≡ Menu

Japanese tell the Korean actress Kim Taehee to go away

These days news from Japan reads like news from Korea.

Hundreds of people took to the streets in an impromptu protest this time telling the South Korean actress Kim Taehee to go away because they think she is an anti-Japanese actress at heart. This is because she was seen handing out Dokdo related materials in Switzerland in 2005.

She was already asked this question by the Japanese press at the promotion of the upcoming release of a Japanese drama “99 Days with a Star” in which she plays, pretty much, herself, i.e. a South Korean Hallyu star in Japan who falls in love with a Japanese bodyguard (heck, the writers should really add the anti-Korean fans to the story).

She replied to the charge/question in fluent Japanese that she had visited Japan over 30 times and she likes Japanese books and films, that she hopes to play the role of “a peaceful go-between between the two countries”. Here we have pretty much the same story but with some pictures and links.

For those who don’t know who Kim Taehee is she is this lovely woman who is meant to be the “brainy” one (due to her Seoul National Uni degree), with the prettiest face (natural too!) amongst the Korean actresses. She starred in Korean dramas such as “Love Story at Harvard” and “Iris”. Her acting skills have always been a bit on the wanting side according to the drama watchers.

  • http://rjkoehler.com Robert Koehler

    Bizarre. Just bizarre.

  • cm

    I thought no Japanese care about Takeshima? Or the popular saying goes.

  • numberoneoppa

    Whoa, listen here, Japan. I don’t mind it when you continually claim Dokdo, but now you’re hating on Kim Tae Hee? You’ve gone too far this time.

    (funny that this is actually just related to the dokdo shit anyways)

  • R. Elgin

    Inexplicable and sad.

  • Seth Gecko

    numberoneoppa,
    Change that damned picture.

  • Arghaeri

    News Flash from G Bevers,
    apparently there are absolutely no ancient maps to demonstrate that Kim Taehee belongs to Korea.

  • hoihoi

    I think many Japanese does not know about her much..
    they dont care ..
    it Just hates Fuji TV
    she is a just scapegoat
    everything that is related with fuji TV are hatered because of fuji TV

    for example Kao..
    it is as same as kao

  • http://f5waeg.blogspot.com/ F5Waeg

    Her acting skills have always been a bit on the wanting side according to the drama watchers.

    What acting skills?

  • CactusMcHarris

    You’re all missing the point – if there was one place that would be safe from The Dokdo / Takeshima Scourge, shouldn’t it be Switzerland, home of the best saffron in the world (and lots of Nazi gold legends, too!)?

  • http://www.xanga.com/wangkon936 WangKon936

    Well… Methinks that thinking Dokdo is Korean does not equal hating Japan, but that’s just me.

  • gbevers

    WangKong wrote:

    Well… Methinks that thinking Dokdo is Korean does not equal hating Japan, but that’s just me.

    Is it anti-Korean to think “Dokdo” is Japanese territory?

  • DLBarch

    I could not care less about Japanese protests regarding Kim Taehee, and in fact I could not pick her out on the street even if I were standing right next to her at a stoplight.

    BUT, and here’s the rub, actors who involve themselves in activist politics are absolutely fair game when it comes to popular backlash. I have no problem with Michael Moore going after Charlton Heston for his stand on gun rights, and equally have no problem with Palinistas going after Matt Damon or George Clooney or whomever for their alleged political transgressions.

    This is the price of public participation, and all the more so in emotional, hot-button issues. Throw in a hefty dose of nationalist sentiment, and voila!

    DLB

  • cm

    “Well… Methinks that thinking Dokdo is Korean does not equal hating Japan, but that’s just me.”

    Especially if that someone has visited Japan more than 30 times, and have kept saying how she loves Japan and Japanese.

  • http://www.xanga.com/wangkon936 WangKon936

    “Is it anti-Korean to think “Dokdo” is Japanese territory?”

    Absolutely not. I don’t think I’ve ever given an indication otherwise.

  • yuna

    I think many Japanese does not know about her much..

    No, they don’t

    Here is a recent update by a non-Korean person.

    You have to be careful, if you comment with a Korean-bias, or with a very obvious extreme anti-Korean bias you get called a Korean (pretending to be Japanese) by the Japanese camp. It’s damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.

  • http://pawikoreapics.blogspot.com/ pawikirogii 石鵝

    gee, why is the yahoo brigade silent about this? no koreans to bash, eh?

  • YangachiBastardo

    The thought of a (rather hot albeit obnoxious) Hallyu starlet handing out Dokdo related material in Switzerland ( ? ? ? ????????????) and because of this incurring the wrath of Japanese nationalistic whackos makes me wonder if the Maya were not after all right

  • YangachiBastardo

    (heck, the writers should really add the anti-Korean fans to the story).

    heck the writers should come up with somehting resembling a story… i’m off to watch some reruns of Secret Garden (Boys Over Flowers too, Italian edition with all the names changed, if i feel insomniac)

  • CactusMcHarris

    #11,

    Well, yes, Gerry, coming from you, it is. As it’s apparently a catharsis for you to display your love/hate relationship with the Han and their sagobangshik, I would have to reply in the affirmative.

  • gbevers

    Cactus wrote (#19):

    Well, yes, Gerry, coming from you, it is. As it’s apparently a catharsis for you to display your love/hate relationship with the Han and their sagobangshik, I would have to reply in the affirmative.

    So, Cactus, it is anti-Korean to believe that Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) was historically Japanese territory because I believe it was? Do you, Cactus, believe that “Dokdo” was historically Korean territory or Japanese?

    What else have I done to make you think I am anti-Korean?

  • http://vmphotography.com.au hoju_saram

    What else have I done to make you think I am anti-Korean?

    If you can refer us to an important (preferably historical and controversial) issue in which you have taken the Korean side, I for one am willing to entertain the idea that your positions on Dokdo, the entire colonial period, the Samil movement, comfort women, etc etc., promote an anti-Korea agenda purely by coincidence.

  • gbevers

    Hoju_saram wrote (#21):

    If you can refer us to an important (preferably historical and controversial) issue in which you have taken the Korean side, I for one am willing to entertain the idea that your positions on Dokdo, the entire colonial period, the Samil movement, comfort women, etc etc., promote an anti-Korea agenda purely by coincidence.

    Why wouldn’t you be willing to entertain the idea of looking at historical evidence to form your opinions–without condition–instead of simply accepting Korean pronouncements on Dokdo, the colonial period, the Samil movement, and the comfort women?

    Why is it anti-Korean to question Korean claims on any of those topics, especially when there is evidence to the contrary? For example, how can you still support Korea’s historical claims to Dokdo with all the evidence showing that Korean claims have been fabricated? Are anti-Japanese?

    I suggest you start thinking for yourself, Hoju.

  • http://www.xanga.com/wangkon936 WangKon936

    Okay, this is where you and I diverge.

    There is A LOT of evidence to indicate that Japan’s colonial occupation was pretty shitty for most Koreans and that the comfort woman issue may have been as bad as many Koreans have indicated.

    The issue that some people have here with you Gerry is not so much that you have decided to take the Japanese point of view in one case, i.e. Dokdo/Takeshima, but you have decided to take the Japanese point of view in most, if not all, cases. Thus, it’s easy to see why some people would view you as anti-Korean.

  • http://vmphotography.com.au hoju_saram

    Gerry,

    I had a debate with you a few years ago on the Samil movement. Your position (obviously) was to downplay the significance and popularity of the independence movement. What struck me during the argument was when we started discussing actual numbers involved. There were about a dozen different figures touted by about a dozen different historians, and we threw around half a dozen of them. I suggested, (for argument’s sake, and so we could concentrate on other elements of the discussion), that we consider a figure somewhere in the middle (actually, it was much closer to the pro-Japanese numbers than the pro-Korean ones).

    But you wouldn’t budge in inch from the lowest number – the one that suited your (and the Japanese) position the best. There seemed no academic reason for you to discount all the other numbers. But you stuck to it with a stubborn insistence that was quite telling.

    At that point I realized that you’re just an anti-Korean hack with a grudge or a chip or an obsession (perhaps all of the above), lacking in objectivity and balance.

    That’s me thinking for myself. But like I said, if you ever entertain a single notion or position that the favours the Korean side of things, or even a acknowledges a middle ground or a grey area in this arguments, I’m willing to revisit my opinion of you.

  • Arghaeri

    What else have I done to make you think I am anti-Korean?

    He aleady explained once ….

  • Arghaeri

    and thought you wer so mellow now that you wouldn’t be commenting on dokdo amymore

  • Arghaeri

    Well… Methinks that thinking Dokdo is Korean does not equal hating Japan, but that’s just me.

    Methinks you’ve been overseas too long your korean logic has become corrupted :-)

  • CactusMcHarris

    #22,

    Gerry, let me preface that that I’m second to no one in admiration of your Korean ability, and I think I marveled here about your applaudable cheek in teaching Koreans Korean.

    But Dokdo has, like Lucille did to Joe in Frank Zappa’s ‘Joe’s Garage, Acts 1-3′ messed up your life. I’d suggest something healthier for you that will bring positive change and is feasible. What you do here, you’re trying to shovel the ocean with your views on Dokdo. I get the fact that, due to questionable historical records, there are different views, but in the three years or so which I’ve been reading this blog, and contributing a bon mot here and there and learning more from you than you from me, I don’t think you’ve changed anyone’s mind, and you’ve managed to annoy the hell out of a lot of people. Far be it from me to derail you from an unpopular course when you believe it’s true, but the (damn French again) raison d’etre for your writing here shouldn’t be some questionably-valued rocks. From what I understand, your position on those rocks in Korea has disrupted your life. Call it what you want, call it concern, but I don’t want to see your official name changed to Gerry Dokdo – as a former fellow Korling, I thought I owe it to you. People just don’t care here – take it up with the UN and that board which governs the seas. I don’t like you being seen as a laughingstock when you have so much more to offer, especially those of us who are (always) learning Korean and you being where you’re at vis a vis the language and the characters, too.

    And that’s my two sens’ worth.

  • gbevers

    Hoju wrote (#24):

    But like I said, if you ever entertain a single notion or position that the favours the Korean side of things, or even a acknowledges a middle ground or a grey area in this arguments, I’m willing to revisit my opinion of you.

    No, Hoju, you did not say you would reconsider your opinion of me but your opinion of Dokdo. Again, do you believe that Dokdo was historically Korean territory or Japanese?

    People started calling me anti-Korean or ridiculing me when I first started questioning Korea’s historical claim to Dokdo. After the lights finally came on, many of those cockroaches scurried for cover, including Mr. Oranckay.

    As for the number of Koreans killed during the Samil Movement, you do not just come up with a number by “spliting the difference,” especially when there is no basis for the Korean claim that 7509 were killed. You give the Japanese claim and the Korean claim and leave it at that. Are you anti-Japanese for no accepting the Japanese claim?

    Com’on, Hoju, do you think Dokdo was historically Korean or Japanese?

  • cm

    I think people are skeptical of anyone who isn’t either Korean or Japanese with no stakes on either emotionally, culturally, ethnically, or nationalistically, to take the Dokdo issue so seriously, that he devotes his entire life on it to prove Japan’s rightful ownership. Not only that, take the issues and champions the Japanese rightist views, using their materials provided to him by the same group who are more than willing to collaborate with him, then present him as a third party non biased opinion from an outsider.

    Kim Tae Hee has more than on one occasion, has let it be known, her like for Japan. If you’re not anti-Korean, Mr. Bevers, then like Kim Tae Hee, just say so. I’ll believe you.

  • gbevers

    Wangkon wrote (#23):

    There is A LOT of evidence to indicate that Japan’s colonial occupation was pretty shitty for most Koreans and that the comfort woman issue may have been as bad as many Koreans have indicated.

    Then show me the evidence that “Japan’s colonial occupation was pretty shitty for most Koreans.” That is all I am asking for.

    Also, I notice that you wrote that the comfort woman issue “may have been” as bad as many Koreans have indicated, which suggests that you do not have the evidence to support that claim, either.

  • cmm

    @29 Did you miss hoju’s comment @21??

  • Arghaeri

    kind of like asking for proof that living in a victorian slum, whilst working in a victorian cial mine was pretty shitty.

  • Arghaeri

    No, Hoju, you did not say you would reconsider your opinion of me but your opinion of Dokdo.

    He stated as he claimed, it is you who are deliberately misreading it.

  • gbevers

    Cactus wrote (#31):

    What you do here, you’re trying to shovel the ocean with your views on Dokdo. I get the fact that, due to questionable historical records, there are different views, but in the three years or so which I’ve been reading this blog, and contributing a bon mot here and there and learning more from you than you from me, I don’t think you’ve changed anyone’s mind, and you’ve managed to annoy the hell out of a lot of people.

    So you don’t think I have changed anyone’s mind on Dokdo? Well, one thing that I have noticed over the last few years is that there are a lot fewer people trying to defend Korea’s historical claims to Dokdo. Ponder on that for awhile.

    Maybe one reason people are upset with my Dokdo postings is that they do you like my rubbing salt in the wound.

    Are you anti-Japanese for believing that Dokdo was historically Korean territory, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary?

  • gbevers

    Cm wrote (#30):

    Kim Tae Hee has more than on one occasion, has let it be known, her like for Japan. If you’re not anti-Korean, Mr. Bevers, then like Kim Tae Hee, just say so. I’ll believe you.

    I’ve said it a million times, Cm. I’m not anti-Korean. Thank you for believing me.

  • cm

    “Well, one thing that I have noticed over the last few years is that there are a lot fewer people trying to defend Korea’s historical claims to Dokdo.”

    There wasn’t a whole lot of foreigner support for Korea’s claims to Dokdo in the first place. Because I don’t think anybody outside of Korean and Japanese spheres, really cares – certainly not to the same extent as your obsession. Most non-Korean/Japanese people just think all this squabbling is well.. just silly.

    If you’re not anti-Korean, then just say so, and let’s just move on.

  • http://rjkoehler.com Robert Koehler

    In case anybody was wondering about that Samil Movement debate:

    http://www.rjkoehler.com/2005/12/28/on-the-movie-front-aiaaa-eoc/#comment-27620

  • hamel

    Wow this *is* starting to get interesting.

    Gerry, you have *such* an interesting perspective on things.

  • http://vmphotography.com.au hoju_saram

    No, Hoju, you did not say you would reconsider your opinion of me but your opinion of Dokdo. Again, do you believe that Dokdo was historically Korean territory or Japanese?

    I’m not sure if your reading comprehension is poor or if you’re deliberately being disingenuous. Cm and Arghaeri understood me. Below is what I wrote. Read it again very carefully. If you still don’t grasp it, get your son to explain it to you.

    If you can refer us to an important (preferably historical and controversial) issue in which you have taken the Korean side, I for one am willing to entertain the idea that your positions on Dokdo, the entire colonial period, the Samil movement, comfort women, etc etc., promote an anti-Korea agenda purely by coincidence.

    The question is about your motivation and your (possible) agenda, not my personal position on dokdo’s historical ownership. Incredible that you’re trying to spin it that way.

    Anyway, to answer your irrelevant question: I don’t have a position on Dokdo. I don’t give two shits about it. The only time I’ve ever read anything about it was in a few of your rants, which I couldn’t really follow (hardly surprising, given your propensity for (deliberately or otherwise) muddying up a debate with semantics when it suits you. (And I thought Texans were supposed to be straight-shooters?) So I can’t give you an informed opinion, sad to say.

    As for the number of Koreans killed during the Samil Movement, you do not just come up with a number by “spliting the difference,” especially when there is no basis for the Korean claim that 7509 were killed. You give the Japanese claim and the Korean claim and leave it at that. Are you anti-Japanese for no accepting the Japanese claim?

    Once again, I took a middle figure, you took the lowest Japanese figure.

    Anyway, you’re avoiding my question: show me an instance or a situation where you’ve been sympathetic to the Korean position on an issue of relative importance and I might entertain the notion that you’re objective.

    And while you’re at it, please answer bumfromkorea’s long-outstanding question:

    Would you have hot, gay sex with a dolphin in a pool filled with pepto-bismol if you knew it could have prevented 9-11?

    a) yes
    b) no
    c) maybe

    Inquiring minds wish to know, Gerry!

  • http://vmphotography.com.au hoju_saram

    In case anybody was wondering about that Samil Movement debate:

    Thanks, Robert. The link clearly illustrates what I’m talking about. The figure Gerry is using comes straight from the Japanese colonial police – the absolute lowest one available.

    Kushibo already did a great job of fisking, so I won’t go there again, other than to ask Gerry whether he would like to revise his position or explain it to us why he thinks it’s the best one?

  • inkevitch

    Once is an instance, twice is a coincidence, three times is a trend. What Gerry has established is a firm position, on matters that involve conflict between Japan and Korea, it is always Korea that is wrong and revisionist and it is Japan that is accurate and historical.

    When you, enter or actually start a series of debates on different topics where there is a pro-X or anti-Y position and you always take the anti-Y position it is natural and correct to see you as anti-x.

    Gerry, everyone else can see it. Where is your insight. Even those that agree with you see that there is an intense burning anti-Korea streak in you.

    Now having accepted this, the question is why? And then what can you do about it? What advice would you give your son if you saw him pursuing something with such negativity that has brought him no benefit but only problems.

    Or maybe youy are just happy with this situation and it allows you to feel comfortable in your world vew that you are misunderstood and only have the interest of scholarly accurracy at heart.

  • inkevitch

    anti-x should be anti-Y

  • babotaengi

    “…maybe youy are just happy with this situation and it allows you to feel comfortable in your world vew that you are misunderstood…” Haha. That reminds me of a lot of Koreans I’ve known.

  • gbevers

    Hoju wrote (#40):

    Anyway, to answer your irrelevant question: I don’t have a position on Dokdo. I don’t give two shits about it. The only time I’ve ever read anything about it was in a few of your rants, ,,.

    If you do not “give two shits” about Dokdo or know much about the historical facts surrounding the debate, then why are you using it as an example of my being anti-Korean? Is stating historical facts anti-Korean?

    My motivation is to get to the truth, not simply accept Korean pronouncements on their history. If you had studied the history of Dokdo as thoroughly as I have, you would also be just as suspicious of Korean historical claims because the Korean government, the Korean media, and Korean academia have definitely lied about Dokdo.

  • cm

    The radiation level at Tokyo is off the charts. Yet Japanese people don’t care, because they trust their government like sheep.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4QXYyqdP2o&feature=channel_video_title

    They should be protesting their government, not protesting about some Hanryu star. They care more about stopping Korean entertainers which looks pathetically silly, instead of taking care of their own welfare. Where are the priorities?

  • frogmouth

    Mr Bevers, you have been misleading people on numerous forums about Dokdo and it’s time you came clean. I’ve studied the Dokdo issue just as much (and more) than you and I can say with conviction you are full of it.

    Finally people can see your shabby “research” for what it is. Those of you who read Mr Bever’s posts about Korean Japanese issues now understand how he lies (yes lies) about Dokdo’s history as well.

    To hear Mr Bevers crow he is on some quest for “the truth” really makes me lose my lunch. Even worse, I think he has actually convinced himself we believe him!

    Somebody on this forum had a very valid point, I think it was cm. Any credibility Mr Bevers might have had about Dokdo was lost through his slanted opinions on other contentious Korea Japanese historical disputes. ie comfort women.

    Actually Mr Bevers is more qualifed to speak about Korean comfort women. Unlike Dokdo he has actually been to Korean whorehouses…

  • Robin Hedge

    Does anyone ever suggest sharing Dokdo/Takeshima, since both Koreans and Japanese used it in the past for fishing? I guess rosary I mean iss that, in the past both sides used the Rocks, a little, so why not consider a shared claim? Do I think it will happen? Haha…

  • Robin Hedge

    Omg welcome to the age of things like Swype and voice recognition, where you don’t just get typos, but entirely mistaken words like “rosary” instead of “what.” My fault of course for letting grazing the submit button… Anyway because Dokdo/Takeshima is just that kind of infuriating thing I have tried to look at both views objectively, and I come away concluding that neither side has a compelling case.

  • Charles Tilly

    Would you have hot, gay sex with a dolphin in a pool filled with pepto-bismol if you knew it could have prevented 9-11?

    a) yes
    b) no
    c) maybe

    Question about the question before I answer: What makes you think the dolphins gay?

  • inkevitch

    Deflecting again Gerry.

    “If you do not “give two shits” about Dokdo or know much about the historical facts surrounding the debate, then why are you using it as an example of my being anti-Korean? Is stating historical facts anti-Korean?”

    1. It is an example he gives as it is part of an overarching trend/ pattern in your discourse
    2. Are they historical facts that you state. From what I can tell they are DEBATED facts not historical facts. Your saying they are historical does not make them so.

    “If you had studied the history of Dokdo as thoroughly as I have, you would also be just as suspicious of Korean historical claims because the Korean government, the Korean media, and Korean academia have definitely lied about Dokdo.”

    No doubt they have lied, and some of their lies have been about Dokdo. But you now equate any position they have that is contrary to the Japanese right view as being “lies” now. How is this not an anti-Korean stance?

    Stop dancing around the questions Hoju has politely asked you three times.

    Point out one significant issue where you have taken the Korean side. If your motivation was simply “to get to the truth” surely there is some truth on the Korean side that you have defended?

  • Robin Hedge

    But, it is interesting that the Korean side refuses to submit to international arbitration. If the Korean case were so obviously strong, why would they be afraid of an international court? I don’t think the Korean majority really cares about evidence or facts, beyond the facts on the ground of police, marines, a destroyer… evidence that they would be perfectly happy to get into a little firefight and kill a few Nippers, if it ever came down to it, in a grand display of “You see these Rocks?” Which, by the way, would be followed by a victory party in the streets. It is revenge lust. I spoke to a little Korean boy in a church who explained how thrilled he was that Japan was struck by triple tragedies this year. He informed me that the 150 million citizens of Japan are “only shit” and that indeed the Chinese are also “only shit” because they occupy Goguryo territory. I wonder where he got his opinions…

    And what the hell is an actress doing distributing Dokdo flyers in Switzerland of all places? I mean it’s like straight out of the pizza mockumentary. The overall Dokdo message seems to be, we are eager for the world to know that Dokdo is rightfully ours, but we refuse to bring the case to an international court of law.

  • Charles Tilly

    So you don’t think I have changed anyone’s mind on Dokdo?

    Nope.

    Well, one thing that I have noticed over the last few years is that there are a lot fewer people trying to defend Korea’s historical claims to Dokdo. Ponder on that for awhile.

    Okaaaaaayyyyy. *Pondering, pondering, pondering, pondering….* Finished. Here’s what I came up with: It’s because no one gives a shit. They just wish you’d shut the fuck up about this topic.

    Maybe one reason people are upset with my Dokdo postings is that they do you like my rubbing salt in the wound.

    No. They just don’t like you.

  • hamel

    I wonder if I need to add my two sen to the discussion here. Gerry, once I thought you were just a misunderstood guy on a quest for the truth.

    Here is your own nutshell summary of your views on Korea vis-a-vis history:

    If you had studied the history of Dokdo as thoroughly as I have, you would also be just as suspicious of Korean historical claims because the Korean government, the Korean media, and Korean academia have definitely lied about Dokdo.

    There it is. Korea lies about Dokdo, so it probably lies about everything else, says Gerry. So basically, in other words, Gerry, you are anti Korea when it comes to history.

    HojuL you wouldn’t be the first to accuse Gerry of being disingenuous. I have wondered for years if he is just dense or deliberately disingenuous. It is a pity that Oranckay’s blog is gone now, or I would point you to the amazing debate Gerry led in 2005 or so about how the Korean dictionary was wrong about such-and-such.

    .

  • gbevers

    Frogmouth wrote (#47):

    Mr Bevers, you have been misleading people on numerous forums about Dokdo and it’s time you came clean.

    Steve, you are the epitome of the word “troll” because you have spammed Web sites all over the Internet with your Dokdo propaganda using such alliases as Frogmouth, Toadface, Wedgie, Zippertrout, and others. The only reason you now sometimes post under your real name is that you were found out.

    Before you were found out, you wrote the following:

    Kanganese, don’t lump me together with other Koreans on the Dokdo issue. I have done my studies on this subject on my own. My only connection with Koreans on this is for gathering maps and documents. Unlike Ponta and Pacifist I’m not an errand-boy for my local political organization such as Shimane Prefecture. I’m not Korean nor am I a part of a political movement like Ponta.

    After your writing the above, an email you wrote to a Mr. Cho was discovered on the “Killzap.cafe” Web site:

    Dr Mr Cho:

    I went onto Hanmaumy’s website and just by the visual images I saw I can say his website is the best I’ve ever seen !! I’m very impressed.

    The problem is that it is all in Korean language. Koreans already believe Dokdo is Korean land so Hanmaumy is in a sense wasting his time. We must get this valuable information out to the global community. If the Dokdo issue ever goes to the ICJ it is absolutely necessary that all of the related information be available to the public in English.

    Mr Cho I must stress these days there are more Japanese working with foreigners promoting Takeshima is Japanese and they are doing it in English while working with idiots like Gerry Bevers. Like after WW2 Korea isn’t getting its message out there about Dokdo.

    That being said, Mr Lovmo’s site is up and running and I’ve been working on my own to try to gather information and translate it but to be honest my lack of ability in Korean language makes it impossible to gather images on some of these Korean National Archives Websites because they are totally in Korean.

    We should use Mr Lovmo’s site because it is already quite popular and it has the greatest amount of exposure on the English/Foreign Internet.

    Please me must work together to get the message out there. I will do my best. In addtion please tell Hanmaumy I am going to gather images from his website and translate as well as I can for Mark.

    I would love to meet both of you someday.

    Yours Truly:Steve

    Your Web site is full of lies, half-truths, and omissions, all designed to deceive people and foment anti-Japanese feelings. It is a propaganda/hate site that does not allow discussion or opposing views. I think it is quite telling that people on this forum have so little to say about all the anti-Japanese crap you write on your site.

    Now, give me some examples of where I have lied about Dokdo.

  • yuna

    Robin Hedge, I agree with you that it’s ridiculous to have such hate from such a young child and also actresses handing out flyers, but what can you do? From time to time people in the public eye will get it in their pretty heads they have to use their celebrity status to bring things they are passionate about to a wider audience.

    Why the Koreans won’t let it go to the court? It’s because they are the opposite of disingenuous and calculating. Instead of quietly gathering evidence and building a case for it (like the Japanese usually do) they whip it up into frenzy and take out stupid ads in the international press and make a song and dance about it, and say well done to each other, thinking that’s the way to win battles. Which is why they usually end up losing.

    Or, it’s like this. We have three cracked floor tiles in the kitchen in the flat we are about to move out of. If we email the busy agent what we need to do about it so that they won’t take away our whole deposit, they might say:

    1. you should mend it
    2. let us take your deposit

    One thing they are not going to say is

    3. thanks for letting us know, we won’t charge you for it because it’s part of wear and tear

    If we moved out without telling them they might

    1. notice and take our deposit
    2. not notice
    3. notice but think it’s part of wear and tear and tell the landlord to fix it without charging us
    4. notice but as long as the next tenant doesn’t complain, don’t do anything about it

    Now what is in it for us to tell the agent?

    As a flatowner I usually end up picking up after the tenants mess because I don’t have the heart to charge for them. As a renter I always seem to get all my deposit taken away no matter how clean and carefully I use the flat.

    Is the way I live something that I should take to the international court for arbitration? My mother thinks so.

  • Maekchu

    I’m not sure which is more ridiculous…….A Korean going to Switzerland to hand out pamphlets over some disputed rocks or the Japanese for being angry that she did it.

    I’d say it’s a tie…both parties are idiots.

  • hamel

    Yuna: I loved your last comment. Your final sentence had my smiling wrily. Not sure about your point, but I loved the way you expressed it. Cheers to you, girl! [raises beer class filled with Oettinger Pils]

  • yuna

    GBevers, why don’t you help this Japanese civic group who recently unearthed evidence about the number and the method of the maruta human experiment by the Japanese that the Japane government has been denying due to “lack of evidence/record”?
    To give a bit of balance on things..

  • cm

    “And what the hell is an actress doing distributing Dokdo flyers in Switzerland of all places?”

    That was back in 2005. It’s obvious she felt strong enough about it at that time to participate in a public campaign. Still doesn’t prove she’s anti-Japanese, especially after she has said she likes Japan and that she doesn’t hate Japanese. The Japanese right wingers are just using this as an excuse to bash Korean entertainers active in Japan, because they are butt hurt. It’s just a childish reaction, and I’m quite surprised not many are calling it as what it is. I can imagine if this was the case of Koreans protesting Japanese entertainers active in Korea, the amount of negativity toward Korea would be much more intense and the criticisms of Korea would be flowing freely here. But since this is Japan, everybody loves Japan. How can you criticize them.

  • gbevers

    Hamel wrote (#72):

    There it is. Korea lies about Dokdo, so it probably lies about everything else, says Gerry. So basically, in other words, Gerry, you are anti Korea when it comes to history.

    I am skeptical when it comes to Korean history. That does not make me anti-Korean. Was Washington University Professor James Palais anti-Korean for stressing that his Korean History students use original sources? Why do you think he stressed the use of “original sources”?

    Koreans are very nationalistic, so you have to keep that in mind when you read Korean history. You should be skeptical until you can confirm or reject claims by looking at original sources. That was how I discovered that Korean historians were lying or misrepresenting the history of Dokdo.

  • Benjamin Wagner

    Why the Koreans won’t let it go to the court?

    The answers I often hear are:

    1. Why would we when it’s already ours and we’re in possession of it?
    2. If there’s even the slightest possibility of a loss why risk it (especially since . . . see 2 above)?
    3. Sometimes having a claim is more valuable than a victory.

    I take number 3 to relate to Yuna’s point about “the way to win battles”.

  • yuna

    hamel, Cheers back, I don’t actually know what my point is, either, apart from the fact, I’m tired of moving.

    Gerry, you are disingenuous, like the people who protest that Japanese flag waving protestors are against Fuji TV but not anti-Korean.
    They are anti-Fuji for showing Korean stuff, which they maintain they are not anti towards? Say you had a massive hangover from drinking too much Archers, and you gag for the rest of your life with anything to do with Archers, that’s called hating Archers.

  • hamel

    Ah, Disingenuous Gerry….

  • gbevers

    #62,

    They may not say it, but the main reason Koreans do not take the Dokdo dispute to the ICJ is that they know they would lose.

  • frogmouth

    Mr Bevers let me start by saying you are a slimy worm.

    Did I use other handles? Yes of course, I’ve never denied that. And what happened when I posted my info on the WHOIS page for my website? You and your scumbag crew at occidentalism posted my phone number address etc., Go figure why I’d want to remain anonymous.

    But now that I’m out there tearing you a new arse it makes me wonder why your Japanese “friends” still post under false names.

    Now, here is how Mr Bevers works, what a piece of work this guy is.

    Let’s look at his childish attempt to link me to “killjap” The e-mail he refers to was sent by me to Mr Cho Min Su. He has a brilliiant blog in Korean about Dokdo and other Korean issues.

    See this link.
    http://dokdo-or-takeshima.blogspot.com/2008/08/steve-barber-in-korean-news.html

    If you closely you can see the source of this e-mail (maemi30@hotmail.com) which is me and the destination (spar@paran.com) which is Mr Cho. In fact this Mr Cho, whose website is called 수박 겉핥기 is even on the blogroll of the Japanese website Mr Bevers frequents. You can see it at the bottom.

    Immediately after I sent it Hanmaumy sent me apology for my email having been forwarded to this cafe. To say I have any connection to any anti Japan organization is rubbish quite simply because I’m not. After almost 10 years of posting on the internet about Dokdo I’d like to see one post where I’m anti Japanese.

    Now Mr Bevers let’s get serious and look at your lies.
    1. Mr. Bevers says Japan’s annexation of Dokdo had nothing to do with the colonization of Korea. We all know Gerry is lying about that.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGgyL_bd20E
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/japans-takeshima-x-files-ii.html

    2. Mr Bevers says the Japan Peace Treaty granted Dokdo to Japan. This is more crap from Japan’s MOFA, Again Mr Bevers is lying.
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/the-japan-peace-treaty-and-dokdo.html

    We at the Marmots Hole have been over Mr Bever’s slanted translation of historical records before and know they don’t hold water.

    Again, Mr Bevers we appreciate your insight into Korean juicygirls and brothels because you have obviously done your field “research.” However, after reading your interpretations of other historical matters I’ll pass on your Dokdo opinions.

  • Benjamin Wagner

    @65
    ” . . . Koreans do not take the Dokdo dispute to the ICJ is that they know they would lose.”

    That Korea would certainly lose in an ICJ dispute over the rocks is not a view I have ever seen stated by international law of the sea scholars. The opinion is generally that Korea’s legal claim is a strong one – and this from scholars who are neither Japanese nor Korea. Feel free to send me some cites to the contrary. Not a challenge, I’d genuinely be interested in reading them.

  • gbevers

    Frogmouth wrote (#66):

    But now that I’m out there tearing you a new arse it makes me wonder why your Japanese “friends” still post under false names.

    You used multiple IDs to post about Dokdo, Steve. The Japanese who post to my Web site each use only one ID. That is the difference.

    In fact this Mr Cho, whose website is called 수박 겉핥기 is even on the blogroll of the Japanese website Mr Bevers frequents. You can see it at the bottom.

    That is my Web site, Steve, and the reason that Mr. Cho’s Web site is listed is that I am not afraid to give people the opportunity to read opposing views, unlike your Web site. By the way, your propaganda site is also listed on my Web site.

    I have to take my dad to get a haircut and run some errands with him, but when return, I will respond to what you claim are my lies about Dokdo.

  • frogmouth

    I haven’t seen one article written by a foreign (Western) expert that supports Japan’s claim to Dokdo (Takeshima).

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/legal-study-of-the-dokdo-issue-i.html

  • frogmouth

    No Mr Bevers, it’s not YOUR website at all. The anonymous Japanese who run that blog don’t use their names because they are career lobbyists who are afraid of having their affiliations with Shimane Prefecture and Japan’s MOFA exposed. This collection of idiots is all over cyberspace. You are just their little errand boy now. Look at the posts !! It’s 99% Japanese. Can you read Japanese, Mr Bevers?

    I haven’t posted under any anonymous handle for years and it’s time for you to stop your pathetic whining. It doesn’t help your case at all .it just shows how weak and pathetic you are.

    Mr Bevers, I chose not to use my website as a forum for every nutbar from Japan’s Channel 2 to rant about irrelevant Japan Korean issues etc and that is my prerogative. Most of them just spam in Japanese anyway. I have a Japanese version which is quite popular these days. In fact, more and more Japanese people visit the English and Japanese versions of my website which is great news don’t you agree?

    If you are trying to imply that I am not willing to debate the Dokdo issue with you, those on this forum will testify I am more than willing to discuss the Dokdo matter (sometimes ad naseum) anytime..

    I’ve posted on the shabby Japanese blog you frequent on many times. In fact, the Japanese there refused to debate (even though they could speak English) they would only babble in Japanese when I posted responses. So why bother?

    You should be ashamed for trying to link me to this Killjap forum when you know damn well I had nothing to do with. It shows everyone here what a pathetic person you really are.

    After you get the ol’ boys hair cut. Why don’t do us all a favour.

    Show us where the Japan Peace Treaty grants Dokdo to Japan. Now don’t post any of those confidential memorandums by Rusk, Van Fleet etc All right Mr Bevers? We know they don’t mean jack

    Refute the evidence I’ve shown that the Japanese Navy systematically surveyed and mapped Dokdo Island for watchtowers and telegraph lines before they annexed the islands.

    Oh and pleeeeese Mr Bevers, convince us all that Imperial Japan annexed Dokdo because they felt the urgent need to wack seals while the Baltic Fleet engaged the Japanese Navy in the Tsushima Strait.

    That should be rich…

  • inkevitch

    Gerry’s debating tactics are here for all to see.

    1. Avoiding direct simple questions that would clarify his position (despite being repeated)
    2. Stating opinion as fact
    3. Attacking the person not the argument

    Now lets look at two of your diengenious arguments
    “I am skeptical when it comes to Korean history. That does not make me anti-korean”
    No Gerry it has been stated at least 5 times above by multiple people, that you are anti-korean because you automatically take the position that is contrary to the Korean one because you think Korean historian lie. It is the fact that you always take this position. A point you have yet to debate and have avoided for 60 odd posts.

    “Koreans are very nationalistic, so you have to keep that in mind when you read Korean history. ”

    Replace Koreans with Japanese, Chinese, Americans, Australians, Saudis. Gerry are you really such an idiot to think the above statement only applies to Koreans or is it because you are familiar with Korea and can understand their language but not so much with Japanese or Chinese. Once again this is why you appear anti=Korean, you state a negative aspect of a society (one that all share) and you attribute it to Korea as though it is enough to discredit their argument and proves that they are lying. The subtlety that no one misses is that by stating this of Korea you imply that it is not true for the Japanese.

    Gerry, you ask where have you lied? The post a week back when you said you would not be posting like this anymore.

  • Q

    A Japanese confides that this is the typical way of Japanese government about truth:

    1) Don’t announce anything.
    2) Announce something but it doesn’t look so bad.
    3) Announce something which is probably more true,and it’s way more than (2) and we have already got exposed to it.

  • http://vmphotography.com.au hoju_saram

    Question about the question before I answer: What makes you think the dolphins gay?

    You’ll have to apply to bumfromkorea for an answer to that. Actually, from memory, Iceberg had a similar query.

    Koreans are very nationalistic, so you have to keep that in mind when you read Korean history.

    Because Japan has never been nationalistic, and throughout modern history has been entirely trustworthy and objective in all their undertakings. Right?

    Remember, the debates you involve yourself in (on comfort women, dokdo, the Samil movement) involve two parties, both with vested interests in fudging their statistics.

    The fact that you uncritically quote the colonial Japanese police on the number of people they killed (why would they lie?) is awesome.

    Carry on.

  • gbevers

    Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo/Takeshima) — Part 1

    Let me start by saying that Korea has no old maps of Dokdo, by any name, or any documents showing that Koreans ever traveled there before the Japanese started taking them there on Japanese fishing boats in the early 1900s. Also, there are only two or three references in all of Korean history to a distance, “unnamed “ island visible to the east of Ulleungdo, but those references either said or suggested that the island was Japanese territory.

    On October 27, 1900, King Kojong signed Imperial Edict No. 41, which made the Korean island of Ulleungdo a county of Gangwon Province. It was called Udo County. Article 2 of the edict stated that the county office would be located at Taehadong and would have jurisdiction over “the whole island of Ulleungdo, Jukdo, and the rock islets.” Jukdo is Ulleungdo’s largest neighboring island, which is just two kilometers off Ulleungdo’s east shore. In the past it was also called Usando. The “rock islets” in the edict was a catchall phrase used to include the remaining rocky islets around Ulleungdo, including Gwaneumdo, which is Ulleungdo’s second largest neighboring island.

    Koreans claim that Seokdo was a reference to Dokdo, but they can provide no evidence to support that claim. For example, there was no distance or direction given or ever any further references to an island named “Seokdo.” Also, they have no reasonable explanation why the edict would include Dokdo, but not Ulleungdo’s second largest island of Gwaneumdo.

    In a 1902 Trade Document published by Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA), Ulleungdo was described in detail. In the section describing the fishing situation on Ulleungdo the following was written:

    There are absolutely on Korean fisherman on the island, but many do come each year from Samdo in Cholla Providence to gather brown seaweed that grows thickly on the seashore.

    In his book, “The History of Dokdo & Ulleungdo,” Kim Ho-dong, who is the head of the Dokdo Research Center at Korea’s Yeongnam University, confirmed the above statement with the following excerpt from his book about the Korean settlers on Ulleungdo:

    From the beginning, the settlers avoided the seashore and went deep into the valleys to continue the same kind of farming life they had had on the mainland. They plowed fields they had slashed and burned, built dugouts, and worked hard until the winter, but the only thing they got in return was cold and starvation. They could not return to the mainland, so it is said that one after another they starved to death. Actually, if you look at an April 29, 1902 article in the Hwangseong Sinmun (皇城新聞), it says that among the August 1901 Customs Official Dispatch (海關派員士) articles, there was an article that said, “The Japanese population is about 550 people, who are all shipbuilders/loggers (造船伐木者)…. The Koreans are about 3,000 families, but they are all tenant farmers (佃戶農氓).” From this we can know that most of Ulleungdo’s residents at the time were farmers who lived a difficult life of jeon-ho, that is, tenant farming. At that time, they survived on wild edible greens and ggak-sae (a kind of seabird), which were their salvation. In spite of suffering this kind of starvation, it is said that the settlers would not fish. Even though the Japanese were gathering abalone and squid from right under their noses, the settlers did not take notice, and if their children tried to imitate the Japanese by trying to fish, they got their calves beaten until they bled in order to stop them from imitating disgusting sailors. It is said that the people on Ulleungdo did not start trying to fish until after the start of Japanese imperialism. Through testimony saying that the settlers shunned fishing because they came as emigrant farmers, we can determine that instead of Ulleungdo fishermen taking the lead in fishing the waters around Ulleungdo and Dokdo, Japanese fishermen, violating international law, illegally took the lead. We probably have to view the ill-conceived settlement policy at the time as what finally led to Japan’s declaring Dokdo ownerless in 1905 and incorporating it into her territory.

    As for the Japanese fishermen on Ulleungdo, the 1902 MOFA trade document described them as follows:

    Section 7 – The Fishing Situation

    The fishing season on the island is usually from March to September, and the marine products are only abalone, blowfish. agar weed, laver, and a few kinds of wakame seaweed. Most fishermen come from Amakusa of Kumamoto (熊本ノ天草), Oki in Shimane (島根ノ隠岐) and Shima region in Mie (三重ノ志摩地方). There are absolutely no Korean fishermen on the island, but many do come each year from Samdo (三島) in Cholla Province (全羅道) to collect the brown seaweed (wakame) which grows thickly on the seashore. [Samdo (三島) was present-day Keomundo (巨文島).]

    This year fishermen from Amakusa and Oki brought eight boats equipped with diving gear and set up a base at Dodong (道洞). There were also two boats with divers (蜑船) from Shima and a one boat with divers (海士船) from Amakusa, who set up a temporary base at Jeodong (苧洞). All of these fishermen cruised around the island fishing, but compared to last year, the haul of fish was poor; thus, not much profit is expected this year. Also, about fifty nautical ri due east from the island, there are three small islands called “Ryanko-do” (Liancourt Rocks), which Japanese residents call Matsushima. There is abalone on the island, so some fishermen go there. However, drinking water on the island is scarce, so it is impossible to fish there for long periods. They come back to this island after four or five days there.

    Notice that the 1902 document said that the Japanese fishermen not only fished Ulleungdo, but also “Ryanko-do,” which was the Japanese name for Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo). It also said that the fishermen had to return to Ulleungdo every four or five days for water. This is evidence that the Japanese were fishing Liancourt Rocks from Ulleungdo in 1902. Through Japanese fishermen on Ulleungdo, Koreans will come to learn about Liancourt Rocks.

    I have to tutor my son now, so Part 2 will follow later.

  • VG866

    Robin Hedge #52

    That’s where you’re wrong. The Korean side isn’t scared of arbitration, its the Japanese side that hasn’t requested South Korea take the case to the International Court of Justice in almost 50 years. The last time the Japanese government made such a request was in 1962 with a note verbales. Note verbales are informal notes that are unsigned by the sender. In other words, they are the equivalent of sending text messages in the world of international politics. Not to mention that making such a request in 1962 would have been rather difficult to fulfill with all the chaos caused by Park Chung Hee’s coup de tat at the time.

    People like Gerry buy into Japanese propaganda and make it seem like South Korea is scared of taking the case to court when nothing could be further from the truth. And lets say for a second that both countries agreed to take this dispute to court, which country would win? The International court of Justice bases territorial disputes on several factors-effective control, economy, geography, dominant culture, uti possidetis, elitism, treaties, ideology and history. If we look at each factor and see which country holds a favorable advantage over the other, it becomes apparent as to why the Japanese government is not interested in taking this dispute to court despite the fact that they don’t have anything to lose.

    1. Effective control- Korea has had effective control of the islands for many decades now while Japan has demonstrated no such sovereignty. As the saying goes, possession Is 9/10ths of the law. The ICJ tends to side with the current occupier of the territory assuming the territory wasn’t obtained via illegal aggressive war and genocide.
    2. Economy- Dokdo’s economy and its surrounding waters have been integrated into the Korean economy. Japan on the other hand does not make even a penny from the island.
    3. Geography- Dokdo is closer to Korea’s Ulleungdo island then it is to any Japanese island. Closer to the Korean mainland then the Japanese mainland.
    4. Culture- the dominant culture of the people living/patrolling the island is Korean. Japanese citizens are not even allowed to visit the island without permission.
    5. Uti possidetis- the US government granted South Korea the right/permission to occupy the islands after the end of world war 2 and has yet to request the Korean government to leave.
    6. Elitism- does not apply in a dispute like this to either country.
    7. Treaties- Korea and Japan have yet to sign a treaty over the island. Does not apply.
    8. Ideology- Koreans view Dokdo as the starting point for Japanese war time aggression as well as an important historical symbol. Japan views the islands as a mineral mine.
    9. History- Koreans have used the islands far longer than the Japanese and it is even visible from ulleungdo. The Japanese governments in the 17th and 19th century have openly stated in written documents that the islands belong to Korea or did not belong to Japan. The 1877 Kobunruko documents for instance openly declared that Dokdo did not belong to Japan and even included a detailed drawn map of Dokdo to get their point across. Furthermore, Japans initial claim to the island began in 1905 with the illegal(under international law) seizure of the islands for military purposes without the consent of its neighbors. The 1905 seizure holds no weight in the ICJ.

    As you can see, South Korea enjoys an overwhelming advantage in every single category in the ICJ. That’s the real reason why the Japanese government refuses to take this dispute to court with a formally signed government level request. All you have is the diplomatic equivalent of a text message they sent 50 years ago. The way I see it, the higher ups in Japanese politics know full well that Japan does not have even the slightest chance of taking the islands back. They simply keep the issue alive whenever they want to get one of their right wing cronies elected or to rally nationalist support.

    Above all, there really is nothing to gain in going to court with the Japanaese. South Korea effectively controls the island and there is nothing the Japanese can do about it.

  • slim

    Let’s give the descendants of the Le Liancourt crew a say in this matter.

  • VG866

    #57
    I think hundreds upon hundreds of Japanese people taking to the street to protest this non-event is far more pathetic then what some airheaded actress did many years ago while on vacation. Far far more pathetic.

    #62(Gerry)
    Gerry, I thought you were a lawyer because it’s quite apparent that South Korea would win pretty easily in court. They enjoy an overwhelming advantage in pretty much all major categories involved in territorial disputes. There’s a very good reason why Japan hasn’t made a formal request to the Korean government in nearly 50 years. To top it off, Japan’s 1962 request was an informal and unsigned note verbale.

    You bought into Japanese propaganda. Idiotic, uneducated, jobless morons from 2ch who lack even an infantile understanding of law believe they would win in court. They base this moronic belief on the fact that the Korean government hasn’t taken this dispute to court, therefore the Korean government is scared and secretly knows it will lose. In reality, the Japanese government absolutely refuses to take this territorial dispute to court because they know they will lose and so do the Japanese lawyers who work for them. The jobless and clueless NEET losers of 2ch(many of whom probably dropped out of highschool) believe the exact opposite. They believe they would win a swift victory over Korea even though they are functionally illiterate on matters pertaining to the international court of justice.

    They base their belief on total Japanese victory over Korea not on scholarly research, well thought out arguments, court procedures or history but rather on the simple belief that the Korean government is “scared” of going to court. Who said the Japanese are humorless robots, they are a very funny people. Whats even funnier is the fact that you actually believe the exact same crap those clueless morons on 2ch believe.

  • VG866

    Oops didn’t mean #62, I meant #65 Gerry.

  • Q

    A repeated reminder for gerry-san(#45),

    I just finished writing about your post over at the Marmot’s Hole, where they do not generally like to read comments about the Takeshima/Dokdo dispute. I will not debate it there and do not recommend that anyone here do either

    (一口二言) double-dealing; being double-tongued ―하다 contradict oneself; be double-tongued; talk out of both sides of the mouth.

    Anyways, Japanese government recognized Dokdo as Korean terrioty by their law in 1951:

    三  鬱陵島、竹の島及び済州島 (Uleungdo, Dokodo, and Jeju island)

    http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S26/S26F03101000024.html

    And Monthly Chosun has a very good article too:

    일본정부는 연합국 최고사령부 지령 제677호에 의거해 1951년 6월 6일 일본 총리부령(總理府令) 제24호(조선총독부 교통국 공제조합의 본방 내에 있는 재산정리에 관한 정령의 시행에 관한 총독부령)에서 울릉도·독도·제주도를 한국 영토로 규정해 총리부령 제24호의 적용대상에서 제외했다. 샌프란시스코 평화조약에서도 독도가 한국 영토로 인정되고 일본 영역에서 제외되자, 일본정부는 총리부령 제24호를 1960년 7월 7일까지 개정하지 않고 독도를 울릉도·제주도와 함께 한국 영토로 규정하고 총리부령 적용대상에서 제외했다. 이 사실은 일본정부도 독도가 샌프란시스코 평화조약에서 한국 영토로 인정되고 일본 영역에서 제외되었음을 잘 인지하고 있었다는 증거이다.

    http://monthly.chosun.com/client/news/viw_contentA.asp?nNewsNumb=201106100079&ctcd=N&cPage=1

  • cm

    “Above all, there really is nothing to gain in going to court with the Japanaese. South Korea effectively controls the island and there is nothing the Japanese can do about it.”

    Correct. And that’s why I’ve always been in favor of Koreans ignoring Japanese claims and stop being so sensitive of what Japan thinks and what they claim. Let them claim the island, they can’t do anything about it. It’s senseless for Korea to raise these into international issues.

    And one more thing, am I the only person here who finds satisfaction and a laugh at the way how those Japanese protestors are behaving, protesting against Korean entertainers? Finally Koreans aren’t the only ones making a fool of themselves (like the Dokdo protests). It’s the Japanese who are making themselves look silly for a change, and it’s the Koreans who are coming off looking cool and composed – a complete reversal of position. LOL.

  • slim

    “It’s the Japanese who are making themselves look silly for a change, and it’s the Koreans who are coming off looking cool and composed – a complete reversal of position. LOL.”

    I wouldn’t go that far yet. Takeshima is a minor cause in Japan outside of Shimane and the fringe right. Dokdo is a still an exponentially bigger deal to Korea.

  • theotherkorean

    It could be possible that those Japanese protestors simply don’t like Kim Taehee because of her chaebol princess in waiting image but since that doesn’t make a good excuse decided to link it with Dokdo.

  • cm

    “I wouldn’t go that far yet. Takeshima is a minor cause in Japan outside of Shimane and the fringe right. Dokdo is a still an exponentially bigger deal to Korea.”

    I wasn’t referring to Takeshima, I was referring to all those anti-Fuji TV protests that are really anti-Korean protests, due to some Japanese getting upset because a few Korean programs got on their TV – all the while ignoring far bigger issues. Fuji TV bought out by Koreans nonsense floating around is also a total nonsense, but it seems to have gained a fairly strong national traction.

  • slim

    That is a weird one, for sure.

  • Ssamzi

    Whenever I read serious anti-Korean blogs run by Japanese nationalists who scan and collect everything from Korea 24/7 to put it in their propaganda machine, I have to believe their existence can be complete only with Koreans. It must be their full-time job. I hardly find such level of life dedication and deliberateness from the Koreans who may crap-talk Japan. It’s scary they seem to seriously believe they are doing the right thing and scapegoat Chousenjin for every problem in Japan somehow. The persistent wave of propaganda has been insane with all this anti-Fuji/Korean Wave cause as if it is a matter of life or death. They seem to occupy the Japanese net space very effectively.

  • yuna

    It shows, they are Asians after all, no matter how they try not to be, i.e. petty and childish and jealous.

  • cm

    #86 yuna, can’t you tell just by looking at the faces of those Fuji demonstrators, they all look Korean? They don’t sound Japanese, can’t you hear their Korean accent? Japanese never do that. They are all Koreans disguised as Japanese. (sarcasm intended ).

  • frogmouth

    Hmm, this is very interesting.

    On the blogroll of the Dokdo website Mr Bevers insists he manages there is one person named GTOMR if you look closely.

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/japanese-right-wingers-1.jpg

    Apparently this Dokdo “researcher” refers to Koreans as “gooks” and claims Koreans are the rapemen of the world. He lobbies extensively on youtube and hurls racist insults.

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/japanese-right-wingers-2.jpg

    So you can pretty much see how much credibility Mr Bevers and his ilk have. Shame shame Mr Bevers, so much for your “quest for the truth…”

  • gbevers

    Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo/Takeshima) — Part 2

    A 1903 Japanese fishing guide published by the Black Dragon Society describes Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo/Takeshima), and says that both Korean and Japanese fishermen called it “Yanko,” which was the Japanese name for the Rocks. Here are the relevant passages:

    About 30 ri southeast of Ulleungdo, and almost the same distance northwest of Japan’s Oki county, there is an uninhabited island. It can be seen from the highest peak on Ulleungdo when the weather is fine.

    Korean and Japanese fishermen call it “Yanko.” Its length is about 10 cho. Its coast is full of bends and twists, thus, it’s easy for fishing boats to be in anchor and to escape winds and waves. However, it is very difficult to get firewood and drinking water. One can dig for several shaku (1.0 – 1.5meters) from the surface, but it is hard to get water.

    The fact that Koreans were using the Japanese name to refer to Liancourt Rocks suggests that the Japanese fishermen had just recently introduced Koreans to the Rocks.

    In September 1904, the Japanese naval vessel Nitaka (新高丸) was visiting Ulleungdo as part of its mission to lay telegraph cable between Ulleungdo and Jukpyeon (竹邊), which is near Uljin on the Korean peninsula. In the September 25 entry in the ship’s log, it was recorded that a Japanese civilian staying on Ulleungdo had personally visited Liancourt Rocks, which he said was written as “Dokdo” (獨島) by Koreans and was called “Riangko-shima” by Japanese fishermen. He also said that the people from Ulleungdo who hunted sea lions on Liancourt Rocks used Japanese ships, which means that if any Koreans were among those doing the hunting, they would have been working for the Japanese. Here is a translation of the ship’s log entry:

    Information gathered from the oral testimony of a person on Matsushima (Ulleungdo) who has seen Liancourt Rocks:

    Liancourt Rocks is written as “Dokdo” (獨島) by Koreans and is called “Riangko-shima” by the fishermen of our country. As can be seen on the attached map, it is made up of two rock islets. The west islet is about 400 feet high and has a slope so steep that it would be difficult to climb; however, the east island is relatively low and has weeds growing on it. He said that the land on top is a little flat, so it would be suitable for buidling two or three small huts.

    … The people who travel from Matsushima [Ulleungdo] to hunt sea lions use Japanese boats that are sixty to seventy seok in size. They build temporary shelters on the island and stay there about ten days each trip. He said he heard that they make a lot of money. Also, the number of people sometimes exceeds forty or fifty, but a shortage of water is not being reported. There have also been a number of trips this year. And he said that on June 17, he personally saw three Russian ships appear in the vicinity of the island. After drifting offshore for a while, the ships sailed off to the northwest.

    Sketch of Liancourt Rocks

    45 Japanese ri from Oki Island
    25 Japanese ri from Matushima (Ulleungdo)
    1 ri in circumference

    Number of sea lions: Tens of thousands. Breeding season: June

    This September 25, 1904 log entry of a Japanese ship is not only the first evidence of Koreans using “Dokdo” to refer to Liancourt Rocks, but also the first evidence of their using a non-Japanese name to refer to them.

    On September 29, 1904, a Japanese businessman named Nakai Yozaburo (中井養三郞) petitioned the Japanese government to officially incorporate Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo/Takeshima) into Japanese territory as a means to help protect a sea lion harvesting business he had been operating on the Rocks since 1903. The following is a translation of his petition:

    In the distant sea eighty-five ri to the west of Oki and fifty-five ri southeast of Joseon’s Ulleungdo is an uninhibited island called “Ryanko-to.” It is comprised of two rocky islets, Islet A and Islet B (甲乙), each with a circumference of about fifteen cho. The two islets face each other and there is a channel between them and forty or fifty reefs around them. The two central islets have steep cliffs on four sides and rise toward the sky. There is little soil on top and only weeds. There are no trees on any of the islands.

    On the shore at the curvature of the islet there is gravel that looks like a beach, but there is only one place where one can build a house on Islet A, facing the channel. In the middle of the Islet A there is a water pond, which looks brownish. On Islet B, there is slightly salty water dripping down from the cliff. Ships can be safe if they drop anchor in the channel, shifting toward the left or right to avoid winds.

    This island is located on the route that ships take going back and forth between the Japanese mainland, through Oki islands and Ulleungdo, to Joseon’s Gangwon (江原) and Hamkyeong (咸鏡). provinces. It would be convenient if there is someone who lived on the island and managee it. For example, he can offer firewood, water, and food to ships who lack them. It would benefit Japan’s fishery and trade with the Gangwon and Hamgyeong districts, which is now on the increase. Therefore, the management of this island will be most necessary.

    This island is only a rock island rising into the sky in the distant sea, so no one pays attention to it and it has been left untouched. However, I land at the island whenever I go to and from Ulleungdo and have seen lots of sea lions living there. I thought that it was not good to leave it untouched, and have made various plans.

    In the 36th year of Meiji (1903), I decided to invest and built a fishery house there, moved workers there, prepared fishing gear, and started hunting sea lions. At that time, people laughed at me saying it’s reckless. Of course, if somebody starts a new business on an uninhibited island, they risk failure, lose of equipment, and other things, and I didn’t know how to hunt sea lions, and was unsure of their use and marketability. I wasted lots of money, but after much effort, I developed a hunting method, product manufacturing techniques, and other inventions this year, so I began to market them.

    Their skin, after preserving it in salt, will be used as a subsitution for cowhide, which is used in many ways. The oil from their fresh grease is equal to whale oil in quality and price. I confirmed that its well-squeezed dregs can be used for glue, and its meat will be made into powder and mingled with bone to make fertilizer. That means junting sea lions at this island is promising. However, there will be no business on this island other than sea lion hunting.

    I have not researched it, so I am not sure of fishing in the area, but since it is in the middle of the Sea of Japan, there should be various fish around the island. If sea lion hunting continues, and if I am given a chance to research it, I think there will be a chance to start other new promising businesses in the future. In short, if someone has enough capital and equipment and started hunting sea lions, the management of this island will be very promising. However, the ownership of this island undetermined.

    The other day I met a foreign ship in trouble. Such unexpected events can occur, but without firm protection, investment of lots of money in this island will be very dangerous. The sea lions on the island do not always live there. Every year in reproductive months, April and May, they come there and then leave in July or August after reproducing. So the hunting will be conducted during that season. Therefore, if hunting is not limited and reproduction not properly protected, the sea lions will soon vanish. However, limiting hunting and protecting reproduction cannot be managed if there is competition.

    People gather around beneficial things like ants gather around sweets. If they know sea lion hunting is beneficial, people, including the ones who first laughed at me, will come and compete. They will exhaust all the sea lions by overhunting. In the end, collapse of all the hunters is inevitable. As I have said, I have tried various things and now prospects are good for hunting sea lions at this island. I want to increase capital and put various production machinery there and have fishery equipment for fishing. I want to limit the size and count of my catch, protect the sea lions, especially females and infants, and make preserves somewhere on the island. I want to expel the killer whales and sharks that hurt the animals, but as I have already say, I cannot because of the mentioned risk. This would be not only disadvantageous to me, but also to the nation.

    Therefore, in order to assure the safety of the business and to complete the management of the island, please swifly incorporate this island into Japan’s territory and simultaneously lease it to me for the next 10 years.

    I am enclosing a drawing.

    29th of September, the 37th year of Meiji (1904)
                                       
    Simane prefecture, 周吉gun, Saigo cho, Nishimachi

    Yozaburo Nakai

    To: The Secretary of the Interior, Viscount Sir Norimasa Yoshikawa; The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Baron Sir Jutaro Komura; The Minister of Agricluture and Commerce, Baron Sir Keigo Kiyoura

    On January 28, 1905, a Cabinet decision was made to allow the annexation of Liancourt Rocks based on the fact that there was no evidence of occupation by countries and the fact that a Japanese fisherman had been engaging in fishing there since 1903. Here is a translation of the record of that decision:

    We have examined the proposal by the Secretary of the State for Home Affairs, which was about an uninhabited island. As to the uninhabited island, at 37 degree 9′ 30″ N. latitude, 131 degree 55′ E. longitude and 85 sea miles northwest of Oki island, there were no traces of occupation by any other countries, and as a Japanese Nakai Yozaburo recently petitoned to incorporate the island and then lease it to him after he began sea lion hunting at the island two years ago in the 36th year (of Meiji, 1903), built a hut for fishery, tranferred laborers and got proper fishing gear, we need to clarify to which prefecture it will belong and the name of the island. The proposal suggested the name of the island be Takeshima and put under the jurisdiction of the local government of Oki island of Shimane Prefecture from now on.

    So we examined the matter and found that there is a fact of occupation under the international law, as it is clear from related documents saying that Nakai Yozaburo moved to the island in the 36th year of Meiji (1903) and has engaged in fishery there. So we think that we may make it belong to Japan and put it under the jurisdiction of the local government of Oki island of Shimane Prefecture. Therefore, we agree that it is reasonable to let the Cabinet make the decision as per the proposal.

    Shimane Prefecture announced the incorporation of Liancourt Rocks on February 24, 1905 in Notice No. 40. The incorporation was reported in the San-in Shimbun on February 24, 1905.

    Koreans claim Liancourt Rocks were incorporated in secret in spite of it being reported in a Japanese newspaper. Also, a New York newspaper called “The Outlook” apparently knew about the incorporation since it used the name “Takeshima” in parentheses next to Liancourt Rocks in a July 29, 1905 article reporting on the naval battle between Russia and Japan in the Sea of Japan. Liancourt Rocks had been renamed “Takeshima” when they were incorporated by Japan. Here is the excerpt from the article:

    Upon being surrounded near the Liancourt Rocks (Takeshima) at 10:30 A.M. by the main Japanese force, this last cohering fragment of the Russian fleet surrended.

    As you can see from the January 28, 1905 record of the Japanese Cabinet Decision, the decision to incorporate Liancourt Rocks was based on the petition of the Japanese business who had set up a sea lion hunting business on the island, not on any request to use the Rocks for military purposes.

    Steve Barber’s “X-Files” is just a silly attempt to try to attach some nefarious purpose to Japan’s incorporation of Liancourt Rocks. There was nothing secret about the ship logs he posts or anything nefarious in them. And if the Japanese ship logs posted on Steve Barbers site were really something “the Japanese Foreign Ministry would prefer remain unseen by the general public,” then why were they made public? In fact, Steve got his translation of the September 25, 1904 Nitaka log entry from an October 2007 post on my Web site. See HERE.

    In June 1905, after the defeat of the Russian navy in the Sea of Japan, the Japanese Warship Hashidate was sent to Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks) to determine the suitability of building a watch tower on the island. On June 13, the Hashidate and her crew arrived at Takeshima, where they found about thirty-five fishermen from Oki Island hunting sea lions with guns and nets. The man in charge of the fishermen was Nakai Yozaburo, the Japanese businessman who petitioned the Japanese government in September 1904 to incorporate the islets into Japanese territory. (Takeshima was incorporated into Japanese territory on February 22, 1905. Here is a translation of the ship’s report on Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks):

    The Report of the Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks) Investigation

    As ordered, we departed from Takeshiki on June 12, 1905 and arrived at about 1 ri off the east side of Takeshima’s East Islet at 2:00 the next afternoon. While floating on location, we lowered a small landing craft to dispatch the investigating officer, Lieutenant Okuura, and his assistant, Lieutenant Second-Class Okida, to investigate the suitability for building a watch tower. The engineer and other workers from the Sasaebo headquarters were included in the dispatched group.

    The Report of the Investigation by the officers above is as follows.1. Takeshima consists of two rocks standing next to each other. The West Islet, very rocky and barren, stands high (410 feet in altitude), but all around are precipitous cliffs, which make climbing very difficult. There are no flat areas on top of this islet and no place for installing a watch tower because of its steep, erect, peak.

    The East Islet stands is not as the other one (estimated to be 325 feet in altitude) and not so steep as to make climbing impossible, though it could be challenging. On the top of this islet is a relatively flat, dish shaped area, and it will be possible to erect structures by dumping landfill.1. It will be challenging to unload construction materials onto land and carry them to the top. As far as landing locations, after some trials, they are shown in the attached map. All around the East and West Islets are a row of single-formed reefs connected to each other, which is about one ryeon (600 feet) long (recorded as two-and-a-half hyeon in the Seaways Directory) and two or three shim deep (about 16~24 feet) around to the top of the reefs. A small boat can easily make it through, and reefs all around are laid out like dykes. To the West of the East islet are pointed rocks joined together to form something like a miniature harbour. And this offers convenient place for small boats to be moored, although they cannot stay long because of the strong winds blowing from the west. This little harbour, compared to the East Islet, is the only way to make it to land. On some small flat areas on the seashore are currently a few little huts built by fishermen, where about 30 people are temporarily staying. To transport materials to the top of the mountain, a machine like a derrick would be useful, and to climb up the steep cliffs another machine (bulldozer?) could be considered as an option. From the top of the West islet, a small steam runs down, but the water contains too much salt to drink. A test result shows the water is unsuitable for drinking.1. It is also not possible to plant vegetables to provide watch tower personnel with food because the top of the island is too infertile to be called soil and there is not enough precipitation. So far, the above is the survey by the dispatched officer, and during this inspection the ship circumnavigated the island keeping a distance of one ri away and didn’t observe any particular reefs.

    To the northwest of the East Islet, however, lies reef line, which is estimated to be two ryeon (1,200 feet) long. Now is the hunting season for sea lions on this island, and about 35~36 fishermen from Oki Island are here catching a large number of sea lions with rifles and nets. What has been learnt through a talk with these fishermen during the survey was thought to be useful and, therefore, recorded below.The island has an abundance of sea lions, and from mid-April until mid-July, by lunar calendar, fishermen stay here to engage in seal hunting. What can be obtained from those sea lions is their skin and oil, which are sent to Osaka and produce 4,000~5,000 yen of income yearly. Currently a man named Nakai Yozaburo, who is from Okino, is in charge of these fishermen. He says that if there are applicants for this winter, he is willing to spend his winter on the island. Other than sea lions, a small amount of abalone is also caught. In terms of weather, in the summer gets very hot during the midday and quite cool in the morning and the evening. The worst hot spell comes in June, by the lunar calendar. The island gets thick fog and a very small amount of rainfall compared to Japan. The nearby currents, like the ones in the northeast, are not slow, and the difference between high and low tides is about four feet. According to this report, it is believed to far exceed four feet, but this figure is considered doubtful according to local fishermen. Because there are no trees and water on the island, they go to Okino once or twice a month and bring back food, wood, and other things. This report is recorded as above. June 15th, 1905

    From Hukui Masayushi, Captain of the Warship Hashidate to Taketomi Kunikanae, Commander of the 3rd Fleet.”

    Results of the water test (on Takeshima) are as follows–Odor: Odorless / Clarity and colour: Light brown, microscopic floating particles / Chlorine: A large quantity / Coal: A small quantity / Ammonina: Large quantity / Lactic Acid: Slightly large quantity / Nitrous Acid: None / Nitric Acid: None / Organic Matter: Great quantity / Conclusion: This water is unsuitable as drinking water.

    The report shows that Nakai Yozaburo’s sea lion business was up and operating and that he was supplying himself and his men from Japan’s Oki Island, where they would go twice a month to bring back food, wood, and other things. There were no military watchtowers on Takeshima (Liancourt Rocks).

    I will write more later.

  • CactusMcHarris

    Gerry,

    Had you not written that, I wouldn’t have known there was some marine animal husbandry going on, I reckon for the 해구신 content.

  • http://www.xanga.com/wangkon936 WangKon936

    Gerry,

    Question. Do you condone or tolerate GTOMR’s racist speech? I was once one of the moderators to a highly charged Chinese History online forum and routinely banned commentors if they spoke as GTOMR did.

  • gbevers

    WangKon wrote (#91):

    Question. Do you condone or tolerate GTOMR’s racist speech? I was once one of the moderators to a highly charged Chinese History online forum and routinely banned commentors if they spoke as GTOMR did.

    I do not allow anyone to use such racial slurs as “gook” or “jap” on my site. Can those who run The Marmot’s Hole say the same thing?

    Frogmouth wrote:

    The Japs got their asses kicked after WWII. After being bombed back to the stone ages the Japanese watched helplessly as the opportunistic Koreans seized what was theirs to begin with. It’s a done deal.

    http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/04/15/tora-tora-tora/

  • JK

    gbevers,

    A lot of regular commenters on the Marmots Hole will not respond to your recent long posts about Dokdo (like #89). But it’s not because people agree with your arguments, like you so like to believe. (After all, you wote, “Well, one thing that I have noticed over the last few years is that there are a lot fewer people trying to defend Korea’s historical claims to Dokdo.”) It’s because people know you will repeat the same old WRONG arguments ad nauseum. A reduction in the replies you get after posting an excessively long and boring (as well as grossly inaccurate) post about Dokdo does not in any way mean people agree with you or your arguments.

    Get that through your head, sir.

  • JK

    “I do not allow anyone to use such racial slurs as “gook” or “jap” on my site.”

    So why did you allow this GTOMR refer to Koreans as “rapemen of the world”??? Such a generalization of one ethnic group sounds pretty racist to me, gbevers.

  • gbevers

    JK wrote (#94):

    So why did you allow this GTOMR refer to Koreans as “rapemen of the world”??? Such a generalization of one ethnic group sounds pretty racist to me, gbevers.

    I police my site, JK, not the sites of the world.

  • Q
  • frogmouth

    Mr Bevers the term “Jap” used in the context of Imperial Japan during WWII is not a racist term at all. It was used as an abbreviation for Japanese. That is the manner in which I used the word.

    Is that all you could dig up on me after a decade of debating with you and your right-wing nutbars from Chanel2? One word some consider politically incorrect and a bogus link to a website? You suck Mr Bevers.

    That’s O.K. because everyone knows the data on your website is tainted

    Now how about your rant.

    Also, anyone who says on this blog or any other blog that Korea’s claim on Dokdo/Takeshima is stronger than Japan’s is either a dumbshit goofball, a Korean ass-kissing goofball, or a dumbshit, Korean-ass-kissing goofball. And anyone who knows the truth, but fails to expose the ridiculous lies of Korea’s goofball historians is chicken-shit goofball.

    http://www.rjkoehler.com/2006/04/15/tora-tora-tora/#comment-34042

    Mr Bevers, the logbooks of the warship Tsushima weren’t available to the general website. They were on a Japanese site. The owner of it is so right-wing he considered the ship’s surveys as proof of sovereignty over Dokdo. In reality, the logbooks show Japan’s annexation was military NOT peaceful.

    The Japanese did know about the annexation of Dokdo (Takeshima) but that was months later. The newspaper article was simply a translation of a military report on the battle of Tsushima when the Japanese wiped out the Baltic Fleet near Ulleungdo and Dokdo.

    Nakai Yozaburo your hero apparently was not a businessman. He was a two bit squatter. He toured all over Korea even through Chollanamdo trying to make a score. These people were the lowest of the low in Japanese society. Nakai even went as far as the Ogasawara Islands to make a living and failed. These people were supported by the Japanese government. They were looked upon as agents of expansionism and saw Korea as the new frontier.

    Nakai Yozubro’s application was guided by the military (kimotsuki) right wing Genyosha (Yamaza Enjiro) and fanatic expansionists (Yamagata, Komura)

    By the time of the Hashidate’s survey Nakai had secured rights to Dokdo (Takeshima) and no doubt had the wherewithal to become a “legitamite” businessman. But in 1904 when he applied for his application to lease Liancourt Rocks (Dokdo) was a grubby squatter running is “enterprise” illegally while squatting on Korea’s Ulleungdo.

    Nakai Yozaburo and the like on Ulleungdo were illegals. At this time they were trespassing on Korean land. Treaty regulations forbade these people from living outside of designated areas.

  • frogmouth

    Newsflash: AP Reuters.

    This just in ANOTHER CONTRIBUTOR ON “MR BEVER’S” WEBSITE A JAPANESE RIGHT WING EXTREMIST!!

    Again here is the list of contributors on the website Mr Bevers claims. You can see one person’s name is Pacifist written below GTMOR.

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/japanese-right-wingers-3.jpg

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/japanese-right-wingers-4.jpg

    Pacifist claims that Japan’s Invasion of Korea and declaration of war on Russia was simply to protect Japan and Korea. This is quite typical of the Uyoku Dantai’s perception of Japanese history.

    If you note, all of the contributors on “Mr Bevers” website blogroll are all former regulars on the notorious anti-Korean blog “Occidetalism” ran by Shakahoochie (Matt)
    Mr Bevers whole Takeshima lobby group is just a collection of anti-Korean radicals.

    The plot thickens on this scandal folks. Stay tuned as we uncover more Uyoku Dantai lurking within the ranks of Mr Bevers Takeshima lobby crew.

    I think I will name this scandal “Mr Bevers Yakuza Gate”

  • http://rjkoehler.com Robert Koehler

    frogmouth — Thanks for the link to the “Tora, Tora, Tora” post. It’s fun to read the old stuff sometimes…

  • slim

    I want the Dokdo/Takeshima issue to be retired here until such time as there is actual movement in the real world, where Korea is dug in and doubled down on those rocks and Japan can make only pro forma claims on them.

    All sides will agree that China really loves this pointless-in-the-larger-scheme-of-things dispute.

    Here at the Hole, it is my view that Bevers and Frogmouth should hold an off-line duel.

  • http://www.sperwerslog.com Sperwer

    With light sabers or air guitar!

  • slim

    With Ninja throwing stars made of beveled Tokdo/Takeshima seashells at close range. Bevers gets to drink shochu, while Frogmouth has to drink soju.

  • frogmouth

    In my defense….

    I could be wrong, but I don’t remember starting any of the Dokdo Takeshima debate threads. It was Mr Bevers.

    I’m not going to sit back and let Mr Bevers tell his lies on this or any forum.

  • gbevers

    Frogmouth wrote (#98):

    This just in ANOTHER CONTRIBUTOR ON “MR BEVER’S” WEBSITE A JAPANESE RIGHT WING EXTREMIST!!

    Again here is the list of contributors on the website Mr Bevers claims. You can see one person’s name is Pacifist written below GTMOR.

    Pacifist claims that Japan’s Invasion of Korea and declaration of war on Russia was simply to protect Japan and Korea. This is quite typical of the Uyoku Dantai’s perception of Japanese history.

    Russia had been expanding and there was real fear that she was preparing to expand farther into Korea. Anyway, here is the link to the discussion thread of which Frogmouth posted a screen shot. Read it and judge for yourselves if Pacifist and the other Japanese discussing on the thread are “right wing extremists.”

    http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=611&cpage=1#comments

    By the way, what led to the comment by Pacifist was the following nettling comment by Toadface, which was one of Frogmouth’s many aliases.

    Toadface:

    I can’t believe Japanese are blubbering about 44 Japanese Fishermen killed on Dokdo by Koreans. In May of 1905 the Japanese Navy slaughtered 5000 Russians in the Sea of Chosun around Ulleungdo-Takeshima-Tsushima in the naval battle dubbed the “Tsushima Massacre.” Such hypocrisy
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/dokdo-ulsan-tsushima-2.html
    This happened about 3 months after the Japanese annexed Dokdo.

  • frogmouth

    News Just In!! Another Member of Mr Bevers Takeshima lobby forum implicated in Uyoku Dantai (Japanese right wing) lobbying!! Mr Bever’s Yakuza Gate scandal grows….

    Apparently if you read the blogroll on Gerry’s website you can see other Japanese contributor named Kaneganese. His name is the second below Pacifists. Kaneganese was another Japanese lobbyists from Matt (Shakahoochie’s) website.

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/japanese-right-wingers-3.jpg

    On this link you can see, much like Mr Bevers, this person denies Japan’s Imperial Army was involved in the Comfort Women issue. Kaneganese says that the Japanese did not force women to have sex during WWII.

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/japanese-right-wingers-5.jpg

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/japanese-right-wingers-6.jpg

    Mr Bevers, it seems that everyone on the site you frequent justifies Japanese military aggression and subsequent colonization of Korea. They also deny the Japanese forced women into prostitution during WWII. T

    This shows the bulk of Takeshima lobbyists cannot be trusted as they deny facts that are accepted by the general public.

  • frogmouth

    Mr Bevers that is not what Pacifist said.

    He tried to sell us this rubbish that if not for Japan’s invsasion of Korea both nations would not exist today. What a load of crap to justify Japanese colonial expansionism, like we should be grateful.

    And I stand by the quote from you. It’s outrageous for Japanese to gripe about 44 people being killed in the big picture considering:

    1. Korea was coming off of decades of Japanese occupation and numerous WWII atrocities.
    2. Japan was knowingly violating the MacArthur Line and Rhee’s Peace Line. I’m not trying to justify it, I’m saying these fishermen deliberately threw themselves in harm’s way and paid the price.

    Anyway follow the thread, I even stated I didn’t agree with Korea attacking civilians you plod,

  • JK

    Gbevers, based on what Frogmouth has showed on his links, you’re in pretty bad company when you find yourself in bed with right-wing Japanese.

  • frogmouth

    The lies of Gerry Bevers!

    This is a classic case of “dump and run” Takeshima lobbying by Gerry Bevers. That is to make a bold statement (or in this case bald-faced lie) and then not give any evidence to back it up and then slink away into the night.

    In this case, Mr Bevers stated the Japan Peace Treaty granted Dokdo (Takeshima) Island to Japan. (Typical Japan MOFA shite)

    Read this link:
    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/wordpress/wp-content/images/gerry-lies.jpg

    Here is the entire text of the Japan Peace Treaty.

    http://www.taiwandocuments.org/sanfrancisco01.htm

    Nowhere does it say Japan was granted Takeshima (Dokdo) In fact, if you look at the bottom you can see the signature by John Foster Dulles. He publicly stated (Sept 5th 1951) any unresolved territorial issues had to solved outside the Japan Peace Treaty.

    http://www.dokdo-takeshima.com/the-japan-peace-treaty-and-dokdo.html

    Mr Bevers on post #55 you asked me to show you were you’ve lied and now everyone can see you are a fraud. You know damn well the Japan Peace Treaty made no mention of Liancourt Rocks, Dokdo or Takeshima.

    You owe us all an apology.

  • gbevers

    Frogmouth wrote (#106):

    It’s outrageous for Japanese to gripe about 44 people being killed in the big picture considering…

    Anyway follow the thread, I even stated I didn’t agree with Korea attacking civilians you plod,

    Do you not see any contradiction in what you wrote, Frogmouth (Toadface)? By the way, why did you refer to the Sea of Japan as the “Sea of Chosun”?

    As for Kaneganese, he or she is much more educated than you, and much more thoughtful.

    US and UN military personnel used Korean “comfort women” while knowing that many were forced into the business by debt obligations and other means. Do American and Canadian middle school textbooks mention that? Is the US military culpable for the recruiting methods of Korean pimps? What about the steam-and-cremes that were on US military bases in Korea up through the 1980s and maybe beyond? Are those mentioned in US middle school books?

    Here is what Kaneganese wrote:

    By the way, it is not only LDP, but also DPJ who started fresh investigation on this issue. Many Japanese started to serioiusly worry that foreigners and Japanese left wingers are taking advantage of inaccuracy of this issue and try to understand what really happened and what didn’t. I think it is very fair to do so.

    Sex slave history erased from texts because we couldn’t find any evidence that they were “slaves” except some cases that illegal brothel owners forced them to do. I don’t understand what is wrong with this? Are you saying that Japanese textbook need to teach Junior High School students something that the historical evidence doesn’t support? If Mr. Nakayama find anything that prove Japanese military systematically forced them to be a “slave”, then we are able to put them in text book, though I still think the comfort women issue is not suitable for JHS students. I don’t want the Governement whitewash the textbook, but if they keep “sex slave”description which is inaccurate, in the history text book, it is the whitewashing in my opinion.

    The thing I am worrying most is, by doing this investigation, we have to expose some former comfort women’s, who just want to forget their past, private information as well. It could harm those people’s and their family’s human rights. But as long as some Korean, and some American and foreign media never stop those inaccurate accusation, we have to do thorough investigation to reveal what really happened to those women unfortunatelly. That is a shame.

    http://www.occidentalism.org/?p=543

  • JK

    Very interesting links in #108. Thanks, Frogmouth!

  • JK

    Gbevers, you’ve basically been called on it by Frogmouth. He has presented evidence that you said Japan was granted Dokdo through the Japan Treaty. It turns out this statement of yours was in fact not true.

    Do you acknowledge that you were wrong, gbevers?

  • Charles Tilly

    Do you acknowledge that you were wrong, gbevers?

    I think I could find a way to convince him to say that he is. But there’d be one, very important condition upon which this deal would rest: JK would have to admit that he indeed would have hot, gay sex with a dolphin in a pool filled with pepto-bismol totally irrelevant as to whether it would have prevented 9/11.

    Can you do that, JK? Sack up and step to the plate like that? Give it some thought.

  • Charles Tilly

    I’ll give you the last word here too, JK. I’m having a good day at the office and feeling generous.

  • JK

    Thanks, Charles Tilly. I’ll take you up on that.

    If it would have prevented another 9/11, the answer is not likely (and sorry fellow Americans, but I’m being honest here). BUT…if my having hot heterosexual sex with YOUR MOTHER in a pool filled with pepto-bismol would prevent another 9/11….then the answer would be yes, I would do it.

    Happy, Charles Tilly? As for your last comment on the other thread, I’ll let it sit there since it shows people that I did get under your skin. :)

  • JK

    Now then…once again, Gbevers, going back to the lie Frogmouth caught you telling, do you acknowledge that you were wrong? The evidence has been presented.

  • frogmouth

    Mr Bevers, It’s been shown You and all Japanese Right Wingers on your “Takeshima” (Dokdo) Island forum are part of an anti-Korean movement formerly run on the website Occidentalism.

    Kaneganese denies on that forum that Japanese forcibly used Korean women for Japanese soldiers. (BTW, you referred to Kaneganese as he or she, didn’t you say he was a Japanese housewife? Is he a transgender?) It seems even you don’t trust Kaneganese’s story

    You asked me to show where you have lied and I did. I suggest you aplogize to the admin of this website and the frequent posters.

    We are waiting…

  • Wedge

    If the energy that went into this Liancourt Rock debate was put to a more productive use, we’d have a cure for the hangover by now.

  • dogbertt

    I think people are skeptical of anyone who isn’t either Korean or Japanese with no stakes on either emotionally, culturally, ethnically, or nationalistically, to take the Dokdo issue so seriously, that he devotes his entire life on it to prove Japan’s rightful ownership.

    Interesting that you seem to have difficulty applying this skepticism toward Gerry’s two chief antagonists on the Dokdo issue, neither of whom are Japanese or Korean.

    What stakes do you suppose they have?

  • Pingback: Remeber Kim Taehee? Nevermind..go with Sayuri

  • Pingback: Osaka court finds a man who harrassed Kim Taehee/Rote guilty