JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- ALT - Mie Prefecture - Yokkaichi City - June start
- NPO法人グローバル教育推進機構（GLAD), Mie
- Salary: ¥230,000 / Month For a full working month. Some months differ.
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
0
LFRAgain
I agree with Kazan and Fishy. There's a lot to desired when it comes to the loose translation employed in the English version of this news. It seems either engineered to provoke the most sentational response or the work of a very lazy translator.
Debucho,
Do they now? And you speak from what vast body of personal experience involving the death of a child?
You cannot presume to know what a person would or wouldn't do in the event of one's own child dying, particularly if you felt powerless to stop it due to disasterous financial circumstances.
They were living in a car and shoplifting food, for Pete's sake. Not exactly a situation on par with someone living in a 3LDK.
Posted in: Child's body found in car of couple caught stealing at supermarket
0
LFRAgain
The circumstances surrounding this child's death are certainly horrific, and the parents should bear full reponsibility for what has happened, but I think it's premature and unfair to hop onto our various soapboxes and affix every negative label we can think of to these folks who were living in a car and had to resort to stealing to eat. The truth is we don't know a single thing about what these folk's lives were like up until the point the child's body was discovered.
It's also not a simple matter to claim we would have done anything differently, having never faced similar dire circumstances -- No home, no income, no food. Sure, some of us have been poor in our lives. But I doubt any of us have been as poor as the family in the above article.
Abject poverty . . . and I mean ABJECT poverty of the sort these folks were obviously experiencing for whatever reason can make people do truly desperate things. Wiser people than I would say it's best to reserve judgement until we've walked a mile in the other person's shoes.
Posted in: Child's body found in car of couple caught stealing at supermarket
0
LFRAgain
12yearsensei,
I would ask that you read the article carefully again yourself. You upbraid the author for supposedly lacking intellectual awareness, yet you willingly stumble into your criticisms unarmed with even a rudimentary grasp of the more fundamental aspects of the issue, carrying some sort of anti-liberal chip on your shoulder in a forum that has little to do with American politics, left or right.
The author does not “blame” U.S. policy after the war for Japan’s refusal to apologize (which Japan did . . . several times, speaking of “intellectual awareness”). She writes that U.S. foreign policy towards rebuilding Japan after the war made the chances of an apology Chinese would be happy with increasingly unlikely. And the historical record supports this, as U.S. foreign policy and the War Tribunals essentially answered any and all questions of reparations and contrition, culminating in the San Francisco Treaty, whether those answers were what the Chinese wanted to hear or not. It should also be noted that the Chinese had very little influence on the outcome of the conclusion of the war or the Treaty. This isn’t leftist dogma or liberal revisionism. It’s fact.
You discredit the author’s observations out of hand for supposedly lacking adequate thought, balance, and maturity, but I have to say again, it’s hard to take seriously the criticisms of someone who not only seems unaware of simple historical facts, but also insists on couching those criticisms in some bizarre out-of-the-blue assault on “Liberalism.”
Posted in: Japan, China play Nanjing numbers game that both will lose
0
LFRAgain
This article is so old and tiring. Plus this writer just repeats the most heated aspects of the arguments. Her mixing up all the various WWII issues, such as the Comfort Women and colonization, which are SKorea-Japan issues together with Nanking , a China-Japan issue decimates any credibility she attempts to project. There is an enormous Chinese population that is not hung up on WWII as evidenced by the popularity of Japanese products, culture and food and the long lines to visit the Japan pavillion at the Shanghai Expo. Frankly, a crappy article at the wrong time.
On the contrary, this article is quite timely. Rather than let happen what usually happens when the subject of Nanking and other Japanese Imperial Army atrocities in East Asia is debated, namely bring everything to a standstill as Japanese scholars refuse to go forward towards any meaningful expression of contrition due while they quibble over details, it keeps the issue alive and in proper perspective.
The author states with much-needed clarity:
As it stands, the debate has continued to be a rehash of the something like this:
Chinese Parties: “We would like to have a comprehensive apology for the Japanese Imperial Army’s slaughter of 300,000 unarmed Chinese in the city of Nanking during the War.”
Japanese Parties: “It was only 20,000 slaughtered . . . . . . ”
Chinese Parties: “ . . . . . ?”
Japanese Parties: “What? You certainly can’t expect us to feel sorry until we settle on numbers, can you?”
And the debate rolls on ad nauseum.
Like a master burglar seeking to reduce a stiff prison sentence for 1000 burglaries, because, he states, “I only committed 100 burglaries,”
Or the rapist who seeks to overturn a life sentence for 500 rapes, because, “I only committed 50.”
Or the murderer who seeks clemency from the death penalty for killing 100,000, because, he passionately implores, “I only killed 1000.”
This silliness of Japan trying to knit-pick its way via technicalities out of meaningful dialog and contrition regarding some of the most horrific atrocities of the 20th Century leaves everyone, friends and allies alike, with a bad taste in their mouth at a time when Japan needs to start acting like a leader and less like a petulant child.
Posted in: Japan, China play Nanjing numbers game that both will lose
0
LFRAgain
12 Year Sensei,
Considering there wasn’t a single instance in the above article in which the author attempted to “blame American policy for Japan’s refusal to apologize” (a statement in and of itself wholly inaccurate, since Japan is on record for having apologized numerous times over the years), I find the irony of you presuming to lecture anyone on awareness, balance, and maturity particularly rich. Methinks thou knoweth squat of what thou speaks.
Posted in: Japan, China play Nanjing numbers game that both will lose
0
LFRAgain
The problem with cells phone use while driving has very little to do with not having both hands on the wheel. Like Smith points out, there are a myriad of ways we drive with one hand while we're reaching for something with the other: Putting a CD in, adjusting the navigation system, turning up/down the volume, taking a drink of beverage, popping a piece of gum in your mouth.
The problem with cell phones is that it distracts the driver's attention significantly from what's going on around him or her to the point of being hazardous. Studies have show that someone engaged in a cellphone conversation displays the same lack of awareness as someone who is driving while intoxicated. In some cases the lack of focus is even worse.
What happened with the truck driver is probably a combination of him trying to take a cigarette out of the box with one hand, which isn't an easy feat when you're driving, and looking down to see if he was successful. Whatever the case, those big trucks are in desperate need of stronger regulation on the roads. Truckers and the rigs they drive scare the bejeezus out of me because of accidents just like this.
Posted in: Trucker, trying to smoke, causes 5-vehicle pileup in Tokyo
0
LFRAgain
Midnightpromise,
Apparently you missed the part in the article about lawsuits being filed by U.S. citizens, like Officer Martin Escobar.
Oh, wait. His last name is Escobar. Ahhhh! He's one of "them." And if he isn't with us, he's against us, right?
nudge! nudge! wink! wink!
Gotcha'!
Posted in: Lawsuits challenge new Arizona immigration law
0
LFRAgain
Lovely piece of logic there, Alphaape. So, if one doesn't have the presence of mind to just follow orders, even in the face of a perceived violation of Constitutionally guaranteed rights, then he or she is consequently not good enough to wear a badge? He's a cop, not a Marine. Cops exist to uphold civil law, and there is no law greater in the United States than the Constitution. Your "Shut up and follow orders" refrain sounds surprisingly totalitarian, don't you think?
The centerpiece of anti-immigration thought, and conservative thought in general, always seem to revolve around the idea that if the rights of the few or even the many are trampled in order to preserve a steady cash flow for the privileged, then it’s a fair trade. Many would disagree. This Arizona law won’t see the light of 2011.
"Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power." -- Ben Franklin
Posted in: Lawsuits challenge new Arizona immigration law
0
LFRAgain
jgarbuz,
You obviously have me mistaken for someone who speaks any dialect of "God is great." I don't give two stones about territory claims based on religious rhetoric or propaganda, so your exhortations regarding the Koran, the Bible, or any other piecemeal, self-contradictory, anthology of local parables, metaphors, and campfire tales written and compiled long after the fact are for naught.
I know it may surprise or even shock you that there could be anyone in this world who doesn't buy into this nonsense we lovingly call religion, but believe you me, it's going to take the efforts of those whole lean far closer to my way of thinking than yours to find solutions that won't end in the needless deaths of millions of Israelis and Arabs.
I also find it quite telling the lengths you will go to in order to misconstrue and twist the historical record showing that Muslim, Christian and Jewish communities have lived in the Palestine region in relative peace for some 2500 years since the first Israel was effectively conquered. This is a transparent attempt to de-legitimize the property rights of people who were displaced by Israel’s creation in 1948, and it doesn’t impress me in the least.
That you can deny the rights of the de facto inhabitants of that region based on the petty semantics of what a “Palestinian” actually is, while laying claim on Palestinian lands based on little more than a 2500-year-old “I got dibs” claim chit tucked away in a the Jewish holy book is sad and unreasuring.
I'm certain your forefathers who dreamt of an Israeli state also dreamt of a world in which Israeli children would have to live in fear of daily rocket attacks, suicide bombers, and a distant but looming threat of nuclear annihilation for the rest of their natural lives. They must have dreamt it, or why else would they have knowingly placed their grandchildren, great grandchildren, and all future generations of Israelis in perpetual peril through a land grab that at its moral, ethical, and legal core, is fundamentally unjust?
At any rate, I will choose to bow out here. While you deal in religious absolutes to justify your position, I prefer to deal in modern and internationally recognized conventions of right versus wrong. Israel, IMHO, has chosen to place itself squarely in the camp of wrong in its pursuit to wrest away the property of others via force. You no doubt are very firm in your conviction that this theft of land can be justified by ancient texts written by and for Jews (convenient that, BTW). With that representative attitude, good luck with that quest towards a secure Israeli nation. Israel's going to need all the luck it can get.
Posted in: Israel rejects U.S. calls for east Jerusalem freeze
0
LFRAgain
jgarbuz,
Wait, Which is your supposed enemy here? Muslims or Arabs? Or do you just sort of lump them all into the same group for convenience's sake? You assume the rest of the world believes this to be a conflict between two opposing faiths, and it isn’t. It’s a debate over property rights -- not in a “prophesized homeland” sense, but in a legal one. This isn’t about religion and never has been.
Yes, certainly, Islam groups have seized upon the opportunity to make this a religious debate to pursue selfish aims, but that wouldn’t be an accurate description of Palestinian goals. They just want their land back.
In the meantime, please point out where I made any factual errors regarding the history of Israel or what rights it does or doesn’t have.
Again, what are these rights you speak of? And where are they enumerated? Also, would you be so kind as to explain how those rights supercede the rights of a people already living for tens of generations on the very land Jews want to claim as their own?
This isn’t a clash between the Koran and the Bible. Your attempts to cast this conflict as some sort of holy war is a transparent effort to legitimize Jewish claims to the land Israel currently occupies, which from every legal and moral standpoint (points, I might add, you chose to ignore) wasn’t fairly or judiciously given to Jews in the first place. Ultimately, this desire to view the conflict in the black and white realm of religious differences makes both parties, Jews and Arabs, two sides of the same uncompromising, irrational coin, i.e., religious zealots.
The other problem with turning this into some sort of religious conflict is that you effectively give every crackpot, fanatical, zealot with a bomb and a plan a reason to attack Israel. Since the battle of “My God can beat up your God” is now being waged in the Nuclear Age, it’s probably not too wise to shout out religious proclamations of legitimacy from the nearest rooftop. To do so is essentially begging someone to prove you wrong with a bang.
So, this isn’t about religion. At least not from the standpoint of the Palestinians who are attempting to regain some semblance of control over lands their great, great, great grandparents tilled.
Aside from the fundamentally flawed assumption that Israel has any sort of right to Palestinian lands, to state that any sort of criticism of Israel automatically negates friendship is patently shallow, don’t you think? Again, which friend would you rather have? One who tells you only what you want to hear, or one who tells you the truth?
Regarding Jerusalem:
Wonderful. A 130-year Jewish majority. Versus a one thousand year span of being a non-Jewish majority. What’s your point here? Are you really going to try and trot out the “We’ve been there longer” argument? You’d lose.
This statement is so arrogantly racist that it doesn’t deserve any more comment than to simply call it what it is. Let’s try to keep this mature, shall we?
Posted in: Israel rejects U.S. calls for east Jerusalem freeze
0
LFRAgain
jgarbuz,
Aaaaaaaand THIS is right about where most reasonable people start looking for the exits. Sorry, but in this day and age, Israel is going to have to provide a far more compelling reason to claim a certain stretch of land than one steeped in ancient religious dogma.
It's also very hard to take seriously claims of a near-mystical all-encompassing unity across the Jewish Diaspora, a construct and idea that at its very core presumes the superiority of, well, one arbitrary and entirely subjective definition of a group of people, Jews, over, well, regular folks like me. Sorry, but unless you can prove it with verifiable and quantifiable data, you aren't any more "special" than me or the Palestinians Israel hopes to supplant. It's high time Israel accepted that. "We are the chosen people" sounds as irrational and unpredictably frightening as anything from radical Muslims.
No one has said Israel was the property of the U.S. I said that the United States has supported Israel heavily since its inception, and that that support has resulted in Israel transforming into a regional bully. Your hyperbole serves no purpose other than the deflect the question from one of friends respecting one another to one of a stronger power dominating another . . . Which is ironic considering Israel’s stance towards Palestine.
It really doesn’t help your argument to ignore the likelihood that the greatest single factor influencing world opinion regarding Israel in 1947 was not some universal epiphany that, “Hey, Jews are right! Israel really does belong to the Jews,” but rather a universal realization that some sort of safe haven needed to be created for Jews experiencing the worst persecution in their history. Do keep in mind that the general attitude throughout Europe and reaching even the shores of the United States was one decidedly unfriendly towards Jews, even after WWII.
Illegally? The land Israel sits on today was handed over to Jews by a League of Nations that included few Arab states, among which none supported handing their own territory over to someone else. Talk about illegal. In the rush to give Jews safe haven, nobody bothered to really consider the people they would ultimately displace. Funny that. So please refrain from preaching here about illegalities if you’re going to conveniently overlook that fact.
Of course they did. The very legal (and moral) premise of Israel’s creation was flawed from the start, predicated on the idea that Britain possessed the right to hand out parcels of Middle-Eastern land like popcorn at a county fair.
That’s never going to happen as long as Israel continues to build settlements in a slow, but inexorable expansion into Palestinian territories. When -- not if – but when a major Middle Eastern power gains possession of nuclear weapons, Israel is going to be forced to concede this point. Call me a cynic, but I sadly believe (and I by no means hope for this outcome) that peace will never come as long as Israel continues to push into Jerusalem. For Israel, it’s a religious destiny argument. For Palestinians, it’s a “You took our homes” argument. I can see no reasonably way for these two viewpoints to be reconciled without MAJOR concessions on the part of both parties. But that's not going to happen considering the amount of vitriol and hatred that's been allowed to fester over the past 60 years. It's going to get worse before it gets better, I'm afraid.
Again, either by willful ignorance or calculated obstinacy, you seem all too willing to overlook the moral truth that the mandate over Palestine bestowed upon Britain by the League of Nations in 1922 was not the League's to give in the first place. You’re arguing for civilized adherence to late 20th Century rules of international law based on an intrinsically flawed and immoral application of 19th Century imperialist conquest. There’s no reconciling the two.
Yes, sir. Yes, they do, something Israel would do well to consider. After all, a friend is one who launches satellites for you when you pay them enough. A real friend is one who places themself between you and your worst enemies. Which friend does Israel want?
Posted in: Israel rejects U.S. calls for east Jerusalem freeze
0
LFRAgain
Precisely. Most, if not all of the legalese in this new law are already codified in federal immigration law. So why bother?
Basically, the biggest thing this law does is deputized local police to act as immigration officials. I suspect this is the area where opponents will attack the legislation, namely in that it gives federal powers to local authorities.
As if Arizona police don't already have enough on their plates, now they have to act as immigration police as well? Janet Napolitano is correct. This law is not only going to piss off a lot of legitimate American citizens, but it's also going to hurt the general populace in terms of decreased service from police bodies.
I agree that something most definitely needs to be done about the illegal immigration problem plaguing the American Southwest. Molenir stated it well in that Americans don't mind people coming to the US, since we really are a nation of immigrants. But the immigration has to be regulated somehow. Willy-nilly influxes across a long border does little to help anyone, including illegal immigrants who relegate themselves to second-class citizenship by the very virtue of having to sneak around and stay beneath the radar of authorities. However, I just don't think this ham-fisted legislation is the best way to effect change.
Posted in: Furor grows over Arizona's new immigration law
0
LFRAgain
jgarbuz,
Your hypothesis assumes that an Israel willing to use nuclear weapons against its enemies emerged from a vacuum. However, it has been Israel’s long and close relationship with the U.S. and its pocketbook that have shaped Israeli foreign policy to this very day. Being the recipient of over $114 billion in U.S. aid since 1949, including an August 2007 promise of military aid over ten years worth $6 billion, everything Israel is and ever will be are due to the assistance and continuing goodwill of the United States. To that point, to claim that these two nations are not allies due to a lack of formal diplomatic paperwork is sheer fantasy.
Israel’s hubris in pushing past treaty-bound territorial borders is precisely because it counts on the continued goodwill of the United States to protect Israel in the event things get out of hand. The reason Israel feels it can count on this aid is because of a correct assumption that the United States wants and needs to maintain a forward military presence in the Middle East via Israel. It’s a mutually parasitic relationship, but it is what it is.
Quite frankly, I’m not surprised Israel is a bit quick on the trigger, seeing enemies all around. After all, its people have to reconcile their very existence with the fact that their nation was effectively build on stolen land. It’s kind of difficult to maintain the moral high ground when you working from a position of being wrong from get-go. This reality does not evaporate with time or generous coats of religious dogma to perpetuate the illusion of legitimacy.
The more Israel continues to presume upon the benevolence of its friends, the worse their footing is going to become in the international community. Those two buildings you spoke of? There are a relatively large number of Americans, many influential, who have made the reasonable assumption that those buildings were brought down precisely because of the United States’ relationship with an increasingly belligerent and recalcitrant Israel. There will come a point when Americans will demand their leaders reassess the question of whether or not that relationship is worth it anymore. And that tipping point is coming sooner than later.
Posted in: Israel rejects U.S. calls for east Jerusalem freeze
0
LFRAgain
hworta269,
America and the rest of the world have a right when those so-called allies continues to prod and provoke neighbors who may experience little if any reservation in dropping a nuclear weapon on Israel's head in a one-shot game of "If we can't live here, then no one can."
America also has a responsibility since it's 40 years of U.S. support, and a presumption of continued support, right or wrong, that has given Israel the cojones to behave like the schoolyard bully of the Middle East.
It also doesn't help when Israel uses its own undeclared nuclear weapon stockpile as an implied threat while it eats up more real estate, essentially delivering the classic bully line, "You gotta' problem with me? What'cha gonna' do about it?"
Again, screw Israel. They stopped being allies and started being trouble-causing a-holes a long time ago.
Posted in: Israel rejects U.S. calls for east Jerusalem freeze
0
LFRAgain
djuice,
I'm perfectly aware that the U.S. provides medical, financial, and military support for Israel. That's the point of my hypothesis. I was suggesting that if the U.S. were to withhold its support, Israel might be a lot less obnoxious towards its neighbors.
Posted in: Israel rejects U.S. calls for east Jerusalem freeze
0
LFRAgain
The Israeli people and Israeli leadership have no interest in peace in the Middle-East. All they are concerned about is seizing by force even more of the land surrounding what they were illegally given by Britain. Any moral authority or mandate Jewish refugees ever had on the eve of Israel's creation long since evaporated with the first expansion of "settlements" outside of 1948 treaty-proscribed boundaries.
Screw 'em. If they want to continue pursuing this 21st Century version of Imperialist conquest, let's see how enthusiastic they remain without the backing of the United States.
Posted in: Israel rejects U.S. calls for east Jerusalem freeze
0
LFRAgain
manfromamerica,
What? No reply? No witty retort? No label impugning my American-ness?
Posted in: Obama slams Wall Street ways while asking support
0
LFRAgain
Couldn't agree more. Thing is, there's no collective national consensus, much less will to address the underlying problem. The mixed message being broadcast loud and clear to Mexican nationals is: "Stay out! *. . . UNLESS* you're willing to pick my fruits and vegetables, clean my yard, and raise my kids for pennies on the dollar. In which case I won't tell if you don't. But if Immigration rolls around, you're on your own. Besides, I can just get a new one of you tomorrow if you get deported."*
But no matter how many laws you pass, no matter how many Minute Men you put on the border, no matter how big a wall you erect, as long as there are Americans willing to hire these people, they will come.
It's seems the climate of blame-the-other-guy is firmly entrenched even in something like immigrants crossing a boarder to fill jobs that can't be filled locally. The onus to change things falls squarely on the shoulders of the cheap, tight-wad, self-important AMERICANS who hire illegal immigrants, and the whole of American society that turns a blind eye as long as prices are kept down.
(Sorry if that's too lecture-ish for you, jruaustralia, but I've got plenty more to add . . . )
Posted in: Arizona governor signs immigration enforcement bill
0
LFRAgain
jruaustralia,
Apparently you think this new law will magically solve the problem. Care to explain how?
Posted in: Arizona governor signs immigration enforcement bill
0
LFRAgain
Right. And I've got some beach front property in Arizona to sell you. Cheap! ;-)
The fundamental problem with illegal immigration has a lot in common with the free market system. The market determines supply and demand. As long as there's work to be had across on this side of the border, people will continue to cross that border. There are countless agricultural businesses all across Southwest that employ large numbers of illegals. And the American owners continue to utilize illegal labor with impugnity.
"But no, we can't punish our own now, can we? That would be un-American. So we'll turn our wrath on the defenseless."
If there are jobs, the workers will come. If the locals worker won't do those jobs, then others with the intestinal fortitude to work hard will. Simple as that. When Americans reach a point where they no longer believe they're too precious for manual labor, or, god forbid, agricultural work, then maybe we'll see a drop in illegal immigration from the south.
But until then, as long as the laws continue to skirt the real issues, this problem will continue. No fence is going to stop it. No half-baked "Minute Man" idiocy is going to stop it. And no law giving state police sweeping new powers to infringe on the privacy rights of U.S. citizens is going to help it.
Posted in: Arizona governor signs immigration enforcement bill