Having a great interest in history, I naturally read the article in the Korea Times today `Tsushima Controlled by Ancient Korean Kingdom’ and found Prof. Lee Hyun-bok’s reference material extremely amusing.
I am not quite sure what Prof. Lee was hoping to achieve with his proof. He is said to have stated that Homer Hulbert’s book, “History of Korea” [1905] should be used as “important historical evidence in disproving Japan??s claim to Korea??s easternmost islets in the East Sea.” He further stated that:
“What we should do to counter Japan??s groundless claim over the Tokto islets is to find more historical facts, instead of just holding emotional and nationalistic protests.????
Perhaps we should talk a little about Homer Hulbert. Personally I think that he was a good man who really loved Korea, after all he is buried here and I have visited his grave more times than I can remember. He was chosen by Emperor Kojong to try and persuade President Roosevelt to come to Korea’s assistance in 1905 - which he failed at, not because of his faults, but because the President had deemed Korea not worth saving because Korea could not or would not defend itself. Homer Hulbert then went on his own personal campaign to highlight the faults of Japanese rule over Korea - the crimes that the Japanese committed as they raped Korea of its resources. Homer Hulbert was an extremely educated man - but he was also known for being blind to two sides of an issue.
Horace Allen, the American Minister to Korea and one of early American pioneers in Korea wrote about Hulbert in less than glowing terms. Morgan, Allen’s successor also did not speak too highly of Hulbert and found that his point of view was definitely biased against the Japanese. Hulbert wasn’t exactly tolerant of other religious beliefs and often wrote articles with a negative slant when describing the French Catholics in Korea.
With all of that said, I think that Hulbert’s book is a fantastic source of information on Korea’s history, but what I don’t understand is where Prof. Lee’s “historical evidence disproving Japan’s claim” to the islands in the East Sea is found in Hulbert’s book. Is it the highlighted part shown in the picture? Historical facts at their best.
Here’s a historical fact as reported in the Boston Sunday Post - the royal wedding of Emperor Kojong to an American in 1903.
Sphere: Related Content
126 Comments
Wow, I guess the Koreans really appreciated what this man did for the country. Probably a few things named after him or a museum or something. I bet if all the netizens from the Marmot Hole could come up with quite a list of things that Koreans have done over the years to show an appreciation for a guy like him.
On another note, it almost seems, at least the way the story is written, that this professor ?橫discovered?? this book or the passages regarding Tsushima island. But actually he is just reading from the book. Does anybody else wonder what the big deal is. I read that book and it says lots and lots of things. Even a few unflattering things about Korea. I guess those passages aren??t worth discovering from a Korean professor. Anyway, the real kicker is that the time period is about 500 AD. Ummmm who really cares if Korea owned, controlled, populated.. etc that place then. I heard that the Romans once controlled England.
Korea’s target is to become a Hermit Kingdom with China acting as the big brother.
They are doing this same shit as described in today’s paper
[??????] “??????? ? ????? ????????? ?????”?? ??????? ?????
http://www.chosun.com/editoria.....50394.html
to.. Japan.
America views Japan and Taiwan as friends, Korea has failed the friendship test. With America and Japan going going gone, there’s nobody left for Korea to trust other than North Korea. Many Koreans don’t realize if Americans aren’t going to be there, there won’t be no foreign investments from Britain, Canada, Japan, Germany, and France. I think it will be a pretty sad day when they find this out too late.
According to the Korean logic.
Whole Europe must be returned to Italians(Rome)?
But we all now when Koreans say “Ancient Koreans” it is always fabricating from historical records which is written in old Chinese.
Korea has failed the friendship test? For what? Asserting itself toward Washington? Is this part of the you’re either for us or against us policy?
Come on, Korea is the US’s second largest coalition partner in Iraq. If Korea has failed the friendship test, what is needed to pass?
Homer Hulbert clearly earned the right to be a really good foreigner to nationalists like Lee Hyun Bok, given that Lee doesn’t like the McCune-Reschaeur system for romanizing Korean because it was done by foreigners (not even close to entirely, but it has their names on it), and since he is one of those Korean linguists who think Han’geul is so totally superior to all other writing systems - and not just for Korean but for use to write any language - that he has spent some of his summers with a Southeast Asian hill tribe teaching the yougins Han’geul because the tribe lacked a writing system for its language. So there’s a small hill tribe that writes it language with Han’geul, “evidence” of Han’geul’s universal applicability. ??????? ????? ?? ??????? ?? ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??.
If anyone has some recommended readings on early, turn of the century korean history(like the one by Homer Hulbert), would you mind helping me out and posting the title and author?
Admiral Yi, I like your name.
Here’s the Chosun English version just in case you haven’t read it yet:.
http://english.chosun.com/w21d.....50034.html
It could come as no surprise, the Americans traditionally eager to stay away from disputes between Korea and Japan, may increasingly side with Japan. Korea is losing a big leverage and they’re too stupid to realize this.
By the Roh government goes out of power in 2,3 years, it will be too late.
yawn. dokdo makes me sleepy…
Obviously, claiming Tsushima as a Korean is a cheap ploy to counter Takeshima claims. Tsushima claim is a bargaining chip against Japan. It is a childish and amaturish foreign policy display of a nation unbecoming. Koreans need a lot of growing up to do. I couldn’t have written any better, what mizarv wrote above. I guess that makes at least two ’sa hwa dongs’.
Noolji -
Not quite sure if you realized that I wrote the post - and not Mr. Marmot. I assume that your using part of my quote and putting Mr. Marmot’s name behind it indicates that you thought he wrote it:
“blind to the two sides of the issue.??? mr marmot”
However, just in case - I agree completely that Tokdo is Korean territory and I fully agree with Mizarv’s view on the point. I think that Korea needs to wake up and act like an adult-nation and stop playing into the Japanese ploy of making Korea look like an idiot. I am sure that for the most part the Japanese are just rolling over in laughter at the tricks they have Koreans doing. I say trick, because it seems like the same thing I do with my dogs - I tease them by hiding their toys, or tie a string to it and pull it away from them before they can get it.
Somebody posted earlier about some minor little government official who declared Tokdo Day and now everything has erupted over this. The Koreans are now claiming Daemado Day (Tsushima) a tit-for-tat little girls’ game (sorry for the sexist comment). Daemado is extremely friendly to Korea - one of the only places in the world that I have seen two national flags flown with the same respect - the Korean and the Japanese. Why does some minor Korean government official want to endanger this great relationship between Korea and the island.
Orancay - thanks for the background of Prof. Lee. Not to take anything away from the esteemed man (nice to know that someday in the future, while trekking in the South-eastern part of Asia I will be able to speak using Korean) but with what you added I can easily see his [Prof. Lee's] logic in his article -NONE.
‘they may side with japan.’ sa hwa dong
yeah, so? japan ain’t getting tokdo back no matter what bush says. listen, what you think the japanese clinging to america’s jockstrap for? could it have anything to do with seeing their dreams of being the leader of asia disappear before their eyes? could it be their fear of falling back into the chinese orbit? got bad news for the nipponese, no amount of ass licking is going to prevent what will be. sorry.
‘blind to the two sides of the issue.’ mr marmot
and you aren’t? you’ve already admitted to being an apologist for japan.
‘korea has done far more for the us than japan has ever done.’ nulji
You miss the entire point and with your closed mind, you’ll never get it. You calling me a Korean Benedict Arnold doesn’t bother me at all. That’s because you tend to freely throw such name callings at anybody that doesn’t conform to your view of the world. It’s passe and boring. Forget about expecting any kind of intelligent reply to your unintelligent BS.
Right, Kimbob, Like the majority of Koreans, he’s missed the entire point and will never get it. I’ll spell it out.
By pretending to some supposed moral high ground, we are making fools of ourself in front of the entire world. By displaying our angst to the world and playing the eternal victim, we continue to embarrass ourselves and isolate ourselves from the entire world.
Dokdo is Korea’s simply by virtue of the fact that we occupy it. There is no moral issue at stake. All we need to win over world opinion is to act calm and confident and comport ourselves with dignity. But we only seem to know how to expose our insecurities and thereby shoot ourselves in the foot.
There is never any logic or self-interest in our reactions to international events of any kind which is why the president of Seoul National recently wrote that we will long remain on the threshold of being an advanced nation but never make the transition. We think like pigmies but aspire to be giants.
The 2 rocks is NOT a matter of national pride or national interests. It is a measure of our inability to reason.
http://www.japantoday.com/e/?c.....9id=331861
This is getting interesting…
I think dbc, this one comment in your link sums it up just about perfectly. Just imagine what will happen if the US ever leaves this region. It will go to the dogs.
“i just don’t get it why these nations fight each other without looking at what they are supposed to do. japan is crazy by its stupid politician such as koizumi. china is crazy by its unappropriete policy maker. and koreas are especially crazy in all regards. is it humbleness a good heritage of our shared culture?”
Does Japan ever sleep? Let me be the first to suggest to Koizumi’s government a new day - July 4th, USA day. Might as well claim the United States ……hell…., get Canada too…..make a four day holiday just add July 1st to it.
I think that Korea needs to wake up and act like an adult-nation and stop playing into the Japanese ploy of making Korea look like an idiot. I am sure that for the most part the Japanese are just rolling over in laughter at the tricks they have Koreans doing.
Robert, that is a very irresponsible comment. Japan cannot be held to blame for the way Koreans conduct their international diplomacy. I would remind you that since the Choson Era, the Korean ‘method’ of diplomacy (and subsequent disasters) is very similar to what we are seeing now. Blaming the Japanese for everything, including Koreans own actions, will not help Koreans ‘wake up.
‘korea needs to grow up…’
and japan doesn’t? your implication that japan is a mature nation doesn’t wash with me; it’s not just a small prefecture declaring korean territory as their own. the central government was complicit here since shimane’s action falls into the realm of foreign policy. here in the us, states cannot conduct foreign policy. i’m sure the same is nominally true in japan. let me show you and the others why i think many of you are hypocrites:
1. japan declares it owns korean territory. korean reacts by declaring it owns japanese territory. your reaction? to slam korea but say almost nothing about japan. btw, masan is a local government and yet you say ‘korea’. shimane is a prefecture and yet you object to shimane being portrayed as representing japan.
2. your perscription for korea is to simply ignore any provocation by japan, yet you have absolutely no advice for the japanese. why?
what do you have to say to these things, mr neff?
****
the finger chopping was a bit much and the street protests were overdone but the masan declaration was right on the money. it was tit for tat. and korea can use dubious evidence that taemado is theirs as the japanese use dubious evidence to support their claim to dokdo. tit for tat is the name of the game and if japan can play it, so can korea.
****
why does korea have a trade deficit with japan? answer: it buys japanese components for korean products. that’s bound to change as the koreans lean to build them theirselves but why not, in the interim, look for a new supplier? is japan the only country that makes these things? i’ve noticed the french seem eager to do business with korea but seoul keeps snubbing the parisians. i wonder….
****
i’ll stop calling you ’sa hwa dong’, but you remember this all started with your unwarranted comments about me. should you wish to continue with this chonjaeng, you know how to respond. and mizarv is not a sa hwa dong for he’s certainly no korean. that’s why i’ve stopped posting to him and ignore large parts of his posts for the mind wonders.
lastly, when have you seen a korean who speaks perfect english use the word ‘we’ to talk about korea and koreans? does kimbob do it? nulji? june? Sugar Shin? imperialismsucks?
Nulji — As Mr. Neff pointed out, I didn’t write the post. And while I am, generally, sympathetic to Japan when it comes to some of the arguments over “past history” (and not because I believe Japan is being completely honest, mind you, but because I feel that everyone else is either lying or being extremely selective/subjective with what choose to remember), I happened to agree that Dokdo is part of Korea. I also happened to agree that the Fusosha textbooks present what, at best, could be called an extremely incomplete version of history. My point of disagreement comes over how to handle the situation. In fact, all Seoul’s response has done, aside from possible give President Roh’s support numbers a short-term boost, is give ammunition to the Japanese right, who argue that Koreans are overemotional, unstable, hypernationalistic and dangerous to do business with. Is that true? Of course not. But President Roh hasn’t helped himself. And I willing to bet dollars to donuts that Seoul’s behavior as of late is actually going to increase the number of schools that adopt the Fusosha text, simply because nobody likes it when other states openly try to interfere in their internal affairs. That’s not to say that Seoul shouldn’t take an interest in the matter. It should, and I believe Japanese law does call for sensitivity toward Japan’s neighbors on the past of the Ministry of Education. But just as its a sensitive matter for Seoul, likewise, it’s a sensitive matter for Japan, being essentially an internal matter, and it needs to be handled with due care. What that means is that hyperbole — something we’ve seen a whole lot of the last couple of weeks — will likely backfire, putting Korea’s diplomats in an even bigger hole than the one in which they already find themselves.
Marmot,
Why do you believe Dokdo is part of Korea? And what specifically do you find wrong with the Fusosha textbooks? And why can’t there be a debate on these issues instead of the simply “I believe…, I believe…” argument or the often used “Well, look what the Japanese did in World War II” argument? Or maybe the debate was hidden somewhere among all of the emotional postings on this site and I just missed it?
Mr. Marmot, if you believe that “everyone else is either lying or being extremely selective/subjective with what [they] choose to remember,” why would you say, before getting all the facts straight, that you “agree that Dokdo is part of Korea”? Is it simply because Korea is occupying the islets now?
Curious in Incheon
Oranckay:
??? ?????? ??????? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ???????: ??? ?? ??
(??)????????(???)
err, DONARD
Noodles “Japan declares it owns Korean territory. Korean reacts by declaring it owns Japanese territory”
Shimane prefecture declared a takeshima day. Takeshima Island is internationally recognized as a disputed territory. Japan has declared that it owned Takeshima for 100 years now.
The city of Mason said that Tsushima Island is Korean land. Tsushima has been recognized to be Japanese territory for centuries.
People actually live on Tsushima, and have for centuries. In fact Yi Dynasty Kings (not emperor because Korea had no emperors until Japan forced China to let Korea elevated its king to emperor) signed treaties with Tsushima. Takeshima is a rock and nobody (unless you count the ultra nationalistic kooks) can live there.
It??s not exactly the same thing noodles
I agree, Shakuhachi.
How is Japan playing Korea? By remaining clam in the face of Korea’s tantrums?
Kids throw tantrums to get attention, and they hate it when their mother responds by simply ignoring them. Maybe that is why Koreans are so upset with Japan?
Thanks for your agreeableness, Gerry. I second the the call for marmot to point out some of the issues regarding the textbooks. I have seen some examples of the complaints and they certainly do not ‘distort history’.
“…Koreans are overemotional, unstable, hypernationalistic and dangerous to do business with. Is that true?”
Let’s just say I agree with half that statement.
By the way, today, I went hiking with an American friend of mine who is fairly new to Korea. We stopped at a mountain ledge along the trail to look out over the fogged in scenery below. Sitting on a rock above us were three Korean boys who looked to be about 12 or 13. Expectedly, one of the boys yelled “Hello” and asked in English where we were from. My friend said, “The USA.” The boy responded by saying, “Tokdo is our land,” in Korean, and “F-ck Japanese,” in English. My friend raised his eyebrows and gave me a questioning look. I told him, “Let’s go. I’ll tell you later.” As we were walking away, “One of the boys said in a whisper, “F-ck you.”
I believe Koreans are hypernationalistic and overly emotional, and I believe they do not really have a problem about teaching those traits to their children.
It seems that even young korean children dont like you mr beav. I think you are all Aces.
If I was you I would tell your story to a korean person. I think they can come up with a very good excuse for the little tykes behavior. Perhaps it was your fault. You should be more reasonable. If you dont start brainwashing children when they are young, how do you expect adult koreans to have any beliefs.
When my Canadian friends get called a me-gook-nom, they correct the little ones to that they are not megook but kan-a-da-saram-nom.
on a last note, perhaps those kids are the missing “frog boys”.
As for dangerous to do business with: I don’t think dangerous applies, if it is meant as representing a danger for your physical integrity or your wallet ?? this is neither Vladivostok nor mainland China. That said, doing business here can be a little trying, as Koreans are usually, if not “good” negotiators, at least relentless ones. Negotiating with them implies a mixture of outright lies, chest-thumping, emotional bonding (usually around a full table of food and drinks), moments of (supposed) honesty and the ever-present ???[?????], which I am at a loss to translate accurately (maybe expediency, makeshift, something like that, and then some).
Prolonged exposure to Korean business practices ?? even (or maybe especially) for people who speak the language and know the culture ?? can be dangerous for the mental health, even if it has its good moments. Visiting businesspeople have an even harder time (as opposed to resident ones) because of the added pressure of the schedule (Oh well, your plane is leaving tomorrow morning, and if we don’t get an agreement tonight, we may have to look somewhere else…).
There are bad people, like everywhere else, and the whole BS about “face” (?????[????], like we Westerners ain’t got any!) and ??/bonding leading to an ever-lasting relationship can be misleading (many Korean biz partners will drop you in a New York minute if they find a better deal: very short-term oriented), but once in a while you stumble on very decent people who also treasure the relationship. I’ve been lucky to meet a few, and it is a pleasure to work with them.
On the other hand, for Koreans, doing business with certain countries can be trying, too. In the Kingdom of ?????????!, one does expect prompt answers to queries, and explanations like It is summer here, and people are on vacation or I know this is Friday, but our sales manager took a day off don’t go down easy. Extreme cases like Oh? Your email? Sorry, I haven’t opened our email box this week. We usually do that on Friday. (true story, believe me!) won’t even register…
1. japan declares it owns korean territory. korean reacts by declaring it owns japanese territory. your reaction? to slam korea but say almost nothing about japan. btw, masan is a local government and yet you say ???korea??. shimane is a prefecture and yet you object to shimane being portrayed as representing japan.
-You’re reading into too much of something that it isn’t there. You always do that.
2. your perscription for korea is to simply ignore any provocation by japan, yet you have absolutely no advice for the japanese. why?
- Again, you’re exaggerating. Everyone must be a Jap spy.
****
the finger chopping was a bit much and the street protests were overdone but the masan declaration was right on the money. it was tit for tat. and korea can use dubious evidence that taemado is theirs as the japanese use dubious evidence to support their claim to dokdo. tit for tat is the name of the game and if japan can play it, so can korea.
- Childish tit for tat. It’s getting out of hand. Now the fight is spilling over to the Washington Post. Americans who are reading the two rants must be scratching their heads, what the hell’s this?
why does korea have a trade deficit with japan? answer: it buys japanese components for korean products. that??s bound to change as the koreans lean to build them theirselves but why not, in the interim, look for a new supplier? is japan the only country that makes these things? i??ve noticed the french seem eager to do business with korea but seoul keeps snubbing the parisians. i wonder??.
- What are you proposing here, stop business with Japan?
****
i??ll stop calling you ??sa hwa dong??, but you remember this all started with your unwarranted comments about me.
- “Unwarranted?” Your rants only reinforces my points about you. By the way, I don’t care what you call me.
should you wish to continue with this chonjaeng, you know how to respond. and mizarv is not a sa hwa dong for he??s certainly no korean. that??s why i??ve stopped posting to him and ignore large parts of his posts for the mind wonders.
- I don’t care what mizarv is. But he sure does makes sense.
“That said, doing business here can be a little trying, as Koreans are usually, if not ??good?? negotiators, at least relentless ones.”
I concur. I do business with Koreans, I prefer not to. It’s so difficult to deal with Koreans. Doing business with non-Koreans is stress free compared to doing business with Koreans. I’ve heard even other Koreans say the same thing. I don’t know why Koreans are like that. It’s also hard to work and difficult to work for a Korean boss. They’ll take and take and take if you let them.
For all who think that Roh’s tirade was childish and stupidly undiplomatic, I would point out that the local elections are coming in April. Seems every year around this time, Roh says/does something incredibly stupid, the GNP responds in the worst or lamest way possible, and the Uri Party cleans up in the next election cycle. How many times does Roh and Uri have to do this before people catch on?
And just because the Japan (or the ultra-rightists, anyway) speak quietly and calmly, that hardly means they are being reasonable. I think the Japanese are the kings of passive aggressiveness. Some people there know how to press others’ buttons and do it quite well.
(That said, Dokdo is Korea’s (in fact, if not in theory)… No need for Koreans to get upset. Some old Japanese farts say something stupid, just give them the old ???????? and move on).
Anonymous,
If Dokdo is not Korea’s “in theory,” then what those “old Japanese farts” are saying is not “stupid.”
Sorry, Roh??s tirade WAS childish and stupidly undiplomatic–and duly noted overseas. And when I read stories like this: http://english.chosun.com/w21d.....50027.html
I really despair of the whole situation resolving in Korea’s favor.
there’s way too much seriousness going on in here. hey neffster, i bet you didn’t expect to generate so much blather over such an inoccuous post. not to demean all the replys… mizvarf was most eloquent of all; thread should’ve ended there.
anyways rob, when are we having that beer?
A top Japanese envoy claimed Friday that South Korea’s easternmost islets of Dokdo are Japanese territory and that the body of water between the Korean Peninsula and Japan should be called the “Sea of Japan.”
“These islands are an integral part of Japan, and thus they should be referred to as ‘Takeshima,’” Naoyuki Agawa, minister for public affairs at the Japanese embassy here, said in a contribution to the Washington Post, referring to Dokdo, which is called Takeshima in Japanese. “Japan believes it is essential to refer to this body of water as the ‘Sea of Japan,’ a name used widely by the global community since the early 19th century.”
But many South Koreans still harbor deep resentment against Japan for its brutal colonial rule as it mobilized millions of Koreans as forced laborers and sex slaves.
http://english.yna.co.kr/Engne.....127E1.html
Am I the only one who sees the contradiction in the following statement?
?橫What we should do to counter Japan??s groundless claim over the Tokto islets is to find more historical facts, instead of just holding emotional and nationalistic protests.????
If the Japanese claim on the Tokto islets is so “groundless,” why does the writer feel Koreans need to “find more historical facts” to counter it?
Just curious.
It took decades, but progress made. A landmark decision by a Japanese court for the first time. They admit there was something wrong.
http://english.ohmynews.com/Ar.....1back_url=
Japan was behind the creation of the Korean national anthem, for the purpose of modernizing the primitives.
http://english.ohmynews.com/ar.....53rel_no=1
Wow - I lost a huge post that I was doing in answer to all of this -
I will make it quick
KT
I didn’t think that it would have progressed the way it did. I was actually poking fun at the esteemed Prof.’s comments and reasoning.
Today while looking over Hamel’s journal and another book done by a Dutch mayor who relied on the eyewitness accounts of two other Dutchmen with Hamel I got to wondering why Prof. Lee did not use these books. They are the oldest Western books dealing with Korea that I know of {I believe Cerepedes -spelling and I don’t have access to my notes - did not leave a journal}. Hamel believed that Tsushima [a.k.a Daemado] was once ruled by Korea until about the 5th century when the Japanese occupied it. Seems like that would have been an idea source for him to use instead of Hulbert - but then I got to thinking about the time period - 1600s,…. plus maps from that period [Western] depict Korea as an island so maybe not. Then I read another section and noticed that when some of the Dutch asked the Korean fishermen about the sea to the north-east [East Sea a.k.a Sea of Japan] they were told that the sea was empty with no land - hmmm., doesn’t seem like they were too aware of Ullong Island and Tokdo.
History is a matter of perception - one side can support their views with “facts” and the other side can support their views with “facts” and both sets of facts are probably accurate from a point of perspective. It is the big picture made up of many many small pictures, uncolored by emotion that tells the true story.
Shakuhachi
Robert, that is a very irresponsible comment. Japan cannot be held to blame for the way Koreans conduct their international diplomacy. I would remind you that since the Choson Era, the Korean ??method?? of diplomacy (and subsequent disasters) is very similar to what we are seeing now. Blaming the Japanese for everything, including Koreans own actions, will not help Koreans ??wake up.
You are correct on a lot of what you said - Korea needs to answer for its own actions. Choson did blame many countries for its own misfortune, and in some instances had reason to, while other ways Korea was playing its “Superior inferiority Complex = everyone is always picking on me.”
However - I see this as a deliberate attempt to rile Korea and cause a reaction. If I remember right there are many Japanese who react somewhat negatively to the rememberance of the dropping of the Atom bombs and have protested. I remember several years ago a minor (?) government official invited the Japanese government to attend Pearl Harbor Day - the Japanese declined. You can not tell me in all honesty, especially after the incident last year with the minting of the Tokdo Island stamps and the large campaign in which Koreans sent postcards of protest to the Japanese government, naturally using Tokdo postage stamps, that the local Japanese government (with the tacit support of the main government) didn’t think this would incite the Korean public.?
Oranckay:
???? ?????? ??????? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ???????: ??? ?? ??
(??)????????(???)
err, DONARD
Cute - where is Mickey?
‘i don’t care what mizarv is…’
well, of course, you don’t! he’s ashamed too. it don’t wash off, sa hwa dong. you’re not related to michael jackson are you?
btw, responding by saying ‘you’re reading too much into this.’ is not a response at all. it means you really don’t have one.
why am i always right?
gerry lives in korea? now, tell me gerry don’t need some medication.
you know, some nazis learned all about judaism, it’s culture, it’s heritage. why? so they could destroy it, of course.
kimbob, maybe you and bevers should get together, no?
Lobert:
???? ??????????? ????? ????? ??? ???????!
You see me CUT OFF FINGER for Mickey now, OK?
OK!?
DONARD
noolji “you know, some nazis learned all about judaism, it??s culture, it??s heritage. why? so they could destroy it, of course.”
What are your historical sources for this unlikely claim? I suppose you have studied naziism - to destroy it cor course?
You prove yourself a reliable demonstration of problem tendencies, our nation needs to overcome that stand in the way of our national interests, namely the tendency to rely on rhetoric and resort to sensationalist emotionalism rather than logic to express a view. The result of such behavior is that the more we continue to express our views in this manner, the less compelling our assertions become to world opinion. Two recent events illustrate this:
1- First, a motion was recently put aside by US congress to honor the anniversary of US Korea friendship while similar motions were passed to celebrate 150 years of friendship with Japan and US Taiwon ties. Tired of dealing with Korean intransigence, emotionalism and irrationality, US polititians have had enough of trying to make sense of a foreign policy that is tantamount to coddling the tantrums of hyperactive children.
Koreans have not understood, no less appreciated, the incredible sensitivity andd generosity of the US in dealing with Korea. Last year, for instance, Korea got an unprecedented personal apology from Pres. Bush on a traffic accident. As inappropriate as this gesture was considering the great sensitivity, consideration and transparency with which the US comported itself in dealing with this issue, the US government clearly demonstated its sincere unilateral spirit of friendship and cultural sensitivity through such an act of diplomacy. But the Korean media disdainfully disregarded this, just as they had willfully ignored and misreported the facts of the case itself. Because the facts of the case could not be allowed to stand in the way of the need to whip up anti-foreign sentiment and no appeal to Korean logic or sentiment could make a difference.
2- A second incident: The government has acted to block websites that present the Japanese perspective on Dokdo because of the potential to “damage young people’s minds”. If our claims are so ironclad, why move to prevent objective analysis of the situation? So much for “progressivism”…
The facts were sacrificed to emotion and this is good enough for our people. But it backfires in the larger arena of world opinion because no matter how much we demand the world understand Korea, the rest of the world could not be bothered trying to make sense of our temper tantrums.
The world is laughing and rolling thier eyes at us, Whose fault is that? Think about it, noolji. The fact that you insist on excluding me from your race because of my views speaks volumes about you. Which of us is in fact part of the problem and which part of the solution?
Why does the Tokdo in the first link look smaller than the Tokdo in the second link? Just curious.
Little Tokdo
Big Tokdo
-Beav-Why does the Tokdo in the first link look smaller than the Tokdo in the second link? Just curious.
Little Tokdo
Big Tokdo
Mr Beav, perhaps this is why Koreans young and old don??t like you( but I still like you). If you questions anything about Takeshima, you are attacking all of Korea. As a metaphor, you are making Korea your comfort woman (and not paying her enough!!!) By asking why in one picture of the clearly visible takeshima (90+ Km from Ullongdo) is much larger then the other, you are acting as a toady of Japan. By asking such utter and total nonsense you are stealing history. In fact, by even thinking that those pictures are somewhat odd, you become at least partly responsible for whitewashing history (by using arguable truths in .04% of middle school textbooks) and not apologizing sincerely for legally annexing Korea.
Next time I recommend you point out how beautiful Takeshima is in that picture.
What does “sa hwa dong” mean?
Mizarv, when Noogie Marzipan says he can’t believe you’re really Korean, it’s self-loathing on his part. He can’t accept that a Korean person can be level-headed and self-reflective. Fortunately I know many Mizarvs in Korea, and no Noogies save for the occasional drunk ajossi.
The minor discrepancies in the pictures could have a number of reasons. Different vantage points, different time of day, varying light levels, atmosphereic conditions at the time. The simplest explanation is that the second photo is zoomed in somewhat and resized. I don’t agree with Noolji, but this kind of boorish insinuation that there is foul play on Korea’s part is somewhat absurd Gerry. Takeshima was being sarcastic when he called you a Japanese toady in questioning the pictures. Im simply calling you irrationally anti-Korean for missing the obvious and jumping to paranoid conclusions.
I agree, Jing. It looks like they zoomed in to take the picture, giving the impression that the islets are closer than they really are and easily visible from Ullungdo at a certain altitude.
Do you really think I am paranoid? Then maybe you can explain why the manager of the “Big Tokdo” site forgot to mention the fact, among all the other facts on the site, that it was a Korean surveyor, not the Japanese, who in 1882 said he could not see any islands in the waters surrounding Tokdo? By the way, I did not jump to any conclusions; you did.
Also, thank you for pointing out that Takeshima was being sarcastic. I was worried there for a while.
“What does ?橫sa hwa dong?? mean?”
“sa hwa dong” is his way to term that kimbob is a traitor for the Japanese.
Sa hwa dong was a 16th century Choson Korean who betrayed his nation during the Japan’s Hideyoshi rule. He was caught and was executed. It’s his way of saying that I’m a Korean version of Benedict Arnold.
Is that dokdo in the little dokdo picture or is it a ship? I can’t tell. I’m sure Korean internet portals will be restricting the little Dokdo site soon for being Pro Japanese. How are people suppose to get both sides of a story with Korea blocking Dokdo sites that they feel are Pro Japanese?
Non Korean,
The “Little Dokdo” site is not pro-Japanese; the site manager simply posted what looks to be a none zoomed-in picture of the islets.
Even without the zoom, the island is still clearly visible with the naked eye. I don’t even see why you are debating that the Koreans are somehow fudgeing things. The island is VISIBLE with or without the zoom. The first picture shows someone’s head so you have a ready sense of perspective. Besides, the camera and image quality are not that good which is likely why its blurred out. It seems likely that the image is a scan of a regular photograph. Take a nice professional digital camera (no zoom) and you will get a very clear picture of the island.
From Michael Breens’ “The Koreans” (1998):
“Centuries of mutual dislike seems to have coagulated around the question of who owns a small uninhabited rock between the two, called Tok-do by the Koreans and Takeshima by the Japanese. The Koreans have by far the better case. Japan gave up all sovereignty rights over Korea at the end of the Second World War, but claims that the rock became Japanese just before formal annexation in 1910. This is a piece of legal trickery because Japanese domination of Korean affairs, through ‘advisers’ in government offices, began in 1905. With a bit of research the Koreans could have found out the name of a Japanese adviser who arranged the transfer of the rock and made a perfectly reasoned case that fell into the category of claims that Japan abandoned in 1945. Instead, they made an emotional, table-thumping response and whipped up a frenzy or nationalistic bluster which featured boatloads of patriotic students, poets, you-name-it, wearing headbands with slogans on them, clambering up on the rock and liberating it for the fatherland.” Plus ca change…
“The island is VISIBLE with or without the zoom.”
I think this is what you call over-scrutiny. Trying to find something, anything that will back up one’s biases. There’s not much you could do to debate someone who’s sole position is anything Koreans have as evidence are lies, while anything Japan (and we know they always tell the truth about history) gives as evidence is gospel truth.
The trees in both pictures look about the same. Another thing in common with both pictures is that they are both grainy. you can??t find more then two grainy pictures.
Sa Hwa Dong,
Why are the pictures even up on the sites? The “Big Tokdo” site guy said it was to prove that the Japanese were lying about the islets not being visible from Ullungdo, and the “Little Tokdo” site guy said it was to prove that Usan-do (????????), which is supposed to be Tokdo, can be seen from Ullung-do, as recorded in the Official Records of King Sejong.
However, the problem with the “Big Tokdo” site explanation is that it was not the Japanese, but a Korean official in 1882 who said he could not see any islands in the sea around Ullung-do. And the problem with “Little Tokdo” site is that we do not know that the island as being visible was Tokdo.
According to the “Little Tokdo” guy, Ullung-do and Usan-do (i.e. Tokdo) made up the country of Usan-kuk (?????????). Without going into the suspicions the Japanese have about Korea’s claim, I will simply ask my question: Why did the people living on Ullungdo call their country “Usan-kuk” instead of Ullung-kuk? In other words, why did they name their country after a small group of uninhabited rocks that were 90 kilometers away from where they lived?
Whether or not Tokdo/Takeshima can be seen from Ullungdo is not the point. The point is that there is not solid proof that Koreans even knew that Tokdo existed before 1905.
If you drink a few bottles of soju in Ullungdo and look out at the ocean you can see pink islets. Goodnight.
“However, the problem with the ?橫Big Tokdo?? site explanation is that it was not the Japanese, but a Korean official in 1882 who said he could not see any islands in the sea around Ullung-do. And the problem with ??Little Tokdo?? site is that we do not know that the island as being visible was Tokdo.”
- I don’t know what this is all about, but the guy might have made an honest mistake when he was looking at the quote, or he maybe right, and maybe indeed that’s what the Japanese said.
“Whether or not Tokdo/Takeshima can be seen from Ullungdo is not the point. The point is that there is not solid proof that Koreans even knew that Tokdo existed before 1905.”
- How can anyone possibly believe that there is “no solid proof that Koreans even knew that Tokdo existed”, if the islands are clearly visible from Ullungdo? Let’s see now, Koreans were capable of going to Ullungdo, but they weren’t capable of rowing few paces to an island that’s clearly visible from Ullungdo? That is what you’re essentially saying here. Japan also once claimed Ullungdo, Kommundo, and Chejudo. Do you also think those three islands should belong to Japan as well? I wouldn’t be surprised if you said yes.
Sa Hwa Dong,
Tokdo/Takeshima is only a few paces from Ullungdo?
Why didn’t the people living on Ullungdo see Tokdo/Takeshima from their island?
Maybe they did not see any reason to climb up a mountain on a clear day to search the horizon for islets they could not see from sea level. Besides, even if the people of Ullungdo climbed the mountain on a clear day, seached the horizon for an island, and spotted Tokdo, they seem to have forgotten to mention it to Korean officials.
Also, I have never been to Ullungdo, so I do not know what Tokdo looks like from there, but it is possible that even the small image of Tokdo is also a zoomed-in image.
By the way, I wonder how much Michael Breen really knows about what the Japanese have to say about Tokdo/Takeshima? Has anyone seen any English material on the Japanese views, besides what Koreans provide us or the brief summary provided by the Japanese Foreign Ministry site?
Does anyone have a reliable picture of Takeshima from Ullungdo? I mean, the difference in size in those two pics is so large that it is hard to accept them as genuine. Koreans are claiming that Takeshima is ‘visible to the naked eye’ from Ullungdo, but it seems that what we are really seeing is telescopic photography.
As for Michael Breen, if he was so sure that the Koreans have to stronger case, then why didnt he go into detail about it. Heck, if he has the answers, why doesnt he become an advisor to the Korean government and help the Koreans win at the International Court of Justice? Anyone that has read Breens book knows that he occasionally makes sweeping, unsupported statements.
Marmot,
I don’t know why you set up this site but known Japanese agents like Gerry Bevers and others are using this site to send out their propaganda and general hate of Koreans.
If you want to continue, you must kick out some of these paid psyop people. Otherwise, this will quickly become anti-Korean site.
Dear Concerned,
“Known Japanese agents?” I was unaware that Gerry was on anyone’s payroll other than some university in Incheon.
Rather than advising me to kick the “spooks” out, might I advise you to simply argue with them?
Wait - there’s a payroll?
There are a few different arguments running around here. The first has to do with the diplomacy (for lack of a better word) between Korea and Japan over the rocks known as Tokdo. Japan claims that the island is Japanese territory and should be returned to Japan. Some steps were taken and Korea chose to react. Let me liken that to the way children provoke each other. The provoker (Japan) does something they know will make their target mad and they (Korea) respond. The other choice is that Korea could have ignored it and chosen to remain aloof but they didn??t leading to some people posting arguments over the dynamics of Korean diplomacy and the future of Korea. The bottom line is that Korean (I think they are technically policemen) military people occupy the islands and if the Japanese want them back, someone is going to have to open a can of wup-ass. Unlike other areas of dispute like the west bank, Tokdo is not territory that has been taken by force. Unlike places like Maastricht or Prussia, it is not an area that has been lost to war. IF it ever was Japan??s territory and they didn??t defend it, is that not the same as the same little kid that leaves his bike out on the sidewalk for a few days or weeks until it disappears? Clearly they didn??t want it otherwise they would have defended it. Yes I am being a bit flippant but?? The best thing Korea could have done is for the government to subsidize Yon-sama making a historical drama addressing all the fallacies of the Japanese text book with a good sprinkle of Tokdo nationalism for good measure. If they were real creative they could use a Japanese actress and have him fall in love with her and in the process have to explain about Korea and his royal ancestors including those that went to Japan. That would have been subtle.
Gerry Bevers is still singing his old anti-Korean hymns over and over again. No other spare time hobbies left, dude-san???
How about teaching them Japanese right-wing folks some lessons about Japanese unglorious history… uh, in Japan, instead of babbling bullshit stuff to Koreans in Korea?
And your heartwrenching story of the indoctrinated Korean kids… the kids are all right. Never let the next 10000 upcoming generations forget the past!
Ah, well, Koreans… Mizar 1/5, you are definitely NOT Korean. Laughing my ass off about your pretentious writing style. So half-intellectual, sigh!
Hm, after this ranting: Easter greetings to Mr. Marmot. Your Tokdo posts are really filling your comment section and I enjoy reading the stuff. Mainly those ones from the silly brigade… ;-))!
Psyops? you don’t actually believe that mierda do you? Oh please-that would be like claiming that the Al-qaida sponsored the English teacher website that bragged about sexual exploits with Korean women in order to change public opinion about working with the Americans in Iraq. I can think of many much more effective means to disseminate anti-Korean materials and ideas than this forum-(I am a big fan-really)
Dear Concerned,
I am no Japanese agent. In fact, I cannot even read the Japanese language, though I wish I could. Why? Because I want to know both sides of the Tokdo/Takeshima controversy. Wouldn’t you? For example, wouldn’t it be nice to know what the guy on this site is saying?
By the way, does anyone know if Ullungdo can be seen from the east coast of the Korean mainland on a clear day? I am asking because of a couple of pictures I found on the site mentioned above. Consider the following:
The following is a link to a map of modern-day Ullung-do. (You need to scroll down the page to see the map.) Notice the two small islands off the east coast of the main island?:
Map of Ullungdo
Now follow the following link to a map of Korea published by the Chosun Kingdom in 1530. Notice that Usan-do, ????????(??????), which Koreans claim is Tokdo, is closer to Korea than Ullung-do, ???????(??????). Since present-day Tokdo is 90 kilometers southeast of present-day Ullungdo, not west, then that means that Usan-do could not have possibly been Tokdo, at least, not according to this 1530 map:
A 1530 Korea-government map of Korea
Could it be that Usan-do was really present day Ullung-do and that the Ullung-do mentioned on the 1530 map was just the larger of the two small islands just off shore of the main island, possibly present day “Chukdo,” ??????(????”)? Wouldn’t this explain why the country of Usan was named “Usan-kuk” (????????) and not “Ullung-kuk” (??????), since ????? would have been the larger island?
Now, if Ullung-do can be seen from the Korean mainland on a clear day, then I think I have solved the mystery.
Sorry. My link to the Ullung-do map was wrong. Here is the correct link:
Map of Ullung-do
If you want to continue, you must kick out some of these paid psyop people.
Marmot, man, how’d you miss responding to that part of “Concerned”’s comment? I enjoy reading the stuff here but is the well so poisoned that not only are people who take critical stances labeled “Japanese agents” but also anyone who doesn’t censor “pro-Japanese” viewpoints can have their forum threatened (by hackers?) with being shut down? Cripes.
How much is the going rate for a Japanese agent these days Gerry:) Do ya get benefits? Retirement? If one can do it part time I will sell my services to the highest bidder (Korea or Japan)?
I’ll sign up for that. Are there performance bonuses? Any other fringe benefits?
For example, wouldn??t it be nice to know what the guy on this site is saying?
I don’t have the time/leisure to translate it, but the expression “????????” the author uses in connection with Korea and the islets — something along the line of “The de facto rule of Korea over Takeshima” — tells it all.
Maps from the period reflect thinking just as much as geography.
Look how close Jeju is.
Whichever island is which in whichever map from the time, there’s a reason Ulleungdo and Dokdo, whatever their names, are usually drawn so close together - they were thought of as being part of the same general sphere. Which is why Koreans say they claimed Dokdo even when the record says “Ulleungdo.”
Not quite like claiming Hawai’i…….. and by doing so also claiming Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Lanai, etc in the process, but something along those lines.
In the case of the map above, EITHER you have to find the fac they’re so close together as having special signifigance OR you have to say the cartographer was ignorant, and then you’d have to explain why you’re claiming the fact that the ignorant cartographer got the positions switched means something.
Dokdo “seen from Ulleungdo” or not, you’d get the impression it can be on maps from both Korea and Japan. LIke I say, evidence that they were always seen - by both sides - as intertwined. Dokdo was never out there in the middle of nowhere, it was always - and again, by both sides - seen as being within Ulleungdo’s sphere.
NOTE to Mr. Bevers - ????? (????”, Chukto, Jukdo) is ALSO to the EAST of Ulleungdo. Good try though.
http://myhome.shinbiro.com/~sh.....rd_map.htm
Oranckay,
Could you explain your “note” to me? I do not understand it. I get the feeling you misread my post.
I know that the Korean island of Chukdo, ?????(????”), is just off the east coast of Ullungdo. In fact, that is why I posted the link to the Ullungdo map, to establish that fact and to propose that Chukdo may have been what the 1530 mapmaker was referring to when he showed Ullungdo east of Usando, which Koreans claim to be present-day Tokdo and I suggest may be present-day Ullungdo.
There may be evidence that Usando and Ullungdo were the same island, but where is the evidence that Usando was Tokdo?
Point well taken, sorry for the misread.
But the point remains that on most maps islands with names that can only be the present day Ulleungdo and with names that can only be the present day Dokdo are drawn very close together.
I think that’s the case here, too. Obviously there is some confusion in the cartography, but it seems utter nonsense to suggest something the size of Cukto (and hey, it’s either Chukto or Jukdo
) would warrant mention on the map. Look at all the islands on that map. ALL of them (????????, ???????, ????????, ??????? etc) have tiny little sub-islets the size of Chukto in real life but that are not mentioned on it. So, unlikely that one of the two islands that have been circled are Chukto, Kwan??mdo, “Pukch?k Pawi,” or any other islands/rocks you’d see if you swam around Ull??ngdo.
Oranckay,
Are you possibly confusing the Korean island of Chukdo, ?????(????”), which is just off the shore of Ullungdo, with the Japanese name for Takeshima (Tokdo), which has the same Chinese characters (????)? The Korean ????? is only a couple of kilometers off the shore of Ullungdo, while the Japanese ?????, which is Takeshima (Tokdo), is approximately 90 kilometers southeast of Ullungdo.
Oranckay,
Another possibilty is that the 1530 mapmaker was trying to say that both names, Usando and Ullungdo, were used to refer to the same island, which is what Japanese scholars claim. If Usando and Ullungdo were both referring to present-day Ullungdo, then that would explain why the residents of the island referred to their country as Usan-kuk ?????????(?????).
“Could it be that Usan-do was really present day Ullung-do and that the Ullung-do mentioned on the 1530 map was just the larger of the two small islands just off shore of the main island, possibly present day ?橫Chukdo,?? ??????(????)?” asked Mr. Bevers, and he answered as to why not by saying, immediately above, “…Chukdo, ??????(????”), which is just off the shore of Ullungdo….”
Chukto as seen from Ull??ngdo:
http://www.toursi.co.kr/ulleun.....lery36.jpg
S?ngmodo as seen from Kanghwado:
http://nakjo.com/JiRi/Do/SeokM.....50.100.jpg
Chejudo, from Udo (couldn’t find pic of Udo from Cheju):
http://www.dhatour.com/goods_i.....EB%8F%84_1(2).jpg
There is no reason to believe one of the two islands circled on the map are Chukto, because the cartographer clearly has no interest in drawing the islands that you might bang your head on should you swim around the islands he did choose to include.
Oranckay,
Here are five choices. Pick one.
1) The Korean mapmaker screwed up and put the island that Koreans claim is Tokdo due west of Ullungdo, instead of southeast of it.
2) The Korean mapmaker put the two names beside each other to show that the present island of Ullungdo was known by two names, Usando, ????????(?????”), and Ullungdo, ???????(??????).
3) The Korean mapmaker referred to the present island of Ullungdo as Usando, ?????????(?????”) and the Korean island of Chukdo, ?????(????”) as “Ullungdo,” ???????(??????).
4) The Korean mapmaker labled present-day Ullungdo as “Usando,” ?????????(?????”) and present-day Tokdo/Takeshima as “Ullungdo,” ???????(??????).
5) The island the mapmaker labeled as “Ullungdo,” ????????(??????) sank beneath the sea sometime during the past 500 years.
Before you make your choice, Oranckay, ask yourself the following question:
“Why did the people of the ancient country of Usan-kuk, ?????????(?????), call their country “Usan-kuk,” instead of Ullung-kuk, ??????(???????)? In other words, why would they name their country after a small group of uninhabited rocks 90 kilometers away instead of after the island they lived on?”
Also, if the 1530 Korean mapmaker felt that the Korean island of ?橫Chukdo,?? ??????(????) was too insignificant to put on the map, why do you think he would put Tokdo, which is just as insignificant, on it?
Does anyone know, or can anyone find out, the height of the highest point on Dokdo? You give me that number and I’ll give you proof of what height you would have to be to see Dokdo from Ullung-do.
Correction to my above post:
5) The island the mapmaker labeled as ??橫Usando,?? ????????(?????”) sank beneath the sea sometime during the past 500 years.
If I might throw in my own two-bits (inflation - no one wants to listen to 2 cents worth).
I personally believe that Tokdo is Korean. I am pretty sure that the Koreans were aware of the islets - I read some material on the islets being checked to determine if tax-evaders were hiding on them. Of course, I am not sure how accurate they are - Oranckay would be a better judge of that, and probably more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.
A couple of days ago I was going to offer some fine reading material suggestions to the esteem prof. that might support his call for ?橫important historical evidence.” I would think that it is apparent just how I feel about the proof he displayed. However, several deadlines hit me at the sametime and I am still trying to get some stuff put together.
The one book that I am surprised that he didn’t turn to was Hamel’s Journal. Hamel states that Tsushima was owned by the Koreans up until the 5th century and then Japan took over (really big paraphrase - no notes). I think that might have helped his theory a little more than Hulbert because Hamel was here in the mid 17th century. However, I also realize why he probably didn’t use the book - because there is another side that would weaken his argument on Tokdo and Ullongdo. When Hamel, actually I think it was one of the other men (perhaps the whaler), asked the fishermen and Korean whalers along the coast if there was any land in the sea to the northeast [East Sea - a.k.a Sea of Japan], the Korean fishermen denied that there was any land and claimed that it was just vast open sea. This doesn’t seem to support the idea that they knew that Ullongdo existed, and for that matter, Tokdo. Is that proof that Korea knew nothing about these islands? Obviously not, because there are other documents that show that they did know of at least Ullong do.
As for Michael Breen digging up the name of the Japanese advisor - I don’t believe he actually needs to do that - but if he did need to do so he shouldn’t be that difficult. In 1905 there are not that many Japanese advisors to the Korean government - at least not that many that held the title of advisor.
A friend of mine, Henny Savenije, has his own website - he specialities are Hamel and maps - here is a map for all of you to argue over to prove your theories one way or another. I think this map is very good because it is dated 1843.
http://www.cartography.henny-s.....43_jpg.htm
Incidently - those who would like to visit Henny’s site on maps it is below, but please note that he has a lot of material- not just on maps
http://www.cartography.henny-savenije.pe.kr/
Forgot to add -notice what color the islands are outlined in and why does Tsushima a.k.a Daemado have a green line beneath it?
Wow Mr. Beav. You have even more people that hate you. Sugar shin (no sweetness for the Beav) only left a post to an insult you and another person (smart of you to snuggle up to Mr. Marmot Sugar Shin). Then Concerned called you a spy. This is the second time I heard you being called a spy. What exactly kind of spy are you? It seems that your information is from books, pictures, internet etc, and your own analysis. In other words public knowledge plus thinking. You are a pretty sad spy if you are only getting your spy stuff from sources that anybody can access, and then just critically thinking about it, instead of just accepting it. Nobody is dumb enough to pay spies for public knowledge. I mean there isn??t a country in the world so full of dummies.
However, I do wonder, with all the people who do seem to hate you, and let it be known if you worry about your safety. Perhaps if you hold the opinion that Takeshima is a disputed territory that should be taken to ICJ to resolve who owns it, can get you into trouble in Korea. Perhaps it??s nothing to worry about, but somebody was helpful enough to let netizens your job and location so it??s not too hard to narrow down where you are. So, please be careful Mr Beav. In a nation where people eat flags, cut off fingers, and, if you remember 2002, attack, or kidnap foreigners without prosecution, you could get hurt.
On another note, I have to say that your arguments have convinced me that Takeshima