated Asia’s first republic, the authoritarian imperial system that had lasted for centuries was finally supposed to have been laid to rest. But social conflict inside our country and external pressures were to prevent it; China fell into a patchwork of warlord fiefdoms and the new republic became a fleeting dream.

The failure of both “self-strengthening” and political renovation caused many of our forebears to reflect deeply on whether a “cultural illness” was afflicting our country. This mood gave rise, during the May Fourth Movement of the late 1910s, to the championing of “science and democracy.” Yet that effort, too, foundered as warlord chaos persisted and the Japanese invasion [beginning in Manchuria in 1931] brought national crisis.

Victory over Japan in 1945 offered one more chance for China to move toward modern government, but the Communist defeat of the Nationalists in the civil war thrust the nation into the abyss of totalitarianism. The “new China” that emerged in 1949 proclaimed that “the people are sovereign” but in fact set up a system in which “the Party is all-powerful.” The Communist Party of China seized control of all organs of the state and all political, economic, and social resources, and, using these, has produced a long trail of human rights disasters, including, among many others, the Anti-Rightist Campaign (1957), the Great Leap Forward (1958–1960), the Cultural Revolution (1966–1969), the June Fourth (Tiananmen Square) Massacre (1989), and the current repression of all unauthorized religions and the suppression of the weiquan rights movement [a movement that aims to defend citizens' rights promulgated in the Chinese Constitution and to fight for human rights recognized by international conventions that the Chinese government has signed]. During all this, the Chinese people have paid a gargantuan price. Tens of millions have lost their lives, and several generations have seen their freedom, their happiness, and their human dignity cruelly trampled.

During the last two decades of the twentieth century the government policy of “Reform and Opening” gave the Chinese people relief from the pervasive poverty and totalitarianism of the Mao Zedong era and brought substantial increases in the wealth and living standards of many Chinese as well as a partial restoration of economic freedom and economic rights. Civil society began to grow, and popular calls for more rights and more political freedom have grown apace. As the ruling elite itself moved toward private ownership and the market economy, it began to shift from an outright rejection of “rights” to a partial acknowledgment of them.

In 1998 the Chinese government signed two important international human rights conventions; in 2004 it amended its constitution to include the phrase “respect and protect human rights”; and this year, 2008, it has promised to promote a “national human rights action plan.” Unfortunately most of this political progress has extended no further than the paper on which it is written. The political reality, which is plain for anyone to see, is that China has many laws but no rule of law; it has a constitution but no constitutional government. The ruling elite continues to cling to its authoritarian power and fights off any move toward political change.

The stultifying results are endemic official corruption, an undermining of the rule of law, weak human rights, decay in public ethics, crony capitalism, growing inequality between the wealthy and the poor, pillage of the natural environment as well as of the human and historical environments, and the exacerbation of a long list of social conflicts, especially, in recent times, a sharpening animosity between officials and ordinary people.

As these conflicts and crises grow ever more intense, and as the ruling elite continues with impunity to crush and to strip away the rights of citizens to freedom, to property, and to the pursuit of happiness, we see the powerless in our society—the vulnerable groups, the people who have been suppressed and monitored, who have suffered cruelty and even torture, and who have had no adequate avenues for their protests, no courts to hear their pleas—becoming more militant and raising the possibility of a violent conflict of disastrous proportions. The decline of the current system has reached the point where change is no longer optional.

II. Our Fundamental Principles

This is a historic moment for China, and our future hangs in the balance. In reviewing the political modernization process of the past hundred years or more, we reiterate and endorse basic universal values as follows:

Freedom. Freedom is at the core of universal human values. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom in where to live, and the freedoms to strike, to demonstrate, and to protest, among others, are the forms that freedom takes. Without freedom, China will always remain far from civilized ideals.

Human rights. Human rights are not bestowed by a state. Every person is born with inherent rights to dignity and freedom. The government exists for the protection of the human rights of its citizens. The exercise of state power must be authorized by the people. The succession of political disasters in China’s recent history is a direct consequence of the ruling regime’s disregard for human rights.

Equality. The integrity, dignity, and freedom of every person—regardless of social station, occupation, sex, economic condition, ethnicity, skin color, religion, or political belief—are the same as those of any other. Principles of equality before the law and equality of social, economic, cultural, civil, and political rights must be upheld.

Republicanism. Republicanism, which holds that power should be balanced among different branches of government and competing interests should be served, resembles the traditional Chinese political ideal of “fairness in all under heaven.” It allows different interest groups and social assemblies, and people with a variety of cultures and beliefs, to exercise democratic self-government and to deliberate in order to reach peaceful resolution of public questions on a basis of equal access to government and free and fair competition.

Democracy. The most fundamental principles of democracy are that the people are sovereign and the people select their government. Democracy has these characteristics: (1) Political power begins with the people and the legitimacy of a regime derives from the people. (2) Political power is exercised through choices that the people make. (3) The holders of major official posts in government at all levels are determined through periodic competitive elections. (4) While honoring the will of the majority, the fundamental dignity, freedom, and human rights of minorities are protected. In short, democracy is a modern means for achieving government truly “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Constitutional rule. Constitutional rule is rule through a legal system and legal regulations to implement principles that are spelled out in a constitution. It means protecting the freedom and the rights of citizens, limiting and defining the scope of legitimate government power, and providing the administrative apparatus necessary to serve these ends.

III. What We Advocate

Authoritarianism is in general decline throughout the world; in China, too, the era of emperors and overlords is on the way out. The time is arriving everywhere for citizens to be masters of states. For China the path that leads out of our current predicament is to divest ourselves of the authoritarian notion of reliance on an “enlightened overlord” or an “honest official” and to turn instead toward a system of liberties, democracy, and the rule of law, and toward fostering the consciousness of modern citizens who see rights as fundamental and participation as a duty. Accordingly, and in a spirit of this duty as responsible and constructive citizens, we offer the following recommendations on national governance, citizens’ rights, and social development:

1. A New Constitution. We should recast our present constitution, rescinding its provisions that contradict the principle that sovereignty resides with the people and turning it into a document that genuinely guarantees human rights, authorizes the exercise of public power, and serves as the legal underpinning of China’s democratization. The constitution must be the highest law in the land, beyond violation by any individual, group, or political party.

2. Separation of powers. We should construct a modern government in which the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive power is guaranteed. We need an Administrative Law that defines the scope of government responsibility and prevents abuse of administrative power. Government should be responsible to taxpayers. Division of power between provincial governments and the central government should adhere to the principle that central powers are only those specifically granted by the constitution and all other powers belong to the local governments.

3. Legislative democracy. Members of legislative bodies at all levels should be chosen by direct election, and legislative democracy should observe just and impartial principles.

4. An Independent Judiciary. The rule of law must be above the interests of any particular political party and judges must be independent. We need to establish a constitutional supreme court and institute procedures for constitutional review. As soon as possible, we should abolish all of the Committees on Political and Legal Affairs that now allow Communist Party officials at every level to decide politically-sensitive cases in advance and out of court. We should strictly forbid the use of public offices for private purposes.

5. Public Control of Public Servants. The military should be made answerable to the national government, not to a political party, and should be made more professional. Military personnel should swear allegiance to the constitution and remain nonpartisan. Political party organizations shall be prohibited in the military. All public officials including police should serve as nonpartisans, and the current practice of favoring one political party in the hiring of public servants must end.

6. Guarantee of Human Rights. There shall be strict guarantees of human rights and respect for human dignity. There should be a Human Rights Committee, responsible to the highest legislative body, that will prevent the government from abusing public power in violation of human rights. A democratic and constitutional China especially must guarantee the personal freedom of citizens. No one shall suffer illegal arrest, detention, arraignment, interrogation, or punishment. The system of “Reeducation through Labor” must be abolished.

7. Election of Public Officials. There shall be a comprehensive system of democratic elections based on “one person, one vote.” The direct election of administrative heads at the levels of county, city, province, and nation should be systematically implemented. The rights to hold periodic free elections and to participate in them as a citizen are inalienable.

8. Rural–Urban Equality. The two-tier household registry system must be abolished. This system favors urban residents and harms rural residents. We should establish instead a system that gives every citizen the same constitutional rights and the same freedom to choose where to live.

9. Freedom to Form Groups. The right of citizens to form groups must be guaranteed. The current system for registering nongovernmental groups, which requires a group to be “approved,” should be replaced by a system in which a group simply registers itself. The formation of political parties should be governed by the constitution and the laws, which means that we must abolish the special privilege of one party to monopolize power and must guarantee principles of free and fair competition among political parties.

10. Freedom to Assemble. The constitution provides that peaceful assembly, demonstration, protest, and freedom of expression are fundamental rights of a citizen. The ruling party and the government must not be permitted to subject these to illegal interference or unconstitutional obstruction.

11. Freedom of Expression. We should make freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and academic freedom universal, thereby guaranteeing that citizens can be informed and can exercise their right of political supervision. These freedoms should be upheld by a Press Law that abolishes political restrictions on the press. The provision in the current Criminal Law that refers to “the crime of incitement to subvert state power” must be abolished. We should end the practice of viewing words as crimes.

12. Freedom of Religion. We must guarantee freedom of religion and belief and institute a separation of religion and state. There must be no governmental interference in peaceful religious activities. We should abolish any laws, regulations, or local rules that limit or suppress the religious freedom of citizens. We should abolish the current system that requires religious groups (and their places of worship) to get official approval in advance and substitute for it a system in which registry is optional and, for those who choose to register, automatic.

13. Civic Education. In our schools we should abolish political curriculums and examinations that are designed to indoctrinate students in state ideology and to instill support for the rule of one party. We should replace them with civic education that advances universal values and citizens’ rights, fosters civic consciousness, and promotes civic virtues that serve society.

14. Protection of Private Property. We should establish and protect the right to private property and promote an economic system of free and fair markets. We should do away with government monopolies in commerce and industry and guarantee the freedom to start new enterprises. We should establish a Committee on State-Owned Property, reporting to the national legislature, that will monitor the transfer of state-owned enterprises to private ownership in a fair, competitive, and orderly manner. We should institute a land reform that promotes private ownership of land, guarantees the right to buy and sell land, and allows the true value of private property to be adequately reflected in the market.

15. Financial and Tax Reform. We should establish a democratically regulated and accountable system of public finance that ensures the protection of taxpayer rights and that operates through legal procedures. We need a system by which public revenues that belong to a certain level of government—central, provincial, county or local—are controlled at that level. We need major tax reform that will abolish any unfair taxes, simplify the tax system, and spread the tax burden fairly. Government officials should not be able to raise taxes, or institute new ones, without public deliberation and the approval of a democratic assembly. We should reform the ownership system in order to encourage competition among a wider variety of market participants.

16. Social Security. We should establish a fair and adequate social security system that covers all citizens and ensures basic access to education, health care, retirement security, and employment.

17. Protection of the Environment. We need to protect the natural environment and to promote development in a way that is sustainable and responsible to our descendents and to the rest of humanity. This means insisting that the state and its officials at all levels not only do what they must do to achieve these goals, but also accept the supervision and participation of non-governmental organizations.

18. A Federated Republic. A democratic China should seek to act as a responsible major power contributing toward peace and development in the Asian Pacific region by approaching others in a spirit of equality and fairness. In Hong Kong and Macao, we should support the freedoms that already exist. With respect to Taiwan, we should declare our commitment to the principles of freedom and democracy and then, negotiating as equals, and ready to compromise, seek a formula for peaceful unification. We should approach disputes in the national-minority areas of China with an open mind, seeking ways to find a workable framework within which all ethnic and religious groups can flourish. We should aim ultimately at a federation of democratic communities of China.

19. Truth in Reconciliation. We should restore the reputations of all people, including their family members, who suffered political stigma in the political campaigns of the past or who have been labeled as criminals because of their thought, speech, or faith. The state should pay reparations to these people. All political prisoners and prisoners of conscience must be released. There should be a Truth Investigation Commission charged with finding the facts about past injustices and atrocities, determining responsibility for them, upholding justice, and, on these bases, seeking social reconciliation.

China, as a major nation of the world, as one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and as a member of the UN Council on Human Rights, should be contributing to peace for humankind and progress toward human rights. Unfortunately, we stand today as the only country among the major nations that remains mired in authoritarian politics. Our political system continues to produce human rights disasters and social crises, thereby not only constricting China’s own development but also limiting the progress of all of human civilization. This must change, truly it must. The democratization of Chinese politics can be put off no longer.

Accordingly, we dare to put civic spirit into practice by announcing Charter 08. We hope that our fellow citizens who feel a similar sense of crisis, responsibility, and mission, whether they are inside the government or not, and regardless of their social status, will set aside small differences to embrace the broad goals of this citizens’ movement. Together we can work for major changes in Chinese society and for the rapid establishment of a free, democratic, and constitutional country. We can bring to reality the goals and ideals that our people have incessantly been seeking for more than a hundred years, and can bring a brilliant new chapter to Chinese civilization.

 

Chinese (中文) Version:

1993年11月14日，我和李海、周国强、刘念春、宋书元、沙裕光、陈旅、钱玉民、杨周（何德普负责在外面观察当局的反应以便发生紧急情况时向国际传媒通报故没有进入现场没能当场签署）八位同仁在北京公布了《和平宪章》。
十五年后，也就是2008年12月8日，先期入狱的刘晓波和300余人在北京公布了《零八宪章》。

《和平宪章》和《零八宪章》的基本精神一脉相承，那就是：高扬普世价值，主张人权至上，以实现宪政民主制为宗旨。
有这样几个基本点，它们之间的一切分歧都是枝节问题。
可以说，八百年来，人类历史上出现的所有宪章都是朝这个方向走的，无论是开以民权限制君权先河的13世纪英国的《大宪章》，抑或是为普罗大众争取选举权的19世纪英国的《人民宪章》，还是要求按赫尔辛基条约保障人权的1977年捷克的《七七宪章》，更广泛地说，包括1776年美国的《独立宣言》和1789年法国的《人权宣言》，都是在不同程度上为被统治者争取制约统治者的权利，并且归根结底是为社会大众争取平等的权利和自由。
从这种角度说，我作为先走了一步的当代中国民运尖兵，无条件的拥护《零八宪章》，就像我无条件的拥护以上两个宣言和那些宪章的基本精神一样。

可想而知，一切中国和外国的、过去和未来的高扬普世价值、主张人权至上的宣言和宪章都是特定历史的产物，都会有其局限性，而且，越往历史深处追寻越是如此。
但是另一方面，反过来说，越往历史深处追寻就越具有创造性，其意义就越重大，就像远古时代发明生火对人类社会进步的价值必然大于近人发明蒸汽机一样，因为越是早出的思想观念越具有开拓意义，对后世的影响就越大。

当然具体情况还要具体分析， 说到《和平宪章》，由于特定的艰难条件，它的历史作用主要是打破六四镇压的血腥恐怖，为中国民主运动的再掀高潮铺路，同时作为中国大陆本土的第一个民运纲领性文献为之指明了方向，就它本身的作用而论，并没有起到形成共识、凝聚力量、开创良性互动局面的作用。
在这个方面，《零八宪章》的工作要比《和平宪章》更有成效。

虽然《和平宪章》和《零八宪章》的基本精神一脉相存，两个文本差别却很大。概括的说，这种文本差别主要表现在三个方面：
第一， 前者非常简约，并且主要是就事论事，没有对历史和理论做多少说明，相反，后者相对全面的回顾了近代历史，并且对普世价值的核心概念作了逐条解说。
第二， 前者重点放在和平转型上，后者重点放在对转型结果的诉求上。
第三， 前者注重的是民主转型的启动操作，后者注重的是宪政民主的建构本身。

两个文本为什么会有这些差别？
这既是客观原因所致，也是起草人主体观念、社会经历和文化背景差异的结果，下面，就来对两个宪章的异同进行和一些说明和比较。

首先，两个文本出台的客观环境完全不一样。
8964之后，整个中国笼罩在血雨腥风之中，九州大地夜气如磐万马齐喑，任何政治异议活动都不复存在，几个有点声名的人借美国当局要向本国人民做点交代，发出了一点声音之后立即走为上计，国内还是一遍死寂。在这种情况下，作为一直在公开独立从事民主人权活动的民主墙斗士，本人根据长期的实践经验，首先以开展“反对北京申办奥运”活动来投石问路，试探当前公开开展民主人权活动的空间是否存在，取得一定成效后，就开始了正式运作。
1993年10月中旬，我开始了这一年的第五次北京之行，和原北京大学“学自联”外联部长李海、原北京“工自联”法律顾问周国强二人一起敲定了开展《和平宪章》活动的意向，随即开始寻找合作对象，并得到了刘念春、沙裕光、钱玉民、宋书元、陈旅、何德普等人的大力支持（上海的扬周是签署日由周国强请来的），此外，北京大学法学院的研究生王中秋明确表示参加，他的老师讲师袁红冰则和我作交易，要我先参加他的“劳工权利活动”，然后他再参加《和平宪章》活动。与此同时，我拜访了几十位著名的专家、学者、异议人士，由于对当局的恐惧，这些人大多数都谈虎色变，根本不愿与闻其事，只有个别学者表示了兴趣，但在当局发现蛛丝马迹加以施压的情况下，还是被迫放弃了从文字上加以修改的初衷（然而，这些人中的一部分十五年后签署了《零八宪章》）。

我还两次找了魏京生，第一次是由何德普开面包车和刘念春等人到魏家接了魏京生去宣武区达官营红居五巷，和沙裕光一起在他家附近的餐馆里谈，第二次和周国强王家琪（北京大学法学系研究生）与魏京生魏小涛在他家附近的阜成门烤鸭店，两次当面向他提出邀请，他的回答都是：“这种事当局一‘抵撸’一大串，再说调门也太低。”因此拒绝参加。11月14日出台的当天的第一次会议地点在魏家附近，我又派人找了魏京生，他还是拒绝了我们的邀请。
《和平宪章》出台前，我们还还专门对王丹进行了反复邀请，对他的邀请是由李海负责的，他的回答是：“老魏不去我也不去。”

这里尤其要专门一提的是，刘念春特地向我介绍了刘晓波的情况，说他虽然在64之后说了一些不妥的话，但现在精神状况已经在恢复，不妨去试探一下。这样，在北京城到处找人的过程中，我特地按刘念春提供的地址打开地图寻找“四道口”这个地名。谁知一查，地图上居然有三四个四道口，分别位于不同角落，想想根据介绍动员其出山的可能性实在不大，自己又面对着当局的围追堵截，随时可能遭到不测，就放弃了在全北京城四处寻找他的打算。
就这样，我这个《和平宪章》的起草人，和十五年后的《零八宪章》的名义起草人终于缘吝一面，虽然1996年刘晓波为“双十宣言”劳教时我曾给他的妻子刘霞打过慰问电话。

再从传播媒介上说，当时还没有互联网，没有个人电脑，甚至没有手机，连有线电话也不普及，所以社会动员必须以人对人一对一的进行为主，其难度之大可想而知！在这种情况下，想多联系一个人，就得花几天时间多找几个人，在当局已经警觉，到处对我实施守候抓捕的情况下，想进一步扩大签名范围难上加难不说，拖长了时间还可能胎死腹中。
所以，《和平宪章》是在当局极其残酷的镇压异议人士、全中国人都处于极度恐惧的情况下出台的，加上没有任何通信工具可资利用，也就根本没有向社会大范围扩散，广泛动员人们参与的可能性，此时，我们唯一能够借助的是国际传媒，当时美国之音等还没有受到干扰，虽然我们提前把文本交给了他们，但依靠他们传播这种方式只能在公开后运用，而公开后我第二天就被捕了。

至于《零八宪章》出台的2008年，整个形势已经完全不同。
仅仅是十五年的时间也使六四屠杀的恐惧效应早已消退，何况整个社会已经高度动员起来，在1998年的组党运动、1999年的法轮功运动的冲击下，所有的思想禁区已经打开，社会大众已经高度动员，社会精英顾忌越来越少。尤其是胡温上台之初，面对市场经济条件下由于财富膨胀分配不公导致社会矛盾积聚，官民冲突迅速激化，推行“新政”（这是过誉之词）成为必然选择。在这种背景下，不仅合法的维权运动如火如荼的开展起来，被当局视为非法的“群体性事件”每年也高达数万起，而且呈逐年上升的趋势，许多民众甚至走上了暴力抗争之路。
这样，举国上下敢于出面提出政治要求的人已经不计其数，现在的问题不是驱除恐惧，而是如何用有效方式把那些有民主政治诉求却被当局互相隔绝的社会大众凝聚起来，使其有机会看到我们的纲领性文献，从而表明自己的政治态度，并以各种方式联合起来。

与此同时，2008年的大众通讯工具已经从有线电话发展到无线电话、互联网和个人电脑，几乎一切人之间都可以进行一对一的即时交流，更不要说还形成了一对多众对众的公共交流平台，这样，民间既有的联系网络和大众传播媒介也为宪章的广泛传播提供了良好条件。
所以，《零八宪章》能够传播开来并获得社会的强烈共鸣，是和恐惧高压消退，社会已经普遍觉醒，以及全新公共传播媒介的普及分不开的。
应当说，以上情况主要是决定了两个宪章运动的组织、传播方面的不同。

决定组织、传播不同的因素还有重要一条。
那就是主要当事人主客观条件的差异。
以我和刘晓波的情况为例。
我是武汉人，在北京开展活动受到当局的高度注意和严密防控，而且不可能持久，在当局发现我要进行大规模的政治活动之后，就开始了在北京城全方位的搜查抓捕，因此，一个人月后我不能不尽快把《和平宪章》正式公布，否则就根本没有机会出台了（由此开始当局绝对不让我前往北京，几次为此在火车站拦下来）。
刘晓波虽是辽宁人，却因妻子刘霞的关系长住北京，在北京开展活动相对方便，可以长时间的从容进行前期准备工作，在当局不知不觉下和各方面的有识之士进行交流沟通讨论磋商。

另一方面，我只有小学文凭，却从1966年文革开始就关注政治，1970年就因日记文章和写书打成反革命从而卷入政治，是几十年一贯制的社会活动家，和中下层社会大众与异议人士关系密切，在知识分子和上层人物中缺乏影响力。
比我小五岁的刘晓波1980年代末作为博士和“文坛黑马”横空出世，89民运中以“天安门四君子”横切进入民运领域，因此他卷入政治的时间要比我晚二十年，主要借助从文坛获得的影响以及89民运的助力取得了从事民主运动的高端平台，由于和知识界有天然联系，在文化界艺术界和上层社会打开局面也就相对容易。
我和刘晓波的差别，基本上也是《和平宪章》和《零八宪章》的主要成员班底的差别，这里就不深说了

相应的，我们《和平宪章》人士的知识结构、社会经历、文化背景和《零八宪章》核心人士完全不同。
《和平宪章》人士中，文凭程度最高的是李海，他是北京大学哲学系研究生，其他人基本上没有高等文凭。与此同时，《和平宪章》人士个个都有非比寻常的社会政治活动实践经验：89民运中，李海是北京大学学生自治会对外联络部部长，刘念春是民主墙时代的民办刊物、朦胧派诗歌的摇篮《今天》的编辑，陈旅是民主墙时代的《人权同盟》的主要成员，沙裕光是民主墙时代的民办刊物《中华四五》的编辑，何德普是民主墙时代民办刊物《北京青年》的编辑，杨周是民主墙时代上海最活跃也最早被判刑的民主斗士，周国强也是民主墙时代的《今天》的编辑，并且是89民运中北京“工自联” 的法律顾问，钱玉民则是北京“工自联”的秘书长！所有这些人都有着很长的民主人权活动的实践经历，也几乎都为民主人权事业坐过牢受过迫害。
如果要对《和平宪章》签署人群体做一个最简单的概括，那就是——都是民主人权事业的社会活动家，有着丰富的实践活动经验，相对而言，整体文化素质较低，理论水平较低，我本人更只是一个小学生，这样，草写的宪章蓝本缺乏历史回顾和理论分析是很自然的。

《零八宪章》由于在社会上获得了广泛传播的机会，故上到知识界文化界艺术界，下到访民群众和普罗大众都有大量人员签名。但是，如果我掌握的情况不错的话，那么它的起草人则都是具有高等教育背景的知识分子。不仅刘晓波是博士，夏先生是北京大学教授，张先生是宪政学者，其他参与起草和发起的人也都具有很高的学历背景，从事的也都是知识性工作，由于他们所居地位相对较高，在民主人权活动第一线的公开斗争经验较少，缺乏开展民主人权活动的实践经历 ，因此对宪章的草写缺乏操作性考量，没有想一想自己提出来的东西当局有无理论上的可接受性，没有考虑以目前的力量对比自己拿出的宪章能否让当局狗咬刺猬无处下口。
说到这里，我们再来分析两个宪章的文本差异就比较容易理解了。

如前所述，《和平宪章》的特点是没有过多的进行历史回顾和理论阐述。
我为什么要这样做？
当然因为我给自己的定位是民主人权事业的实践活动家，我要做的是在目前的特定条件下推进中国的民主人权事业，启动民主化进程。
也因为在我看来，中国作为落在全世界最后面的大国面对的民主专制问题已经没有什么深刻的理论可言，一切已经在全世界人面前彰明较著，我不知道今日中国的政治理论有哪一点能够突破发达民主国家提供的理论范式，这不仅指欧美，也包括印度日本韩国菲律宾印度利西亚尤其是台湾，甚至包括许多非洲国家，在这种时代，草写这样一份文件其意义和《七七宪章》及此前的宪章完全不同，《七七宪章》也算在所谓社会主义国家有开创性（其实它和我们开展的民主墙运动基本同时），中国已经落在最后，无论草写一份理论上多么完善的宪章，也不过是重复举世皆知的陈词滥调，绝对不会有任何开创性可言。
在这种情况下，以一个《宪章》作为中国民主转型的纲领，主要不是一个理论武器问题，而是一个操作策略问题。
所以，如何草写一份从当前说当局在社会压力下可能接受，从长远说可以指导中国完成民主化转型任务的宪章，就是我撰写这份文件的基本指导思想。

须知，1997年和1998年当局才签署《经济社会文化权利公约》《公民权利和政治权利公约》，在宪法中加入“国家尊重和保障人权”字样更是几年之后的事情，1993年的当时，当局尚完全不承认人权原则，当然反对的调门也在降低。
应该说，把人权原则作为第一条要求提出来，在这种情况下就已经涵盖了民主世界的一切现代政治的理论精华，与此同时，当局即使一时不会认可，也没有理由高调反对，更不宜以此治罪，至于此后的各条各款，则都有强烈的针对性，都是国人普遍关心的重大问题，也都必然会在人权和正义基础上获得解决。我们把这些条款提出来，只要能在社会上 流布开来，就不难获得有利害关系的广大民众的热烈拥护和积极参与。

当然，这种操作性的宪章不可能面面俱到，这个问题如何解决？
讨论中我指出：这场宪章远动不是到沙漠中更不是到火星上去探险，而是到深林中去旅行，因此，我们没必要一切备足，面面俱到，相反要轻装上阵尽快出发，只要能撬动一个合法化运作的缝隙，其他要求可以随着形势的发展逐步提出。
民主世界公民可以做的一切我们都要做，但是，在当前的特定条件下，我们必须尽量降低要求，以求得合法化运作空间，中国的政治异议活动只要能合法开展，其他一切就可以顺理成章了。

为此，我特地在作为附件的意见书中强调，以后会随时根据需要发布新的文件，这就为该宪章的内容深化扩大留下了充分的余地。
这方面，还有一个策略考量是，古今中外，一切成功的政治运作，都是高度讲究策略，讲究斗争艺术的，无论何时，随时要审时度势，根据力量对比决定自己的政治态势，不宜一开始就把自己的政治诉求都表露出来。用《孙子兵法》的话说：“小敌之坚，大敌之擒也。”“敌则能战之，少则能逃之，不若则能避之”“知可以战与不可以战者胜”。用老子的话说：“图难乎，其易也，为大乎，其细也。”用孔子的话说：“暴虎冯河，死而无悔者，吾不与也，必也临事而惧，好谋而成者也。”从现实政治说，朱元璋曾接受“高筑墙广积粮缓称王”的建议，共产党对国民党、毛泽东对蒋介石的态度变化一直是由实力对比决定的。具体的说，绝对劣势下只能出哀兵。对民主人权事业来说，我们的力量只在于“讲理”，我们需要的是在全面专政下开拓出合法化运作的滩头阵地，否则什么都谈不上。所以，我不主张搞一个高调的、宏大的、强硬的纲领，而要搞得低调些、适中些、柔韧些，就这个时代的情况说，文字上不能叫当局抓到可判刑的字句，至于劳教，没有任何法律可循，因此不在考虑避免之列，果然，后来当局也的确只好把我抓去劳教了两年。

《零八宪章》的做法和考量我不去评价和推测，只指出人所共见的是它把大量篇幅用于新时代的“宏大叙事”
概括的说，《零八宪章》的第一部分“前言”是结合普世价值的经典阐释回顾中国政治现代化转型的百年历史，第二部分“我们的基本理念”是对普世价值的核心概念进行逐条阐释，第三部分“我们的基本主张”是对转型结果的原则概括，第四部分“结语”是对现实的焦虑和致力转型的决心。
可以说，《零八宪章》是“政治正确”的典范，是当今世界普世价值普及的教科书。

不过，它似乎完全无视自己政治对手的存在，完全没有考虑以什么步骤去达到自己的目的，完全没有顾及操作性问题，完全没有想到怎么获取合法的滩头阵地。
儒学经典《大学》有云：“物有本末，事有始终，知所先后，则近道也”，中国近代史上,“戊戌变法”的一大教训，就是不考虑现实政治生态的可承受性，不考虑大国转型必须注意历史进步有其不可跨越的阶段性，不考虑变法过程的可控性，在短短近百日里拿出那么多法律来推行，虽说失败是顽固派发动政变所致，难道和康有为志大才疏没有政治运作能力无关吗？
政治运作不是做学问，不能光考虑理论上的完整性、系统性、纯洁性，而是和对手博弈，必须充分考虑对手的反应，还要根据形势决定先说什么，后说什么，此时此地只能说什么，怎样说才有效益，最重要的是,尤其要弄清楚眼前不能说什么！

关于《零八宪章》，别的方面我不做具体评价，只在这里指出一点，其第三部分第18条在这里出现是否必不可少？
让我们来看看它是怎么说的：
“18、联邦共和：以平等、公正的态度参与维持地区和平与发展，塑造一个负责任的大国形象。维护香港、澳门的自由制度。在自由民主的前提下，通过平等谈判与 合作互动的方式寻求海峡两岸和解方案。以大智慧探索各民族共同繁荣的可能途径和制度设计，在民主宪政的架构下建立中华联邦共和国。”

其实在《和平宪章》中也有类似类容：
“第七、我们呼吁台湾海峡两岸的政府立刻开始直接的对等谈判。我们相信中华民族的凝聚力足以使台湾与大陆和平统一。因此，我们呼吁大陆当局正式放弃武力解决问题的主张，并以同等态度对待台湾的国民党、民进党以及其他政党，在条件成熟时，应当欢迎台湾政党到大陆发展。我们也呼吁台湾朝野各界届时能对等地欢迎包括共产党在内的大陆政党到台湾发展，从而最终完成台湾海峡两岸的社会政治整合。我们也呼吁台湾民进党放弃“台独”主张，积极致力于包括大陆、台湾、港澳在内的全中国民主进步事业。
第八、我们呼吁大陆政府充分尊重香港和澳门人民的自治权利，以主权归中央，治权归地方为原则处理港澳回归祖国后的问题，充分尊重当地人民对社会、政治、经济制度与生活方式的选择。
第九、我们呼吁全国各族人民共同维护中华民族大团结，同时呼吁政府按现代国际标准处理各种少数民族问题，充分尊重各少数民族的民族自决权，放弃以暴力维持大一统的封建观念。”

显然，《零八宪章》是简明扼要，高屋建瓴，大气磅礴。
《和平宪章》则啰啰嗦嗦，低三下四，对“建立联邦制”的要求只是弦外之音，千呼万唤不出来。
联邦制对中国港澳台和少数民族问题的解决当是一个不容回避的办法，但是，目前这个条件下，在这么个纲领性文献中提出来，就涉及一个国体和政体问题。

那么，在民间民主力量没有站稳脚跟之前就提出这样的要求，是否有授人以柄之嫌？是否必然会使当局不给我们以立足之地？
梁启超早已指出，欧洲的民主化是一波波的国民运动造就的，国民运动的要求必须是当局目前可能接受的，提出其绝对不可以接受的要求就等于最后通碟，这种情况下，当局只会以强力镇压，决不会让步。
所以，如果我们意图以和平理性非暴力的方式推进民主化进程，提要求就不能不考虑民主力量自己目前的实力状况、集结状况、合法状况，不能不考虑当局的可接受性。

至于民主力量站住脚了，合法化了，态度可以强硬起来，要求可以不断提高，这是另一码事。就是到那时候，也必须注意分寸，因为彼时当局虽不能抓我们，不能判我们徒刑，也还有个要价太高后人家买不买账，能否达到我们的预期目的问题！
说白了，和平理性非暴力的民主运动，就是一个根据目前的形势和民主力量的实力，和政府当局讨价还价的问题，就是一个虽然不断提高价码但也不断和当局妥协的问题。

我早已把《和平宪章》的原则概括为十六个字：“全民和解，人权为本，良性互动，和平转型。”
全民和解当然首先是官民和解，谈判妥协是和解的基本途径，而我们谈和解不是没有原则的，这个原则就是人权至上，就是要保护包括执政党和政府的一切官僚在内的所有人的人权，也理解和尊重其所有的合理合法的以及由历史造成的特殊的权益和利益，只有在这种基础上，才可能谈和平转型。
在这个框架下，对话、谈判、妥协就成为官民互动的基本特征。
如果我们一开始就把改变国体、政体的要求提出来，当局可能和我们对话吗？可能和我们谈判吗？这样的问题又可能妥协吗？

现在我们来看第二点。
《和平宪章》和《零八宪章》的最大区别，就在于后者只有一个最高价值，那就是“宪章”，也是所追求的结果，这是它从名称上完全承袭《七七宪章》的结果，一个产生于1977年，一个产生于2008年。
《和平宪章》则不同，它有两个价值，中心价值当然也是宪章，即要求回归世界文明主流，奉行人权至上理念，实行宪政民主制，但是在此之外，它还有一个限定词“和平”，也就是强调再以宪政为目的的同时，还要求以和平过渡为原则，也就是不仅要结果正义，而且要过程正义，要求目的和手段相统一，不能为了目的不择手段。
从《和平宪章》问世到今天已经过去了十八年，这十八年里我坐了十四年牢，有人问我改变了和平转型的主张没有，我觉得这是一个没有道理的问题，为了中国人民的最高利益，也因为对当代中国社会进步规律的把握，我认为和平转型是唯一出路，也是必然选择。为此有人居然说我秦永敏不止该只坐二十几年牢，而且应该关两百年！说这话的人对中共政权的寿命太乐观了，显然，这是典型的共产党思维——苦大仇深必然苗红根正，似乎受迫害越多就越主张暴力革命。应该承认，二者的确有正相关，越是无知者越如此，正如毛泽东所说“压迫越深反抗越大”，与此同时，根据法国大革命中产生的《人权宣言》等最重要的人权文献，人民也有反抗暴政推翻政府的权利。

但是，我要指出几点
第一， 从当前说，中共已经掌握了控制国家的超级能力，它的庞大国家机器通过两种手段足以镇压一切和任何暴力反抗的图谋。首先，它的国情监控系统足以查明任何十几个几十个人以上的暴力反抗图谋，所以，规模小了根本不足以撼动中共统治，一切稍有规模的武装反抗中共统治的企图则都不可能不在早期准备中被当局侦破，其次，中国早已不是民众可以“斩木为兵揭竿为旗”既能足以和当局的长矛大刀抗衡并取得胜利的时代，国家暴力足以轻而易举的镇压一切民众的暴力反抗，并且将其真正从肉体上“消灭在萌芽状况”。从这种情况来看，一切暴力革命、武装反抗推翻中共统治的做法都是自寻死路愚不可及。

第二， 中国已经不是二十世纪上半叶的中国，那时中国刚开始进入工业革命时代，大批失地农民成了中共煽动暴力夺取政权的最好愚弄对象，赤贫农民也还和几千年王朝循环时期的农民一样，反正没饭吃，狠下一条心，要么死了拉倒，要么打进京城坐江山。今日中国的社会大众包括农民接受了中共利用大众尤其是农民打江山，打下江山加倍欺压大众和农民的教训，也因为市场经济发展使大多数人有了一点财产，就都希望守着自己的财产过日子，通过自己的劳动一点点的改善生活，不会再受革命家的蛊惑去为成功之将当万具枯骨，还因为这个时代已经成了人人都可以娱乐至死的时代，再穷的人也可以守着个电视机影碟机看个不停，也没有多少人有衣食之虞，故已经没有几个人会铤而走险。总之，凡是在中国大陆的人都清楚，今日中国并不存在能够发动起来进行暴力革命的社会大众

第三， 当然，今天确实有不少聪明人在煽动暴力革命，却绝不担心自己性命难保，因为他们都在国外煽动国内的人这么做，或者在国内躲在无人得知的地方匿名在互联网之类的地方煽动别人这么做，他们惯于让别人去冒风险， 让别人去丧命，他们自己是绝不会在中国大陆本土公开从事他们所号召的暴力革命的。前段时间闹得沸沸扬扬的“革命”鼓噪中，我就亲历了这样一件事：国外某个激进团体派人在网上动员我发动人们这么做的同时，他人在海外尚且还怕我看见了真面目，视屏对话中居然还要把自己藏起来！这么做的人还不聪明至极么？让国内的人去送死，他们是绝对安全的，但这么做的结果能达到他们的“伟大革命目标”？所以，对这些煽动暴力革命的人我要说，如果你在国外，请你回来搞，如果你在国内，请你公开搞，如果你煽动别人，请你亲自搞！几十年来我坚持民主人权活动的同时坚持“和平、理性、非暴力”，并且一直首当其冲身体力行，希望那些煽动搞暴力革命的人也如我知行合一，当尖兵滚地雷始终冲在最前面。

第四， 况且历史的教训早已告诉我们，暴力夺权者必然暴力掌权，绝不会给国家社会带来民主自由，相反，历史的经验充分证明，自由是一波一波的国民运动争得的，民主是在选举制度的实施中一步步发展成熟的，绝不是暴力革命革出来的，暴力革命在最好的情况下也只是赶走了独裁者，从而为建立民主自由的社会开辟道路，更多的则是被野心家利用，是社会在流血漂杵之后还是无法迅速建立民主制度。

第五， 从我们中国的国家、社会、大众的根本利益来说，也只有和平转型是唯一选择。和平转型对国家、社会、大众的利益损害最小，这是就客观效果说；人民不会起来暴力革命，只会起来和平表达意愿，这是从原因上说。对当局而言，暴力革命意味着他们的毁灭，因此只会不计代价的镇压，和平转型以承认他们的许多既得利益为前提，在一定条件下，也就是在民众压力够大，反对派组织够强，同时做法也够温和理性的情况下，当局是完全可以接受的。关于这一点，就涉及到“转型正义”。正义是让一切人随时随地得其所应得，转型正义就是在转型过程中随时随地确保统治者方面的人身财产权利不受侵犯，对其过去在特定历史条件下的罪恶，可以清查，但要赦免——这就是“第一次宽恕”。也就是说，为了和平转型，必须对统治者进行“赎买”，用确保他们的部分特权，同等保障他们的全部人权，来逐步交换他们所掌握的统治权。

第六， 反对和平转型原则的人第一条理由是中共当局犯下了那么多反人类罪，至今还在无恶不作，因此中国没有任何和平转型的希望。在我看来，说中共比德国法西斯还坏证据充分，说中国不能和平转型则毫无道理。中共最残酷的罪行是毛泽东仿效苏联犯下的，邓小平“复辟资本主义”以后一代代又犯了不少反人类罪，但是，毕竟一代比一代要理性一点，总体上说做的孽少一点，再加上他们已经从暴力夺权意识形态至上的军事强人换成了锦衣玉食的天潢贵胄和谨小慎微的技术官僚，其现实利益已经向金钱至上利益至上转化，意识形态是不能谈判不能分割的，所以以前的确无法指望其接受普世价值，现在的基本情况已经完全不同，金钱至上意味着利益至上，而利益是可以切割的。这样，就像台湾的民主转型和对“228”事件的认罪只能发生在蒋氏父子死后一样，到有重大血债的死得差不多了以后，新的统治者在全民压力下被迫和平转型是必然的，因为那时候他们确保既得利益的办法将不再是把持保不住的绝对权力，在能确保其生命财产安全的前提下，当然是顺应历史潮流。

另外，要强调，和平转型的基点绝不是当局开皇恩大赐，而是全民的觉醒和民主人权力量的强大。
和平转型是民主人权力量的理性诉求，是民运领袖作为历史创造者必须坚持的“为万世开太平”的胸怀气度，这并不是说，有了这种指导思想，转型过程中就绝对不会发生暴力,《和平宪章》指出，转型不可避免，区别只在于暴力和非暴力，非暴力转型的一个前提就是当局必须有足够的理性。
这就是说，统治者越理性，转型就越和平，统治者越不理性，转型的暴力性就越强，这是被历史充分证明了的定则。今年以来阿拉伯世界的民主变命风潮再次印证了这一点，突尼斯相对平和，埃及也还不太爆烈，绝世狂人独裁暴君统治的利比亚则以屠杀导致内战，它怎么可能不被该国人民彻底清算？

此外，无论民主人权力量多么理性，由于统治者作恶太多，在和平转型过程中出现一定数量的和局部的暴力事件必不可免。尤其是中国这样一个大国，本来情况就高度复杂，再加上地方政府黑社会化，多年来激起的民变数量直线上升，一年达十几万起，迄今已发生几十起官逼民反导致民众捣毁县市政府的重大事件，因此转型中没有暴力事件相伴是天方夜谭。对此，我们的原则第一是完全理解但坚决反对，第二要求妥善处理，防止事态恶化，第三，要求各方克制，控制事态发展，全力避免形成全局性及全国性的暴力冲突。

当然我们要大力强调，当局对防止形成全国性暴力事件暴力对抗负有不可推卸的责任，毫无疑问，局面恶化到这种地步只能是当局维持专制高压所致，它也必须对此负完全责任。
但是，，就和平转型这个历史性课题而言，作为为万世开太平的历史创造者，民主阵营的领袖和核心集团必须未雨绸缪，拿出切实可行的方案来。

与此同时，解铃还须系铃人，当局更必须拿出令人信服的和平转型诚意来。
这两个方面是不可偏废的。
《和平宪章》和《零八宪章》对转型过程和转型正义上的重视程度不啻天壤的区别，导致了二者的第三个差别，那就是《和平宪章》重点谈转型的启动操作，《零八宪章》重点谈宪政民主的建构。
《和平宪章》只提出了“实行多元化民主政治”的基本主张，并且要求在大量进行各种双边和多边会谈的基础上举行圆桌会议，因此，对未来的国体和政体未置一词，也就乏善可陈，认为先进民主国家已经有足够多的经验可资借鉴，具体决定则是全民和解过程中圆桌会议讨论并交由全民公决的事情，就像中共当局没有资格单独决定一样——任何离开全民公决单独决定的宪政章程都必然缺乏权威性，因而不可能不留下无穷后患。

《零八宪章》把当代民主国家宪政制度的基本原则一一罗列出来，可以说洋洋大观完整系统。
不过，对其排列方式在下颇有疑问。
本人专门研究过人权观念的成长和发展，对人类历史上各种权利的出现作了排列研究，发现了这么一些要点：
人权是抽象的原则性的，是政治概念，它的对象包括一切人，涵盖包括一切已有的和未来可能有的即潜在的权利，对人类来说它是一个周延性概念。这就决定了人权观念一问世就有极其强大的生命力，成为一切被压迫者争取平等权利的强大的思想武器。人权观念是欧洲启蒙运动时期产生的，或者说是信基督教的白皮肤的欧洲男人发明的。随后其他宗教的人，美洲的黑皮肤人、亚洲的黄皮肤人、全世界的女人也纷纷接过来。
经过了几百年时间，到联合国《世界人权宣言》问世之时，它就成了这样一个经典表述：

“第一条
人人生而自由,在尊严和权利上一律平等。他们赋有理性和良心,并应以兄弟关系的精神相对待。
第二条
人人有资格享有本宣言所载的一切权利和自由,不分种族、肤色、性别、语言、宗教、政治或其他见解、国籍或社会出身、财产、出生或其他身分等任何区别。
并且不得因一人所属的国家或领土的政治的、行政的或者国际的地位之不同而有所区别,无论该领土是独立领土、托管领土、非自治领土或者处于其他任何主权受限制的情况之下。”

但是，联合国的规定是一码事，现实又是一码事，其实，它对世界各国只是一种软约束（当然今天的欧盟除外，由于它的先进发达成熟，和《世界人权宣言》相应的《欧洲人权公约》在欧盟范围内已是硬约束，高于所有成员国的法律）。
原因在于，和人权不同，权利是法律概念。法律不规定，该法律系统下辖的民众就肯定没有相应的权利。法律规定了以后，则成了字面上的东西，是否能兑现，也不是绝对的。只有在全民出面来运用那些权利，并且以强大的压力迫使当局兑现的情况下，才能成为社会生活的直接现实。

所以，权利首先必须写进法律，这是使它从形式上获得认可的一环，也是使它得以实行的必要条件。
与此同时，字面上的法定权利并不是民众拥有该项权利的充分条件，这种充分条件是：从法律上拥有该权利的一切人在社会上行动起来，坚决勇敢顽强持续的维护它们、捍卫它们、运用它们。

与此同时，在人类历史上，人权观念的普及是和各项权利的逐步制定和实施相应的，也就是说，权利不是一股脑儿产生的，而是有个逐项被各国的先贤们想到、提出、立法、实施的过程，而且，越往早去，产生和提出越难，每项权利提出的间隔越大。
更重要的是，它们不是哪一个国家的哪一个先贤完整系统的提出的，而是许多不同的国家的人在不同时代，根据本国当前的社会生活需要，在其他国家的人已经提出的其他的权利的基础上一个个增添出来的。
这就是为什么梁启超说欧洲的民主自由是一波一波的国民运动带来的，国民运动可以断续，但要持续的原因。
这里，我们首先要感谢的是世界近代史上的第一个现代共和国，由今天的荷兰一带的市民建立的尼德兰共和国，它于1581年发布了近代人类历史上第一个有关权利的法令，宣布言论自由权和男子的私有财产权受法律保护。
可以说，这个最早最简单的权利法令也是最英明的权利法令，因为私有财产权是一切社会和经济权利的基础，没有私有财产权公民在社会生活中就没有立足之地，而言论自由权又是一切公民权利和政治权利的前提，“口将言而嗫嚅”的社会里有何公民权利可言？又如何去过问政治？
说到这里不能不遗憾的指出，中共政权建立后迄今为此不仅从事实上完全剥夺了中国人民的言论自由权（言论自由度虽然一直在扩大），而且剥夺私有财产权半个世纪后迄今为止也没有给中国人民以完全的私有财产权——没有土地私有权，物权法就是一个跛足法律。

近百年以后，也就是1776年，美国诞生后，人类才第一次有了“有财产的白人男子在全国选举中的投票权”！
再从美国来看，其各项权利也有一个漫长的产生、制定过程。
由于一开始其他法律承袭了英国的，这样，在1795年才出台了以下三项法律：
1 白人男子的私有财产权
2 言论自由权
3 信仰自由权
至于已婚妇女的私有财产权，则迟滞到1905年才出台，
妇女的投票权，迟滞到1921年出台，
所有民族和种族在全国选举中的投票权直到1970年才出台！

应当说明，社会权利概念到是当时最专制的德国在俾斯麦统治下搞“三部大法安天下”于1883年出台的，其制定的第一种社会权利是工人工伤补偿方面的，相应的的法律美国则到1912年才制定。
反观中国，民国时代就几乎制定出了当时几乎所有先进家所有的权利法律，但大多数并没有落实。
至于中共政权成立之后，更将包括私有财产权和言论自由权在内的一切权利剥夺殆尽，与此同时，为了欺世盗名宪法则从形式上始终保留言论自由权。

所以，我们今天面临的现实是：必须把欧美发达国家自从1581年以来在四百多年里头陆续创化出来、也几乎为中华人民共和国宪法统统规定了，但却被中共当局统统剥夺了的所有权利都讨回来。
另一方面，无数事实告诉我们，权利的实现不可能是一个平面，不可能起步走，不可能没有一个先后顺序，有些权利必须先行，有些权利不能不缓一步，无论我们怎么要求当局全部归还，在现实生活中我们还是要考虑哪些项目必须优先必须靠前，那些项目只能后延只能等待条件具备。
这一点，正是《大学》教导我们的“物有本末，事有始终，知所先后，则近道也”，也就是《和平宪章》强调可操作性的原因。
就是说：《和平宪章》提到的方案未必是对的，更不会是最佳的，但是，中国的民主化进程，和设计宪政民主制度的建构，必须有一个科学合理的次序方案，这一点是不容质疑的。

那么，中国民主化进程所需的最基本顺序是什么？
15年过去，《和平宪章》当年的主张不一定适用，要求可能太低了一点，那时主要致力要求言论出版结社三项权利，而建议将游行集会示威暂缓，现在则当然要求全面兑现公民权利！
但是，政治权利方面还是应该有一个逐步渐进的过程。
比方说，在没有进行过基层选举、没有自由政党, 或者基层选举还没有坚实的基础、自由政党还没有充分运作的情况下，能够搞好全国领导人和国会的选举吗?
在这种情况下，推动中国民主化进程的领军人物，和中国民主制度的设计者，是否应该“把马克思主义的普遍真理和中国革命的具体实践相结合”？是否应该考虑如何按照客观需要和可能科学的有效地按部就班的推进民主化进程？是否应该阐明中国宪政民主制度建构的程序和步骤？
固然，当局的阻碍使其不可能没有很多变数，但是，当局的作用又为什么不是这个设计蓝图中周密考虑过的一个因素呢？

这就要求我们充分意识到：
第一，中国的宪政民主和当前的制度之间应该没有一条不可逾越的鸿沟，就是有，也需要我们在二者之间架起一道坚实的桥梁。
第二，中共当局则不仅是我们的对手，也应该是我们共建宪政的因素，即使它目前不是，我们也必须把它变成共建宪政的因素
第三，无论我们怎么对中共暴政深恶痛觉，中共本身还是代表百分之几的中国人，在宪政中国他们必将是多元化政治力量中的一员，这股政治势力即使会在几十年后消亡，也应该是一个民主生态下的自然历史过程，而不能用违反人权原则的方法强行驱散，何况它们今天仍然是执政党，它们仍然垄断着国家政权，在这种情况下，我们草拟中国走向民主化的大纲，似乎没法不把中共当局作为博弈对象，不能不把它作为一个共建宪政民主的一个有着巨大变数的复杂因素考虑进去。
无论是非对错好坏优劣，这，或许就是《和平宪章》和《零八宪章》的不同之处。

2011.7．8

附：和平宪章（草案）

（十几年来，大陆上的经济体制发生了巨大变化，对此我们深表赞赏 。然而，正如当代世界历定事实已充分表明的，市场经济的迅猛发展必然要求实行多元化的民主政治。鉴于当前世界结束冷战，走向新秩序，鉴于所有中国人都关注中国未来的和平发展，我们特提出本宪章。）

古今中外政治制度转型的各种先例，使我们不能不对中国下阶段的历史进程忧心忡忡。既然多元化民主政治是不可阻挡的历史必然，那么，我们不能不问：这一进程在中国究竟将以和平方式还是以非和平方式进行？
我们深信，中国大陆政府当局中，有历史洞察力的人士也同样认识到了上述问题及其迫切性，因此，历史的经验教训，尤其是前苏联和东欧正反两方面的先例，完全足以使我国大陆仍然充满对立情绪的朝野各方达这种共识：

中国大陆从一元化走向民主政治的历史性变革，只有在政府当局有诚意的情况下，从上而下地程序化地和平进行，才能将其负面影响——即对民众社会经济生活的破坏作用，降到最低限度！
应当指出，浩浩荡荡的世界潮流，国际上空前强大的民主力量，不仅使中国的和平变革成为众望所归，也使之获得了各种必要的条件——今天的国际国内形势，无论从哪方面说，绝不容许“六•四“那样的惨案重演，与此同时，正义和理性也不希望”六•四“之前的社会管理失控状况发生。

当前问题的关键在于，这一变革必将使中国社会的上层阶级和某此既得利益者受到了一定的冲击，从而使他们对变革持消极、拒斥态度；同时，一些现制度的受害阶层及个人，也难免出现偏激情绪。这两种情况，均在一定程度上对和平地程序化地政治转型产生消极作用。
至于台湾海峡两岸的问题，其关键显然并不在于以什么方式，在什么时候统一，而在于以什么为基础，在什么共识上统一。
在上述历史背景下，我们作为中国公民，满怀伟大的使命感，斗胆站出来呼吁全国朝野上下：
让我们以“全民的利益高于一切”为原则，捐弃前嫌，互敬互让，折中妥协，共商国是，实现中华民族大和解，以求在平和稳妥的方式下，一起来完成中国大陆的政治制度转型，以及台湾海峡两岸的和平统一大业！
我们特别提醒朝野各界，为了避免矛盾的激化，导致必然来临的政治变革进程失去控制，从而使国家陷入无政府状况，造成持续的社会动荡，以及内战乃至割据局面，有关各方从现在开始，便应采取一切可能的方法来防患于未然。特别是中国大陆政府当局，尤其有责任尽早采取主动措施，逐步缓和局面，抓住目前的有利时机，自觉顺应历史发展规律，否则，便必须对可能出现的上述各种局面负最大的历史责任。

为了避免中国下阶段的政治历史再次重蹈近百年的恶性怪圈，我们在充分考虑到海峡两岸朝野各方的共同利益，特别是它们各自的特列殊利益的前提下，特向海峡两岸的政府，当然首先是大陆政府，向包括海峡两岸及港澳和少数民族在内的全体中国人和海外同胞，向海内外一切致力于社会进步的团体，郑重地推荐以下具有可操作性的全民和解程序：

第一、我们认为，大陆政府代表中国作为联合国安理会的常任理事国，有义务遵守联合国有关人权问题的一切决议，并应该从以当代国际标准保障中国人民的人权入手，立刻制定与当代各民主国家类等的人身、言论、通信、出版、集会、结社（含开放党禁）、游行、示威、罢工以及公民自由出入国境等方面的法规，立刻废除“反革命罪”，并在国际监督和国际国内與论督促下严格执行。
作为一种善意的回应，我们呼吁民众将自己不可让渡的集会、游行、示威权利，在一段不长的时间内停留在当局目前的法律水平上，以减少由政府主导的和平过渡起步阶段的社会震荡。

第二、我们呼吁大陆政府当局拿出驾驭历史性变革的宏大气魄，从速制定并实施从一元化到多元化，进而建立和健全民主政治的战略措施，从而创造使大陆的政治制度转型过程始终处于中央政府可以控制和调节的范围内的条件。

第三、在大陆政府承认上两条的前提下，我们呼吁全体民众和海内外一切进步力量，尊重大陆政府是唯一有可能主导大陆和平变革的主要力量这一事实，积极主动地与他们合作，提供各种具有可操作性的建设性建议，搁置那些无关宏旨的利害冲突，力争与当局之间形成一种良性互动关系，从而共同推动和解进程。

第四、我们督促大陆政府首先做出第一个必要的和解姿态，那就是立即平反“六•四”事件，释放因“六•四”和其他原因入狱的一切政治犯，不分政治信念和派别，给所有“六•四”遇难者及其他政治受害者或家属发放适量抚恤金。
我们呼吁受难者家属与社会各界，在大陆政府真正表现出和解诚意的时候，拿出向前看的态度，不再追究“六•四”和以往各种政治事件的一般责任。

第五、我们呼吁中共及其政府解除一切对政治流亡者的法律禁令，允许流亡国外的一切学生、学者、工运人士和其他人回国。
我们坚信，中国的问题只能靠中国人自己在中国本土解决。因此，我们呼吁一切真正有志于献身祖国的人，立即回国参加中国的经济现代化和政治民主化建设。

第六、以现代国际标准制定与实施结社法并开放党禁之日，就是海内外一切非暴力政治社团与政党可以合法注册之时，届时，各社团与政党均应勇跃到有关部门去登记注册。今天，我们则呼吁各方以公开性、合法性与非暴力为原则，有策略有艺术地开展不会造成社会秩序动荡的思想运动，以此作为争取人权和民主运动所应有的最低限度的压力方式。在能够合法注册之后，当然也应以此为原则。

第七、我们呼吁台湾海峡两岸的政府立刻开始直接的对等谈判。我们相信中华民族的凝聚力足以使台湾与大陆和平统一。因此，我们呼吁大陆当局正式放弃武力解决问题的主张，并以同等态度对待台湾的国民党、民进党以及其他政党，在条件成熟时，应当欢迎台湾政党到大陆发展。我们也呼吁台湾朝野各界届时能对等地欢迎包括共产党在内的大陆政党到台湾发展，从而最终完成台湾海峡两岸的社会政治整合。我们也呼吁台湾民进党放弃“台独”主张，积极致力于包括大陆、台湾、港澳在内的全中国民主进步事业。

第八、我们呼吁大陆政府充分尊重香港和澳门人民的自治权利，以主权归中央，治权归地方为原则处理港澳回归祖国后的问题，充分尊重当地人民对社会、政治、经济制度与生活方式的选择。

第九、我们呼吁全国各族人民共同维护中华民族大团结，同时呼吁政府按现代国际标准处理各种少数民族问题，充分尊重各少数民族的民族自决权，放弃以暴力维持大一统的封建观念。

第十、在以上各条被各方，当然首先是被大陆政府基本接受的基础上，我们建议从速召开包括大陆、台湾、港澳、少数民族以及海内外朝野各界人士在内的圆桌会议，共同讨论并决定中国下阶段的和平变革与海峡两岸的和平统一问题。当然，根据客观情况的需要，可以先做许多双边或多边的预备性会谈，并分专题分别举行和平变革或两岸统一的圆桌会议。
我们相信，上述建议不仅符合中国人民的根本利益，也是中国下阶段历史的理性要求。我们特别要求大陆政府理解我们的善意，接受我们的全民和解主张。

我们呼吁所有的中国人和全世界的炎黄子际与我们一起来联名表达希望大陆实现和平的政治转型、希望海峡两岸实现和平统一的共同意愿。
《和平宪章》是一切认同本宪章的海内外中国人不分政治派别组成的自由而公开的非正式团体，它以个人和集体的努力，为和平过渡到一个多元化的政治力量并存的民主的统一的中国，而开展各种公开的合法活动。
《和平宪章》欢迎海内外同意其观点的人以各种有效方式支持和参加它的工作——发起签名运动，进行广泛的宣传，以及在当今宪法和法律允许并保障的范围内开展的其他活动。

《和平宪章》极端重视和尊重这样一个事实，中共及其政府是唯一能主导大陆和平地完成从一元化转型到多元化民主政治的主要社会力量，真诚地希望能促成其肩负起这一沉重的历史任务，并强烈敦促它不要错过最后的机会。
《和平宪章》所提出的各条措施，只是我们在当前情况下所能看到的具有可操作性的一些步骤，对这些抛砖引玉的看法没有过分拘泥的必要。但我们坚信，本宪章主张在现政府主导下实现程序化的和平变革的精神，不仅符合中国人和大陆政府的最大利益，而且是当代中国唯一理性的抉择。

《和平宪章》签署人包括各界人士，他们共同作为本宪章的发起人对该宪章承担责任，同时，他们推举出三位发言人，在和台湾海峡两岸的政府的讨论中，在国内外的公共场合全权代表《和平宪章》。该宪章颁布的文件依其重要性程度，由签署人或仅仅由发言人签名生效。全体签署人均有义务接受各界人士的签名，与有志于本宪章的各界人士一起来开展各项活动，执行特定的任务，并共同承担全部责任。

让我们和全体中国人一道，为中国大陆的和平变革与海峡两岸的和平统一而努力！

起草人：秦永敏

关于《和平宪章》（草案）的意见书

我们——所有关注中国大陆政治制度和平转型与海峡两岸和平统一的朋友，作为本意见书的签字人，与《和平宪章》（草案）的起草人，于1993年11月14日，在北京举行了关于《和平宪章》（草案）的讨论会，大家原则上同意《和平宪章》（草案）的基本思想。
本建议的所有签字人决定，责成《和平宪章》（草案）的起草人在广泛听取社会各界意见的基础上，对之进行充实、修政和完善，经进一步讨论后通过。
考虑到中国当前的形势，签字人一致同意，自《和平宪章》公布之日起，就在北京、上海、武汉等地设立联系人，并就《和平宪章》向社会广泛征集意见。所有签字人都有义务征集意见。一旦《和平宪章》正式通过，所有签字人自动成为它的正式签署人，此前所有征集到的有签名意向的人，则自动成为《和平宪章》的正式签名人。

《和平宪章》（草案）的联系人暂定为：
1、北京市朝阳区三里屯北区南20楼一门12号
刘念春 邮编：100027
2、上海市黄浦区外滩街道人民路558号
杨周 邮编：200002 电话：3732605
3、武汉市青山区红钢城21街坊4门2号
秦永敏 邮编：430080

本“意见书”签字人：周国强、秦永敏、宋书元、杨周、刘念春、陈旅、李海、钱玉民、沙裕光

一九九三年十一月十四日

Ron Paul Money Bomb – 1 Million Dollars is in sight

The first debate is now over, and it has been quite a day!

My trip to Greenville, SC has been a great success, and the debate went well. Our issues are resonating with the American people like never before.

And the CNN poll that came out today really shows how far you and I have come.

According to that poll, I am running a strong second in New Hampshire and am tied for third nation-wide.

But even more important, I am the most likely Republican to beat Obama in 2012.

And today’s money bomb has been a huge success.

As I write this we have raised over $950,000 in this effort.

With less than one hour to go in the day (on the East Coast), we are very close to $1 million!

Let’s post a number that will pop their eyes out of their sockets and show them the liberty movement is a force to be reckoned with.

So please, chip in to help make the Debate Day Money Bomb a huge success.

Some people are giving as much as $2,500 (the maximum allowed), and others have already pledged to give $1,000, $500, or $250.

Many others are giving $10, $25, or $50.

Whatever you can do will help us send a clear message to the political establishment that our movement is here to stay, and our issues will not go away.

So click here to make a generous contribution of $10, $25, $50, or even $2,500 – the maximum allowed – to help make the Debate Day Money Bomb a massive success.

Thank you for all that you do in the name of Liberty.

For Liberty,

Ron Paul

Ron Paul Debate Day Moneybomb!

Tonight is the first Republican Presidential debate in Greenville, South Carolina, and as you know, the grassroots has launched a Money Bomb for today.

I am very humbled by the massive outpouring of support.

So far, the grassroots Money Bomb has raised over $600,000.  I hope you’ll help push that total even higher before or after the 9PM eastern debate.

And the good news continues to roll in.

Earlier today, CNN released their latest Presidential preference poll and I am within striking distance of first place, only 6 points behind, in fact!

And Suffolk University put out their poll of New Hampshire Republicans where I am tied for second.

Americans are fed up with the media-anointed, establishment-approved, “frontrunners,” and they are turning to our message of liberty.

Our momentum is surging.  We need to keep the ball rolling by making the Debate Day Money Bomb a massive success.

If you have already contributed to our effort, thank you!

If not, I hope you will now, as grassroots support is a key indication to me of what I should do… and a critical marker the media and establishment use to decide whom to cover and how to treat them.

Let’s post a number that will pop their eyes out of their sockets and show them the liberty movement is a force to be reckoned with.

So please, chip in to help make the Debate Day Money Bomb a huge success.

Some people are giving as much as $2,500 (the maximum allowed), and others have already pledged to give $1,000, $500, or $250.

Many others are giving $10, $25, or $50.

Whatever you can do will help us send a clear message to the political establishment that our movement is here to stay, and our issues will not go away.

So click here to make a generous contribution of $10, $25, $50, or even $2,500 – the maximum allowed – to help make the Debate Day Money Bomb a massive success.

I also hope you will watch the debate on Fox tonight.

Thank you for all that you do in the name of Liberty.

For Liberty,

Ron Paul

China Bans the Burqa

BEIJING (AP) — China’s Interior Ministry announced yesterday that it would ban the burqa from being worn in public. The new law, which will be imposed next month, would forcefully put an end to the wearing of modesty-protecting garments for women in public. The new regulations also stipulate fines for wearing certain types of culturally-related clothing.

State-controlled media stated that the ban was necessary in order to maintain security. The Chinese regime is known for keeping widespread surveillance on ordinary civilians, especially ethnic minorities, to prevent possible anti-government activity. Last month an ethnic Tibetan, who was caught stealing on a convenience store’s camera was ordered to pay a fine, even though a number of dissidents criticized the video footage as “unfair evidence”.

The new law is expected to target ethnic minorities, such as the Uyghurs as well as the growing number of African immigrants, both of which already experience widespread discrimination in the racist Chinese society. While many ethnic minorities experience also prejudice if they wear ethnic clothing, but the new law is expected to add to already-existing prejudices.

“The burqa is like a security shield for me,” said one African woman who recently joined her husband and two children in Guangzhou. “In a hostile society, it gives me the confidence I need. People always stare at me when I go by because I am African. The burqa at least helps me emotionally,” she said. Another Ngubago Okulenagu, who has become an advocate for African immigrants working in China called the ban “simply unfair,” and pointed out the failure of the Chinese government’s ability to accommodate new members of society.

Several dissidents and activist rights groups have criticized China’s new law, which has been described as discriminatory. Reporters Without Borders, Amnesty International, and the International Woman’s Rights Group have all condemned the restrictions. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, responding to the new crackdown also said, “Abridging people’s right to wear cultural symbols violates fundamental human rights,” and urged the Chinese government to reconsider.

The Roewe (荣威) 350

The Roewe 350 won’t be formally launched until the Beijing motor show later this month, but already it has been confirmed a hatchback version will be on sale in the UK this time next year, badged as an MG and part assembled at the MG Birmingham plant in Longbridge.

As with the MG6, a development model of which we recently drove and found to be borderline best-in-class to drive, the Roewe 350 is based on an all-new platform. Its set-up has been tuned by the SAIC technical offshoot in the UK.

There are some similarities in appearance to the 550/MG6, although it’s hard to call the 350 stylish. Inside it is a cut above the 550/MG6, although there’s still a fairly basic use of leather and silver trim detailing. The switchgear shows some flair and the interior materials are of a high standard.

Visibility is good, particularly up front thanks to small A-pillars that give the cabin an airy appearance. It’s spacious too, particularly in the rear.

The 1.5-litre engine, however, is a disappointment. Part of the new NSE family of engines being produced by SAIC, it only meets Euro 4 emissions standards and will need modifications to reach Euro 5, meaning UK buyers won’t be buying it in this spec. Instead, a 1.5-litre turbocharged unit will be added to the Roewe 350 line-up, with a new 1.3-litre unit expected to feature in the MG range.

With just 107bhp and 100lb ft of torque, the unit in our test car lacked grunt and needed to be worked hard, with power only coming in strongly above a raucous 3000rpm. It’s not that frugal either, averaging 37.6mpg, although both wind and road noise are well suppressed. Part of that is down to the four-speed auto gearbox which does, at least, make smooth changes.

More positive is the ride and handling. The 350 rides smoothly in town and out on the motorway, but is firm enough to be reasonably fun on twisty roads.

The handling isn’t sporty, with a deliberate emphasis on comfort, but the steering offers a reasonable amount of feel. However, it is let down by a very soft brake set up that does nothing to inspire confidence.

In the Chinese market this is a good car, if not class-leading one. In Europe that’s unlikely to be enough, but it’s worth remembering, though, that there will be significant changes before it goes on sale as an MG – and that’s why we’re reserving final judgment.

http://www.roewe.com.cn/roewe350/

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/FirstDrives/Roewe-350-1.5/248880/

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/03/26/roewe-350-the-first-car-to-run-on-android/

Taiwan is not country, but US Territory says Chen Shuibian

So there you have it: Chen Shuibian admits that Taiwan is not a country and implies that the entire Taiwan Independence movement is not directed at China, but the United States, which would make the entire movement anti-American and “pro-terrorist” as some right-wingers say.

Former Taiwanese President Chen Shuibian has been indicted on new embezzlement charges just weeks after being sentenced to life in prison, and has filed a lawsuit claiming that the U.S. legally controls Taiwan and should release him from detention, officials and a lawyer said Wednesday.

Published on Taipei Times
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2009/09/24/2003454322

Chen asks US court to intervene to free him
PETITION: The Taiwan Civil Rights Litigation Organization said it was sponsoring the legal action on behalf of the former president, demanding his immediate release
By Ko Shu-ling
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Sep 24, 2009, Page 3

“His intent is to clarify that native Taiwanese people are not Chinese and should not be subject to any legal prosecution by courts of a Chinese government in exile.”
— Roger Lin, Taiwan Civil Rights Litigation Organization

As part of his affidavit for a case at the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) petitioned for the US to intervene as the “principal occupying power of Taiwan” to seek his immediate release and restore his civil and human rights.

Roger Lin (林志昇), a member of the Taiwan Civil Rights Litigation Organization, yesterday said his organization was sponsoring the legal action for Chen and demanding full respect for his civil rights and his immediate release from incarceration.

But Lin focused on Chen’s argument in the affidavit concerning Taiwan’s international status and dismissed speculation that the suit was aimed at resolving Chen’s legal problems.

“This is what I call the ‘Viagra effect,’” he said. “The drug was originally used to treat heart diseases, but most people pay more attention to its other effect — just like the suit is aimed at clarifying Taiwan’s international status, but most people look at its fallout.”

Chen has been in custody since December last year. He and his wife were handed life sentences for a string of charges last week. Chen has asked his lawyers to file an appeal.

Despite his repeated calls for the court to release him, the Taipei District Court overruled his most recent request.

Chen has decided to use international law and US constitutional law to resolve the legal problems concerning Taiwan’s status, while at the same time tackling his own legal problems, Lin said.

“His intent is to clarify that native Taiwanese people are not Chinese and should not be subject to any legal prosecution by courts of a Chinese government in exile,” Lin said.

In an English declaration provided by Lin, Chen said that during his eight-year presidency, the US executive branch often made decisions for the people of Taiwan without consulting them. These affected the lives, liberty and property of Taiwanese and the nation’s territory.

“I concluded that the machinery operating in the background was not the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act or any Executive Orders issued by the US Commander in Chief, but rather the 1952 San Francisco Peace Treaty,” he said in the declaration.

Under the peace treaty, Chen said it is clear that Taiwan was not awarded to the Republic of China and thus remains under the US Military Government until that government is legally supplanted.

His assertion is based on the argument that the US commander in chief did not make any announcement recognizing any civil government in Taiwan as supplanting the US Military Government after the 1952 treaty, he said.

Chen said the US is “the occupying power” under the customary laws of warfare because all military attacks against Taiwan in the World War II period were conducted by US military forces.

While some have called Chen “crazy” for putting forth this argument, Lin said, Chen’s accusers are the ones who are crazy.

Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Taipei branch director Huang Ching-lin (黃慶林) said he supported the theory that Taiwan’s status was undetermined but that only the 23 million people of Taiwan should have a final say in resolving it.

Calling the corruption trial against Chen invalid and unfair, Huang said he hoped that once Taiwan’s status had been determined by a US military court, a new constitution could be written and Taiwanese who break the law could be tried under Taiwanese law.

Richard Hartzell of the Formosa Nation Legal-Strategy Association said Chen’s case was a very good approach, adding that many people had confused territorial control with sovereignty.

“[If] I have lived in this hotel for 60 years — it does not mean the hotel belongs to me,” he said. “Occupying territory is a foreign territory. Taiwan is not the 51st state, not a part of the US. It’s a foreign territory under the dominion of the United States.”

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus secretary-general Lu Hsueh-chang (呂學樟) yesterday accused Chen of committing treason by referring to himself in his appeal as the former president of the “exiled ROC government.”

KMT Legislator Lee Hung-chun (李鴻鈞) said Chen must be mentally ill after spending so much time in detention.

Meanwhile, DPP spokesman Cheng Wen-tsang (鄭文燦) said the party was surprised by Chen’s remarks and did not know when Chen had made them.

“The fact that Taiwan is independent and that the sovereignty rests in the hands of its people is not only the basis of a resolution on Taiwan’s future adopted by the DPP in 1999, but a fact that is recognized and accepted by all the people [of Taiwan],” Cheng told a news conference.

“What former President Chen stated is different from the DPP’s stance,” he said.

ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY FLORA WANG AND LOA IOK-SIN

“Chen claimed he is immune from the Taipei court’s ruling because as president he was acting as civil administrator for the U.S. military government, according to the petition, which demands that Washington release him.” – http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hA1Z8MlHPhdXAe2_2z7zBBZhV99QD9AT1DS00

So there you have it: the Taiwan Independence is all about seceding from the United States and Chen Shuibian was never a President in anything but name because he was just an elected bureaucrat doing America’s bidding.  We should all be grateful that Chen Shuibian finally clarified what Taiwan Independence is all about because it was never a Chinese issue as many Taiwanese Secessionists claim, but rather it is an American issue with a corrupt American official now behind bars in a Taiwanese prison who admits that Taiwan is not a country or independent.

He is so honest with his claims that even his colleagues at the Democratic Progressive Party are confused because Chen’s views seriously contradict their party platform.  The Democratic Progressive Party started as a grouping of dissidents and democratic reformers who fought against corruption and authoritarian rule.  Once the KMT’s grip relaxed they started talking about Taiwanese Independence and this actually prompted some core democracy activists to leave the party since Taiwan Independence was never a major issue for them.  Now we learn the DPP was never fighting for independence from China or Chinese under Chen’s leadership but rather for secession from the United States and from being Americanised.

Why does Chen have to do this legal roundabout rants when he could have just worked for gradual autonomy with the United States like what Puerto Rico did?  In any event, the fact Chen admitted that Taiwan is not a country and the Taidu movement is anti-American does not change the fact he got busted for being incapable of money laundering.  Maybe Chen Shuibian should follow his American counterparts and learn from masters of scams like Bernie Madeoff and ACORN.

The Truth of Nanking leaked script

The Truth about Nanjing (南京の真実, Nankin no shinjitsu?) is a forthcoming film by Japanese filmmaker Satoru Mizushima (水島 総) about the 1937 Nanking Massacre.

Less than a month before the 70th Anniversary of the Nanjing massacre, the director said in an interview, that Japanese war criminals were martyrs who were made the scapegoat for war crimes as Jesus Christ was nailed to the cross in order to bear the sins of the world, and died bearing all of old Japan’s good and bad parts and headed for the gallows. He also claimed that the Nanjing Massacre was a politically motivated frame-up by China and many of the Westerners who made witness account about the Nanjing Massacre were bought-off or engaging in espionage activities.

Below is a leaked draft script of the third part of the “Truth of Nanjing” trilogy intended for Americans. The premise involves a naive American, a Japanese-American, and their film crew working to investigate the “lies” behind Iris Chang’s novel, evading Chinese agents who are out to silence them, show how China is evil with Japan being a victim, and ending with a courtroom drama to prove Iris Chang’s work is a sham. Enjoy!

The Truth of Nanking

Written by Satoru Mizushima

Prologue

A close up of a part of a revolver shows up in the dark.

The gunpoint of the revolver slowly points towards the camera and we gradually realize that this is a gun.

The camera closes into the gunpoint. It is pitch black inside the gunpoint.

The screen is pitch-black and suddenly a gunshot is heard.

The screen turns red and quietly fades out.

A headshot of Iris Chang emerges out of the black screen.

Superimpose

On Tuesday, November 9, 2004 at about 9 a.m., Iris Chang, the author of The Rape of Nanking (1997), a book about the massacre and rape that was said to be conducted by the Imperial Japanese Army at Nanking, China in 1927, was found dead in her car by a county water district employee on a rural road south of Los Gatos and west of California State Route 17, in Santa Clara County. Investigators concluded that Chang had shot herself through the mouth with a revolver.

S-1 Dawn (Aerial shot)

(S-1 to S-4 will be shot drama style)

Dawn, Santa Clara County, State of California

A car drives down the street.

An aerial camera follows the car.

The car runs south of Los Gatos and west of California State Route 17.

S-2 Near the suicide site

Cailifornia State Highway

Route 17

The car slows down on the freeway and goes to the side into a private road. This is the private road of a water company. The gates are closed.

S-3 Side road of California

State Highway Route 17

We see the back of a parked car with its engine still running.

A woman can be seen inside the car.

A woman is sitting in the driver’s seat. She’s looking straight ahead and is not moving.

The woman is actress, Anna Kinskey (ANNE).

ANNE swallows hard.

The crack of dawn shines into the car.

ANNE looks the car clock. It’s 7:08 am.

Her hand opens a bag.

A gun is pulled out of the bag.

It’s a “Ruger Old Army .45”, a gun unfit for a woman.

With an extremely nervous look the woman sticks the gun into her mouth.

A shaking finger cocks the gun and touches the trigger.

Her eyes are wide open.

Her finger is on the trigger.

She closes her eyes tight.

The finger on the trigger moves.

Suddenly she let’s out a sound like that of an animal’s cry.

The woman pulls the gun out of her mouth.

ANNE

No…No…It’s not suicide.

(Looks into the camera)

Iris didn’t commit suicide.

Man’s voice

Cut! Okay!

Camera pans from ANNE and we see three tough looking men come out of a car that had been following ANNE. They walk up to her.

DAN (Dan Shiotsuki)

How was it?

ANNE

(Shakes her head) It’s not suicide. I would never commit suicide like this. After sticking the gun into my mouth…I realized…that my face and head was going to be blown off…I’d never die this way.

DAN

But she had depression. She could have done anything on impulse…right?

ANNE

But Iris is a mother. And she had a little son that she loved. That son will look at her death mask…This suicide is strange.

DAN

But Iris did…

ANNE

And plus, this is a replica gun, right? Would you want to end your life with a replica gun? She must’ve at least wondered what would have happened if the replica gun didn’t do its job

DAN

Yeah, you’re right…

ANNE

DAN, she was taking pills for depression everyday. Then why didn’t she commit suicide using these pills? It’s much easier to do and cleaner. Something isn’t right. This definitely isn’t a simple suicide. DAN, I think her death is worth investigating again.

…

DAN

Ms. Anna Kinskey, what you just did for us isn’t actually an investigation or any experiment.

ANNE

What?

DAN and Man A suddenly stick a gun to ANNE’s head.

ANNE

(Surprised)

DAN, what is this?

DAN

The actress Anna Kinskey will commit suicide today. Just like Iris Chang.

ANNE

…!

DAN

(Towards the cameraman) Start shooting!!

Man B sits in the passenger seat beside ANNE and sticks a gun to her temporal.

Man A sits in the back of the car.

ANNE

DAN, what’s going on? Explain this to me.

DAN

Shut up!!

Man A brings his arms around ANNE’s neck and holds her from behind.

Man B who was sitting beside ANNE pushes the gun into her mouth, forces ANNE to hold the gun, and tries to maker her pull the trigger.

The man’s hand and finger forces the trigger to be pulled.

The trigger is pulled.

ANNE

(Screams)

A “click” sound is heard and we now know that the gun is not loaded.

The gun is pulled out of ANNE’s mouth.

DAN

Sorry about that ANNE. We just had to tape this scene.

ANNE

(Surprised)

Then this is all fake?

DAN

Yes. I wanted to create a situation that was as real as possible

ANNE looks shocked for a split second.

Then, gets out of the driver’s seat still confused, and looks at DAN.

DAN

I’m sorry. But we were able to get a perfect shot. We got acting far more superior than…acting!

With an expression mixed with cry and laughter, ANNE suddenly slaps DAN on the face as hard as she could. DAN accepts the slap.

ANNE

(Finally relaxes and takes a deep breath)

You had me there, DAN.

DAN

I’m really grateful to you ANNE. Now we’re certain that our suspicion was true.

ANNE

So you’re saying that her death was not from suicide?

DAN

Yes. You didn’t guard yourself when I, a person you know, came close to you. There’s a possibility that she was summoned by someone to come here…There’s a restaurant here that’s open until late at night. She could have met someone there.

ANNE

…! Let’s go!

S-4 The restaurant “Neko”

located near a sideroad of

California State Highway Route 17

ANNE and the staff’s cars drive down the state highway and go into the restaurant “Neko” located in a little open area near a side road.

ANNE, DAN, and the others get out of their cars.

DAN

The people of this restaurant disappeared about half a year ago. Look through the window. See? The napkins and forks are still placed on the tables. It seems like they ran away scared of something.

ANNE

Did Iris go to this restaurant as well?

DAN

Possibly. Or else she wouldn’t have found that place where she was found dead.

ANNE

So she met with someone…here?

DAN

Yes, she could’ve met someone here, and then got dragged to that place.

ANNE

And it wsa disguised as a suicide…

DAN

There’s also a rumor that Iris was scared that she might be killed…Iris bought a replica gun the day before she died. She might have bought it for self defence because she was scared of something.

ANNE

Maybe she was forced to commit suicide.

DAN

Yeah, and told that if she didn’t, her kids and husband would be massacred.

ANNE

Massacred…?

The inside of the restaurant is still dark.

S-5 Inside the car (heading towards

Iris’s former house)

ANNE and DAN are inside the moving car.

DAN

ANNE, in her book The Rape of Nanking, Iris claims that the Japanese army massacred over 300,000 Nanking civilians and raped over 20,000. But I’m starting to believe that the Nanking Massacre is fiction.

ANNE

So you’re saying it’s a total lie?

DAN

Iris’s book The Rape of Nanking had over 30 obvious historical errors in it. Frankly speaking, this book can’t be called a history book, although it may be a best selling gorey fiction novel. The more I do research on it, the more I’m certain.

ANNE

But…what has Iris’s death and the Nanking Massacre have to do with each other?

DAN

(Looks at ANNE)

ANNE

I get it…Iris found out that what she wrote was a mistake…she wrote a lie…and that’s why she committed suicide?

DAN

(Nods) But there are other possibilities as well…I’m now certain after doing that experiment on you.

ANNE

Killed…(swallows hard). Are you serious?

DAN

…

ANNE

But…why?

DAN

Because there are some people out there who want her dead.

ANNE

Who?

DAN

There are people who don’t want the public to know that The Rape of Nanking was fiction. That it was a demagogue and everything was false, because they would be in horrific trouble if this happened.

ANNE

…! (Looks at DAN’s side face)

DAN

There are a lot of people in this world that spread political demagogue as a business. They existed long ago, and they exist today.

ANNE

And Iris was one of them?

DAN

This year marks the 70^th year after the Nanking Incident. Over 30 million dollars are spent in making 12 Nanking Massacre movies in China and the U.S. It’s still continuing, ANNE.

Suddenly we hear TONY, who is driving behind them in an equipment truck, call in from the transceiver.

TONY’s voice

DAN, can you hear me? It looks like someone is following us.

DAN

Are you sure?

TONY’s voice

They’ve been following us since the site. It’s weired.

DAN

O.K. Let’s turn left at the next crossing and stop our vehicles. We’ll see what’s going on.

TONY’s voice

Roger

ANNE

…

ANNE, DAN, and TONY’s two vehicles suddenly accelerate and make a sharp turn at the crossing. The car following also accelerates and makes a sharp turn at the crossing but as soon as it notices that the two cars have parked, it drives by.

ANNE

What? What just happened?

DAN

Not sure…

S-6 In front of Iris Chang’s grave.(could be a non-existent place)

ANNE and DAN stand in front of Iris’s grave.

ANNE puts flowers in front of her grave.

ANNE

When I came out of Iris’s house, it was still dark. I was supposed to be acting, but tears kept flowing out of my eyes. I kept on looking back, many many times. Her family was still sleeping in the house and I felt her pain. I imagined her kids sleeping and couldn’t even drive straight. I felt extremely lonely…

DAN

Iris was probably very lonely. She felt that she was the loneliest person in the whole world. ANNE, people don’t commit suicide just because they were threatened or were a victim of violence. They die when they feel that they are all alone in this big world. And I think they are willing to die if it’s for people they really love.

ANNE

Is this coming from your experience?

DAN

Maybe (laughs) By the way, ANNE, will you still continue working with me?

ANNE

DAN, why did you choose me?

DAN

(A bit baffled) W…well, one, you’re a very famous actress, two, you’re very honest and full of integrity, and…(Hesitates)

ANNE

(Encouragingly) And…?

DAN

I’m…well…your fan.

ANNE

(Smiles and looks at him) Is that it?

DAN

(Confused) Is that not enough?

ANNE

(Doesn’t answer and smiles) No…One more question…DAN… (Looks straight at DAN)…is this dangerous?

DAN

It’s dangerous

The two look into each other’s eyes.

ANNE

(Smiles)

OK! Then I’m going to do it. It’s dangerous because it’s worthwhile, right? And first and foremost, how can I refuse an offer from my fan?

DAN

You’re fantastic.

(Hands out his hand with a smile)

ANNE shakes DAN’s hand.

ANNE

Whose hand is shaking?

DAN

Both of ours (Laughs).

S-7 Experiment in front of an outdoor shooting range.

ANNE points a replica gun towards the camera.

The staff set up a plaster figure (other flexible figure OK as well) apart from ANNE, and move away.

TONY

All set!!

DAN

Start filming! Ready, set, go!

ANNE places the replica gun inside the figure’s mouth and starts reporting in front of the camera.

ANNE

The bullet that was said to have been shot by Iris stopped at her throat. It didn’t penetrate it.

ANNE pushes off the safety device and fires the replica gun.

ANNE

This is the limit of its fire power. If you were going to commit suicide, wouldn’t you want to be certain and use a real gun? There also seems to be an an issue with the bullet that is said to have been created by her.

DAN’s voice

Cut!!

S-8 In front of Santa Clara County Police Station

(S-8 – S14 will be shot in a documentary style)

A car stops in front of the County Police Station. ANNE and DAN get out of the car and go into the police station.

S-9 Investigation Department inside the station.

ANNE and staff interview the investigator who investigated Iris’s death. (This will be filmed like a documentary interview)

They ask about her committing suicide by shooting herself through the mouth with a revolver.

About the place of her death being at a place too plain.

The mysterious fact of her using a replica revolver.

The possibility of it being a cover up murder.

About the drugs in her body found after her postmortem.

S-10 Gun shop “Reed’s Sport Shop”

ANNE and staff go to the gun shop where Iris bought her replica revolver and ask about her mental and physical condition when she bought the gun.

Also conduct interviews with people who taught her how to shoot.

S-11 Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, Stanford University

A bronze statue of Iris Chang stands in the building.

A description is inscripted.

ANNE and staff attempt an on-the-spot interview.

Why did they put this statue in this University?

Have they acknowledged that the Nanking Massacre did in fact happen?

What are they going to do if they find out that this incident was fabricated?

Questions regarding donations from a private Chinese organization in the U.S.

Who proposed this relationship with the organization?

S-12 The Pentagon? Relic Room

ANNE reads the documents related to the Tokyo Tribunal of War Criminals.

The Tokyo Tribunal of War Criminal film records are screened and ANNE studies them.

(Permission to dub and use the The Nanking and Shanghai portions of the Tokyo Tribunal and Blakeney’s comments on the use of the atomic bomb should be obtained immediately)

S-13 Interviews with academics

and intellects.

Unappointed interviews conducted with academics and intellects who wrote appraisal and recommendations for Iris Chang’s The Rape of Nanking.

“Do you seriously believe that the historical facts written in that book are true?” “What is your base for this?””Japanese researchers are validating the fact that the Nanking Massacre did not actually happen, but what do you think about that?” Ask specific questions and corner them. The fake photos used in the book would be a good start. But this has to be done in a polite manner

i.e. Fredrick Wakeman (UC Berkeley) or Beatrix S. Bartlett (Yale) would be good targets.

S-14 Interviews with people in the film industry.

The same kind of interviews will be conducted to directors and producers of the Nanking Massacre movies.

What kind of research and verifications have you made? Don’t you think this was used as a propaganda?

S-15 Interview with Mike Honda

Interview with Congressman Mike Honda.

Have you read Iris Chang’s The Rape of Nanking?

What do you think about the authenticity of the Nanking Massacre and why?

What are you going to do if you find out that this was all made up?

Ask about his relationship with the private Chinese organization in the U.S.

Ask about donations and its amount.

S-16 In front of the office of

“Global Alliance for Preserving

the History of WWII”

ANNE and her staff arrive in San Francisco’s China Town.

Anne and her staff go into the entrance that has the

sign Global Alliance for Preserving the History of

World War Two.

If the interview is denied, then I would like to capture

this on film as well.

There will be another camera in a different group as

well.

S-17 Public Relations staff for the

the organization.

ANNE interviews the PR staff.

Why was this organization established? What are its activities?

Its relationship with China. Financials (Where does the money come from?)

There are rumors that this is the Chinese government’s spy organization.

Aggressively ask about China’s suppression of human rights, Tibet, Uighur, Taiwan.

What is your relationship with the 12 movies about to be made about the Nanking Massacre?

Request evidence regarding the Imperial Japanese army’s atrocities and obtain permission to publicly disclose this information.

S-18 Outside the building

ANNE and DAN go outside the building together with their staff. From behind, a Chinese woman, along with a tough looking Chinese man, calls ANNE.

Chinese Woman (FORELY)

Anna Kinskey, I’m FORELY Kim. I edit books. (Reaches out her hand for a handshake) I came here because I had a meeting regarding a new book. Can I talk to you for a moment?”

ANNE

(Shakes her hand)

Sure. What can I do for you?

FORELY

I hear you’re going to make a movie about the Nanking Massacre?

ANNE

Yes I am.

FORELY

I’m really interested. I heard that you were going to make a movie that says that the Nanking Massacre never happened, but is this true?

ANNE

I’m not sure what this movie is going to be about yet. But I do have a lot of questions and am investigating them right now.

FORELY

What do you think? Do you seriously think that the Nanking Massacre never happened?

DAN

So I’m telling you. We’re investigating this right now. I believe that there are a lot of mistaken facts in Iris Chang’s book. I also think that her death is full of mystery and I am interested in looking into that as well.

FORELY

So you’re saying that Iris Chang didn’t commit suicide?

DAN

We don’t know this yet as well. But I do question this considerably.

Chinese guy

Are you guys receiving money from the Japanese?

DAN

Of course not. We haven’t accepted a single cent. We’re not like some organization or congressman I know of.

ANNE

(Smiling)

That’s why we don’t have much money to produce this film!

FORELY

If we can mutually agree on historical facts, than we are willing to support you on the creation of your film…

ANNE

(Strongly) No thank you. As a journalist, we just want to find out what the truth is. It’s not for the money.

DAN

As a Chinese American, I understand that you have sympathy for Iris. That’s why the Chinese organization financially supported Iris and that book, right?

The four glare at each other in a foul atmosphere.

FORELY

(Suddenly smiles)

You guys are trouble. Are you planning to turn the entire Chinese community in the U.S. against you?

ANNE

Of course not.

DAN

Are you threatening us? Wow, you scare me! (Laughes and provokes them)

FORELY

Of course not. But the Chinese in the U.S. will get angry (Nice but firmly) seriously angry.

ANNE

(Looks straight into FORELY’s eyes)

FORELY, this is the U.S. It is a country of freedom. We will investigate this freely, and we will report it freely.

DAN

It’s different from a one-party dictating country where there’s no freedom of press.

The four glare at each other again.

FORELY

(Smiles again)

Yes. The U.S. is a great country.I am an American just as you are. I also wish that China will become like the United States some day. In order to do so, the U.S. and China should understand each other and get along. Anna Kinskey, let’s meet again. You’re just like Iris Chang (points to the tip of ANNE’s nose and smiles)

The two Chinese people walk away

ANNE and DAN look at each other, and see the Chinese off.

S-19 In front of DAN’s Production building

Two equipment trucks come in and ANNE, DAN, and the staff get out of them.

A car passes by.

ANNE and DAN see the car off and look at each other.

DAN

Did you notice?

ANNE

It’s the same car from that morning we were followed. I did feel as though we were constantly being watched…

DAN

They might be making themselves visible on purpose to intimidate us. I told our staff to keep a sharp look out for anyone going in and out of the building so no bombs will be set in the office or in the cars.

ANNE

(When closing the door) If I close this door…

DAN

…(Looks at ANNE)

ANNE

Boom!! (Closes the door)

S-20 A film of the Atomic bomb being dropped is shown

(This is actually a filming of the press conference of the Nanking movie in Los Angeles)

With an explosive sound, a B-29 Bomber files into the thunder clouds.

From the sky over Hiroshima City, something is dropped.

An atomic mushroom cloud explodes over Hiroshima City

Caption:

On August 6^th, 1945, a plutonium type Atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima City, Japan.

Next, an atomic mushroom cloud explodes over Nagasaki City.

Caption:

On August 9^th, a uranium type atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki City, Japan. The two explositons caused by plutonium and uranium atomic bombs, also known as a human experiment, massacred approximately 300,000 noncombatants and civilians.

Show devastating images and films of Hiroshima and Nagasaki City after being bombed.

S-21 The Great Tokyo Air Raid

A film recording the actual Tokyo Air Raid will be shown.

Caption:

March 10^th, 1945. The Great Tokyo Air Raid.

Caption:

After the 3 air rades conducted by the U.S. forces, 51% of all of Tokyo was reduced to ashes. Especially the air rade on March 10^th was, apart from the two atomic bombs, the largest war damage in history conducted by a conventional weapon and 100,000 civilians were indiscriminantly massacred. 3,040,000 total victims. 250,000 dead, injured, and missing. The bombing strategy was to bomb from the outer borders of Tokyo and then to close in towards the center. This bombing was conducted to literally exterminate the people in Tokyo.

Film footage and photographs of the Great Tokyo Raid will be shown.

Caption:

The indiscriminant bombing throughout Japan led to over 1 million dead and injured citizens.

S-22 The Nazi’s massacre in

Auschwitz

Images of the massacre of the Jews in Auschwitz.

Caption:

Nazi Germany carried out the genocide of the Jews aimed to their extinction and this lead to victims of about 6 million. Racism and totalism ideology represented in Nazism created from European modernism had caused various genocides.

S-23 Pol Pot Massacre

A mountain of human skeletons piled up.

A concentration camp created by Pol Pot.

The remains of their rooms and torture instruments are

shown.

Caption and Narration:

Influenced by China’s Maoism, Cambodia’s Pol Pot government massacred one third of its population, which accounts to 3 million of its own people. The Pol Pot government was brought down but the Chinese government who assisted this massacre still has not expressed any regrets or apologies.

S-24 North Korea’s horrible condition and the abduction issue

Show footage of North Korean citizens suffering from starvation and the North Korean People’s Army marching forward.

Show Megumi Yokota, abduction victim’s photograph. Then show numerous photographs of other abduction victims.

Caption and Narration:

Kim Jong-il, who is said to have taken on Mao Tse-tung’s military first policy and thorough dictatorship, continues to kill more than 3 million of his people by starvation and continue its terrorist and abduction activities around the world.

S-25 The Tibetian Massacre

Show film of the Tibetians and Lama monks trying to flee across the border to India to escape Tibet.

Then show Chinese Border patrol shooting them down.

Narration:

This is footage of Tibetians and Lama monks trying to flee across the border to India, looking for freedom, in 2007. They were shot and killed from behind by the Chinese Border Patrol. This was filmed by chance by a Rumanian TV crew.

＊　　　　＊　　　　＊　　　　＊

A pro-independence Tibetian woman shot in public by the Chinese Security Police.

Narration:

In 1950, the Chinese army invaded Tibet, and 1.2 million Tibetians were massacred by Chinese oppression.Now, the number of Chinese who have immigrated to Tibet, outnumber the number of Tibetians. The top positions in local government and companies are all occupied by the Chinese and Mandarin is forced to be used as Tibet’s language. With the Chinese government’s ethnic cleansing policythe Tibetians and its culture is at a verge of extinction. And the oppression and massacre of the Tibetians still continue to this day.

S-26 The Massacre of the Uighur

Show film of the people of Uighur suffering from radiation that resulted from over 50 nuclear experiments and contamination conducted in the area.

Show images of the resistance of the Uighur people and political oppression.

Narration:

It is the same with the people of Uighur. The Uighur people who claim human rights and freedom, and ethnic independence, are labeled terrorists and are victims of political oppression and massacre. The Chinese government has conducted over 50 nuclear experiments near the residential area of the Uighur people which continue to produce huge numbers of deaths and victims of radiation.

Conduct an interview with World Uyghur Congress spokesman Dolkun Isa (Regarding the nuclear contamination and radiation disorders and massacres)

Narration:

Massacres originating from racism have also been conducted to people with different religion and philosophies under totalism ideology.

S-27 The Tiananme Massacre

Show film and photographs of the People’s Liberation Army surpressing and killing the students. Show photographs of people run over by tanks.

S-28 The Surpression and Massacre of Falun Gong.

Show images of political suppression, massacre, and torture.

Trading of organs belonging to death row prisoners.

Number of victims killed due to political suppression in China during the 60 years after World War Two:

70 million.

It is said that history repeats itself. Is this true? Has the history of massacre repeated itself to this day as well?

The words for the title “Human Genocide”shows up on the screen.

Then the screen disappears and turns white.

ANNE’s voice

This is the avant-title. We were planning to make the main part of the documentary after this.

S-29 Press Conference (Press

conference room in Los Angeles)

Documentary and drama style using numerous cameras

Will document the actual American press conference of the movie The Big Nanking Trial – Mankind’s False Accusations.

ANNE, DAN, their staff, a Japanese staff group, and some academics and intellects hold a press conference in front of domestic and international media.

ANNE

Hello everyone. My name is Anna Kinskey, and I am the creator and reporter of this documentary film. I’m also an actress. We were originally planning to make a documentary film on Massacres. This is because we thought that massacres originated from racism that ignored human rights, and totalism. We also believed that the Nanking Massacre which was said to be conducted by the Imperial Japanese Army was also an example of this. As written in Iris Chang’s book The Rape of Nanking, we too at first thought that there were “forgotten massacres” conducted to over 300,000 Chinese. But we have now begun to suspect this

(prompts DAN)

DAN

Hello my name is DAN Shiotsuki and I am the producer and director of this film. While we were making this documentary, we realized that something strange was going on. A country that is continuing its massacre and surpression of human rights on Tibet and Uigher and giving military support to the Sudan Government to massacre its people to secure oil rights, is making 12 movies on the Nanking Massacre that happened 70 years ago and is planning to distribute them internationally. Something strange is going on here. A country that is continuing its massacre and human rights suppression to this day, is about to largely advertise an incident that happened 70 years ago, and portrayd as a victim. We started to think that there was a hidden truth that was kept from us. Now, I’d like to introduce the people who have agreed to support us and participate in this project, and to have a few words from them.

The people from the Uighur human rights organization, the Tibet pro-independence group, Falun Gong, the Tiananmen democratization group, and the Sudan massacre opposition group introduce themselves and make brief statements (has to be within 30 seconds).

DAN

Now, what I’d like to mention is that this film is a U.S. – Japan co-productin consisting of staff from both the U.S. and Japan. I’d like to introduce to you Tomoichiro NAGOSHI, our producer for Japan.

NAGOSHI

Hello, my name is Tomoichiro NAGOSHI, the producer for Japan. The Japanese, probably because of its Bushi-do philosophy, have perceived not making any excuses for its own conduct and not blaming others, as virtue, and lived by this.

Historical photographs are projected onto the screen.

NAGOSHI

In World Word Two, over 300,000 Japanese were massacred by the atomic bomb. In the Great Tokyo Air Raid 100,000 were killed over night by indiscriminant bombings. Right after the war ended, a genocide and rape were conducted by the Soviet Union in Manchuria and 600,000 were sent to Siberia against their will for forced labor and 60,000 died there. But still, the Japanese did not once conduct a voice of protest on this. They probably thought that there was nothing to be said about a war that they had lost to. But now, their virtue is abused and an incident that never happened, is about to be turned into an incident that did happen. That incident is the Nanking Massacre. If this actually happened, then we will accept this and apologize without any hesitation. But after conducting through investigation and historical verification, we started to become certain that this whole incident was a huge set up full of questionable elements. If this incident infact did not happen, then this is totally unfair. As a Japanese citizen, I would like to clarify the truth of this incident with my American friends.

DAN:

As an American, I believe in the United State’s liberty and democracy, its justice and fairness. This film is something that the Japanese, for the first time after World War Two, have stood up and given a voice of protest to the world, that they want to clarify the historical truth. We decided to act with them on their actions because we share the same set of values on liberty and democracy.

ANNE

I am also convinced that the Nanking Massacre did not actually happen.

I conducted some investigation on this event on my own.

And the more I investigated the facts, the more I became certain that this was a historical fabrication and that it was an unjust and false accusation shameful in the history of mankind.

What made me absolutely certain of this was when I saw an old Japanese film that had a record of Nanking at the time.

I think the number of people in the world who know about the existence of this film, including everyone here, is very limited.

Now, I’d like to show a part of this film to everyone.

DAN’s voice

This film found in Japan starts shooting the scenery of Nanking the day after it was occupied. Of course you’d have to discount the fact that this film was used to elevate the fighting spirits of the Japanese soldiers, but in comparison with other film and photographs, it tells us where, when, and who shot the film and is therefore an A-class primary resource. Please take a look at this.

Nanking filmed by the Toho filming crew is shown on the screen.

DAN’s voice

(voice over the screen) This film was shot the day after Nanking was occupied. I got hold of this in Japan. It is completely different from what Iris Chan wrote in her book The Rape of Nanking

If Nanking was exactly as it appears here in this film, then The Nanking Massacre becomes the biggest lie in history.

ANNE’s voice

The Japanese film crew who shot this film went into Nanking right after its occupation.

It is interesting to see that if the Nanking Massacre and rape did in fact take place, there should be at least some evidence showing that it took place, or evidence of someone trying to cover any evidence of it up, but there is in fact no sign of this at all.

In fact, the doubt of whether the genocide actually did take place or not keeps increasing. Please look at the expressions on the faces of the many Nanking civilians.

If it is one person this may be possible, but I don’t think that a large number of citizens like this could be forced to show such great acting skills.

Look at the expressions on the faces of these children who play with fire crackers at the road in front of the Japanese Imperial Army command center.

Is this the expression of chidren in the middle of a genocide? If they were actors, they would be internationally acclaimed super child actors.

Peaceful scenery of Nanking is shown on the screen and the screen turns white and the light goes on.

ANNE

So, which historical fact do you all believe in? Iris’s, or this Japanese film?

(From the press section of the room)

Iris!

DAN

(Laughes) There are probably a lot of people like you. I want you to see just one example. This is Chinese footage that has been used in various media including TV and movies and in the Memorial Hall of the Nanjing Massacre that was used as evidence for the Imperial Japanese Army’s atrocities

ANNE gives a signal to the staff. Footage of The Battle of China where a fujitive is shot from behind is shown and paused.

ANNE

This is a scene where we gasp in horror. But we cannot see the person shooting. Please look at the next scene (signals)

The same execution scene but this time with the gunner is shown and paused.

ANNE

The scene before was trimmed and we don’t know who shot the fujitive. But we do know in this one.

This is not the uniform of the Imperial Japanese Army.

Yes, that’s right.

The one shooting is a soldier of Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalists party. The fujitive that was shot is probably a member of the Communist party. These scenes are used as though they were conducted by the Japanese army.

DAN

You all may not believe this, but there is not a single motion footage that proves The Rape of Nanking.

Mike (a reporter)

Not a single footage?

DAN

Not a single footage.

There are only films that have been made from putting together bits and pieces of random atrocity films where we don’t know who it was filmed by and what was filmed.

And we also only have unsupported testimonies from self proclaimed victims. And I’m sure you all have recently experienced the uncertainty of testimonies.

Now on the screen we see the testimonial video of a young girl who defected to the U.S from Kuwait at the time of the Gulf War.

She testifies in tears that Sadam Hussein’s Iraqi army invaded Kuwait, went to hospitals and was smashing babies into the ground.

ANNE

We Americans were moved by her testimony and were in favor of the Gulf War.

But I think we all remember that this testimony was completely false.

This little girl was the daughter of the Embassador of Kuwait to the U.S.A. and was not a defector or anything of that sort at all. It was a false propaganda that was conducted by a U.S. Ad agency whose client was the Kuwait government.

It’s a good example that testimonies shouldn’t easily be believed in.

DAN

And now it is known that a lot of things, including numerous testimonies without any evidence to back it up and even the newspaper articles of the time, were false. We have discovered them. We can say that there is absolutely no real evidence telling us that the Nanking Massacre or rape took place at all. But there are numerous evidence telling us that the Nanking Massacre was in fact fabricated.

ANNE

Everyone, please take a moment to imagine. What if the Nanking Massacre was all a false accusation and lie, and that it was a propaganda aimed towards the American people…?

DAN

And if Iris Chang’s book was also someone’s words of propaganda?

Steve (Chinese reporter)

How can you determine this? Ms. Kinskey, if you keep saying such foolish things, the film industry will stop taking you seriously.

ANNE

I’m an American. As an American I want to keep the integrity of justice and truth. With the help of our Japanese friends, we found new important and critical evidence that proves our stance.

DAN

We will announce this evidence to the world in our movie and at an event that we are about to announce. The world will know the truth about The Rape of Nanking, be amazed, and understand the beauty of freedom and democracy.

ANNE

And, the fear and danger of strategic propaganda

MIKE

Can’t you announce it now?

DAN

We can if we wanted to. But everyone, please remember. As I mentioned earlier, it has been 70 years since the Nanking incident and this year there will be more than twelve movies made in the U.S. and China about the Nanking Massacre.

If we think of the total production costs for all these films, it will easily exceed 300 million dollars.

A huge amount of money will be spent on famous producers, directors, and top staff, to create movies with stories that will touch the hearts of many people around the world.

But what if all of this were lies?

What if these stories were based on bogus information created from money and deception?

What if they were all fabricated?

What if it was clearly verified that the stories were fake?

Will the Americans and the people around the world be touched with a story based on false incidents?

(Looks at the reporters)

The answer is no.

The twelve movies would all be worthless.

Our movie and our event is a time bomb. It is a time bomb that will expose the fabrication of historical facts and reveal the truth.

NAGOSHI

And these new evidence found will be a time bomb that will clear the huge false accusations put on Japan and the Japanese.

ANNE

Recently in Stanford University, Iris Chang’s bronze statue was erected.

It was donated by an organization consisting of the Chinese in the U.S. Was it because she was recognized as a true historian?

DAN

In China, they are presently doing expansion works on The Memorial Hall of the Nanjing Massacre and are applying to register it as a world heritage site.

They want to make the fictitious Nanking event into a historical fact such as Hiroshima and Auschwitz.

ANNE

The people in the film industry around the world are about to be made into a supporter of this false history and unjust accusation without knowing it.

The same is with you people of the press. Are you all going to support a historically incorrect and false unjust event?

Are you all going to be a supporter of this false accusation? It is very sad and a pity but I believe Iris Chang was taken advantage of.

The press murmurs.

A Chinese like reporter yells

That’s a lie! That’s total BS! (leaves the conference room)

ANNE

We will see if it is a lie or not in our movie and event by clearly verifying the facts. The one who would not want the public to know that the Nanking Massacre did not take place and that it was a tale used for political propaganda, is the one party dictating Chinese government that killed at least 40 million of its own people since its establishment.

DAN

And this country of one party dictatorship and surpression of human rights is going to hold the Olympics.

Presently Japan is one of the strongest allies to the U.S. closely tied both politically and economically.

Japan shares its values of freedom and democracy with the United States.

What if this was a strategic propaganda to get the Americans to hate and despise Japan and the Japanese, and to separate the two countries?

ANNE

Nazi Germany’s Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, made the following statement.

DAN

“Even if you have a mistaken fact, if you say it with full confidence and repeat it, and promote it extensively, then the general public will believe it.”

We Americans cannot be the ignorant general public.

ANNE

If Japan, the number two economic country in the world, and the U.S. start to separate from each other, Japan will approach the single party dictating country China, and the two countries will most likely oppose the U.S.

Is it appropriate for Asia to go under the influence of totalism that ignores freedom and human rights?

No, even before this ideology, we should not allow historical lies to exist.

As a proud American, I believe in America’s freedom and democracy, America’s fairness and justice.

Our movie will strive to find the truth.

We’re not asking you to believe everything we say.

But we do ask you as fellow journalists, to investigate the truth.

Please do not be a supporter of a propaganda proposed by a single party dictator country

Steve

Wait, so you’re determining that Iris Chang and her book was part of this propaganda?

ANNE

I’m not determining this. But putting aside the question of whether she knew she was part of it or not, I think she was part of it and am investigating this right now. I’ll give you one example.

Two photographs are shown on the screen

One picture is that of a Japanese soldier with a saber about to execute a Chinese looking man tied up and sitting, and the other picture is a photograph after the execution.

DAN

I’m sure some of you have seen these pictures before. In Japan, many of these pictures are thoroughly examined (urges NAGOSHI)

NAGOSHI

This picture was circulated throughout the world as evidence of the Nanking Massacre. This is of course used in Iris Chang’s The Rape of Nanking.It was even used in a school text book in Taiwan.

DAN

Take a look at the two photographs.

First of all, the camera has to be placed really close to the subject or this photograph can’t be taken like it is. Next, is the height of the camera. This next photograph shows his head cut off, but the person who cut his head is also in the picture. Did the camerman take this picture using a step ladder from inside a hole?

They were able to take this photo because it wasn’t a real execution. This is a staged photograph used for propaganda.

NAGOSHI

Look at the shadows of these people. They’re facing various directions.

This is evidence that this is a composite photograph. The person sitting down doesn’t even have a shadow.

ANNE

Maybe there are many suns in China.

The person holding the sword is wearing a strange outfit. There are no uniforms like this in the Imperial Japanese army and there was no custom to where such an outfit.

Now, these are people whose faces and expressions can clearly be seen.

Then why hasn’t the Chiang Kaishek government searched these people after the war and arrested them as war criminals as they did with others?

DAN

There is no trace of an investigation or arrest for these people after the war.

ANNE

(Shrugs her shoulders) Iris’s book contains a lot of false photographs such as these. We can say that most of them are fake photos used for the Chiang Kaishek government’s propaganda. (Signals)

A photograph of a tank burning a farmer’s house with a fire torch and a photograph with a Chinese farmer crossing the bridge with a soldier is shown.

ANNE

This is also a picture used in Iris’s book. During the massacre, a third of Nanking was destroyed by fire.

(It would be great to have a picture overlooking this area). In this picture, it says that the Japanese army is putting a rural house on fire.

But when Nanking was occupied, this tank called the Type 97 Te-Ke did not exist on earth. It was not yet in production.

DAN

Iris argued that the Nanking Massacre continued until the spring of 1938, and so it wouldn’t be strange for the tank to have been in Nanking.

This makes me laugh as well because the Type 97 Te-Ke was built in a number of 274 from 1939. It didn’t exist in 1938.

ANNE

Putting an authentic looking caption on an authentic looking picture and manipulating the mind. These are methods that communists and facists use all the time…Now…

ANNE pulls out a revolver from her bag. The reporters cry out a voice of surprise.

ANNE points the gun into her mouth.

People scream.

ANNE

(Smiles modestly) Don’t worry. This is just a replica revolver. A Ruger Old Army .45. But maybe it is still dangerous. (Becomes serious) Iris Chang committed suicide with the same replica revolver as this. To tell you the truth, we’re starting to question her suicide.

The press murmurs.

Mark (a reporter)

Ms. Kinskey, are you telling us that Iris Chang was murdered?

ANNE

The police concluded that it was a suicide. But there are several points that I am not convinced with. My first question is why she decided to use a gun. I tried an experiment where I was in the exact same situation as Iris. As a woman, I thought about my face after I died. I didn’t want my family to see my destroyed face.

DAN

Iris had a son and husband whom she loved. As a mother and a wife, would she choose to commit such suicde?

ANNE

Anyways, we have questioned everything and continued our investigation. With all due respect, I believe she was a woman with excessive self confidence. Would she (does movement of putting a gun into her mouth and makes an expression asking “what do you think?”)? If it were me, I’d kill myself with pills. It’s clean.

ANNE points at the screen that shows the place where Iris committed suicide.

ANNE

There’s one more interesting thing. The place where she died. Iris was found dead in her parked car at a side road about 20 meters off the State Highway Route 17. It’s the side road that goes into property that belongs to a water company. We went there under the exact same circumstances. It’s a place that’s hard to find where you would have to make a sharpt turn, even if you were going at 50 miles per hour. It’s too much of a dry and tasteless area to end your life in. I heard that Iris was a romantic woman. Why would she commit suicide there?

DAN

There are many other questions as well. Even if she did pull the trigger herself, the barrel was so long that it must’ve been hard for her to pull the trigger. And even if it was a suicide, I believe there had to be someone who forced it on her or something…

ANNE

I have played roles in mystery and suspence for movies and TV shows. And the base for these stories is always motive. Who would have wanted Iris’s death and be happy or in peace?

DAN

Her family? The answer is No. Is it Iris herself? Of course No.

She probably committed suicied because she was not happy.

Then is it the Japanese who were accused in The Rape of Nanking?

The answer is No again.

If she dies, then she will become a heroine and a legend.

In Japan the content of her book is pointed out as being fabricated and fake.

They want her to be alive.

Then who will benefit from her death? Who can use her death as a hero’s death and take advantage of it?

ANNE

The massacre is still continuing to this day on this earth from the same government that is pouring money in the Nanking Massacre movies and using it as propaganda. This government is going to hold the Olympics.

Our identities as journalists are being tested here. In the end, please let me say a word. Iris Chang passed away at the age of 36.

Even if she was an agent for a propaganda organization, or even if she was a pure American journalist, it was very unfortunate for her to leave her children and husband and die.

Whether she committed suicide or was murdered, whatever brought her to that stage, we will investigate.

We don’t want to put a young American woman’s death to waste. We would like to seek the truth for her sake as well.

DAN

In order to do this, we decided to hold an Nanking International Historical Full Court Session here in Los Angeles as the main event of our documentary.

We would like to thoroughly inspect The Nanking Massacre and clarify its historical truth.

Of course this will not be anything official, but we plan to conduct this as fair as possible following the rules and laws of the United States of America.

The evidence I mentioned earlier that tells us that the Nanking incident was a historical fabrication and a political propaganda will be revealed at this court.

We would like to have everyone involved in the production of the Nanking movies, the audience, and the mass media to come to the court and observe.

I believe that this court would be a cluster level time bomb that will blow up the hidden conspiracy of the one party dictating government that is putting over 300 million dollars into movie production or about to hold the Olympics.

The press murmurs.

DAN

(Smiling) We’d like to say in advance that no matter what happens, ANNE and I do not plan on committing suicide.

ANNE

If we are found dead with a gun in our mouths or jumped off a building, that is not suicide. Please assume that we were killed and do an investigation on us.

The press people laugh and murmur.

ANNE

We’re serious about this.

DAN

You all are our bodyguards that insure

our safety.

Everyone becomes quiet.

S-30 Outside the Press Conference 

ANNE, DAN, and staff walk out of the press room. FORELY and a Chinese man are waiting for them and stand in their way.

FORELY

So it seems like you’re going to seriously claim that the Nanking Massacre never happened.

ANNE

We haven’t decided on that yet. The truth is what’s important.

FORELY

We believe so too. We should reflect on history and think about the future. Don’t you agree?

DAN

Yes, that’s why we don’t forget about a certain one party ruled government that after World War Two joined other wars like the Tibet invasion and the Korean War. They killed at least 40 million of their own people. What do you think about the Tiananmen Square Massacre or the Tibetian Massacre?

FORELY

It seems like you have a prejudice against China.

DAN

(Laughing)

It’s not prejudice. It’s a fact.

ANNE

DAN!(Stops him)

FORELY

(Smiles) You’re trouble. Do you not like the Chinese?

DAN

It’s not the Chinese that I don’t like. It’s the one party ruled communist government that never once held a decent election since the country’s founding, that I don’t like.

FORELY

China is still a developing country and so it takes time to become a democratic country like the U.S. It would be great if you understood.

DAN

I can’t understand a government that doesn’t feel shame in killing millions of its own people. The killing is continuing in Uigher and Tibet, as we speak.

FORELY

It seems as though it is useless to debate with you. But if our country was slandered and criticized as it was just now, we have a right to oppose.

DAN

Of course. This is a free country.

FORELY

We clearly demand

DAN

You clearly demand?

FORELY

Yes. We, as Chinese Americans living the the U.S., demand the participation in the Nanking International Historical Full Court Session that you will be holding. We believe we have the right and obligation to do so.

DAN

(Is a bit surprised but says) I don’t know about that. Putting into account what you’ve been doing in the past, I’m worried that you’ll just disrupt our court session.

FORELY

We don’t plan on doing that. We also would like the American peole to know the truth about Nanking. We strongly request our participation as prosecutor. This is our right as we have been criticized.

DAN

The country you’re defending is one that you can’t even claim what you’re saying now. FORELY, I will make it clear that I am refusing your offer. I don’t want to be a part of your political propaganda. The U.S. is a country of freedom of speech. Why don’t you hold your own Historical Trial for Nanking? Actually, why don’t you hold a massacre trial for Tiananmen or Tibet?

CHINESE MAN

(Puts his hand softly on DAN’s shoulder)

Are you running away?

DAN

Get your hands off me. I’m not interested in going to court, but if it’s a fight you’re looking for, I’m all in.

ANNE

DAN, stop! Ms. Kim, right? We’ll think about it and get back to you.

DAN

I’m not going to agree.

FORELY

(To ANNE)

You seem like the only one with some sense. Convince him OK?

FORELY and the Chinese man go away.

DAN laughs and shrugs his shoulders.

DAN

(Calmly) I provoked her on purpose

ANNE

What?

DAN

They’re serious

ANNE

…

DAN

(Smiles)

We’re in serious trouble…

ANNE

(Laughes…)

 
S-31 Location where there’s a tunnel, a bridge, and a river
 
Anne runs as fast as she can through the tunnel.
There’s a car chasing her with extreme speed.
For some reason the car is in flames and is going after her. 
Anne runs away desperately for her life. The lights on the car turn on. 
Anne runs out of the tunnel and jumps to the side. 
The car jumps out of the tunnel and plunges into the river. 
Anne shoots the car with a huge revolver (It’s the same revolver that Iris shot herself with. A Ruger Old Army .45)
The car blows up in flames.
We hear the director’s voice “Cut! OK!!”
 

Assistant Director

We’ll now go into a lunch break. Shooting will resume at 14:15. From Scene 36! We’re now going into our lunch break!

ANNE has her sweat removed from her face by her make-up artist while regaining her breath.

The staff starts putting things away and moves away from the shooting site.

Some of the lights in the tunnel go off.

The producer RALPH comes near ANNE.

ANNE

How was I RALPH?

RALPH

Excellent! It’s going to be a high-rating supense drama.

ANNE

What rating will the producer be giving?

RALPH

An A plus plus! A perfect score.

ANNE

Yeah! (To the make-up artist) thank you. It’s OK now. (In RALPH’s ear) And what’s my score as a lover?

RALPH

Impossible to rate

ANNE

(Starts laughing) Why? Did I fail?

RALPH

ANNE, I need to talk to you.

ANNE

Really? (Senses something but pretends to be cheery). Let’s eat lunch first. We have 3 hours of break so let’s go to a sushi bar. I’m starving so I can probably eat about 30 pieces!

RALPH

(With a confused look) Anne I need to talk to you first.

ANNE

What is it? If it’s something good, I want to hear it before lunch. If it’s bad, I want to hear it after.

RALPH

It’s not so good…but I want to tell you beforehand.

ANNE

(Takes a deep breath) OK. What is it?

RALPH

In the next episode, the plane you’re flying in will crash, and you’re going to die.

ANNE

…! (Is surprised but pretends to be calm) So it means that I’m going to be put off the drama.

RALPH

Anne…(Worried about the people around him)

S-32 At a balcony and a pool

(Something like Mera’s house)

A huge mansion in front of the ocean (RALPH’s house)

ANNE is standing on the edge of the pool and watching the ocean beneath her. We see her from the back.

RALPH’s voice

ANNE.

ANNE

…

RALPH

What are you thinking about?

ANNE

Iris

RALPH

Iris Chang?

ANNE

Iris was really lonely. There was no one to protect her.

RALPH

Are you talking about me?

ANNE

You thought so too?

RALPH

I protected you. As much as I could. Even now.

ANNE

Yes…(Looks back) but you didn’t quit with me.

RALPH

ANNE…Don’t be unreasonable.

ANNE

Is someone pressuring you?

RALPH

No one’s pressuring me.

ANNE

RALPH, I’m not asking you as an actress. I’m asking you as your girlfriend.

RALPH

ANNE, I have a proposal.

ANNE

What?

RALPH

ANNE, you’re an actress. Can you concentrate on this drama only?

RALPH

If you can do this, I’ll talk to them again. I won’t let them put you off the show.

ANNE

RALPH, your words are depressing me. But thank you. I’m grateful to you.

ANNE turns back towards the ocean, puts both her arms up, and jumps into the pool as if falling.

RALPH runs towards the pool.

ANNE sinks into the water face up, like Ophelia.

RALPH

ANNE! What happened?

ANNE

You didn’t jump in with me. Just as I thought…

RALPH

…

Anne swims off with a backstroke.

S-33 Inside the office
 
The staff is busy getting ready for their overseas shooting. On the white board are the schedules for the Japan and China shooting, and a staff chart. 

ANNE walks in from the hall way outside.

She goes into DAN’s producer room and walks through staff who are editing or doing other work on her way.

＊　　　　　　　　＊　　　　　　　＊　　　　＊

DAN is discussing with his production staff (JANE and ANDY).

ANNE comes in, greets them, and sits in a chair.

JANE

ANNE, this morning two large sponsors came and declined their sponsorship. They say that their advertising budget was cut, but their real reason is that they do business with China and they don’t want a documentary saying that the Nanking Massacre did not exist.

ANDY

Even in Japan it seems like the government is ordering self regulations on anti China movies and TV programs.

ANNE

Which sponsors are these?

JANE

(Whistles) A Japanese auto company and a household electronics company.

ANDY

It’s about the honor of their country. Don’t they have any patriotism?

DAN

Money is probably more important than honor. The Japanese today would throw away their honor for money. That’s why people accuse them of rape and murder. Even though it’s supposed to be the country of the Samurai.

ANNE

(Without much energy) It’s hard to believe that they are the descendants of the Kamikazes.

DAN

I guess we’re the only last Samurais (pretends to do hara-kiri)

 
TONY, the technical staff, enters.

TONY

DAN, we’re all ready for the overseas shooting starting from tomorrow.

DAN

Thanks. We have to get up early tomorrow so go get some rest.

TONY

(Is about to go)…everyone in the China group is pretty scared and worried that they might be caught.

DAN

Don’t worry. We won’t be caught. We applied as a Nanking tourist program so if we’re asked, we’ll just stick to that claim. As long as we follow the law, we’re okay.

JANE

TONY, be careful of girls. It’s a honey trap over there.

TONY

Everyone’s saying that DAN is the one who should be most careful!

TONY laughs and walks out. JANE and ANDY walk out too.

ANNE

Is this true?

DAN

Absolutely! If there are no women in the world, there’s no reason to live! (Laughs and denies it) It’s TONY’s joke. Actually, it’s you that should be careful. It’s your first time in Japan right?

ANNE

Yes but Japan is safe and it’s the same democratic country, right?

DAN

But it’s also spy heaven. There is no anti spy law and recently there are a lot of Chinese in the country. Japan is said to be the least patriotic country in the world. It’s said that there are countless number of Japanese spies who would sell their home country. It’s dangerous if you’re too much at ease. (Notices something). ANNE, what’s wrong?

ANNE

Nothing. By the way, what should we do about the trial? Maybe we should have them participate?

DAN

ANNE, these are propaganda professionals.

ANNE

What?

DAN

The fact that 12 Nanking Massacre movies are being made this year, the army comfort women issue that came up a while ago, these are all caused by propaganda experts moving in a systematic and strategic way. Our actions must have been something unexpected to them. That’s why they’re so nervous and scared of us.

ANNE

So they’re going to destroy the Nanking trial no matter what it takes?

DAN

Yes. I think it’s best to just have us at the trial and investigate the historical facts objectively. I can’t imagine what they’d do to us if they participated.

ANNE

So I guess we’re the biggest pain in the neck in the world to them.

DAN

Yes. (Looks at ANNE) …

ANNE

… (Looks away)

DAN

… ANNE, did something happen?

ANNE

…

 
S-34 Road in front of ANNE’s house
 
DAN’s car comes up and stops. 
ANNE is sitting in the passenger seat. 

　　　　　　　　                          
S-35 Inside the car
 
ANNE and Dan still in the car not wanting to separate. 
 

ANNE

…

DAN

You fought well

ANNE

What?

DAN

You did your best. You were a great, courageous partner.

ANNE

DAN, don’t refer to me in past tense.

DAN

I can’t kill your talent and career as an actress.

ANNE

DAN, what are you saying?

DAN

ANNE, you should retire from the team.

ANNE

DAN! I don’t want to! I’m going to continue!!

DAN

You should return to your real career as an actress. You sacrificed everything to get this project going. We came this far because of you. But now it’s O.K. So…

ANNE

DAN…Don’t be nice to me. Please!

DAN

…!

ANNE

Don’t be nice to me.

DAN

ANNE…

ANNE

If you’re nice to me, I become a weak person. DAN, I participated in this project because I really wanted to.

DAN

I know.

ANNE

But to tell you the truth, up to this very point, I was still having second thoughts. I’m sorry. But because you were so kind to me…I can no longer leave this project. I’ve made up my mind. No matter what happens, we’re still going to be partners!

DAN

The best?

ANNE

(Nods) and the strongest!

Their faces naturally close in, and they kiss.

＊　　　　　　＊　　　　　　＊

A Chinese man watches them from inside a car parked a little distance away. Takes a picture with his camera.

 
S-36 An Airplane that flies out of LAX.
An airplane takes off of LAX (a tie up cut)

　　　　　　　　
 
S-37 Scene of the Imperial Palace
Scenery of the Imperial palace and the buildings
Super impose “Tokyo, Japan”　
　　　　　　　　　　
S-38 Yasukuni Shrine

ANNE, her staff, NAGOSHI, and his Japanese staff enter from the big shrine gate.

The two pray at the shrine.

ANNE and Professor Higashinakano meet in front of Yasukuni Kaikan.

S-39 Inside Yushukan

Professor Higashinakano shows them around the building.

He explains about the Nanking Massacre not taking place.

He explains that he was sued by China and there was a trial in absentia and he is demanded a compensation for defamation. They watch a record film inside the Yasukuni Shrine (Japan Conference’s Asia no Akebono)

S-40 Meiji Shrine

Walking around Meiji Shrine.

ANNE prays at the shrine.

S-41 Shiseikan

Meeting Mr. Inagaki, the head of Shiseikan, who performs a sword demonstration for ANNE.

Interview with Mr. Inagaki.

Talks about Bushi-do.

He tells us that because of Bushi-do’s view on life and death, it is impossible for the Nanking Massacre to have taken place.

S-42 A room and a hallway in a hotel in the city.

ANNE comes back from her interviews.

She’s about to open the door when she senses someone.

She quietly unlocks the door and peers in.

The TV is on in a dark room.

A film of ANNE doing her interviews in the afternoon is shown on TV.

ANNE’s smile shows up on TV.

ANNE

…!

Then a middle aged woman appears on TV and waves at her.

Anne

Mom…!

S-43 Bullet train

A bullet train swifts by.

S-44 Atami Kouakannon

The head priest of Kouakannon welcomes ANNE with a hand drum.

ANNE prays in front of the Kouakannon statue.

The head priest talks about the personality of General MATSUI.

Two seniors talk about the Nanking testimony having the ocean in their background.

S-45 The Gotenba wildland where Mt. Fuji can be seen.

Anne, Nagoshi, and the Japanese staff experiment and investigate the validity of fake photographs by reproducing the exact same situation and checking out the composite pictures, direction of light, fake uniforms, etc…This is all filmed.

ANNE’s cell phone rings.

ANNE

Hello? Yes it’s me. TONY, where are you now? Nanking? How are you? What!? DAN’s what!? …arrested? why? …what…?

S-46 In the car. Highway where Odaiba can be seen.

The bus with the crew and the equipment truck rushes by.

ANNE is on her cell phone and the staff is listening.

ANNE

TONY, is the embassy going to do something about this? Can they bail him out? …I see…Okay. Keep Robin there as a point of contact and the rest of you come back. Yes. Let’s meet in L.A. Yes, we’re all heading towards the airport right now. I think we’ll arrive at LAX in about 15 hours. Okay, bye. (Hangs up)

NAGOSHI

So how’s DAN?

ANNE

(Shakes her head) He’s arrested for illegal possession of drugs and child prostitution.

Everyone is surprised.

NAGOSHI

That’s impossible.DAN isn’t a guy who’d do these things.

ANNE

It seems like the impossible happens in that country. Drugs were found in DAN’s room and they have pictures and images of him doing child prostitution. He was probably set up.

NAGOSHI

How about the embassy?

ANNE

They said that if it was something political like a spy accusation, they could protest strongly, but if it’s something like drugs or prostitution, it’s hard for them to move. It seems like they were shown embarrassing pictures of DAN from the Chinese police.

NAGOSHI

What are we going to do?

ANNE

I’m going to go back and start moving to try to save DAN. NAGOSHI, please finish up the shooting left in Japan.

NAGOSHI

OK!

Everyone nods.

S-47 Los Angeles Buildings and Highway

Scenery (arial shot?)

S-48 In front of DAN’s production building

The staff’s car pulls up and ANNE and staff get out of the car and go into the building.

There’s a car parked on the opposide side of the road.

A Chinese man is watching and calls someone on his cell phone.

S-49 Inside the production building

ANNE, the Japan staff, and the China staff are talking.

TONY

Someone must have put the drugs inside his jacket pocket. Hotel employees and Chinese staff have been going in and out…anyways the drugs were found in his jacket and he was arrested.

ANNE

What do you mean they were found? Did the police barge into his room?

TONY

Yeah. The police came in because they had accusations of child prostitution, and found the drugs when they barged in.

JENNY

Why was he accused of child prostitution in the first place?

TONY

I don’t know…after our shooting we had dinner with the Chinese staff, drank alcohol, kept on doing cheers and continued drinking, and then…

S-50 TONY’s recollection

Inside TONY’s hotel room in China

TONY’s room

TONY comes back to his room tipsy, and falls into his bed and falls asleep without even changing

TONY’s voice

That night, everyone fell asleep in their beds without even changing.

＊ ＊ ＊ ＊

Darkness

Suddenly you hear a loud knock on the door and a bright light flashes onto TONY’s face.

A girl’s scream can be heard.

TONY opens his sleepy eyes.

For some reason there is a Chinese girl inside his arms

TONY

(Surprised and screams)

There is a camera flash and TONY has no idea what is going on, and he is naked.

TONY’s voice

DAN was in the same situation as everyone else but in his case the police investigated his room and found the drugs.

S-51 DAN’s office

TONY is talking

TONY

Yes of course I don’t remember doing any prostitution (looks around) right?

Andy

It’s exactly as TONY said it.There was a naked woman sleeping beside me (laughs). And you all know I’m not interested in women.

Everyone laughs

ANNE

They probably put sleeping drugs in the drinks.

TONY

Pictures were taken and we were just deported but DAN was captured because of the drugs. I didn’t know they’d go that far. The room was probably tapped as well.

ANNE

When do they plan to release DAN?

TONY

The embassy told us that they didn’t know. Drugs won’t gain any sympathy even in the States.

JENNY

What are we going to do now?

ANNE

We’re going to continue our shooting. We’re not going to give up because of this. DAN probably wouldn’t have wanted us to stop as well.

TONY

That’s right. He even left a message with the embassy staff to tell us not to give up and continue our filming.

ANNE

Our enemies are trying to sue DAN like they did professor Higashinakano and stop the production of our documentary. They may even kill DAN making it look as though he commited suicide or of sickness using drugs. Anyways, let’s think of a way to rescue DAN as soon as possible… no matter what it takes.

JENNY

Hello, Nanking project…ANNE, there’s a phone call for you. It’s FORELY Kim, that Chinese woman.

ANNE

Tell her I’m in a meeting

JENNY

ANNE is currently in a …yes…(covering the speaker) she said that you’d probably refuse but told me to tell you that it’s about DAN and that it’s important.

ANNE

…(Picks up the phone)

S-53 In front of a restaurant in China Town in L.A.

ANNE comes by taxi and goes inside the restaurant located in China town.

S-54 Inside the restaurant

FORELY Kim is sitting at a table and ANNE is being body checked by another Chinese woman.

FORELY

Sorry about that Ms. Kinskey. It’s going to be an unofficial conversation so I don’t want you recording this.

The Chinese woman finds a small IC recorder in ANNE’s pocket.

FORELY

I’ll return it to you later (signals the Chinese lady). You’re very well grounded and mature. That’s why I can talk to you without playing games

ANNE sits opposite FORELY without saying a word.

The two face and look at each other.

FORELY

What happened is terrible. I’m worried as well.

ANNE

It’s a dirty way to do things.

FORELY

(Slants her head) Ms. Anna Kinskey, reality is what’s important here. It’s fact that he was arrested for possession of drugs and conduct of prostitution. And there is also evidence to prove it. This is reality

ANNE

It’s all false. Just like the Nanking Incident. You turn things that we didn’t even do and make it seem like something we did. (Breathes in and tries to be as calm as possible) So, what do you want to say to me? Why did you call me?

FORELY

As a fellow American, I am worried about DAN and I want him to be free. So, I called up one of our routes and asked them.

ANNE

…!!

FORELY

(Slowly) We know people who have power over there. So… (Stops)

ANNE

So?

FORELY

It’s unofficial but they said that if our group wishes to do so, then considering the friendship between China and the U.S., they will consider letting him go.

ANNE

Really?

FORELY

But there is a condition

ANNE

What’s the condition?

FORELY

To cancel the Nanking International Historical Full Court Session you’re planning to hold.

ANNE

…!

FORELY

How about it? The Chinese governmentand the people are really angry. Your acts are destroying the friendly relation between China and the U.S. They’re serious. They want you to prove it by acting for the release of DAN and for the development of the friendship between China and the U.S.

ANNE

(Stares at FORELY)

FORELY

How about it?

ANNE

I refuse. I will never cancel this event. If I do so, it will mean betraying DAN.

FORELY

Stares at ANNE

The two glare at each other for some time

Suddenly FORELY takes a deep sigh and starts laughing

ANNE

…!

FORELY

I thought you’d say that.

ANNE

I thought I’d say that too. (Smiles) What do you really want from me?

FORELY

Okay. Let’s cut to the chase. This is the real deal. No games. We want you to have our representative be the prosecutor and allow us to participate in the Nanking International Historical Full Court Session, in order to make it fair and square. And…

ANNE

There’s still more?

FORELY

Of course. Of the three judges, one will have to be a judge that understands our postion. The presiding judge will have to be neutral and has to have our approval.

ANNE

…! (Glares but tries to be calm) you are a dirty person. You think we can have a fair trial when DAN is captured and we’re threatened?

FORELY

Ms. ANNE Kinskey. I am from Chinese decent but as an American citizen, I will promise to support a trial that is as fair as possible. ANNE, please don’t get me wrong. We are your best friends. We’re just worried about him. That’s all. It’s up to you. This is your chance. It’s up to you whether you want to take this chance or not.

ANNE

…(glares)

The two glare at each other for a while.

S-55 In front of the building of “Nanking International Historical Full Court Session”

We see a sign that has the words “Nanking International Full Court Session” in both English and Chinese characters

A Chinese American group protesting against the Japanese with banners are making public speeches and passing out flyers.

S-56 Inside the court

The trial is about to start

ANNE, Professor Higashinakano, Professor Takemoto (this could be another person), and TONY sit in the defense seat.

In the Prosecutor’s seat, FORELY Kim, Michael Lee, and a caucasion man sits.

In the defendant’s seat, a large picture is put up and it is a picture of General Iwane MATSUI and his men entering Nanking.

At the judges seat a huge liquid display panel (if possible a 65 – 100 inch) is set.

TONY

They lent us that. I’m happy we have this but they are certainly planning to make this a propaganda event.

The baliff declares the opening of the trial

Bailiff

We will now start the Nanking International Historical Full Court Session.

Everyone stands up. The flashes from the press start to flash out at once.

Three judges, who are a Caucasion (The President of the Tribunal, Judge ERICKSON), an African American (O’NEAL), and a Chinese (JIANG JIN PING) judges, walk in.

ERICKSON

We gather here today to examine the historical truth regarding the Nanking Massacre, and to find out where the true responsibility lays. This court is not an official one, but as an American citizen, we judges will open this court under the freedom and democracy stated in the United States constitution, with justice and fairness. With the support of the prosecuters, defendants, witnesses, and related parties, we would like to hold a respectable court that does not undermine the pride and honor of the United States of America. To end my opening remarks, I would like to quote Geoge Santanaya’s famous remark “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” God bless.

S-56 In the court

Prosecution’s opening statement. Prosecution presents evidence

Black background with caption:

Prosecution’s Opening Statement

Fade in

Start prosecution’s opening statement

LEE

As I start my opening statement, I would like to point out that this case is about a holocaust that was forgotten by the world, no, that was intentionally erased from the world after the Second World War.

This incident was tried at the Tokyo Tribunal of War Criminals taking place in Tokyo, and the Nanking War Crimes Tribunal taking place in Nanking, and its commanding officers and the actual perpetrators were sentenced to death and executed.

But for some reason, after the Second World War, the genocide, rape, looting and fire, all shameful hideous attrocities conducted by the Imperial Japanese Army, were hidden from the world, most likely intentionally.

With the late Iris Chang’s The Rape of Nanking, this Holocaust, an atrocity of mankind, was presented to the people of the world once again.

But Japan and most of the Japanese people will not admit to this undeniable fact, they have no remorse or regrets on this holocaust, and continue to be immoral.

We hope that this court will realize Iris Chang’s wishes and prayers, and stimulate the conscience of the Japanese, and make them accept their responsibility and reflect on what they have done, by us providing evidence regarding the truth about this horrible case.

First, in this court, we are able to use the screen over there to show various images of evidence.

The prosecution would like to provide evidence such as various photographs, films, and witnesses to prove the defendant guilty.

There are various opinions and claims regarding the magnitude of the Nanking Massacre.

But this time we would like to base our basic claim on the judgement made at the Tokyo Tribunal of War Criminals and The History of the War against Japan (Committee of China International Strategic Studies, 1995), the latest research report made out of extensive research and investigation. We will especially focus on a portion titled The Nanking Capture by Japanese Army-Occupation and Massacre.

The reason is because it has been published under the supervision of Chi Peng-fei, former deputy premier and foreign minister of the People’s Republic of China. Therefore, the view shown in this can be regarded as the latest official view of the CCP on the ‘Nanking Massacre’. In addition, it has mostly the same claims as stated in The Rape of Nanking written by Iris Chang.

The prosectution’s claim and proof of evidence will be on the following.

1. From the Marco Polo Bridge to the occupation of Nanking, the Japanese army systematically and intentionally started the war to invade China.

2. The Japanese army committed atrocity to its limit and massacred at least 300,000 Nanking civilians.

3. The Japanese army raped 20,000 to 80,000 Nanking civilians, and conducted large scale looting and arson.

4. The Japanese government led by the emperor, had systematically planned the Nanking Masscre.

5. The Japanese government should officially apologize and compensate for their atrocities.

These claims are the wishes of the late Iris Chang who passed away in her early years, and to also answer her wishes, the prosecution will provide evidence for these crimes so that the court can make a judgement that is in alignment with her claims.

S-57 Prosecution presents evidence

LEE

Now, the prosecution would like to present evidence regarding the above five items using films and witnesses.

First of all, the war between Japan and China was Japan’s war of invasion, and the Nanking massacre was a result of this.

As evidence, I would like you to see a documentary fillm called The Battle of China produced by an internationally acclaimed American director, Frank Capra.

The Nanking Massacre was conducted as part of the Japanese army’s military invastion plan that started at the Marco Polo Bridge incident on July, 1937.

They planned to have the Chinese lose their will to fight by committing unbelievable atrocities in a large scale and in its cruelty. This was just one incident that occurred in many of PRC’s cities.

This utterly inhumane way of fighting represents Japan’s military invasion or evidence that such plans existed, and this film shows evidence of this. (Signals)

The portion of the Shanghai Attack in the film The Battle of China is shown.

LEE

Here, the documentary tells us that the Tanaka Memorial was a document that had on it Japan’s strategy to take over the world.

The film The Battle of China is shown again.

LEE

Next, we will show the verdict issued at The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) that was held in Tokyo, as evidence.

Film on the president of the Tribunal, Sir William WEBB, reading out his sentence is shown.

WEBB

When MATSUI was appointed Commander of the Shanghai Expeditionary forces and left Tokyo for the fighting area, he already had thoughts of pushing on to Nanking after the intended capture of Shanghai. He requested five divisions for the Shanghai Expeditionary Force before leaving Tokyo. Actual preparations for the advance upon China’s capital were made, for he had previously made a study of the topography in the vicinity of Shanghai and Nanking. On 8 October 1937, MATSUI issued a statement in which he said “the devil-defying sharp bayonets were just on the point of being unsheathed so as to develop their divine influence, and that the mission of the Army was to fulfill all its duties of protecting Japanese residents and interests, and to chastise the Nanking Government and the outrageous Chinese.” As the area of hostilities around Shanghai was likely to expand, MATSUI was appointed Commander in Chief of the Central China Expeditionary Forces.

MATSUI issued an order to the effect that as Nanking was the capital of China, its capture was an international event and careful studies should be made so as to dazzle China with Japan’s military glory. The Japanese demand for surrender was ignored by the Chinese Government. Bombardment started and the city fell on 13 December 1937. The Japanese Army that entered Nanking was a newly forced organization, but it was composed of experienced troops. MATSUI made his triumphant entry on 17 December 1937. From 13 December onward, there occurred what has become to be known as the “Rape of Nanking.”

S-58 Defendant presents counter evidence (cross-examination)

そ

ANNE

Frank Capra is one of the top American directors I admire most, but we can tell that the film has been edited so that the impression and conscious of the viewer could be manipulated. This was conducted under US government policy so that the American people would feel sympathy towards the Ciang Kai-Shek government of China. For example…(Signals)

The screen shows the scene where Shanghai is being bombed.

ANNE

See? This bombing is actually an indiscriminante air raid conducted by the Ciang Kai-Shek army to Shanghai. This bombing made by the Nationalist party created antipathy from both inside and outside, and since Ethel Roosevelt, who was in Shanghai for site seeing, was staying in the Cathay Hotel of Shanghai which was also bombed, the U.S. warned Song Meiling, wife of Ciang Kai-Shek, who was in the U.S., to immediately stop the bombing. This film is made to look like the Japanese army was the one conducting the air raid. This air rade immediately killed U.S. missionary Dr. Frank Rawlinson, and in the downtown area known as Nan Jing Da Shi Jie alone, the papers tell us that 445 people were killed. (Please take a look at this photograph)

The Japanese news photo of the Shanghai Incident is shown.

ANNE

The Japanese army only had a naval landing force consisiting of 3000 combattants defending the 30,000 Japanese residents that were located in the Japanese settlement in Shanghai. They were not a heavily equipped force. On contrary, Ciang Kai-Shek had over 100,000 of his superior troops and increased it to 600,000 by the beginning of September. Would an army of 3,000 start a war against an army of 600,000? I am sure you can imagine which army was the one who started the war. Now we will see a film that documents this incident.

The film footage from the Shanghai incident to Nanking is shown.

We will also show the panic of WEBB and the prosecuters at the Tokyo Trial. We will also show various evidence and witnesses that prove that the Shanghai Incident was the conspiracy of the Chinese communist party to get Japan and China to fight against each other so that the Chinese Communist Party, which was almost on the verge of destruction, would be in a favorable position (we will use the Mao documents with Mao Tse-tung’s words to the chair of the Japan socialist party), that General Zhang was a communist spy within the Nationalist Party, and that the Marco Polo Bridge Incident was the conspiracy of the Chinese Communist Party.

S-59 Prosecution presents evidence

LEE

Next, we would like to provide evidence regarding the Nanking Massacre which is the central case for this court. After the Japanese Army gained victory over the Nationalist party in Shanghai, they continued to expand their invasion and headed towards the capital, Nanking. The occupation of Nanking can be characterized by the systematic and cruel rape, murder, and torture towards priosnors, civilians, and women along with the large scale indiscrimant destruction of houses and property that goes way beyond military purposes. These atrocities have no comparison in modern wars. This is a film thatcaptures all of this on record.

The Nanking portion of The Battle of China is shown again.

LEE

Also, at the Memorial Hall of the Nanking Massacre in China, this film is shown everyday.

Although in bad condition, the documentary film on the Nanking Massacre is shown. (Get a recording from Fuji TV’s documentary, or use the tape from Chugoku no Dogou.)

LEE

What the prosecution is about to demonstrate is the charge on numerous atrocities and inhumane acts conducted to civilians. The evidence we will provide proves that the acts of atrocities include those of murder and massacre, torture, rape, looting, arsons, and unlawful destruction. We will observe numourous evidence on film and photographs that prove this.

When LEE signals, brutal photographs and films are shown on the screen. The prosecuter starts speaking while looking at the screen.

LEE

A prominent example of the Japanese army’s crime in its occupied territory can be seen on December 13^th, 1937, the day after Nanking was occupied.

After all of Nanking was conqured by the Japanese army under the defendant, General MATSUI, and the entire Chinese army stopped their resistance, the frenzy of atrocities and crimes started and continued for forty something days without stopping

The Japanese soldiers conducted these atrocities to take away the willingness to fight from the Chinese citizens forever and this was all conducted under the approval of the generals who led them and the headquarters in Japan.

The details will be made clear with evidence from these photographs and testimonies.

These contain numerous examples of crime including murder and massacre, torture, rape, looting, and illegal destruction.

I will provide evidence by showing the documentary film where Dr. Robert C. WILSON who was a surgeon at the Nanking University hospital testifies at the Tokyo Tribunal.

We will now show you the film which was filmed by John G. MAGEE who also testified at the Tokyo Tribunal. This film supports the testimony made by Dr. Robert C. WILSON.

The testimony of Dr. WILSON at the Tokyo Tribune is shown and the hospital portion of the MAGEE film is edited and shown as well.

WILSON

Before Nanking fell, there were about 50 patients who were quite sick in the hospital, but within a very few days after the Japanese soldiers entered the city on the morning of the 13^th of December, the hospital filled up rapidly with many, many cases of injury to men, women and children of all ages, and of all degrees.

One case that comes to my mind is that of a woman of forty, who was brought to the hospital with the back of her neck having a laceration severing all the muscles of the neck, and leaving the head very precariously balanced. From direct questioning of the patient, and from those who brought her in, there was no doubt in our minds that the work was that of a Japanese soldier.

A man was admitted with a wound through the right shoulder, obviously a bullet wound. He was the only survivor of a large group of men who were taken to the river bank of the Yangtze River and individually shot. The bodies were pushed into the river, and hence the actual number cannot be ascertained. But he feigned death, crept away in the darkness, and came to the hospital. This man’s name was Liang.

Another man was a Chinese policeman and was brought to the hospital with a very deep laceration across the middle of his back. He was the only survivor of a large group taken outside the city wall, that was also first machine-gunned and the wounded were then pierced with bayonets to be sure that they were dead. That man’s name was Wu Chang-de.

A man came into the hospital with a bullet throught his jaw, barely able to talk. About two-thirds of his body was very badly burned. His story, as nearly as we coud make it out, was that he had been seized by Japanese soldiers, shot, covered with gasoline, and set afire. He died two days later. (It is a mystery as to why they would shoot him after he was captured).

Another man was admitted with a very severe burn covering his entire head and shoulders. While still able to talk, he told us that he was the only survivor of a large group who had been bound together, had gasoline sprayed over them, and were set afire.

An old man of sixty was admitted with a bayonet wound in his chest. His story was that he had gone from the refugee zone back into the other part of the city to look for a relative. He met a Japanese soldier who bayoneted him in the chest and threw him in the gutter. He recovered consiousness six hours later and was able to get to the hospital.

Cases like this continued to come in for a matter of some six or seven weeks following the fall of the city on December 13, 1937. The capacity of the hospital was normally one hundred and eighty beds, and this was kept full to overflowing during this entire period.

A little girl of seven or eight had a very serious wound of the elbow, with the elbow joint exposed. Her story to me was that Japanese soldiers had killed her father and mother in front of her eyes, and given her this wound.

A girl of fifteen was brought into the hospital by the reverend John MAGEE, with the story that she had been raped. A medical examination confirmed this. About two months later this girl came again into the hospital with a secondary rash of syphilis.

S-60 Cross-examination from Defendant

States that most of this was hearsay evidence.

S-61 Prosecution presents evidence

LEE

Next, is the testimony from John G. MAGEE who shot this documentary film that recorded the hideous massacres conducted. The witness is an American Episcopalian priest who was also a Nanking International Safety Zone Committee member. I would like to show a film that he himself filmed.

MAGEE’s testimony at the Tokyo Tribune is shown

MAGEE

It was unbelievably terrible. The killing began immediately in several ways, often by individual Japanese soldiers or, up to thirty soldiers together going about, with one seeming to have the power of life or death; and then, soon, there was organized killing of great bodies of men. Soon there were bodies of men lying everywhere, and I passed columns of men being taken out to be killed. These people were being killed by rifle fire and machine gun principally. Also, we knew of groups of several hundred being bayoneted to death. One woman told me that her husband’s hands were tied in front of her, and he was thrown into a pond, and she stayed there, and they wouldn’t let her rescue him. He was drowned before her face.

On December 14, our school cook’s boy was taken off with a hundred other men down, outside the city walls near the railroad tracks. He told me that they were divided into two groups of about fifty each, their hands were bound in front of them, and they began killing them in front. He was in the back, and – a fifteen year old boy he was, and he was gnawing frantically at the ropes around his wrists and finally got them released and slipped into a culvert or a dugout or a drain underneath the railroad track. He escaped back about thirty-eight hours or more later, telling us the story. That was the first proof we had of what was happening to these groups of men that first were being taken off.

On that same evening or the next evening, I don’t know which, I passed two long columns of Chinese all tied up with their hands in front of them, four by four. I should say that, the very least, there were a thousand men in these two columns, or there may have been closer to two thousand. (Insert MAGEE’s film on groups of men being taken off).

I do not remember seeing a single Chinese soldier in the group. At least, they were all in civilian clothes. The wounded began to filter back into the mission hospital. A man would often be shot or bayoneted, would faint – would feign death and would get back to us, and we got authentic information as to what was happening to these columns of people that were being constantly taken out in those early days.

On December 16, they came to a refugee camp that I know very well because it was one of my Christian congregations and took out fourteen men from that congregation, including the fifteen year old boy of the Chinese pastor. Four days later, one member of that fourteen, a coolie, came back to tell us the fate of the others. They had been gathered together with about a thousand men and marched to the bank of the Yangtze river and there mowed down with cross-fire machine guns from either end. This man threw himself a split second before the bullets got him and was untouched. The bodies of those about him fell over him, and he lay there until it was dark, under this cover, and was able to make his escape.

On the next day I took – I saw – I was with three other foreigners – two Russians and my colleague. We were standing on the balcony of the house and saw a man killed. A Chinese was walking along the street before this house; two Japanese soldiers called to him, and he was so frightened; he was trying to get away. He hastened his pace, was trying to get around a corner in a bamboo fence, hoping there was an opening, but there was no opening. The soldiers walked in front of him and couldn’t have stood more than five yards in front of him, and both of them shot him in the face – killed him.

I could not possibly have gotten out of the city gate was I not with Vice Consul TANAKA. We turned onto an alley to take a short cut, but soon ran into so many bodies that the car had to back out of the alley, as we couldn’t possible get through without driving over so many bodies.

We went on down to the Bund, near a company, and he – while he went in there with his Japanese policeman, I got out of the car and walked to the river side of the Bund, where I could see down below me, and there I saw three hundred to five hundred bodies. The clothing was burned off these bodies, and many of them were charred. Evidently, they had been set on fire.

On December 21^st, Vice-Consul TANAKA told me that the bad division then in Nanking would be changed foRAABEtter one and that he thought by December 24^th everything would be settled; but by December 25^th and after that there was no apparent betterment.

On the 22^nd of December I took moving pictures of a group of about sixty to seventy Chinese men being gathered on a road – on Shanghai Road it was – and there the picture shows an old woman of about 60 – 70 years old in the streets before the Japanese, begging for the release of their menfolk. (These pictures were not handed in to the court as evidence by the prosecution)

The action of the Japanese soldiers toward the women and children in the City of Nanking after they were in occupation of that city was unbelievably terrible. The rapings continued day by day. Many women were killed and even children. If a woman resisted or refused, she was either killed or stabbed. I took pictures and moving pictures of these. (Again, these pictures and moving pictures were not handed in as evidence by the prosecution)

One evening I was called to a house where a Japanese soldier had come at four-thirty in the afternoon. He was trying to rape the man’s wife and this owner, the husband, helped her to escape out of a door the Japanese soldier didn’t know was in the back of the house.

The Japanese soldier was unarmed when he first came. He went away and came back armed and killed the woman’s husband. The woman took me out in back of the house where the husband’s body was.

The first case of rape that I personally ran into was among the very first nights. A woman stopped me and my colleague on the street and begged us to save her life. It was in the dark. This woman said her story. She had been taken from her husband at six o’clock that afternoon and taken in a motor car for three or four miles where three Japanese soldiers raped her. They sent her back to within about a mile of her house and she got out very near to where we were going; and just as the Japanese soldier called to her, she either saw us or heard us and rushed up to us and asked us to save her, which we did.

On December 18^th, I went with Mr. Sperling, a member of our Committee, to the residential section of the city. It seemed to us that there were soldiers in every house after women. We went into one house. On the ground floor a woman was weeping, she had been raped. She said there was still another Japanese soldier in the house on the third floor. We went up there and tried to get into the room that was indicated. The door was locked. We pounded on the door and shouted. In a short while, a Japanese soldier came out leaving two women inside.

On December 20^th I was called to a house where they told me a little girl of ten or eleven had been raped. I took her to the hospital. When I returned from the hospital, I was called to another house, drove out three Japanese in the woman’s quarters on the second floor; and then the Chinese there pointed to a room. I rushed into the room, bursting open the door and found a soldier – a Japanese soldier – in the act of rape. I drove him out of the room, completely out of the house and out of the alley where the house was.

There were many other cases of this kind. There was one of our biggest problems – all of us foreigners’. We couldn’t do anything about keeping them from taking off men, but we could prevent them from raping these women.

On New Year’s Day when I was having a meal with Forster two of our Chinese came running to say that there were Japanese soldiers in there after the girls. We were not in time to save two girls from rape. One woman was about thirty, and the other was a young girl. The thirty year old woman told me that she was in a room with the young girl and that when the Japanese soldier came in, she knelt before him, begging him to leave the girl alone. He hit her over the head with the flat side of a bayonet and raped the girl.

Herr RAABE, the Chairman of our Safety Zone Committee, had taken in many Chinese woman, two or three hundred into his own yard where they put up little huts. This day when he got home with this Japanese officer, they saw a soldier in the actual act of raping a woman in one of these huts. All the Japanese officer did was to slap the Japanese soldier’s face and Herr RAABE was utterly disgusted and came and told the other members of the Committee.

On January 30^th we had to deal with a new crisis because the Japanese came to us and were trying to force us to send the women back home from our Safety Zone. We decided to make a showing of compliance because we were afraid the whole Safety Zone would be disbanded by force and so we advised the older women to go home but we kept the youger girls under our protection. We began to hear stories immediately of these women, who some of us got to know in the Safety Zone, — rapings began again with the women who went back.

When I went to a house in the South City, a woman was weeping. She told me the Japanese soldiers had killed her husband. I went to the back of the house where lived the owners of the house, a widow in her forties, a twelve year old daughter and her old seventy-seven year old mother. They told me their story.

This widow, when the Japanese first entered, had been raped repeatedly. Then they decided to try to escape to our Safety Zone. On their way, as they were going along the street in the dark, the woman got separated from her old mother. The widow, after returning to her home from the safety of Gingling College, told us that her mother told her that she had been taken into a house on the way and raped between seventeen and eighteen times.

A Bible woman, that is, a Christian woman evangelist, told me she was living with an old woman, an eighty year old Chinese – that means she is seventy-eight or seventy-nine years old. A Japanese soldier came to her house, called out the old woman to the door, and then made motions for her to open her clothing. The old woman said, “I am too old,” and the soldier shot her dead.

It was the year of 1938. When we got inside the south gate, the people told us that about five hundred Chinese people had been killed. I went into a house and was shown around by an old grandmother and told us that a lot of children were killed and only two children escaped. A little girl of about eight or possibley nine told me the story, who had been through the whole thing and was stabbed in the back twice. I photographed the wounds in her back which had healed at that time. (This photograph was also not handed in as evidence by the prosecutors.)

The Japanese soldiers took from the people anything that struck their fancy: wristwatches, fountain pens, money, clothing, food. I took to the hospital in those first few days of occupation a half-witted woman of forty-one who was stabbed in the neck because she grabbed at some bedding that a Japanese soldier was taking away from her. Japanese soldiers paid absolutely no attention to their own consular notices about foreign property or to the American Embassy notices about foreign property.

On December 21, practically all the foreigners in the city signed a petition to the Japanese authorities and took it in person to the Japanese Embassy, beseeching them in the name of humanity to stop the senseless burning of the homes of the people. The burning continued day by day. One of our own Episcopal Church Mission was partly burned on January 26. The Christian Disciples Mission was burned – one of their school buildings was burned, the YMCA, the Russian Embassy, and a great many homes of the people outside of our Safety Zone were burned. The actions of the Japanese soldiers began to taper off after about six weeks although many things happened – individual things happend after that.

S-62 Cross-examination from Defendant

(Reference)

Mr. RAABE, Chairman of the International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone and Mr. Louis SMYTHE, the Secretary of that Committee made daily reports to the Japanese Embassy to tell of individual cases of outrage. In his testimony, as with Wilson’s, he presents statements coming from the only surviving victim from a murder site conducted by Japanese soldiers.

The defense, Captain Brooks who represented the defendant Kuniaki Koiso, cross examined the witness MAGEE from various angles. During his cross examination, he asked MAGEE of how many of these acts of murder or unlawfulness did he personally witness, and MAGEE answered as follows.

MAGEE

I thought I made that clear in my testimony. I only personally witnessed the killing of one man. I told in my testimony of the one man I saw actually in the act of rape. Then I told of driving off two soldiers that were on the bed of a fifteen year old girl. I remember, as I said, of the robbing of those electric iceboxes; I saw that in the process of being done.

With this testimony, it was made clear that apart from the one murder, two rapes, and one robbery mentioned above, the rest of his entire detailed two day testimony on the atrocities of the Japanese Army was based on hearsay evidence.

The Nanking portion of The Battle of China is shown.

ANNE

(The scene changes and is now showing the Nanking portion) This is supposed to be Nanking, but who are these people? These are British soldiers. This is footage of Shanghai and not Nanking. The bombings are also those conducted by Chiang Kai-shek. All these lies are shown in this film. When the Japanese army arrived near Nanking, before they started attacking, they requested the Nationalist army to surrender, but General Kang Sheng Zhi refused and ordered complete resistance. General Kang Sheng Zhi had already ordered the 200,000 citizens to move to the safety zone in Nanking and this was implemented so everyone was in the safety zone and therefore there were hardly any civilians left in the city.

ANNE’s voice

In Nanking, an International Safety Zone Committee was created from foreigners such as Americans and Germans. This committee wrote a letter of appreciation to the Japanese army because they had not attacked the safety zone. And according to the committee’s announcement, there were 200,000 citizens before the occupation, and a month after Japan’s occupation, there were 250,000. This is an official record of the International Safety Zone Committee.

More than 300,000 were killed and the population grew? Did the Chinese go back to Nanking with glee when they heard that there was a massacre going on? Did they gather there? We will show filmed evidence of this incident.

Nanking, the documentary film that the Toho crew of Japan had taken, is shown on the screen

ANNE’s voice

(Over the screen) This is a film shot the day after the Japanese army occupied Nanking.

We got this in Japan. Unlike the shooting material for The Battle of China, this film has information on when, where, who and what they shot. This is an A-class primary source. Please compare the two.

It is completely the opposite and different from The Battle of China film or what Iris Chan wrote in her book The Rape of Nanking. If Nanking was exactly as it appears here in this film, then the Nanking Massacre becomes the biggest lie in history.

The Japanese film crew who shot this film went into Nanking right after its occupation.

Even if we discount the fact that this film was made as a promotional film for the Japanese, it is interesting to see that if the Nanking Massacre and rape did in fact take place, there should be at least some evidence or sign showing this, but there is in fact no sign of evidence of it taking place at all. In fact, the question of whether the genocide actually did take place or not keeps coming up in my mind. Please look at the expressions on the faces of the many Nanking civilians.

If it is one person this may be possible, but I don’t think that a large number of citizens like this could be forced to show such great acting skills.

Look at the expression on the faces of the children who play with fire crackers at the road in front of the Japanese Army command center.

Is this the expression of chidren caught in the middle of a genocide? If they were actors, they would be internationally acclaimed super child actors.

ANNE

So, which historical fact do you all believe in? Both are propaganda films made for the people of their respective countries. The film made by Frank Capra who we all respect? Or will it be the Japanese film that was made from a movie company from a country we hate, Japan? Of course, Frank Capra’s film! (Smiles) I’d like to say so too, but unfortunately not in this case. Our research tells us that the material for this Japanese propaganda film tells us clearly when, where, who and what is shot, and is an A-class primary source. But the film Capra created had been made by putting together bits and pieces of random atrocity films where we don’t know anything about who, what, or where it was filmed. It has been nicely edited with caption and narration so that it would look like evidence that the Japanese Army did conduct a massacre and that they did conduct systematic rape.

S-63 Prosecution presents evidence (Testimony of BATES)

LEE

Next, the prosecution will submit the testimony regarding the Nanking Massacre made by Mr. Miner Searle BATES at the Tokyo Tribunal. The witness is an American and a professor of history at the University of Nanking and also a member of the International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone. He will first testify on the purpose of establishing this committee and its activities. (Signals)

The film on BATES’testimony is shown on the screen.

BATES

This committee was set up in the last days of November, 1937, anticipating the attack of the Japanese Army upon Nanking.

The chairman was a distinguished German merchant, Mr. John RAABE, and the secretary of this committee was Professor Lewis Smith, a professor at the University of Nanking. This committee was assisted to get in touch with the Chinese and Japanese commanding officers through the communications and good officers of the American, German, and British embassies. The purpose was to provide a refuge in a small, nob-combatant zone where civilians might escape the dangers of the fighting and actual attack.

The committee expected that its chief duties would be to provide housing and if necessary some food during a period of a few days or possibly of a few weeks when the city was under siege and when Chinese civilian authority might have disappeared but Japanese military authority would not yet have been established.

The actual event was very different, because the Japanese attack and seizure of the city was swift. But then the troubles began. The treatment of civilians was so bad that the chairman and secretary of the committee went regularly to any Japanese officials who could be reached and soon began to prepare daily reports of the serious injuries to civilians that occurred within the safety zone. Over a period of several weeks a total of several hundred cases, many of them compound cases, involving groups and large numbers of individuals, were thus reported in writing and orally to Japanese officials. They were later published under the editorship of Professor Shu-hsi Hsu, of Nanking University in the year 1939 to 1940.

LEE

Now, we will submit BATES’s testimony when he answers the prosecution’s questions regarding the conducts of the Japanese soldiers in Nanking.

BATES’ testimony is shown on the screen again.

BATES

After the Japanese were in control of the city of Nanking, I, myself, observed a whole series of shootings of individual civilians without any provocation or apparent reason whatsoever; that one Chinese was taken from my own house and killed. From my next door neighbor’s house two men, who rose up in anxiety when soldiers seized and raped their wives, were taken, shot at the edge of the pond by my house, and thrown into it. The bodies of civilians lay on the streets and alleys in the vicinity of my own house for many days after the Japnese entry. The total spread of this killing was so extensive that no one can give a complete picture of it. We can only say that we did our best to find out, in checking up carefully upon the safety zone and adjoining areas.

Professor SMYTHE and I concluded, as a result of our investigations and observations and checking of burials, that twelve thousand civilians, men, women and children, were killed inside the walls within our own sure knowledge. There were many others killed within the city outside our knowledge whose numbers we have no way of checking, and also there were large numbers killed immediately outside the city, of civilians. This is quite apart from the killing of tens of thousands of men who were Chinese soldiers or had been Chinese soldiers.

Large parties of Chinese soldiers laid down their arms, surrendered, immediately outside the walls of the city and there, within the first seventy two hours, were cut down by machine gun fire, mostly upon the bank of the Yangtze River.

We of the international Committee hired laborers to carry out the burials of more than thirty thousand of these soldiers. That was done as a work relief project inspected and directed by us. The number of bodies carried away in the river, and the number of bodies buried in other ways, we cannot count.

Within the safety zone a very serious problem was caused by the fact that the Japanese officers expected to find within the city a very large number of Chinese soldiers. When they did not discover the soldiers, they insisted that they were in hiding within the zone and that we were responsible for concealing them.

On that theory, Japanese military officers and non-commissioned officers were sent among the refugees in the safety zone day after day for about three weeks attempting to discover and seize former soldiers. It was their common practice to require all able-bodied men in a certain section of the zone, or in a certain refugee camp, to line up for inspection and then to be seized if they had callouses upon their hands or the marks of wearing a hat showing on the skin of the forehead.

I was present throughout several of these inspections and watched the whole process. It was undoubtedly true that there were some soldiers – former soldiers among these refuges, men who had thrown away their arms and uniforms and secured civilian clothes. It was also clearly true that the majority of the men so accused and seized were ordinary carriers and laborers who had plenty of good reasons for callouses on their hands. The men so accused of having been soldiers were seized, taken away, and, in most cases, shot immediately in large groups at the edges of the city.

In some cases a peculiar form of treachery was practiced to persuade men to admit that they had been soldiers. Japanese officers tried to persuade many Chinese to come forward as voluntary workers for military labor corps. In some cases these Japanese officers urged Chinese men to come forward, saying, “If you have previously been a Chinese soldier, or if you have ever worked as a carrier or laborer in the Chinese Army, that will all now be forgotten and forgiven if you will join this labor corps.” In that way, in one afternoon, two hundred men were secured from the premises of the University of Nanking and were promptly marched away and executed that evening along with other bodies of men secured from oher parts of the safety zone.

The conduct of the Japanese soldiers toward the women in the city of Nanking was one of the rougest and saddest parts of the whole picture. Again, in the homes of my three nearest neighbors, women were raped, including wives of University teachers. On five different occasionas, which I can detail for you if desired, I, myself, came upon soldiers in the act of rape and pulled them away from the women.

The safety zone case reports, to which we have previously referred, and my own records of what occureed among the thirty thousand refugees on the various grounds and in the building of the University of Nanking, hold a total of many hundreds of cases of rape about which exact details were furnished to the Japnese authorities at the time. One month after the occupation, Mr. RAABE, the Chaiman of the International Committee, reported to the German authorities that he and his colleagues believed that not less than twenty thousand cases of rape had occurred. A little earlier I estimated, very much more cautiously and on the basis of the safety zone reports alone, some eight thousand cases.

Every day and every night there were large numbers of diffent gangs of soldiers, usually fifteen or twenty in a group, who went about through the city, chiefly in the safety zone because that’s where all the people were, and went into the houses seeking women. The raping was frequent daytime as well as night and occurred along the roadside in many cases.

On the ground of the Nanking Theological Seminary, under the eyes of one of my own friends, a Chinese woman was raped in rapid succession by seventeen Japanese soldiers. I do not care to repeat the occasional cases of sadistic and abnormal behavior in connection with the raping, but I do want to mention that on the grounds of the University alone a little girl of nine and a grandmother of seventy-six were raped.

In the first days of the occupation the soldiers robbed a great deal regardless of time or place. Practically every building in the city was entered many, many times by these roving gangs of soldiers throughout the first six or seven weeks of the occupation. In some cases the looting was well organized and systematic, using fleets of army trucks under the direction of officers.

After some months a few foreign residents were given the opportunity to recover pianos taken from their own houses, and they were led to a place where more than two hundred pianos were in one storage hall.

The foreign embassies were broken into and suffered robbery, including personal property. Practically all commercial property of any noticeable value was taken.

On the very night of the entry the Japanese forces placed adequate and effective guards upon the Sun Yat-Sen tomb and upon the government and party building. With the exception of one or two minor fires, apparently started by drunken soldiers, there was no burning until the Japanese troops had been in the city five or six days. Beginning, I believe, on the 19^th or 20^th of December, burning was carried on regularly for six weeks. In some cases the burning followed the looting of a line of stores, but in most instances we could not see any reason or pattern in it. At no time was there a general conflagration, but the definite firing of certain groups of buildings each day.

The Russian Embassy was burned by the Japanese soldiers at the beginning of 1938. The Y.M.C.A. building, two important church buildings, the two chief German commercial properties with the Swastiak flying upon them, were among those burned.

Regarding the conduct of the soldiers in the City of Nanking, on four or five occasions I accompanied Mr. RAABE and Dr. SMYTHE in their interviews with the officials in the Japanese Embassy, who were sent there by the Gaimusho in an effort to provide cushions between this little group of foreign residents and the Japanese military. Futhermore, because the University of Nanking was immediately adjoining the Japanese Embassy, and because it was a very large and important test case of American property with the American flag, and this large number of refugees, it was agreed between Mr. RAABE and myself that I should make supplementary reports on behalf of the University. Almost daily for the first three weeks I went to the Embassy with a typed report or letter covering the preceding day, and frequently had also a conversation with the officials regarding it. These officials were Mr. T. FUKUI, who had the rank of consul, a certain Mr. TANAKA, vice-consul, Mr. Tokuyasu FUKUDA. The latter is now secretary to the Premier YOSHIDA. These men were honestly trying to do what little they could in a very bad situation, but they themselves were terrified by the military and they could do nothing except forward these communications through Shanghai to Tokyo.

In the letter of December 16^th I complained of many cases of abduction of women from the University’ properties and of the rape of thirty women in one University building the previous night.

I reported the saying common among the Chinese that where the Japanese Army is, no house or person is safe.

I also reported that for the second time the American flag had been torn down from the American school and trampled by Japanese soldiers.

A caution is made by the President of the Tribunal, WEBB, regarding the questionable testimony of BATES.

Regarding this testimony, WEBB mentions that this testimony was not evidence of any war crime. When BATES stated the same thing using his notes, WEBB commented that he was not refreshing his memory from his notes but was just reading them and cautioned him that the way he was testifying was inappropriate.

BATES

We were assured by the civil officials in the Embassy that on several occasions strong orders were sent from Tokyo to restore order in Nanking. We saw no significant results of such orders until the coming of some kind of high military deputation about the fifth or sixth of February. At that time, as slightly indicated in the newspapers and more fuly by foreign diplomats and by a Japanese friend who accompanied the deputation, I learned that a high military officer called together a large body of lower officers and non-commissioned officers, telling them very severly that they must better their conduct for the sake of the name of the Army.

Prior to that time we saw and heard of no instance of effective discipline or penalty inflicted upon soldiers who were seen by high officers in the very act of murder and rape.

The several officers in the Embassy declared that one great reason for difficulty was the small number of military police or gendarmes available which, at the moment of occupation, they declared to be seventeen in number. After, three days after the entry, the civil officials secured from high officers of the genarmerie certain small posters or proclamations to be put up at the entrance to foreign property ordering all soldiers to keep away. Not only did the soldiers daily disregard these proclamations from the gendarmerie headquarters but they also frequently tore them down.

(Hearsay evidence)

After the direct examination, the defence LOGAN, who represented the defendant KIDO, asked BATES about the reports he said he made to the Japanese authorities and forwarded to Tokyo. The witness stated that he did not know who in Tokyo the report was forwarded to, and that he did not see the actual report that was forwarded to Tokyo by the Japnese authorities, and therefore admitted that regarding this testimony, it was a hearsay testimony.

S-64 Cross-examination from Defendant

ANNE

What made me change from doubt to certainty regarding the Nanking Massacre not taking place was the old Japanese film I submitted as evidence showing Nanking at the time, and one other critical evidence.

The evidence is a top secret propaganda document that was discoveredy in Taiwan’s National Central Library and discovered by our witness, Professor Shudo Higashinakano of Japan

When I saw this, my doubts became certainty. I believe the number of people in the world, including yourselves, who know about this tape and top secret document, is very limited.

ANNE submits a copy of the document. It is also shown on the screen.

ANNE

(Points to the copied document) This is a top secret document that was found in the National Central Library in Taipei, Taiwan’s capital.

It is a document called “Top Secret Central Propaganda Bureau International Division Outline of Propaganda Activites 1938 – April, 1941.”

The Nanking Massacre is based on the book What War Means which is said to be based on actual reports and testimonies, and was edited by Harold Timperly who was a reporter for the Manchester Guardian.

But Mr. Timperly was the advisor for the Chinese Ministry of Information and was receiving money from the Nationalist Party.

It is also evident that Professor BATES, who co-wrote What War Means and testified at the Tokyo Tribunal, was also an advisor to the Nationalist Government.

The other author of the book and also a witness at the Tokyo Tribunal, George FITCH, was good friends with Song Meiling, wife of Ciang Kai-Shek。

They were all agents of the Nationalist government.

And John RAABE, International Committee Chair of the Nanking Safety Zone and who is about to be called Nanking’s Schindler in this year’s Nanking related moive, was not only a Nazi member, but also a weapon merchant of Germany’s Siemens AG that was taking care of the German military advisory group. The Chinese government has recently created the John RAABE and International Safety Zone Memorial Hall and has opened it up to the public.

The screen shows the John RAABE and International Safety Zone Memorial Hall

ANNE

The year after the Japanese army occupied Nanking, John RAABE returns to Germany, and wrote to Hitler regarding the Nanking atrocities that the Japanese army was conducting.

Iris wrote this in her book too, but soon after his return to Germany, RAABE was detained and interrogated by the Gestapo.

He was released by the intervention of Siemens AG, but stopped talking about Nanking thereafter.

Iris writes that Nazi Germany kept him silent because Germany and Japan were going to join a three-party alliance with Italy, but is this really true?

Isn’t it because Nazi Germany found out that John RAABE, a Nazi member, not only worked for the profit of weapon merchant Siemens AG, but also was a double spy for the Nationalist Party?

This isn’t even funny.

These people who had a vested interest with the Chiang Kai-shek government are testifying for the massacre allegedly conducted by the Japanese army.

As our midterm presentation of our investigation, we were going to conclude that one, the Nanking Massacre mostly likely never happened, and second, the propaganda activities were systematically planned and conducted broadly towards the American citizens by the Chiang Kai-shek government to get the U.S. on their side.

But something more dreadful is about to become evident…

This is the fact that the Chinese Communist Party spies were deeply rooted and widely spread within Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist Party.

And the propaganda activities have been transitioned and continue to this day aimed towards the American people. We would like to provide a testimony by (someone) as evidence on this matter.

＊　　　　　　　　＊　　　　　　　　　＊

xx’s testimony

S-65 Prosecution presents evidence

LEE

Now I would like to present a Chinese testimony by HSU Chuan-Ying, who was living in Nanking at the time and saw what was going on. The witness has graduated from Nanking University and the Universtiy of Illinois, obtained a PhD in literature from the University, and was the Vice chairman of a voluntary association called the Red Swastika Society in Nanking. He was also the Chief of the Housing Commission of the International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone. Now let us hear his testimony.

HSU Chuan-Ying’s testimony at the Tokyo Tribunal is shown on the screen.

HSU

On the day of 13 December 1937, there was no resistance at all in the city. Before that date there was some resistance outside of the city, and on that day all the soldiers left Nanking.

I was connected with the International Committee as the chief of the Housing Commission.

My duty was to look after the accommodations for those who have houses and also those who have not houses in the safety zone. For those who do not have friends or relatives now– it is my duty to find houses for them and put them together. So this number of people amounts to quite a large number. Finally we have twenty-five camps different places for them. These twenty-five camps are under my supervision, and these houses I assigned to them.

Generally speaking – of course, we have no official figures; but generally speaking, there are over two hundred thousand – comes pretty nearly to three hundred thousand people in the safety zone.

The Japanese soldiers entered the city of Nanking from the south side of the city.

The Japanese soldiers, when they entered the city – they were very very rough, and they were very barbarious; They shoot at everyone in sight. Anybody who runs away, or on the street, or hanging around somewhere, or peeking through the door, they shoot them.

On the third day I had the chance of the permission of the Japanese military officers to go around the city – all the cities. I and one Japanese going along with me on the car. The purpose of that is to estimate the number of people lying dead or about to die on the street and in all the houses. I saw the dead bodies lying everywhere, and some of the bodies are very badly mutilated. Some of dead bodies are lying there as they were, shot or killed, some kneeling, some bending, some on their sides, and some just with their legs and arms wide open. It shows that these been done by the Japanese, and I saw several Japanese were doing that at that very moment.

One main street I even started to try to count the number of corpses lying on both sides of the street, and I started to count more than five hundred myself. I say it was no use counting them; I can never do that.

I was at that time on the same car and another Chinese with me. He was educated in Japan, and he speaks Japanese. And we together went to his home, and he found that his brother was also shot in that house and on the step – on the door step, not take him away yet.

No Japnaese soldiers showed any courtesy to any people. I was fortunate because I had on the car a Japanese – a Chinese who can speak Japanese, and many times I was interrupted, and they try to drag me out of the car, and the Japanese on the car help me out because we had permits from them.

All these corpses, not a single one I find in uniform – not a single soldier; they are all civilians, both old and young, and women and children, too. All the soldiers – we do not see any Chinese soldier around in the whole city.

The Saftey Zone Committee – the International Committee has made a rule, no armed soldier or any soldiers – military people – are supposed to be in the military – in the zone, and they would never allow – admit anybody in uniform.

On December 14 in the morning, a high military Japanese soldier came into the headquarters of our International Committee office and I was the one who happened to be there early in the morning, about eight o’clock. There his purpose is want to get permission or talk over – want to make a search of the safety zone. He accused us that there are Chinese soldiers hidden in the safety zone. We all said there were no soldiers – no armed soldiers in the Chinese – in the safety zone, and Mr. RAABE said so, Mr. FITCH, our Director, said so, and we all said so, but the Japanese insist on searching, and they never get our consent of searching the safety zone.

On the following days, with these Japanese military officers – they came with their own will, and go into the camps and also the houses and try to get – to drag people out from our camp and from the houses and accusing them as they are soldiers.

The Japanese soldiers came into the safety zone and searched and took away large number of Chinese civilians in the different camps, in different places.

One day I was with the other member of the Swastika Society, distributing Chinese bread and cakes to those refugees in one of the buildings. When we nearly finish, all of a sudden Japanese soldiers came. Two of them guarded the gate. Several soldiers went in and used ropes and tied the refugee people – the civilians – all civilians – hand in hand – some by some several tens, fifteens, and they took them away. In that compound, in the building, there are about fifteen hundred civilians – refugees – and they are took away in such a manner.

Mr. RAABE, Mr. FITCH, and myself, and another Chinese, who speaks Japanese – we all went immediately to the Special Service Headquarter – the Japanese Special Headquarter. Mr RAABE made the protest He demanded immediate release. The answer we get is they do not know – the Japanese head office, special – head of the Special Service Organization said they don’t know. So we waited there and waited there an hour for them – to enable them to find out where these people go and who took them. We could not find out anything from them. They do not give us any satisfactory answer, and they even promised to give a definite answer before the morning, but they didn’t.

On the following day, about seven and eight o’clock, we hear machine gun. Now, around that place – around the headquarters of the International Committee and also the Swastika Society, we immediately sent people spying around, and we know those – we then, at that time we saw those people were machine-gunned and their corpses were pushed into the pond. Later on, we got those corpses up, and also we recognized a few of them.

After this, we had trouble in every camp. Every day the Japanese soldiers came into the camp and looked for Chinese soldiers in the different camps, sometimes a few tenants, sometimes several tenants, and sometimes hundreds of these refugees – civilians – took away by these Japanese soldiers; and later on we were sure that they were all shot. Their excuse is that these men are soldiers, and also sometimes they simply, but listening to some others say so and so, are soldiers, but in reality they are all civilians, and not a single one even in uniform or armed.

The action of the Japanese soldiers toward women is even worse, and we can never dream of in this civilized world. The Japanese soldiers – they are so fond of raping – so fond of women – that one cannot believe.

I know how the Japanese treated the women in Nanking because in the safety zone in the camps, any Japanese soldier would go in and would try to get a woman or to rape them, I would know about it; they would come to me. So many times I go with Mr. Sperling or another foreigner go with me, and get another soldier.

In one of the camp, the Japanese soldier came with three trucks in one day, and wanted to take all the girls from that camp, and took them to a place where they can rape them. I went – tried to stop them, but no effect. Now these girls, these women, range from thirteen years old up to forty to fifty years old. I see with my very eyes the Japanese soldier raping a woman in a bath room, and his clothes outside, and then afterwards we discovered the bathroom door, and found a woman naked and also weeping and downcast. Once I went with Mr. FUKUDA. At that time he was vice-consul of the Japanese Embassy, now the secretary of the new cabinet in Tokyo (Tokuyasu Fukuda, Secretary to Prime Minister YOSHIDA). Now we went to the camp to try to get – to catch two Japanese who were reported to be living there. I told FUKUDA, “This is the man who did the raping,” Mr. FUKUDA rebuked him, it evidently seems the Japanese soldier there, and also then tried to push the man away, and that Japanese soldier left and afterwards, then, Mr. FUKUDA had a little smile on his face. I gave him a Chinese notebook and asked him to write a notice. I said, “Put up a notice prohibiting these soldiers to come in these camps for women.” He did write that notice, and we pasted it on that camp, but such notice is of no use.

Sin Kai Road, No. 7, on the South Gate, inside of the South Gate there was a family. I went there myself with Mr. MAGEE. In that house there were eleven killed – three raped and two – there were two of the three, one is fourteen and one is seventeen. After raping, they put foreign stuff into the vagina and the grandmother showed me the stuff. The young girl was raped on the table; and whileI was there the blood spilled on the table not all dry yet. And we also see the corpses because they were took away, not far away, only a few yards from that house, all the corpses there. Of those corpses Mr. MAGEE and I took pictures of them because they were naked and shows the crimes there. (This photograph was also not handed in as evidence by the prosecutors.)

I know another case where because of the boatman, he happens to be a member of the Swastiak Society, he told me this: where he saw that too on his boat, it happened on his boat.

At this point of the testimony, WEBB states“The Court will have to consider seriously how far it will have to accept this second-and hearsay.” And the witness HSU continues his testimony based on what he heard from this member of the Swastika Society.

HSU

There was a family of respectable people tried to cross the river on that boat. Now, in the middle of the water of the river, two Japanes soldiers came. They found – they want to inspect that boat; where, on seeing the young women there, the young women and the girls there, two of them, so they began, started raping right in the eyes of their parents and one of their husbands.

After raping, the Japanese asked the old man in that family: “Isn’t that good?” Where his son, the husband of one of the young women, he got so angry so he began to beat the Japanese soldier. The old man cannot stand such a thing so he knows that they were all in trouble so he immediately jumped into the river. Then his wife, old wife, the mother of that young man, she began to weep and came out and also followed her husband. I forgot to say that when the Japanese asked the older man whether it is good or not, he wanted the old man to rape that young girl so all the girls – they all jumped into the river. So the whole family jumped into the river and all drowned.

The Red Swastika has made it as a philanthropic work to bury the dead who are really not able to be buried. Now, at this time there are so many dead bodies on the street, nobody to look after. The Japanese also came, Japanese soldiers, Japanese military men came to ask our help, say: “Well, you have been doing this kind of work, why can’t you do it for us?” After we get their permission to do this, they gave us a permit and passports and some facilities to travel in the city, so we started burying them.

We have on our regular staff around two hundred laborers doing this kind of work. We buried over forty-three thousand where the number is really too small. The reason is we are not allowed to give a true number of the people we buried.

These dead bodies are found either by ourselves or reported by the people in the surrounding places or some – many times the Japanese come around, Japanese officers would report to us. These dead bodies are first get out of their places where, if they are in ponds, get them out of the water; if, in buildings also, they will be get out. Now when they are get out, we find they are, most of them, nearly all of them are tied, tied hand in hand. Now, sometimes they use rope, sometimes they use wire. It is our sacred practice to have a dead body all unloosed if it is tied. We want to unloose everything, and bury them one by one. But with these wires, now it is almost impossible to do that. In many cases these bodies already decayed so we would not be able to bury them one by one. All we can do is simply bury them in groups.

WEBB

You need not go into all those details. The method of disposal of the bodies is hardly helpful.

HSU

Japanese soldiers do not respect any property rights or any personal possessions. They enter every house and take away everything they like. They burn the houses and they damage the houses. They destroy the houses.

My own house has been entered many times and a piano in addition to all the valuables and the usefull stuff have been taken away.

Japanese soldiers started burning the Russian Legation Embassy where I saw they poured kerosene oil on that and started the fire. That was on January 1, 1938, at twelve o’clock. Other institutions like Y.M.C.A., educational buildings and prominent citizens’ residences have all been burned.

This all crazy destruction all done after the Japanese been in the city many days.

The Japanese soldiers, especially the guards, they demand bow down to the Japanese very courteously at every place where they are stationed. 1938, my nephew, for the first time he came to see me. As he get down from the train he had his hat on his head and forget, does not know the necessity of bowing to the guard. The Japanese guard hit him on the face. He does not know. He still walks on but he is driving back and give him another harder kick. The passerby, the man behind him said: “Well, you have to take off your hat and bow him. Otherwise you get always in trouble.”

WEBB

Perhaps you should omit this face-slapping evidence.

HSU

These conducts of the Japanes soldiers toward the civilians in Nanking continued to the end of the war.

These were also conducted in all the other cities I visited.

S-66 Cross-examination by Defendant

ANNE

This testimony was made under the guarantee that the witness will not be subject to any crime of perjury and it is a testimony made by a person who lived in Nanking, a city controlled by the Nationalist Party after the war.

There are many photographs that have been used to support these testimonies.

There are a lot used in Iris Chang’s book.

Putting aside the fact if she knew it or not, we believe that Iris and her book was used as propaganda.

The spotlight goes to a white cover over an object in the corner of the room.

Beside the desks of the producers of the movie, there is a small stage, and on this stage is a Japanese soldier with a saber and a Chinese looking man tied up and sitting. Behind them are two men dressed in a Japanese Imperial Army uniform.

Two photographs are shown on the screen.

ANNE

I’m sure some of you have seen these pictures before

ANNE points at the screen.

ANNE

These pictures were circulated throughout the world as evidence of the Nanking Massacre. These are of course used in Iris Chang’s The Rape of Nanking. They were even used in a school text book in Taiwan.

Please look at this situation…(The situation of the photo shooting is shown). These people have on the same clothes and the same props in order to accurately replicate the picture. There’s also a camerman but if we want to take a photograph…

The Camerman in the film stands by at its position.

ANNE

See? The camera has to be really close to the subjects or this photograph cannot be taken.

This is the next photograph. This is when his head was cut off, but the person who cut his head off is also in the picture.

Did the camerman take this picture using a step ladder from inside a hole?

Isn’t it like this because this isn’t a real execution? This is a staged photograph used for propaganda.

Next, a video showing the shadows of the photograph is shown.

ANNE

See? Look at the shadows of the people here. They’re facing various directions. This is evidence that this is a composite photograph. Unless there are many suns in China.

Another element I would like to point out is that the person holding the sword is wearing a strange outfit. There are no uniforms like this in the Imperial Japanese Army and there was no custom to where such an outfit.

Now, these are people whose faces and expressions can clearly be seen.

Then why hasn’t the Chiang Kaishek Government searched these people after the war and arrested them as war criminals as they did with others?

There is no trace of an investigation or arrest for these people after the war. This is clear evidence that this was used for propaganda. The prosecution presented this as evidence and therefore contradicted their own claim.

Now the film shows a soldier about to thrust his sword.

ANNE

Now we will have these people conduct a beheading execution.

With ANNE’s signal, the film starts again.

The soldier with the sword tries to swing down his sword but almost cuts his own leg because his left foot is in front of him.

Anne

You can see that the photograph is not that of an actual execution. Iris’s book contains a lot of false photographs such as these. Actually, we can say that most of them are fake photos used for the Chiang Kaishek Government’s propaganda. (Signals)

A photograph of a tank burning a farmer’s house with a fire torch and a photograph with a Chinese farmer crossing the bridge with a soldier are presented.

Anne

These are also pictures used in Iris’s book. During the massacre, a third of Nanking was destroyed by fire.

(It would be great to have a picture overlooking this area). In this picture, it says that the Japanese army is putting a rural house on fire.

But when Nanking was occupied, this tank called the Type 97 Te-Ke did not exist on earth. It was not yet in production. Iris argued that the Nanking Massacre continued until the spring of 1938, and so it wouldn’t be strange for the tank to have been in Nanking. This makes me laugh as well because the Type 97 Te-Ke was built in a number of 274 from 1939. It didn’t exist in 1938.

Anne

Putting an authentic looking caption on an authentic looking picture and manipulating the mind. These are methods that communists and facists use all the time.

Investigation on photographs and film continue

(Reference: The Tokyo Tribunal, Nanking portion)

Mr. Masayoshi KANZAKI representing the defendant HATA, and Mr. Kiyoshi ITO representing the defendant MATSUI conducted the cross-examination.

KANZAKI first asked in answer to a question put by the prosecution, HSU answered that the atrocities committed by Japanese soldiers continued until the end – until the conclusion of the war and KANZAKI asked HSU if that was correct. HSU answered “That is not quite correct. If I remember correctly, my statement is this: where it was the worst about the first few months, especially three months, and later on it gradually diminished more or less. It diminished more or less not because of the Japanese soldiers, because of the efforts made on both sides to get rid of these worst atrocities.” As we can see, HSU made a statement that ammended his prior testimony.

Next, KANZAKI asked HSU about him testifying about the burning of the Russian Legation. After two or three question, he asked aggressively “But Mr. Witness, this Russian Legation was not burned. Are you dreaming in regard to this, or are you telling a lie?” But WEBB commented that the “Counsel must accept the witness’ answer”. After a couple of more questions, it was clear that the witness was testifying about the Russian Legation and the defendant was asking about the Russian Embassy, and with the comment from WEBB, the questions on this matter was dropped.

Next, ITO asked if HSU knew that before the fall of Nanking the Japanese Commander distributed pamphlets to the Nanking Army which advised the Chinese to surrender the City of Nanking, and that if the Chinese Army complied with this and surrendered peacefully, there wouldn’t have been a clash.

HSU answered “Well, even though there is such a fact, I don’t know. But that doesn’t come into with the atrocities. The city was taken and no resistance and there was all these atrocities happened. And also I understand that the safety zone, they have already negotiations on both sides, Japan and China, and also these atrocities happened in the city as well as in the safety zone.”

Next, ITO asked if the witness knew that the Chinese troops, when they flee, they occupy a city, or when they are fleeing from a city after defeat, indugle in arson, or setting of fires, raping and pillage.

HSU replied “Well, I have not known any soldiers, Chinese soldiers, doing that in time of peace when there is no resistance. And the Chinese soldiers were in the city before the Japanese came in and we all lived peacefully and quietly and no atrocities has been reported on such a large scale. Then, after the Japanese came into the city and took the city, the Japanese did all those atrocities and the Japanese authorities did not try to stop them. Not a single proclamation, not a single public notice put on the street to stop all these atrocities.

Also we in the International Committee repeatedly complained to your consulate, to the head of the Special Service, and later on when the local self-government was formed again we repeated these things through our local self-government to your embassy and to the commander-in-chief’s office, but not a single proclamation has been made prohibiting the Japanese from raping, looting and killing, and also do all sorts of things.”

Then ITO asked if the witness knew that when the Chinese soldiers are defeated in battle and flee they usually hide and take off their clothes and become ordinary civilians, and when there is the chance, they become plain clothes soldiers.

HSU replied “There might be; but, still, you see, we consider them as civilians before they gather themselves together in open resistance. If they are not, they are civilians same as we are here now.

In the refugee camp that we were in charge of, we did not have any plain clothes soldiers like that. As soon as they have thrown down their arms, we don’t consider they are soldiers.”

After HSU’s statement, ITO says “As far as my competency is concerened, I cannot get the facts or the truth from this witness, and so I regreat that I’ll have to terminate here.” and HSU’s testimony ends.

S-67 Prosecution provides evidence

LEE

Now, other than the witnesses who testified at the Tokyo Tribunal, we were able to find numourous other witnesses. These are the testimonies by the people who lived in Nanking at the time and survived. The photo albums found are clear evidence of the Nanking Massacre and will be a crushing blow to those that still say the Nanking Massacre did not occur.

This is the testimony and evidence that comes up in a TV program created by China’s Jiang Su TV.

The Nanking 1937 tape is shown.

S-68 Cross-examination by Defendant

Takemoto, Ohara, Higashinakano

Various photographs, films, historical facts and lies are all thoroughly examined.

We will ask the Chinese government to have a witness attend. If we are rejected, that would be fine as well.

Have a Japanese anti-war senior come out and then beat him.

Testimony of witnesses who are survivivors of Nanking

S-69 Prosecution presents evidence

LEE

Now we would like to present the ultimate testimony. That is the court decision finalized by WEBB and the other judges at the Tokyo Tribunal.

An image of WEBB reading out the court decision is shown on the screen.

WEBB

As the Central China Expeditionary Force under command of MATSUI approached the city of Nanking in early December 1937, over one-half of its one million inhabitants and all but a few neutrals who remained behind to organize an International Safety Zone, fled from the city. The Chinese Army retreated, leaving approximately 50,000 troops behind to defend the city. As the Japanese forces stormed the South Gate on the night of 12 December 1937, most of the remaining 50,000 troops escaped through the North and West Gates of the city or had abandoned their arms and uniforms and sought refuge in the International Safety Zone and all resistance had ceased as the Japanese Army entered the city on the morning of 13 December 1937. The Japanese soldiers swarmed over the city and committed various atrocities. According to one of the eye witnesses they were let loose like a barbarian horde to desecrate the city. It was said by eye witnesses that the city appeared to have fallen into the hands of the Japanese as captured prey, that it had not merely been taken in organized warfare, and that the members of the victorious Japanese Army had set upon the prize to commit unlimited violence. Individual soldiers and small groups of two or three roamed over the city murdering, raping, looting and burning. There was no discipline whatever. Many soldiers were drunk. Soldiers went through the streets indiscriminately killing Chinese men, women and children without apparent provocation or excuse until in places the streets and alleys were littered with the bodies of their victims. According to another witness Chinese were hunted like rabbits, everyone seen to move was shot. At least 12,000 non-combatant Chinese men, women and children met their deaths in these indiscriminate killings during the first two or three days of the Japanese occupation of the city.

There were many cases of rape. Death was a frequent penalty for the slightest resistance on the part of a victim or the members of her family who sought to protect her. Even girls of tender years and old women were raped in large numbers throughout the city, and many cases of abnormal and sadistic behavior in connection with these rapings occurred. Many women were killed after the act and their bodies mutilated.

Approximately 20,000 cases of rape occurred within the city during the first month of the occupation.

Japanese soldiers took from the people everything they desired. Soldiers were observed to stop unarmed civilians on the road, search them, and finding nothing of value then to shoot them. Very many residential and commercial properties were entered and looted. Looted stocks were carried away in trucks. After looting shops and warehouses the Japanese soldiers frequently set fire to them. Taiping Road, the most important shopping street, and block after block of the commercial section of the city were destroyed by fire. Soldiers burned the homes of civilians for no apparent reason. Such burning appeared to follow a prescribed pattern after a few days and continued for six weeks. Approximately one-third of the city was thus destroyed.

Organized and wholesale murder of male civilians was conducted with the apparent sanction of the commanders on the pretense that Chinese soldiers had removed their uniforms and were mingling with the population. Groups of Chinese civilians were formed, bound with their hands behind their backs, and marched outside the walls of the city where they were killed in groups by machine gun fire and with bayonets.

The German Government was informed by its representative about “atrocities and criminal acts not of an individual but of an entire Army, namely, the Japanese,” which Army, later in the report, was qualified as “bestial machinery.”

Large parties of Chinese soldiers laid down their arms and surrendered outside Nanking; within 72 hours after their surrender they were killed in groups by machine gun fire along the bank of the Yangtze River. Over 30,000 such prisoners of war were so killed. There was not even pretence of trial of these prisoners so massacred.

Estimates made at a later date indicate that the total number of civilians and prisoners of war murdered in Nanking and its vicinity during the first six weeks of the Japanese occupation was over 200,000. That these estimates are not exaggerated is borne out by the fact that burial societies and other organizations counted more than 155,000 bodies which they buried. They also reported that most of those were bound with their hands tied behind their backs. These figures do not take into account those persons whose bodies were destroyed by burning or by throwing them into the Yangtze River or otherwide disposed of by Japanese.

Japanese Embassy officials entered the city of Nanking with the advance elements of the Army; and on 14 December an official of the Embassy informed the International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone that the “Army was determined to make it bad for Nanking, but that the Embassy officials were going to try to moderate the action.” The Embassy officials also informed the members of the committee that at the time of the occupation of the city no more than 17 military policemen were provided by the Army commanders to maintain order within the city. When it transpired that complaints to the Army officials did not have any result, those Japanese embassy officials suggested to the foreign missionaries that the latter should try and get publicity in Japan, so that the Japanese Government would be forced by public opinion to curb that Army.

SMYTHE, the Secretary of the International Committee for the Safety Zone, filed two protests a day for the first six weeks.

MATSUI, who had remained in a rear area until 17 December, made a triumphal entry into the city on that day and on 18 December held a religious service for the dead, after which he issued a statement in the course of which he said: “I extend much sympathy to millions of innocent people in the Kiangpei and Chekiang districts, who suffered the evils of war. Now the flag of the Rising Sun is floating high over Nanking, and the Imperial Way is shining in the southern parts of the Yangtze-Kiang. The dawn of the renaissance of the East is on the verge of offering itself. On this occasion I hope for reconsideration of the situation by the 400 million people of China.

MUTO, then a colonel, had joined MATSUI’s staff on 10 November 1937 and was with MATSUI during the drive on Nanking and participated in the triumphal entry and occupation of the city. Both he and MATSUI admit that they heard of the atrocities being committed in the city during their stay at rear headquarters after the fall of the city. MATSUI admits that he heard that foreign governments were protesting against the commission of these atrocities. No effective action was taken to remedy the situation.

Members of the diplomatic corps and press and the Japanese Embassy in Nanking sent out reports detailing the atrocities being committed in and around Nanking. The Japanese Minister-at-Large to China, Ito, Nobufumi, was in Shanghai from September 1937 to February 1938. He received reports from the Japanese Embassy in Nanking and from members of the diplomatic corps and press regarding the conduct of the Japanese troops and set a resume of the reports to the Japanese Foreign Minister, HIROTA. These reports as well as many others giving information of the atrocities committed in Nanking, which were forwarded by members of the Japanese diplomatic officials in China, were forwarded by HIROTA to the War Minister. They were discussed at the Liason Conference which were normally attended by the Prime Minister, War and Navy Ministers, Foreign Ministery HIROTA, Finance Minister KAYA, and the Chiefs of the Army and Navy General Staffs.

News reports of the atrocities were widespread. Following these unfavorable reports and the pressure of the public opinion aroused in nations all over the world, the Japanese Government recalled MATSUI and approximately 80 of his officers but took no action to punish any of them.

The barbarous behaviour of the Japanese Army cannot be excuses as the acts of a soldiery which had temporarily gotten out of hand when at last a stubbornly defended position had capitulated – rape, arson and murder continued to be committed on a large scale for at least six weeks after the city had been taken and for at least four weeks after MATSUI and MUTO had entered the city.

(Reference)

This is the reproduction of the evidence presented by the prosecution where a part of the evidence provided by the defence is cited so that it will turn against the defendant.

There is also a big error regarding this judgement. The error is the part where the judge talks about the report of the atrocities being sent from the Japanese embassy in Nanking to Tokyo, and then discussed at the Liason Conferences, and names of the members who were present at this conference were stated.

During the individual testimony of SHIKADA, Itaro ISHII, then the head of the Japanese Foreign Ministry’s Bureau of Asiatic Affairs who was a witness, mentions that he brought up the subject of the report at a War, Navy and Foreign administrative conference held by ISHII and told the officer responsible at the War Ministry to take serious care of the matter. But there was no evidence that the Nanking incident was discussed at the Liaison Conference which is a high level conference attended by the Prime Minister, War and Navy Minister, Foreign Minister, Finance Minister, and the Chiefs of the Army and Navy General Staffs, and therefore this is complete error on the judgement side.

Iwane MATSUI

His military duties in 1937 and 1938 cannot be simply dismissed as an act to execute a war of invasion. In order to justify his verdict on being guilty for Count 27, the prosecutor should have provided evidence that MATSUI knew of the criminal characteristics of the war, but none was provided.

In 1935 MATSUI retired but in 1937 came out of retirement to become the commander of the Japanese Shanghai Expeditionary Force. He became commander of the Central China Area Army overseeing both the Shanghai Expeditionary Force and the 10^th Army. On December 13^th, 1937 he occupied Nanking.

The Chinese army retreated just before Nanking fell and the Japanese army conquered a non resistant city. The Japanese soldiers then swarmed over the city and committed various atrocities. The Japanese army committed murder, rape, looting, and burning. The atrocities committed by the Japanese army were denied by a Japanese witness, but opposite testimonies from various neutral witnesses of different nationalities with great credibility were overwhelming and much more favorable. Theses atrocities started when this city was conquered on December 13^th, 1937 and did not stop until Feburary of 1938. During these six to seven weeks, thousands of women were raped and over one hundred thousand people were murdered, and countless properties were looted or burned.

When these atrocities were at its height, which was December 17, MATSUI entered the city and stayed there for 5 to 7 days. From his own observation and reports from general staffs, he should have known what was happening. He admits that he heard from the embassy and the military police that his troops were commiting some atrocities.

These inhumane acts were reported daily to the Japanese diplomats and they reported this to Tokyo.

The Tribunal is satisfied that MATSUI knew what was happening. He did nothing, or nothing effective to abate these horrors. He did issue orders before the capture of the city enjoining propriety of conduct upon his troops and later he issued further orders to the same purport. These orders were of no effect as is now known, and as he must have known. He was in command of the Army responsible for these happenings. He knew of them. He had the power, as he had the duty, to control his troops and to protect the unfortunate citizens of Nanking. He must be held criminally responsible for his failure to discharge this duty.

The tribunal finds the defendant MATSUI guilty of Count 55.

MATSUI was only found guilty for Count 55 but because of this, he was sentenced to hang.

S-70 Cross-examination by Defendant

S-71 Opening Remarks by Defendant

(Reference: Professor Takemoto)
Preface

The trial of the vanquished by the victors cannot be impartial no matter how it is hedged about with the forms of justice.

- Senator Robert A. Taft,
October 5, 1946

Between two countries at war there was always a danger that one or other of the combatants would seek to turn public opinion in his favour by resort to a propaganda in which incidents, inseparable alas (!) from all hostilities, were magnified and distorted for the express purpose of inflaming prejudice and passion and obscuring the real issues of the conflict.

- Sir Charles Addis at Chatham House,
November 10, 1938

World War II and the movement of Resistance were the ‘Battle against Fascism’. Therefore, the false assumption was made that Japan was regarded as same as Hitler’s Germany and such absurd remark has been spread within Japan and it is indeed unbearable. For that very reason, I, with a firm conviction, wrote this book in order to counter-attack such false assumption.

- Alfred Smoular

Auschwitz 186416 dies in Japan

Ten years have passed since the end of the Cold War, and the world is now in the midst of turmoil and crisis. In order to keep the scarcely maintained world peace, the role of the continued Japan-U.S. friendship and alliance is unshakable. Throughout the Cold War era and up to the present day, there has been some serious friction recorded, especially in the area of trade relative to the export of textiles and steel, also in the area of discussions as to increasing Japan’s defense capabilities, and to restructuring of Japan’s economic system. However, these items of discussion have been, without exception, items of national interest. Both nations, Japan and U.S., have tried to mutually resolve the problems and to reach the satisfactory resolutions and these efforts and achievements are universally recognized.

However, for the past few years, some peculiar anti-Japanese campaigns have been started in the U.S., and they have been escalated as the time passed. We are deeply concerned that the new serious friction between Japan and the U.S. has expanded as a result of these campaigns. The reason we express our concerns is that these anti-Japanese activities have been developed in the U.S., but aren’t related directly to the national interests of either country. It is our assertion that there is someone of the third world trying to set them up from behind.

Specifically, Chinese-American Iris Chang’s The Rape of Nanking, which was published in July 1997 in the U.S., and the wave of anti-Japanese campaigns agitated by her claims are sitting at the center of this problem. The book’s contents do not present verified facts, and furthermore, they represent the quite opposite. As a result, those Japanese who are shocked with such an injustice are not few. For this twisted representation of the historical facts of the ‘Nanking Massacre’,¹ even a monthly Japanese magazine, called Sekai which has been a representative of the group which has admitted the ‘Nanking Massacre’, can’t have helped but express its disagreement and published an unusual explanatory statement.

Iris Chang’s book is titled as ‘The Rape’, and subtitled as ‘The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II’, and it has caused a stirring of the ears of the American people who were not familiar with the incident which happened on December 1937 in an obscure corner of the Far East. The book, which starts with unimaginable satanic atrocities and repeatedly describes such acts, has succeeded in maximizing the hatred of the readers against the Japanese. Moreover, it has caused a political problem to develop. Finally, in August 1999, the state legislature of California passed a resolution for it atrocities, citing the ‘Nanking Massacre’.

Needless to say, it is quite understandable for American people, who have kept respect for human rights and fairness as their motto, to raise voices to ‘castigate Japan and punish them’ after hearing these the false representation of ’300,000 Chinese massacred, 20,000 raped’. However, this serious situation should be re-examined if we calmly consider it, because the anti-Japanese campaign is based on the assumption that the ‘Nanking Massacre’ has surely existed. So we wonder if it is true and how they achieved to exactly verify it.

Are there any questions raised by readers of Chang’s sadistic book that can possibly compete with the literature of the Marquis de Sade? We wonder if they have had the following questions:

“The book says that over 300,000 citizens were killed and the most of the corpses were burnt by kerosene within six weeks. If it were so, dozens of incinerators as large as that of Auschwitz would have been necessary. Who has ever seen such things within and around the closed space of the walled castle?”

“Also, the book claims that from 20,000 to 80,000 women were raped. We hear of the enormous number of babies born after fall of Berlin by the Russian Army. Is there a recorded account of the flood of babies that mixed Japanese and Chinese parentage after the fall of Nanking?”

For readers who are equipped with common sense, such questions must abundantly come to mind. Now, let us treat the ‘Nanking Massacre’ as a murder case. How many corpses have been found? Who are the victims? Who are the eyewitnesses? What are the motives of the offenders? For those basic questions, we must justly prove the facts through fair procedures in criminal suit.

Those who prosecute the ‘Nanking Massacre’ insist that insist that there were certain number of corpses, and focus on the testimonies of eyewitnesses and also the motives of the offenders. However, the admissibility and probative value of such claims and evidence are not acceptable in the courts of civilized Nations. Surprisingly, these facts have never been known to the western world. But only the false propaganda, which claims that the horrible incident (Nanking Massacre) occurred, is now becoming established in the U.S., as the anti-Japanese activities intended.

For that reason, we have started the following legal approach. Namely, we have tried to treat the so-called ‘Nanking Massacre’, which was said to have been committed by the Japanese Army during the six weeks starting from December 13, 1937, as a ‘murder case (including looting and rapes)’. Also, we have tries to precisely examine whether the crime has been proved or not and objectively verify the fact, using a method based on the Criminal Procedure Act, in view that the Prosecution has responsibility to adduce evidences to show the committed crimes.

In other words, our objective is not to prove that there was no ‘Nanking Massacre’, but to specify the fact that the testimonies, which claim that there was the ‘Nanking Massacre’, are not substantiated at all. And we take a position whereby all the facts would be clarified by doing so.

However, as for the Prosecution, all we would like to say is that we are not confronting Iris Chang’s The Rape of Nanking. Instead, our debate will be focused on the claims of the CCP (the Chinese Communist Party). The reason is that Iris Chang’s view is based on the claims of the CCP. We perceive that the origin of the message in the anti-Japanese networks, which press Japan to take responsibilities for war crimes, lies in the CCP.

Our objections may appear to the readers rather too mild. But, the Japanese culture, which has produced the serenity of the Noh play and the Tea ceremony, may be quite opposite contrasted with the Chinese culture, which is festively decorated with gongs and firecrackers. The peculiar Chinese fantasy of such expressions as ’30,000 feet of long white hair’ may have produced The Rape of Nanking, and in the opposite manner, we would like to develop our arguments in brief and strictly.

For a half century after World War II, Japan has kept silence whenever and however we were falsely accused of this problem. Here, we would like to break the silence for the first time. We will not scream like the Chinese, but set forth our views purely and fairly as an accused standing in the dock of a courthouse, speaking in a low tone of voice, asking the fair judgement of the readers.

Takemoto Tadao
Emeritus Professor of the University of Tsukuba
Visiting Professor of College de France

Conclusion

The Beijing authorities view anti-Japanese sentiment as something to orchestrate primarily for its own international purposes to strengthen war guilt among Japanese and opposition to Japanese rearmament among the nations of the world. Meanwhile, China’s Communist Party shows no concern with any moral accounting for the atrocities that it perpetrated against its own people during the long years of mass imprisonment, labor camp, the politically induced famine of the early 1960′s, or, for that matter, the massacre of pro-democracy protesters at Tiananmen.

– Richard Bernstein and Ross H. Munro,
The coming conflict with China

When time shall have softened passion and prejudice, when Reason shall have stripped the mask from misrepresentation, then justice, holding evenly her scales, will require much of past censure and praise to change places.

– Radhabinod Pal,
Dissentient Judgement of Justice Pal

Today, the so-called ‘Nanking Massacre’ is said to be another holocaust, which can be comparable to the slaughters committed by the Nazi Germany against the Jewish People. Sue to the fact that Japan made a military alliance with Germany, Japan is often misunderstood as if Japan had pursued similar national policy. However, it was not that simple. This is the same mistake as regarding the Soviet Union as the same democratic nation as the U.S. or the U.K. only because she was in the same military alliance, which had gone to war against Germany.

As we have stated earlier, the ‘Nanking Massacre’ in which the Prosecution claims the ‘massacre of 300,000′, has never been so proved. However, any other unjustifiable killings by Japanese troops are regarded as punishable war crimes during the combats against the Chinese Army, and these should be processed under the international humanitarian law. On the other hand, in case of Germany, they were not fighting the war against the Jewish people. The large-scale slaughters targeting all the Jewish people, including the killings of Jewish people who had German citizenship, committed by the Nazi Germany were systematically planned killings based on the specific ethnic ideology which had no direct connection with the war. Those killings were, indeed, the ‘crimes against humanity’, and those crimes are fundamentally different from the ‘war crimes’ which the Japanese troops were said to have committed.

Many of the war criminals of the Nazi Germany processed at ‘the International War Criminal Court (the Nuremberg Trial) were found guilty of the ‘crime against humanity’. However, in the IMTFE even both HIROTA Koki, the former Foreign Minister and MATSUI who were prosecuted for their responsibility for the ‘Nanking Massacre’, were found guilty under the ‘conventional war crimes’. They were not sentenced the severe punishment due to the ‘crimes against humanity’. This clearly proves that the ‘Nanking Massacre’ could not be put in the same category with the holocaust committed against the Jewish people by the Nazi Germany as we see these different court processes.

Not only so, we must say that there existed the crucial fact that the then Japanese government sternly refused the persecution policy against the Jewish people which the Nazi Germany was implementing, even though Japan had amicable relations with Germany by means of concluding the Anti-Comintern Pact during that time when the battle of Nanking occurred. In December 1938, almost one year after the battle of Nanking, the Japanese Government decided the policy that ‘based on the spirit of racial equality which we have insisted on for many years, we will treat the Jewish people with fairness, in the same manner as we treat other foreigners and we will not take special measures to reject them’.)

For that very reason, the ‘Japanese Oskar Schindler’ SUGIHARA Chiune(Sempo)’s energetic activity was possible, and many Jewish people were rescued. This historical fact proves that the Japanese people were far away from such racism as seen in the holocaust produced by the racial extremist Nazi Germany.

Who can imagine that the Japanese people is a nation who will do anything like systematically planned atrocities called ‘holocaust’? Any westerners who know even a little bit about the Japanese culture may testify. Alfred Smoular, who received many awards from the French President De Gaulle, as a resistance fighter, was one of them. He survived tortures at the concentration camps in Auschwitz and Bofenvalt. This great French hero states the followings in his memoir Auschwitz 186416 dies in Japan (Tokyo:Fuso-sha, 1995):

World War II including the movement of resistance was the fight against Fascism. I can not keep myself silent for such absurd statements which to say we should regard Japan as same as Hitler’s Germany. Those absurd statements are nothing but someone’s ideological propaganda.

We are sure the American people understand our humane heritage over 2,000 years. We, as Japanese, take pride in the same humane history. We can no longer suffer from such an unreasonable disgrace to our nation brought about by unfounded absurd accusations.

On the other hand, any other inhumane criminal acts comparable to the crimes committed by Nazi Germany might be a lot of racially oriented abuses and large-scale slaughters committed in the name of Communism since the Russian Revolution, elsewhere in the world. With the end of Cold War as a trigger, re-examination of Communism, which brought about curse and disaster to mankind and society in large in the 20th century, is now being made. According to Karel Bartosek’s The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (Harvard University Press, 1999), the victims of the crimes committed by the Communism can be estimated no less than 100,000,000. As for the Soviet Union, which was the mainstream of worldwide Communism, it is said that 20,000,000 people had been killed, and after all, its Communistic regime collapsed in 1991. However, Communism in China, where it is estimated that a far larger number of 65,000,000 people had been victimized, is still existing under the dictatorial political system, and still persecuting minorities and committing human right violations ceaselessly.

Especially in Tibet, more then 1,200,000 people, corresponding to roughly 20% of the total population, were massacred since being unfairly annexed to Communist China in 1955. And even today, the people there are still abused, and their cultures are being destroyed. The miserable conditions of ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ in Tibet are known as crueler than ones in Bosnia and Herzegovina or Kosovo. And, it becomes an increasing concern to John Q. Public, because it is introduced to them through hit movies, Seven Years in Tibet (Director: jean-Jaques Annaud, 1997) and Kundun (Director: Martin Scorsese, 1997). If we can not call this crime against humanity as ‘holocaust’, what else can we call ‘holocaust’? The very Communist China declared that the problem of Tibet is a problem relating to domestic affairs and refused the interference of the foreign nations. On the other hand, the CCP is loudly denouncing the ‘Nanking Massacre’ which had been insisted on its happening more than sixty years ago, but not even clearly defined. It is indeed their ridiculous self-righteous gestures.

The extreme example of China’s ridiculous gestures in that the CCP is strongly supporting the production of the movie, titled Rabe’s Diary.Of course, this is a campaign movie for the purpose of denouncing the ‘massacre of 300,000′. In other words, this movie is the indeed the false movie with double fabrications.

The CCP frequently persists in requesting Japan to show an attitude of the ‘remorse and apology’ for the behaviour that Japan took to China in past, citing the ‘Nanking Massacre’ as an example. As for its intention, there is no doubt that the CCP aims at withdrawal of the ‘compensation and financial assistance’ and the ‘concession’ from Japan as analyzed by the Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service.At the same time, in order for the CCP to establish the hegemony in the post Cold War East Asia, the CCP has to drive a wedge into the Japan-U.S. alliance, which is an obstacle on the road to its hegemony. Therefore it may say that as one of measures to accomplish this, the CCP intends to have ex-Allied Nations recall the ‘evil act of ex-enemy Japan’ stressing old ties of Allies Nations.

It is obviously telling of the China’s intention that on the background of the sales campaign of The Rape of Nanking, we can catch a glimpse of the shadow of the CCP through the activities of Chinese-Americans and overseas Chinese merchant organizations in the U.S.

From the years of 1930 through 1940, the national interests of Japan and U.S. became severely opposite, and caused a very unfortunate war. On this background, it is true that China and the Comintern concentrated its effort to carry out the skillful propaganda maneuver, which aimed at splitting Japan and U.S. We must not allow this to appear again.

We would like to emphasize that our assertion that ‘Nanking Massacre’ was a propaganda by the CCP, isn’t only for us to remove the stigma that has been attached to Japan due to the unfounded ‘false accusation’, but also to take into consideration formation of a mature friendly relationship between Japan and U.S., looking toward the 21st Century, and reinforcement of our relationship.

OHARA Yasuo
Professor of Kokugakuin University

S-72 The newspaper and TV

Various newspapers are on the desk. Other newspapers are on them as well.

We can see titles such as“The Nanking Massacre didn’t exist?,” “Is it a Lie? The Rape of Nanking,”are seen on the newspapers.

Announcer’s voice

At the simulated court trial of the “Nanking International Historical Full Court Session” held by the US -Japan private organization in Los Angeles, the prosecutors and the defendants are conducting a furious debate. But it does seem that the new evidence and objective arguments presented by the defendants are overwhelming the prosecutors

S-73 Inside DAN’s Production building

ANNE, NAGOSHI, TONY, JENNY, and staff are looking at the newspaper and watching the news on TV.

Announcer’s voice

There is a possibility that the outcome of this court will make the Nanking Massacre that was said to have been conducted by the Japanese army, and was thought to be an accepted notion, a fabrication and a false accusation, and Iris Chang’s The Rape of Nanking, will be a complete lie. As a result, this could have a huge impact on the over 10 Nanking Massacre movies planned to be produced this year in China and the United States and other parts of the world. I would like to keep you posted on the outcome of the trial.

The staffs clap and cry out.

TONY

I wanna tell Dan in Nanking. He’s going to love this.

ANNE

Have you heard from him since?.

JENNY

The embassy is doing all it can but it seems like they can’t visit every day. He’s not sick or anything but they told me that he’s a bit thin and has no energy.

ANDY

I bet the interrogation’s pretty severe there. They won’t kill him right? If they kill an American citizen…

ANNE

I don’t think they’ll go that far but…

NAGOSHI

They might make it look like a suicide…

ANNE

At the press conference he clearly said that whatever happens, he will never commit suicide. That if something like that happened, think of him as having been killed. So it’s O.K.

Everyone loses their words and is silent.

ANNE

I just got a call from DAN’s ex-wife

ANNE

(Surprised) He’s not single?

JENNY

They got divorced 4 years ago. They also have a 7 year old daughter. Deborah, his ex-wife, got hold of her custody and they live in New York now.

ANNE

Really…and what did she say?

JENNY

She was worried and asked how he was. It seems that Dan always sent money for child support and would sometimes visit his daughter.

ANNE

…

S-74 Prosecution makes Special Statement on Nanking Trial

The prosecution LEE is standing and is making a statement.

LEE

Today, before giving the prosecutor’s final argument, to counter the defendant’s evidence, we would like to submit a testimony from a new witness. The witness is the producer DAN Shitsuotsuki who is producing a Nanking denial movie and who planned and held the Nanking International Historical Full Court Session.

The people in the court murmur.

The defendants are taken back.

ANNE

(Stands up and looks towards the door)

From the door, we can see DAN, with a languished lookm walk in with a Chinese man.

ANNE

…DAN!

LEE

Your honor, the defendant was shooting a documentary in Nanking with his crew but was arrested for drugs and child prostitution. But because his willingness to change is strong and because he obtained new facts and wanted to share with us these new facts in the court, the Chinese police put into consideration the US-China relationship and the necessity to understand historical facts, allowed for his release and departure. We as American citizens would like to thank the Chinese government. Now I would like to ask for DAN Shitotsuki’s testimony.

ANNE

I object! The witness has been captured by China and we do not know what they did to him or what kind of psychological condition he’s in. I think it is better to ask for his testimony after putting some time in between.

LEE

The witness is claiming that he would like to testify in court. The Defendant is trying to slow down the process of the trial because she is afraid that the truth would be revealed. This testimony is based on the witness’s own will.

Presiding Judge ERICKSON

Mr. DAN Shiotsuki, is what the prosecutor saying true? Do you want to testify?

DAN

(Without any expression) Yes. I came here on my own will. I would like to testify.

ERICKSON

Okay

ANNE

Your honor! I ask for a small break. We are all friends of the witness and were worried about his arrest in China. We would like to start the testimony and questions to the witness after hearing about his situation from him.

DAN

There’s no need for that. I want to testify now. Please let me testify.

ANNE

…!

ERICKSON

Okay. Mr. DAN Shiotsuki, please swear in.

DAN puts his hand on the bible at the witness seat and swears in.

TONY whispers to ANNE at the defendant’s seat

TONY

ANNE, look at the spectator’s seat. DAN’s ex-wife and daughter are here. Behind them are his parents from Georgia.

When ANNE looks at the spectator’s seat, she sees a woman in her thirties and a little girl looking at DAN with a worried look, surrounded by three Chinese men. Behind them an old couple is watching over, again, with a worried look.

ANNE

…

All of a sudden the little girl cries out.

Little Girl

Daddy!! (Waves at DAN)

DAN

(Smiles weakly and lightly waves back at the little girl)

LEE

Now I would like to start my question. Mr. DAN Shiotsuki, you are the producer who is planning to make a documentary film on the subject that the Nanking Massacre might not have happened.

DAN

Yes

LEE

You went to Nanking City, Jiang Su Province, China, for footage.

DAN

Yes

LEE

You were then arrested for the possession of drugs and child prostitution.

DAN

Yes, but that was some kind of mistake. I didn’t do such a thing. It was some kind of conspiracy…

LEE

(Stops him) Please answer my questions only.

DAN

…

LEE

You were released by the good faith of the Chinese government who puts emphasis on the good relationship between the U.S. and China, but what did you find out after going to China and getting coverage for your film?

DAN

I didn’t have enough time…

LEE

But weren’t you there for over a week? What did you find out? (Strongly) Please answer me.

DAN

(Looks around without any expression)

DAN

Looks at ANNE’s expression, and then his family’s…

DAN

Actually, as I was continuing my research, I started to think that the Nanking Massacre actually did take place. That Iris Chang was right…

ANNE

(Astonished and out of impulse) DAN! What are you saying??

ERICKSON

The defendant shall not interfere. I will allow you to cross-examine him later.

ANNE

…

LEE

Then you started to have a different opinion than at the time of the press conference, correct?

DAN

Actually, I thought that the Nanking Massacre did exist, even at the time of the conference.

ANNE

…

The people in the court murmur.

LEE

Then why did you lie?

DAN

A certain organization in Japan unofficially offered me financial support and promised to make me a famous journalist, and so I accepted the offer.

ANNE

…! What…!?

ANNE

Was that offer only made to you?

DAN

(A bit painfully) The defendant Anna Kinskey also accepted the same offer

ANNE

That’s a lie! Your honor, the witness is defaming me as a defendant with false testimonies. I have never accepted or even heard of such offer. Dan, what happened to you…? You’re…

ERICKSON

Defendant! Be quiet! You have the opportunity to speak afterwards.

ANNE

…

DAN

After I was captured in China, I had time to think quietly by myself. I reflected on my comments, the things I wrote, and the film I was producing. I am testifying today as a result of that. I am grateful to the Chinese Police for giving me this opportunity

ANNE

…! (In awe)

Black background with Caption:

Cross Examination by Defendant

S-75 Nanking Trial Cross-examination by the Defendant

ANNE, the defendant, is cross-examining DAN, the witness.

ANNE

I will ask the witness. What you just said to the prosecution. Did you really mean what you said? Are you not threatened by someone to say this?

DAN

(Looks straight at ANNE without removing his eyes away from her) I really meant it. I am not threatened…by anyone.

ANNE

Then how about your family sitting there in the spectator’s seat? Didn’t the Chinese people sitting around them bring them here?

DAN

(Glances towards his family) They kindly brought my family over here because of my return to the U.S. I am grateful.

ANNE

Aren’t they indirectly implying that if you don’t testify as they like, they will cause harm to your family?

LEE

Your honor! The defendant is leading the witness based on speculation.

ERICKSON

Objection sustained. Defendant, ask questions based on fact.

ANNE

Mr. Shiotsuki, you testified that you and I received money from Japan. This is a lie, correct?

DAN

It’s true

ANNE

It’s a lie! Why are you lying? Where has your pride as a journalist gone?

DAN

I…haven’t changed at all…and I know everything now.

ANNE

What are you telling me you know? Are you…betraying us? Not only us but also the soldiers who were falsly accused, and those who were executed because of this?

DAN

(A sign of pain briefly shows on DAN’s expressionless face)…I will not betray…I just want to tell the truth…I now know…

ANNE

DAN, when you asked me to join this project, you told me that we were the last Samurai. Are we not?

LEE

Your honor I object. These aren’t questions based on fact but criticism made to the witness.

ERICKSON

Objection sustained. The defendant…

Dan

Your honor. (Strongly) Please let me answer. Please.

ERICKSON

Go ahead.

DAN

ANNE, as a journalist I have lived xx years. And there is something that I definitely learned. There are times when people may physically, through threats and violence, look like they have surrendered on the outside. But they cannot surrender their…thier souls. (Eyes stay fixed on ANNE)Our souls, as long as we choose it to be, will always be free and keep its dignity. Yes, no matter how strong the enemy power, they cannot take away the freedom and pride of our souls. Iris Chang (emphasizes her name), her actions and life have proven this. I finally realize…what she really wanted to say…that there are things that people want to say, even if it menat putting everything they have on the line. As long as we have the will to find freedom and truth, we human beings have hope. I believe in human beings…so…as a journalist, I would like to follow Iris Chang’s footsteps. I’d like to act like Iris Chang. This thought has never changed and never will.

ANNE

…!

Dan

That’s it. Your honor, there is nothing else to testify for. I don’t feel well so I’d like to withdraw out of the courtroom.

ERICKSON

Defendant, is that okay?

ANNE

…(Shocked)

ERICKSON

You may withdraw

DAN leaves the courtyard while being helped by the bailiff.

ANNE

…(in awe)

S-76 Inside DAN’s production company

In the production building where most of the people have left.

ANNE watched DAN’s testimony throught a video monitor in the editing room.

Keeps rewinding and repeating the final testimony

NAGOSHI and TONY come by.

TONY

I’m leaving now. ANNE, I understand you’re shocked, but you should go home. It’s already past midnight

ANNE

Yes. Just a bit longer. Something still bugs me.

NAGOSHI

Everything bugs me. I can’t believe DAN changed so much…I’m starting to lose faith in people.

ANNE

I still can’t believe it.

TONY

(A bit hestitant but) ANNE…are you going to continue?

ANNE

Continue what?

ANNE

The trial and the shooting. Tomorrow’s press is going to be BAD!

ANNE

…(Nods) Of course! Whatever the outcome, I’m going to fight til the end.

TONY

…right…good night.

ANNE

Good night

NAGOSHI and TONY go out and ANNE is left alone in the room.

ANNE stares at DAN in the monitor.

* * *

The clock in the editing room points at 4:50 a.m.

ANNE is sleeping with the monitor still turned on.

(It is her dream from here)

We can here footsteps in an empty halway (it is a weird sound)

A voice is calling out…“ANNE…ANNE…ANNE”

ANNE wakes up.

There is man standing at the doorway.

ANNE looks carefully and sees that it’s DAN.

ANNE

DAN, what’s the matter? So late…did you come back?

DAN stands near the entrance, quiet, then goes away.,

ANNE, surprised, tries to run after him.

ANNE

DAN, wait! DAN! Wait!

ANNE, who had fallen asleep in her chair wakes up and jerks herself up.

ANNE

DAN…! (Looks around but there is no one there)

DAN’s face is still paused in the monitor.

ANNE

…It was a dream…(looks at the clock that says 4:50 a.m.)

ANNE pushed the play button on the monitor again.

DAN’s testimony plays again.

DAN

…I finally realize…what she really wanted to say…that there are things that people want to say, even if it means putting everything they have on the line. As long as we have the will to find freedom and truth, we human beings have hope. I believe in human beings…so…as a journalist, I would like to follow Iris Chang’s footsteps. I’d like to act like Iris Chang. This thought has never changed and never will.

ANNE

I would like to follow Iris Chang’s footsteps. I’d like to act like Iris…(Realizes!)

ANNE stands up and looks at the clock again.

ANNE

Dan’s going to die…!!

ANNE jumps out of the room as fast as she can.

DAN’s testimony continues on the monitor.

S-77 A running car and the interior of the car

We see a car racing down the city night and its wheels.

We can hear ANNE’s voice.

ANNE’s voice

Check his room! Now!

She drives and talks on her cell phone at the same time.

ANNE

Hurry up! It’s a matter of life and death!…Me? I’m his best friend. Just hurry up and check it out!

S-78 In front of xx hotel.

ANNE’s car races in, stops, ANNE jumps out of the car and rushes into the hotel.

S-79 Front desk of the hotel

ANNE runs in.

ANNE runs to the front desk

FORELY and the Chinese man are at the front counter.

ANNE

Where’s DAN? Is DAN here?

FORELY

He disappeared from his room. It seems like he escaped from the back. How did you know Dan disappeared from the hotel?

ANNE

Just bring me to the room where Dan was staying at!

ANNE, FORELY, Chinese man, and the hotel man all head towards the elevator.

S-80 Hallway and DAN’s room

ANNE and FORELY come by.

A different Chinese man is in front of Dan’s room.

ANNE and the others go into the room

＊　　　　　　　＊　　　　　　＊　　　　　　＊

ANNE and the others go into the room.

There is no one in the room. The passport that came back from China is still neatly put away.

ANNE, checks the closet. His clothes are still there.

FORELY

Tonight he had dinner with his parents and daughter and then went into this room…for security reasons they (the Chinese men) were waiting at the lobby but he didn’t go out through the main entrance. You said that it was a matter of life and death right? Why did you think so?

ANNE

Stares at her for a while

FORELY

…what?

ANNE

…Well at least it seems like you had nothing to do with it (tries to go outside)

FORELY

(Grabs her arm) What do you mean?

ANNE still tries to get out but is stopped by FORELY and the Chinese man and they struggle.

DAN’s father’s voice

How did you know that DAN was gone?

ANNE turns around to the voice and finds DAN’s parents standing in their gowns. Behind them is Dan’s ex-wife Deborah.

FATHER

I’m DAN’s father, Henry Shiotsuki, but how did you know that DAN was going to be gone?

ANNE

I’m Anna Kinskey. Tonight, I was watching the video of DAN’s testimony at the court. I felt that there was something behind his words…and then it hit me. DAN was testifying under the same circumstances as Iris.

FATHER

What do you mean?

ANNE

In order to protect the family you love, he made a testimony that he knew was a lie. He had to do this or his family would be in danger (glances at FORELY). He was probably threatened. He was in a position where he couldn’t testify the truth…and then he realized that Iris might also have been in the same situation. As a journalist, they would stop living and stop the lying and fabrication by their own death. Dan and Iris are very proud human beings. They chose to keep their dignity and make a silent protest, even if it meant taking their own lives…I realized this and…

FORELY

That’s nonsense. Dan testified on his own will…

FATHER

Enough! I’ve had enough lies! Ms. Anna Kinskey, DAN is exactly the son you described. Tonight I had dinner with him that I hadn’t in a long time. He was very kind…a bit too kind. Right, Ma?

MOTHER

…(silently nods)

FATHER

Maybe he was saying good bye to us. It’s almost dawn…He’s probably already…

FATHER puts his arms around MOTHER’s shoulders.

ANNE

(Realizes something) I’m going to look for him.

FATHER

Do you know where he is?

ANNE

He might be at the place where Iris died.

ANNE runs off

S-81 Site where Iris was found dead

A little bird is perched on a tree. It is looking at something and its eyes move.

There is a car parked at the site where Iris had died.

The camera slowly closes in from behind.

A whistle can barely be heard from within.

The Georgia State song, Georgia on my mind can be heard in snatches.

Dan is inside the car

The mountains far away turn white and the sun is about to rise.

Dan holds the replica gun he used at the press conference from his seat.

He tries to put it in his mouth.

He turns around at the sound of a bird’s chirp.

He sees one bird fly into the sky.

DAN smiles still holding the gun. Slowly, he puts the gun into his mouth.

We can see the whole car from behind.

We hear gun fire.

10 plus birds fly out of a nearby bush surprised by the sound.

A car is left in an area that becomes silent again.

The sun starts to rise.

S-82 ANNE’s car races through the road.

ANNE’s car races throught the road at dawn,

Her cell phone rings.

S-83 Inside the car

ANNE puts her cell phone by her ear while driving.

ANNE

Hello…what?

S-84 The road and ANNE’s car

ANNE’s car brakes hard and stops.

We see her car from behin. It is silent and still.

S-85 Outside the Nanking International Full Court Session

People drift by.

ANNE, TONY, and NAGOSHI come in.

DAN’s ex-wife DEBORAH and her daughter wait at the corner of the hallway.

DEBORAH

Ms. ANNA KINSKEY

ANNE stops. The others leave to leave her alone.

DEBORAH

I’m DEBORAH Atkins. I’m sorry to stop you right before the trial, but I wanted to tell you something.

I’m happy I got to talk to you. Thank you for calling me. What did you want to tell me?

S-86 Inside the court

Caption:

Closing statement for Defendant

ANNE is conducting her closing statement.

ANNE

One journalist gave up his life to protect the freedom of press and the freedom of speech. He also protected his family and the truth by giving up his life.

DAN Shiotsuki’s face shows up in full screen.

ANNE

He was found dead at the place where Iris Chang died, and died exactly the same way.

It was suicide.

But what he wanted to tell us in exchange for his life was made clear by his death.

As the judges and the spectars are well aware of, his family was invited to this court by the prosecution from their home state Georgia.

When he was captured in Eurasia’s one party dictating country, he realized that if he was going to stick to his pride and freedom as a journalist, than the lives of his family, whom he felt was most important to him, would be in danger. To save his pride as a journalist and to save his family, the only way to do this was to sacrifice his life and tell the truth, in exchange for his life, and he did this. He also clearly claimed this at our court. (Signals)

Dan’s testimony at the court is show on the screen.

DAN

(On the screen) ANNE, as a journalist I have lived xx years. And there is something that I definitely learned. There are times when people may physically, through threats and violence, look like they have surrendered on the outside. But they cannot surrender their…their souls. (Eyes stay fixed on ANNE)Our souls, as long as we choose it to be, will always be free and keep its dignity. Yes, no matter how strong the power, they cannot take away the freedom and pride of our souls. Iris Chang (emphasizes her name), her actions and life have proven this. I finally realize…what she really wanted to say…that there are things that people want to say, even if it means putting everything they have on the line. As long as we have the will to find freedom and truth, we human beings have hope. I believe in human beings…so…as a journalist, I would like to follow Iris Chang’s footsteps. I’d like to act like Iris Chang. This thought has never changed and never will. (Pause)

ANNE

Why did he decide to die at the same place as Iris Chang and why did he decide to die the same way?

I think this is because he wanted to tell us that Iris’s death was exactly the same as the situation he was put in.

I will intentionally declare this.

With his death, DAN Shiotsuki indicated that what he testified at this court was false.

I believe Iris had also discovered that her book was fake and as a journalist hated to have to continue lying, and wanted to keep the dignity and freedom of her soul, and to protect her family that meant so much to her, and to show a sign of protest against the people who threatened to hurt them, and she did this by taking her own life.

DAN Shiotsuki tried to tell us the truth by having his death put exactly the same as Iris’s.

He revealed the true nature of the Nanking Massacre by giving up his own life.

Iris found out herself that the Nanking massacre was false.

But she had to keep saying that it was true.

She did not have the option of expressing this in public. She had to protect her family which was most important to her.

To protect her freedom and pride as a journalist, and to protest against the brutal authorities that will not let the truth be presented, what she decided at the end was her own death.

The reason why she decided to commit suicide by putting a gun in her mouth, a way that no woman would choose, was to show that she was protesting and to tell the world that this was not a suicide.

The death of Iris Chang and DAN Shiotsuki is a declaration of victory for the diginity, pride, and freedom of human beings, and the cry of the soul of the United States that will never surrender to oppression and threats.

The freedom and soul of human beings will never surrender to any evil state power, even if it means giving up your life for it. The death of the two journalists has certainly proven this. No matter how the results of the court trial goes, I will take over DAN’s will and finish the film that we were going to make together.

Finally, I would like to have Henry Shiotsuki, DAN’s father, to testify and this will be the defendant’s closing remarks.

FATHER

My name is Henry Shiotsuki and I am DAN’s father.

I am a farmer in Georgia, but there is something that I have always told and taught DAN.

Don’t lie, be honest, and to do that, be strong. But there are a lot of people in this world who are stronger than you. So you will not necessarily always win.

But don’t lose. Even if you don’t win, it’s okay as long as you don’t lose. As long as you don’t give up.

If you have a strong heart and a proud soul, than you can do that for sure. My son had done exactly that.

In order to protect us family, that last night, he told my softly.

Dad, as a father, a child, and a man, I did my best to protect my child and my family.

Now, I am going to do my best as a journalist, my way.

I’m going to do this my way and tell everyone.

(Gets a catch in his throat)

I asked my son. Was your testimony a lie?

My son laughed and said Dad, it’s exactly the way you think it is. I am proud of my son.

I am proud of my son that might not have won, but never lost to his enemy.

And I am grateful to the country of liberty, the United States of America that brought him up.

FORELY and the presecution are in awe.

ANNE holds her tears back.

The staffs cry while holding each other.

DAN’s face is shown full screen.

S-87 The court hallway

ANNE and the staff walk out of the court.

FORELY comes and sticks her hand out for a handshake.

ANNE

What’s this about?

FORELY

Good job.

ANNE

(Shakes her hand half in doubt)

FORELY

I’m glad I met you. Now, I’m also proud to be an American.

FORELY walks down the hallway as the Chinese men around her are surprised.

ANNE

…

S-89 Different court hallway

ANNE, TONY, and NAGOSHI come in.

DAN’s ex-wife DEBORAH and her daughter wait at the corner of the hallway.

DEBORAH

Ms. ANNA KINSKEY

ANNE stops. The others leave to leave her alone.

Deborah

I’m Deborah Atkins. It was a great closing remark. I think DAN is happy in heaven as well.

ANNE

Thank you. I’m happy to have met you. Thank you for calling me.

DEBORAH

I just wanted to say one thing. One part of our closing remarks that wasn’t true.

ANNE

Really? Which part was that?

DEBORAH

You said that DAN committed suicide to protect the freedom of speech and human rights, and to protect us family.

ANNE

Yes, isn’t that true?

DEBORAH

I won’t say that it’s all false. But you are overlooking the most important truth.

ANNE

…! What is that?

Suddenly the daughter that was with DEBORAH finds her grandparents who appear at the end of the hallway, and starts running to them.

DAUGHTER

Granddad!

DEBORAH

(Shouts) ANNA! Don’t run!

ANNE is shocked when she hears the name.

ANNE

…!She…has the same name as me?

DEBORAH

He wanted to put your name on her and wouldn’t listen…Don’t you think I look a little like you?

ANNE

…

DEBORAH

Even before he met you, he thought about you and continued to love you, as the only person in the world. His suicide was really to protect you. He thought that if he died, then there won’t be any harm put to you. Anna Kinskey, you are that kind of person. That’s why I was always number two. I thought there was nothing I could do about it…I was jealous of you (smiles) It’s very lonely to always be number two.

ANNE

…

ANNA, the daughter, shouts from across the hallway.

ANNA

MOMMY!!

DEBORAH

Well, I’m really glad I got to meet you. I think I can really start a new life from today.

ANNE

Thank you…really.

DEBORAH hugs ANNE and ANNE hugs her back.

ANNA, the daughter, calls for her mom again.

DEBORAH leaves.

There are tears in ANNE’s eyes as she watches them off.

S-90 Nanking International Full Court Session

The mallet is heard loud and clear.

The court is silent.

The Presiding Judge is about to read the verdict.

Presiding Judge ERICKSON

Presiding Judge ERICKSON

We have examined and discussed the authenticity regarding the incident known as the Nanking Massacre from various angles and perspectives in a fair and just manner. Radhabinod Pal, who was an Indian Judge at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) held in Tokyo 60 years ago, stated the following in Judgement, the judgement document he wrote on the IMTFE. “When time shall have softened passion and prejudice, when Reason shall have stripped the mask from misrepresentation, then Justice, holding evenly her scales, will require much of past censure and praise to change places”. With these words deep in our hearts, we would like to pronounce our judgement. Regarding authenticity on the Nanking Massacre, we hereby declare…(Pause)

The faces of ANNE and the others pause as well.

Fade Out

Cherry blossom petals fall down in a black background.

Photographs of two officers emerge.

They are the funeral pictures of second lieutenants Takeshi Noda and Toshiaki Mukaida.

CAPTION:

The two officers were executed after the war for being charged of each executing a murder race to see who could kill 100 Chinese soldiers first. This is the will of one of the officers, second lieutenant Toshiaki Mukai.

 
Officer Mukai’s will in Japanese and English are shown on the screen. The narration is in English. 

The photographs taken of both officers from right before the execution to right after the execution is shown on the screen.

I swear to all the gods in the universe, that I have never killed a prisoner or a civilian.

I have never committed a Nanking Massacre crimes. 

I will accept my death as God’s will and as a Japanese man will proudly become Chinese soil.

But my soul will return to my dear country Japan.

With my death, the grudge associated with 8 years of war with China shall wash away.

If my death helps foster friendship between Japan and China, and brings peace within Asia, then I am happy for this death.

I wish the best of luck to the future and prosperity of China.

I wish the best of luck to the recovery and prosperity of Japan 

Long live China

Long live Japan

Long live the Emperor

The petals of the cherry blossom fall once again in the black background.

I dedicate this movie to the Japanese and Chinese officers and soldiers who died in the war, and the citizens of Japan and China.

I also dedicate this movie to the late professor Futaranosuke Nagoshi and Tomoichiro Shiotsuki.

The Cast and Staff credits start to roll with the music.

The credits of financial support start to roll.

The End.

Head of Japanese Air Force (ASDF) sacked for public denial of Japan’s wartime aggression

Earlier this week, the head of the Japanese air force wrote in a prize-wining essay describing Japan as the aggressor during World War II is a “false accusation.”

The government stripped ASDF Chief of Staff Toshio Tamogami, 60, of his title after deeming his claim deviated from the government’s official view that Japan’s invasions and colonial rule caused great damage and pain to the peoples of its Asian neighbors.

Tamogami wrote the essay titled, “Was Japan an aggressor nation?” and submitted it for an essay contest organized by the APA Group, a hotel and condominium operator. His essay won the grand prize, and the original Japanese version and an English translation were posted on the company’s Web site on Friday.

In his essay, Tamogami says “Our country was a victim, drawn into the Sino-Japanese War by Chiang Kai-shek.”

He then justifies Japan’s wartime colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula and the former Manchuria. “Through the efforts of the Japanese government and Japanese army, the people in these areas were released from the oppression they had been subjected to up until then, and their standard of living markedly improved.”

Below is the English translation of the essay taken directly from APA Group, who sponsored the essay contest and posted his winning essay.  The URL to the Japanese and English version is here

Was Japan an Aggressor Nation?
Tamogami Toshio

Under the terms of the US-Japan Security Treaty, American troops are stationed within Japan. Nobody calls this an American invasion of Japan. That is because it is based on a treaty agreed upon between two nations.

Our country is said to have invaded the Chinese mainland and the Korean peninsula in the prewar period, but surprisingly few people are aware that the Japanese army was also stationed in these countries on the basis of treaties. The advance of the Japanese army onto the Korean peninsula and Chinese mainland from the latter half of the 19th century on was not a unilateral advance without the understanding of those nations. The current Chinese government obstinately insists that there was a “Japanese invasion,” but Japan obtained its interests in the Chinese mainland legally under international law through the Sino-Japanese War, the Russo-Japanese War, and so on, and it placed its troops there based on treaties in order to protect those interests. There are those who say that Japan applied pressure and forced the Chinese to sign the treaty, thus invalidating it, but back then – and even now – there were no treaties signed without some amount of pressure.

The Japanese army was subjected to frequent acts of terrorism by Chiang Kai-shek’s Kuomintang (KMT). Large-scale attacks on and murders of Japanese citizens occurred many times. This would be like the Japanese Self-Defense Forces attacking the US troops stationed at the Yokota or Yokosuka military bases, committing acts of violence and murder against the American soldiers and their families – it would be unforgivable. Despite that, the Japanese government patiently tried to bring about peace, but at every turn they were betrayed by Chiang Kai-shek.

In fact, Chiang Kai-shek was being manipulated by Comintern. As a result of the Second United Front of 1936, large numbers of guerillas from the Communist Party of Comintern puppet Mao Zedong infiltrated the KMT. The objective of Comintern was to pit the Japanese army and the KMT against each other to exhaust them both and, in the end, to have Mao Zedong’s Communist Party control mainland China. Finally, our country could no longer put up with the repeated provocations of the KMT, and on August 15, 1937, the Konoe Fumimaro Cabinet declared that “now we must take determined measures to punish the violent and unreasonable actions of the Chinese army and encourage the Nanking Government to reconsider.” Our country was a victim, drawn into the Sino-Japanese War by Chiang Kai-shek.

The bombing of Zhang Zuolin’s train in 1928 was for a long time said to have been the work of the Kwantung Army, but in recent years, Soviet intelligence documents have been discovered that at the very least cast doubt on the Kwantung Army’s role. According to such books as Mao: The Mao Zedong Nobody Knew by Jung Chang (Kodansha) 「マオ（誰も知らなかった毛沢東）（ユン・チアン、講談社）」, Ko Bunyu Looks Positively at the Greater East Asian War by Ko Bunyu (WAC Co.) 「黄文雄の大東亜戦争肯定論（黄文雄、ワック出版）」, and Refine Your Historical Power, Japan edited by Sakurai Yoshiko (Bungei Shunju) 「日本よ、「歴史力」を磨け（櫻井よしこ編、文藝春秋）」, the theory that it was actually the work of Comintern has gained a great deal of prominence recently.

Similarly, the Marco Polo Bridge Incident on July 7, 1937, immediately prior to the start of the Sino-Japanese War, had been considered as a kind of proof of Japan’s invasion of China.

However, we now know that during the Tokyo War Trials, Liu Shaoqi of the Chinese Communist Party told Western reporters at a press conference, “The instigator of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident was the Chinese Communist Party, and the officer in charge was me.” If you say that Japan was the aggressor nation, then I would like to ask what country among the great powers of that time was not an aggressor. That is not to say that because other countries were doing so it was all right for Japan to do so well, but rather that there is no reason to single out Japan as an aggressor nation.

Japan tried to develop Manchuria, the Korean Peninsula, and Taiwan in the same way it was developing the Japanese mainland. Among the major powers at that time, Japan was the only nation that tried to incorporate its colonies within the nation itself. In comparison to other countries, Japan’s colonial rule was very moderate. When Imperial Manchuria was established in January 1932, the population was thirty million. That population increased each year by more than 1 million people, reaching fifty million by the end of the war in 1945.

Why was there such a population explosion in Manchuria? It was because Manchuria was a prosperous and safe region. People would not be flocking to a place that was being invaded. The plains of Manchuria, where there was almost no industry other than agriculture, was reborn as a vital industrial nation in just fifteen years thanks to the Japanese government. On the Korean Peninsula as well, during the thirty-five years of Japanese rule the population roughly doubled from thirteen million to twenty-five million people. That is proof that Korea under Japanese rule was also prosperous and safe. In postwar Japan, people say that the Japanese army destroyed the peaceful existence in Manchuria and on the Korean Peninsula. But in fact, through the efforts of the Japanese government and Japanese army, the people in these areas were released from the oppression they had been subjected to up until then, and their standard of living markedly improved.

Our country built many schools in Manchuria, the Korean Peninsula, and Taiwan, and emphasized education for the native people. We left behind significant improvements to the infrastructure that affects everyday life – roads, power plants, water supply, etc. And we established Keijo Imperial University in Korea in 1924 as well as the Taipei Imperial University in 1928 in Taiwan.

Following the Meiji Restoration, the Japanese government established nine imperial universities. Keijo Imperial University was the sixth and Taipei Imperial University was the seventh to be built. The subsequent order was that Osaka Imperial University was eighth (1931) and Nagoya Imperial University was ninth (1939). The Japanese government actually built imperial universities in Korea and Taiwan even before Osaka and Nagoya.

The Japanese government also permitted the enrollment of Chinese and Japanese citizens into the Imperial Japanese Army Academy. At the Manila military tribunal following the war, there was a lieutenant general in the Japanese army named Hong Sa-ik, a native Korean who was sentenced to death. Hong graduated in the 26th class at the Army Academy, where he was a classmate of Lt. General Kuribayashi Tadamichi, who gained fame at Iwo Jima.

Hong was a person who rose to lieutenant general in the Imperial Japanese Army while retaining his Korean name. One class behind him at the academy was Col. Kim Suk-won, who served as a major in China at the time of the Sino-Japanese War. Leading a force of roughly 1,000 Japanese troops, he trampled the army from China, the former suzerain state that had been bullying Korea for hundreds of years. He was decorated by the emperor for his meritorious war service. Of course, he did not change his name. In China, Chiang Kai-shek also graduated from the Imperial Japanese Army Academy and received training while attached to a regiment in Takada, in Niigata.

One year below Kim Suk-won at the academy was the man who would be Chiang’s staff officer, He Yingqin. The last crown prince of the Yi dynasty, Crown Prince Yi Eun also attended the Army Academy, graduating in the 29th class. Crown Prince Yi Eun was brought to Japan as a sort of hostage at the age of ten. However, the Japanese government treated him respectfully as a member of the royal family, and after receiving his education at Gakushuin, he graduated from the Imperial Japanese Army Academy. In the army, he was promoted and served as a lieutenant general. Crown Prince Yi Eun was married to Japan’s Princess Nashimotonomiya Masako. She was a woman of nobility who previously had been considered as a potential bride for the Showa Emperor. If the Japanese government had intended to smash the Yi dynasty, they surely would not have permitted the marriage of a woman of this stature to Crown Prince Yi Eun.

Incidentally, in 1930, the Imperial Household Agency built a new residence for the couple. It is now the Akasaka Prince Hotel Annex. Also, Prince Pujie, the younger brother of Puyi – the last emperor of the Qing Dynasty, who was also the emperor of Manchuria – was married to Lady Saga Hiro of the noble Saga house.

When you compare this with the countries that were considered to be major powers at the time, you realize that Japan’s posture toward Manchuria, Korea, and Taiwan was completely different from the colonial rule of the major powers. England occupied India, but it did not provide education for the Indian people. Indians were not permitted to attend the British military academy. Of course, they would never have considered a marriage between a member of the British royal family and an Indian. This holds true for Holland, France, America, and other countries as well.

By contrast, from before the start of World War II, Japan had been calling for harmony between the five tribes, laying out a vision for the tribes – the Yamato (Japanese), Koreans, Chinese, Manchurians, and Mongols – to intermix and live peacefully together. At a time when racial discrimination was considered natural, this was a groundbreaking proposal. At the Paris Peace Conference at the end of World War I, when Japan urged that the abolition of racial discrimination be included in the treaty, England and America laughed it off. But if you look at the world today, it has become the kind of world that Japan was urging at the time.

Going back in time to 1901, in the aftermath of the Boxer Rebellion, the Qing Empire signed the Boxer Protocol in 1901 with eleven countries including Japan. As a result, our country gained the right to station troops in Qing China, and began by dispatching 2,600 troops there. Also, in 1915, following four months of negotiations with the government of Yuan Shikai, and incorporating China’s points as well, agreement was reached on Japan’s so-called 21 Demands toward China. Some people say that this was the start of Japan’s invasion of China, but if you compare these demands to the general international norms of colonial administration by the great powers at the time, there was nothing terribly unusual about it. China too accepted the demands at one point and ratified them.

However, four years later, in 1919, when China was allowed to attend the Paris Peace Conference, it began complaining about the 21 Demands with America’s backing. Even then, England and France supported Japan’s position. Moreover, Japan never advanced its army without the agreement of Chiang Kai-shek’s KMT.

The Japanese army in Beijing, which was stationed there from 1901, still comprised just 5,600 troops at the time of the Marco Polo Bridge Incident thirty-six years later. At that time, tens of thousands of KMT troops were spread out in the area surrounding Beijing, and even in terms of appearances it was a far cry from being an invasion. As symbolized by Foreign Minister Shidehara Kijuro, our country’s basic policy at the time was one of reconciliation with China, and that has not changed even today.

There are some who say that it was because Japan invaded the Chinese mainland and the Korean Peninsula that it ended up entering the war with the United States, where it lost three million people and met with defeat; it committed an irrevocable error. However, it has also been confirmed now that Japan was ensnared in a trap that was very carefully laid by the United States in order to draw Japan into a war.

In fact, America was also being manipulated by Comintern. There are official documents called the Venona Files, which are available on the National Security Agency (NSA) website. It is a massive set of documents, but in the May 2006 edition of “Monthly Just Arguments” 「 月刊正論」, (then) Assistant Professor Fukui of Aoyama Gakuin University offered a summary introduction.

The Venona Files are a collection of transmissions between Comintern and agents in the United States, which the United States was monitoring for eight years, from 1940 to 1948. At the time, the Soviets were changing their codes after each message, so the United States could not decipher them. From 1943, right in the middle of the war with Japan, the United States began its decryption work. Surprisingly, it took thirty-seven years to finish the work; it was completed just before the start of the Reagan administration in 1980. However, since it was the middle of the Cold War, the Americans kept these documents classified.

In 1995, following the end of the Cold War, they were declassified and made open to the public. According to those files, there were three hundred Comintern spies working in the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who took office in 1933. Among them, one who rose to the top was the number two official at the Treasury, Assistant Secretary Harry White. Harry White is said to have been the perpetrator who wrote the Hull note, America’s final notice to Japan before the war began. Through President Roosevelt’s good friend, Treasury Secretary Morgenthau, he was able to manipulate President Roosevelt and draw our country into a war with the United States.

At the time, Roosevelt was not aware of the terrible nature of communism. Through Harry White, he was on the receiving end of Comintern’s maneuvering, and he was covertly offering strong support to Chiang Kai-shek, who was battling Japan at the time, sending the Flying Tigers squadron comprised of one hundred fighter planes. Starting one and a half months prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States began covert air attacks against Japan on the Chinese mainland.

Roosevelt had become president on his public pledge not to go to war, so in order to start a war between the United States and Japan it had to appear that Japan took the first shot. Japan was caught in Roosevelt’s trap and carried out the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Could the war have been avoided? If Japan had accepted the conditions lain out by the United States in the Hull note, perhaps the war could have been temporarily avoided. But even if the war had been avoided temporarily, when you consider the survival of the fittest mentality that dominated international relations at the time, you can easily imagine that the United States would have issued a second and a third set of demands. As a result, those of us living today could very well have been living in a Japan that was a white nation’s colony.

If you leave people alone, someday someone will create the conveniences of civilization, such as cars, washing machines, and computers. But in the history of mankind, the relationship between the rulers and the ruled is only determined by war. It is impossible for those who are powerful to grant concessions on their own. Those who do not fight must resign themselves to being ruled by others.

After the Greater East Asia War, many countries in Asia and Africa were released from the control of white nations. A world of racial equality arrived and problems between nations were to be decided through discussion. That was a result of Japan’s strength in fighting the Russo-Japanese War and Greater East Asia War. If Japan had not fought the Greater East War at that time, it may have taken another one hundred or two hundred years before we could have experienced the world of racial equality that we have today. In that sense, we must be grateful to our ancestors who fought for Japan and to the spirits of those who gave their precious lives for their country. It is thanks to them that we are able to enjoy the peaceful and plentiful lifestyle we have today.

On the other hand, there are those who call the Greater East Asia War “that stupid war.” They probably believe that even without fighting a war we could have achieved today’s peaceful and plentiful society. It is as if they think that all of our country’s leaders at that time were stupid. We undertook a needless war and many Japanese citizens lost their lives. They seem to be saying that all those who perished actually died in vain.

However, when you look back at the history of mankind, you understand that nothing is as simple as that. Even today, once a decision is made about an international relationship it is extremely difficult to overturn that. Based on the US-Japan Security Treaty, America possesses bases even in Japan’s capital region of Tokyo. Even if Japan said they wanted those bases back, they would not be easily returned. In terms of our relationship with Russia as well, the Northern Islands remain illegally occupied even after more than sixty years. And Takeshima remains under the effective control of South Korea.

The Tokyo Trials tried to push all the responsibility for the war onto Japan. And that mind control is still misleading the Japanese people sixty-three years after the war. The belief is that if the Japanese army becomes stronger, it will certainly go on a rampage and invade other countries, so we need to make it as difficult as possible for the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) to act. The SDF cannot even defend its own territory, it cannot practice collective self-defense, there are many limitations on its use of weapons, and the possession of offensive weaponry is forbidden. Compared to the militaries of other countries, the SDF is bound hand and foot and immobilized.

Unless our country is released from this mind control, it will never have a system for protecting itself through its own power. We have no choice but to be protected by America. If we are protected by America, then the Americanization of Japan will be accelerated. Japan’s economy, its finances, its business practices, its employment system, its judicial system will all converge with the American system. Our country’s traditional culture will be destroyed by the parade of reforms. Japan is undergoing a cultural revolution, is it not? But are the citizens of Japan living in greater ease now or twenty years ago? Is Japan becoming a better country?

I am not repudiating the US-Japan alliance. Good relations between Japan and the United States are essential to the stability of the Asian region. However, what is most desirable in the US-Japan relationship is something like a good relationship between parent and child, where they come to each other’s aid when needed, as opposed to the kind of relationship where the child remains permanently dependant on the parent.

Creating a structure where we can protect our country ourselves allows us to preemptively prevent an attack on Japan, and at the same time serves to bolster our position in diplomatic negotiations. This is understood in many countries to be perfectly normal, but that concept has not gotten through to our citizens.

Even now, there are many people who think that our country’s aggression caused unbearable suffering to the countries of Asia during the Greater East Asia War. But we need to realize that many Asian countries take a positive view of the Greater East Asia War. In Thailand, Burma, India, Singapore, and Indonesia, the Japan that fought the Greater East Asia War is held in high esteem. We also have to realize that while many of the people who had direct contact with the Japanese army viewed them positively, it is often those who never directly saw the Japanese military who are spreading rumors about the army’s acts of brutality. Many foreigners have testified to the strict military discipline of the Japanese troops as compared to those of other countries. It is certainly a false accusation to say that our country was an aggressor nation.

Japan is a wonderful country that has a long history and exceptional traditions. We, as Japanese people, must take pride in our country’s history. Unless they are influenced by some particular ideology, people will naturally love the hometown and the country where they were born. But in Japan’s case, if you look assiduously at the historical facts, you will understand that what this country has done is wonderful. There is absolutely no need for lies and fabrications. If you look at individual events, there were probably some that would be called misdeeds. That is the same as saying that there is violence and murder occurring today even in advanced nations.

We must take back the glorious history of Japan. A nation that denies its own history is destined to pursue a path of decline.

The last sentence of his essay is ironic given that Japan has been in economic and social decline since the late 1980s, which happens to be around the same period when fringe ideologies were becoming part of the mainstream political and historical discourse in Japan.

Tibet: FAQs and Assorted Myths

Tibet: True or False?
by Mila Marcos and Michel Collon
July 1, 2008

Tibet is an Integral Part of China

“Historic Tibet”: the megalomanical “Greater Tibet” territorial claims of Tibetan independence ultranationalists

The China Desk: Below is a highly informative Q&A Session on Tibet. FYI.

URL:
http://www.michelcollon.info/articles.php?dateaccess=2008-06-26%2014:54:30&log=articles

IMPRIMER MAINTENANT !
TIBET : true or false?
Test how the media informed you
Mila Marcos and Michel Collon

The goal of these media tests is neither to shock nor create a scandal. All beliefs deserve respect. The goal is to allow each of us to determine for ourselves a decisive question: is what I believe based on reliable information? Or did someone try to manipulate public opinion on these big questions?
What makes a good judge? Someone who listens attentively to the contending parties, leaves her prejudices outside, makes up her own mind, and checks the reliability of each document, of each witness. Wouldn’t a media reader or viewer find it helpful to follow this same method?

1. “BEFORE THE CHINESE INVASION, THE TIBETAN PEOPLE LIVED IN HARMONY WITH THEIR NOBILITY IN A SOCIAL ORDER INSPIRED BY RELIGIOUS TEACHINGS.”

FALSE. Religious doctrines imposed the superior position of the rich noble and the inferior position of the impoverished peasant, the low-ranking monk, the slave and all women, presenting this ranking as the inevitable outcome of karmic virtues and vices of successive former lives.

This religious ideology justified a feudal class order: serfs worked without pay for life on the grounds of the lord or the monastery, unable to move without permission. All life events–marriage, death, birth, a religious festival, to own an animal, to plant a tree, to dance, or to enter or leave prison–were pretexts for heavy taxes. Debts passed from father to son and to grandson. Those who failed to pay were reduced to slavery.

Fugitives and thieves were tracked by a small professional army. Favorite punishments: tearing out the tongue or the eye, slicing the tendon at the knee, etc. There tortures were not ended until 1959, at the time of democratic reforms decided in Beijing.

2. “IN 1951, CHINA INVADED TIBET.”

FALSE. The term “invasion” assumes that there are two countries. However, since the 13th century, the Mongols had annexed Tibet to China. As of the 17th century, it was one of the eighteen provinces of the Chinese Empire. And each new Dalai Lama received his “seal” of office from the Chinese Emperor.

At the end of the 19th century, the British Empire invaded Tibet and installed its trade representatives there. The thirteenth Dalai Lama took advantage of this to assert Tibet’s independence. No Chinese party nor any country in the world took this request seriously. As of 1949, the U.S. State Department still declared Tibet and Taiwan integral parts of China.

This all changed when, led by Mao Zedong, China became socialist. The same U.S. State Department then wrote: “Tibet has become strategically and ideologically important. Since the independence of Tibet can aid the fight against Communism, it is of our interest to recognize it as independent rather than regarding it as belonging to China.” But, it added: “The situation would change if a government in exile is created. In this case, it is in our interest to support it without recognizing Tibet’s independence. To recognize the independence of Tibet, yes or no, is not the true question. It is about our attitude towards China.”

3. “AS SOON AS SOCIALIST CHINA TOOK OVER THE DIRECTION IN 1951, THE DALAI-LAMA AND THE TIBETAN NOBILITY LOST ALL THEIR POLITICAL POWER IN TIBET.”

FALSE. In 1951, Beijing and the local government of Tibet signed an accord on the peaceful liberation of Tibet. The Dalai Lama wrote a poem about the glory of President Mao Zedong and telegraphed him: “The local government, the lamas and the lay population of Tibet unanimously support the accord of 17 articles.” It is within this framework that the Peoples Liberation Army entered Tibet.

The agreement foresaw the continuation of serfdom in Tibet under the authority of the Dalai Lama. The monasteries, the Dalai Lama and the officials would keep their possessions: 70 percent of the land. Beijing would control military questions and international relations. The local Tibetan government, composed of lamas and lords, negotiated and accepted the agreement. The Dalai Lama took the post of vice-president of the Parliament of all China, which he accepted without problems.

4. ”IN 1959, 83.000 DIED IN THE BATTLE OF LHASA.”

FALSE. To understand the sequence of events: while in Tibet, eastern feudalism continued, in the neighboring provinces where minorities Tibetans coexist with of Han, Hui, Yi, Naxi, Qiang, Mongols…, land reform got underway at the beginning of the 1950s. The lands of the great landowners were confiscated and redistributed to the poor peasants. With few conflicts, as the socialist State pays an income to the ex-owners. Resistance came from Tibetan lamas and nobility in these areas. They refuse to give up their privileges.

In 1956, they launched an armed rebellion starting from the monastery of Litang in Sichuan province. After skirmishes with the Red Army, a part of the Tibetan elite of Sichuan flees to Tibet and spreads rumors of “red terror.” From the beginning, the CIA financed and supported the uprising. Armed militia were trained in Colorado, parachuted into Tibet, and supplied with weapons by air. The bloody events of this period were indeed a struggle of the privileged classes, organized by the CIA.

In 1959, the rumor that,“The Chinese will kidnap the Dalai Lama,” sparked a large demonstration in Lhasa. In reality, the CIA had already organized the Dalai Lama’s flight towards India. The demonstrators lynched some Tibetan officials, and the Red Army crushed the riot. How many deaths in Lhasa? Three thousand according to testimonies collected by the political economist Henry Bradsher (pro-independence). Sixty-five thousand, claimed the Dalai Lama in 1959. Then, it will pass to eighty-seven thousand. However, at that time Lhasa only had a maximum of forty thousand inhabitants. It is true that after the riot, ten thousand Tibetans were sent to spend eight months doing forced labor to build the first hydro-electric power station in Ngchen. But the unsubstantiated figures continued to circulate. In 1984, the Tibetan government in exile used the figure of « 432.000 Tibetains dead during the battles with the Red Army between 1949 and 1979 » !

5. “INDIA INITIALLY REFUSED TO GRANT THE DALAI-LAMA POLITICAL ASYLUM.”

TRUE. Starting in 1949, the United States tried to convince the Dalai Lama to go into exile, with the assistance of his two brothers (recruited by the CIA in 1951) and of the German adviser Heinrich Harrer (former SS). It would take ten years before he agreed to take refuge in India with the layer of privileged dignitaries who will make up the exiled Tibetan community.

But neighboring India hardly wanted to grant him asylum. President Eisenhower then proposed to introduce 400 Indian engineers to U.S. nuclear technology. The Indian leader Nehru accepted this deal. In 1974, first Indian A-bomb was given the cynical nickname of “smiling Buddha”.

6. “THE CHINESE OCCUPATION CAUSED THE VIOLENT DEATH OF 1.2 MILLION TIBETANS.”

FALSE. Two major facts contradict this figure, which the Western world has accepted without proof for thirty years.

1. The Tibetan population pyramid in 1953 was estimated as at maximum 2.5 million inhabitants in Tibet and in neighboring provinces. If 1.2 million Tibetans had been killed between 1951 and the beginning of the 70s, most of Tibet would have been depopulated. And there would be a great imbalance between men and women. But demographers note no such anomaly and the population doubled to almost six million Tibetans in China today.

2. The only person who had access to the files of the Tibetan government in exile was Patrick French, when he directed Free Tibet in London. Documents in hand, French concluded that the evidence of the “ Tibetan genocide” had been falsified. The battles of 1959 had been counted several times and the figures of deaths added in the margins afterwards. He denounced this falsification, but the figure continued to circulate in the world…

7. “RELIGIOUS PRACTICE WAS PROHIBITED DURING THE CULTURAL REVOLUTION.”

TRUE. Between 1966 and 1976, all religious practices were prohibited not only in Tibet, but in all China. The monasteries were closed, the monks had to return to their families of origin and devote themselves to productive work, primarily farming. It is not true that all the temples and monasteries were “razed to the ground.” But the Red Guards, young Tibetan intellectuals who followed the general movement in China, destroyed many objects of worship.

When that turned chaotic, the army stepped in and restored social and economic order. The Chinese government publicly admitted the errors of this period and financed the restoration of all Tibet’s religious patrimony. The monasteries were repopulated. Two thousand lamaseries were restored and are functioning in China.

8. “THE DALAI-LAMA IS A SORT OF POPE OF WORLD BUDDHISM.”

FALSE. The Dalai Lama represents neither Zen Buddhism (Japan), nor Southeast Asian Buddhism, nor Chinese Buddhism. In fact, Tibetan Buddhism represents less than 2 percent of the world’s Buddhists. In Tibet itself, there are four separate Buddhist sects, the Dalai Lama belonging to one of them, the gelugpa (yellow bonnets).

When he visited London in 1992, the largest British Buddhist organization accused him of being a “pitiless dictator” and an “oppressor of religious freedom.” This “Pope” seems to have few religious disciples, but many political followers…

9. “THE DALAI LAMA CLAIMS A QUARTER OF CHINA’S TERRITORY.”

TRUE. Although he had recently said he would be satisfied with a kind of autonomy, in his books, he claims a “Grand Tibet,” double the size of that where the Dalai Lamas exerted local political power in the past. This territory would incorporate the whole province of Qinghai and the parts of the provinces Gansu, Yunnan and Sichuan, in which one finds Tibetan minorities among other nationalities.

By what methods? By driving out the non-Tibetan populations? Practicing ethnic cleansing? Yes. The Dalai Lama declared textually in the U.S. Congress in 1987: “7.5 million settlers must leave.” It is not a question of settlers, because the populations of these areas have been mixed for centuries. In any case, this expansionist project would carry out what all the colonial powers have sought to do for 150 years: to dismember China.

10. “DONATION FROM CHARITABLE AND HUMANITARIAN NGO’S FINANCE THE TIBETAN MOVEMENT.”

FALSE. The Tibetan movement indeed receives such gifts, but its principal financier is the government of the United States. Between 1959 and 1972, the CIA poured $1.7 million into the “Tibetan government in exile” and $180,000 dollars per annum for the Dalai Lama. This he denied for a long time, but ended up acknowledging it.

From then on and still today, the payments were more discreet, through cover organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy, Tibet Fund, State Department’s Democracy Bureau… Another important sponsor: George Soros through Albert Einstein Institute, directed until recently by ex-colonel Robert Helvey of the U.S. secret services.

11. “THE SUPPORT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DALAI LAMA IS JUSTIFIED BY STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES.”

TRUE. Ruling U.S. circles see China as their principal enemy. Now China is certainly an essential economic partner, but also, in the long term, a principal factor resisting U.S. world domination. The USA predict that China will catch them up as a world power about 2030. They must then absolutely prevent Asians from creating a Common Market tied to China that would evade U.S. control.

These people dream that they can break up China as they did the USSR. Their goal is to control the economic wealth, the labor power and the largest market of the world. To weaken China, the U.S. has a two-track strategy. On the one hand, to encircle China with military bases. In addition, to encourage separatist movements and all kinds of opposition. They begin with media demonization campaigns. That’s why they invest greatly in the question of Tibet.

12. “THE DALAI LAMA PUBLICLY DEFENDED THE FORMER FASCIST DICTATOR OF CHILE AUGUSTO PINOCHET.”

TRUE. British police arrested Pinochet in England, based on an international warrant for crimes against humanity issued by Spanish Judge Baltasar Garzón. In this occasion, the Dalai Lama actively recommended the British government to release him and stop him from being tried. Pinochet also was a long-term employee of the CIA.

The Dalai Lama is indeed a pawn of the United States. In 2007, George Bush presented the Dalai Lama a Congressional Gold Medal, the highest civilian award given by the U.S. Congress. His holiness praised Bush for his efforts in the whole world on behalf of freedom, democracy and human rights. He called the United States “a champion of democracy and freedom.”

13. “REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS GIVES DISINTERESED SUPPORT TO THE DALAI LAMA.”

FALSE. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) presents itself as a defender of freedom for journalists, and many of its small contributors believe they are supporting an independent and objective organization. But the funds for helping oppressed journalists amounts to only 7 percent of the total budget. The remainder goes to political campaigns.

Behind these campaigns is dirty money. Actually, the boss at RSF, Robert Ménard, uses a double standard when he defends human rights. He criticizes Venezuela and Cuba by distorting facts? Why? He received financings from the Cuban counterrevolutionaries in Miami. He criticizes China for his policy in Tibet? Why? He received 100.000 dollars from the anti-communists of Taiwan. On the other hand, he is more than timid towards the United States, which killed the greatest number of journalists these last few years. Why? He is financed by the CIA through the NED as we already mentioned.

Similarly, Ménard forced RSF to cease criticizing the French media. Why? He is supported financially by the largest French media and some large multinationals. Moreover, the NMPP (owned partially by Lagardere) distribute his albums free. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. Ménard had to admit in 2001: “How, for example,could we organize a debate on the concentration of the press and then ask Havas or Hachette to sponsor it?”

Despite all these suspect financial arrangements, the majority of the mass media continue to relay Ménard’s words massively. On the other hand, UNESCO ceased supporting him, explaining that, “RSF had shown on several occasions an absence of ethics by treating certain countries with very little objectivity.”

14. “CHINA IS COMMITTING CULTURAL GENOCIDE IN TIBET.”

FALSE. Actually, Tibet for a long time has been an autonomous area. Since the 1980s, the culture and the religion of Tibet are practiced freely, children are bilingual, institutes studying Tibet have been opened, lamas, including young children, fill the monasteries. In the streets, believers happily spin their prayer wheels. The language Tibetan is spoken and written by many more people than before the revolution. There are a hundred literary magazines in Tibet. Even Foreign Office magazine, close to the U.S. State Department, acknowledged that 60 to 70 percent of the civil servants are from the Tibetan ethnic group and that bilingualism is common.

In addition, Tibetan culture also experienced new growth in the remainder of China, especially in the fields of language, literature, studies of the everyday life and traditional architecture. China published major collections of books, newspapers and magazines in the Tibetan language. Many publishing houses exist not only in Tibet but also in Beijing. “Cultural genocide” is a political propaganda myth.

15. “THE CONFRONTATIONS OF MARCH 14, 2008 IN LHASA OCCURRED BECAUSE THE POLICE FORCE AND THE CHINESE ARMY VIOLENTLY REPRESSED A PEACEFUL DEMONSTRATION.”

FALSE. All the Western witnesses present on the spot, including journalist James Miles (The Economist) and many tourists attest to it: the violence was started by young Tibetans who the lamas encouraged to commit destructive acts.

These were criminal acts programmed in a racist manner. Several groups, all armed in the same manner (Molotov cocktails, stones, steel bars, and butcher’s knives), all operating in the same way, were spread around Lhasa, and sowed panic by attacking Han (Chinese) and Hui (Moslems). Civilians were burned alive, others beaten to death or cut up. Nineteen died and more than three hundred were wounded. Schools, hospitals and hotels were attacked. Many older Tibetans aided the victims and saved lives.

When these racist violences were exposed, the partisans of the Dalaï-Lama claimed that it was all the work of Chinese soldiers disguised as monks, circulating an alleged “satellite” photograph that was supposed to prove it. We showed that this photograph was a coarse forgery.

The police force and the Chinese army initially remained extremely passive before intervening in force to put an end to the riots. How many became victims there at this time? The Western media spread the figure (“hundreds”) advanced by the partisans of the Dalai Lama.
Some of those the Tibetan government in exile declared “dead” are quite alive today in Tibet. Others were called “Dupont, Charleroi” without being more precise. Other names raised do not exist. The argument goes on.

Translated from French by John Catalinotto

DiYuan Clubhouse at Flushing, NY

On Saturday, I met up with a few friends to do some karaoke at a place called Diyuan Clubhouse in Flushing, NY. Overall, the KTV was advanced, with a computerised system to select songs, trendy private rooms, and a good location. However, the major drawbacks are the poor service, the fact that almost everyone who works at Diyuan does not speak English or Cantonese, and the poor selection of English songs.

I guess the other gripe I had with the place was they overcharged food and drinks. A can of red bull costs about $5 there and the KTV prices are done in such a way that it makes it confusing to pay the bills. For example, they said the KTV would become free if people ordered enough food and drinks to match the hourly rate. So if the rate was $60/hour for a small group of 10-13 people we can theoretically get that hour for free if we ordered $60 worth of food or drinks within the hour.

They are very strict with the hours and they track the exact time spent on the KTV rooms. Despite all these issues, DiYuan is the leading KTV in flushing since its located right near the Flushing Mall, has a big building, and it is part of the popular DiYuan KTVs in China.

What scared me most about DiYuan was this report I found on google:

http://nyc.everyblock.com/restaurant-inspections/by-date/2008/4/16/1003682/

Summary: DI YUAN KARAOKE was inspected on April 16, 2008, and 7 violations were cited, resulting in 33 violation points. Because the restaurant received more than 27 violation points, a follow-up inspection was required. Read more about what this means.

Restaurant inspection details

Location	133-35 ROOSEVELT AVENUE, QUEENS
Inspection date	April 16, 2008
Restaurant name	DI YUAN KARAOKE
Phone	718-539-6666
Violation points	33
Violations	Non-food contact surface improperly constructed Non-food contact surface improperly constructed. Unacceptable material used. Non-food contact surface or equipment improperly maintained. Food contact surface not washed Food contact surface not properly washed, rinsed and sanitized after each use and following any activity when contamination may have occurred. No stem-type thermometer Appropriately scaled metal stem-type thermometer not provided or used to evaluate temperatures of potentially hazardous foods during cooking, cooling, reheating and holding. Spoiled food Food item spoiled, adulterated, contaminated or cross-contaminated. No Food Protection Certificate Food Protection Certificate not held by supervisor of food operations. No work place smoking policy Work place smoking policy inadequate, not posted, not provided. Failure to inform violator. Failure to make good faith effort to inform violator.
Followup inspection required

Yes

I am just glad I didn’t order any of their foods.