web analytics

Apologies, the following item could be distressing….

By Mike Cunningham On August 15th, 2015

Seventy years after the Allied Armadas won the War in the Far-East, the standard statement from a BBC Today report about the manner and fashion which the Japanese Military treated British civilians was given as though the man was reading out the weather, and thus, our very way of life is once more denigrated. Was the elderly lady telling lies about her life in a Japanese internment camp? Did she lie about the brutal fashion with which her brother was bayoneted, thrown off the truck and left to die, lingering in agony, for three days? Was she exaggerating about the pathetic diet handed to the over two thousand inmates, a diet which was the basic cause of so many deaths from malnutrition? Did another interviewee lie when describing the rigours, and indeed the very survival, of life in a Hong Kong internment camp, and the savage and vicious treatment handed out to those who had the temerity to attempt an escape? What could possibly distress anyone upon hearing the truth?

On this particular day,  when we should be CELEBRATING the fact that we beat the living shit out of the Japanese because they were a war-mongering bunch of bastards, when we should be CELEBRATING that we killed them by the very thousand, and tens of thousands, before they surrendered, as we, the Allies, had demanded: the BBC tends towards the soft approach, covering the inhumane manner in which thousands were imprisoned as though it was a side-show in the War; is the thing which I find particularly revolting. The film ‘Bridge on the River Kwai’ was of course, a work of fiction, sanitised beyond belief from the inhuman savagery which was inflicted upon thousands of British, American and Allied Prisoners of War. Sanitised because the producers would never have got a release certificate to show the true side of those yellow bastards, and their worship of their bloody emperor, and how they treated men who had surrendered as a lower form of life; because they were taught that surrender showed them as less worthy of life, and so they treated our soldiers, and our kinsmen, as similarly less than worthy of life.

It is perhaps a good time to discuss parts of Hirohito’s speech which signified the end of the War, because, even after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Japs couldn’t even mention the word ‘surrender’; but instead mentioned, almost in passing,  that the Empire accepted the provisions of their joint declaration (the Potsdam declaration; where we demanded UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER). Prior to that, the Imperial clown puppet stated that the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan’s advantage. As well as the clinching remark ‘it being far from our thought either to infringe upon the sovereignty of other nations or to embark upon territorial aggrandizement’.

No, it should not be distressing’ to tell the truth, and to remind the grandchildren of those who lived through those six long years of war, that their opponents, on the Japanese side, were cruel, bestial, and inhumane: and it should not be ‘distressing’ to state that brave people died at the bloody hands and swords of the Japanese; and on the other side of the world that the average German was either a Nazi, or a whole-hearted sympathiser, and well-versed in the knowledge of the treatment in store for their fellow human beings who were of the Jewish faith; and that the Germans too deserved the punishments meted out at places like Bremen, Berlin and Dresden, for the horrors of places like Auschwitz.

12 Responses to “Apologies, the following item could be distressing….”

  1. That last paragraph is the consequence of ordinary people believing ‘the big lie’. Hitler wrote this of ‘the big lie’, those who tell it and those who believe it:


    All this was inspired by the principle – which is quite true in itself – that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes. From time immemorial, however, the Jews have known better than any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited.

  2. A very emotive post, and a very difficult one to debate as the advent of ‘globalism’ and its effect on nationalism and the defence of home and country has changed the concept of just what made a ‘war in self defence’ justifiable.

    The Geneva Convention, the UN and other such gimmicks have done much to reduce our ability to be self protective in their collective attempt to reduce the horrors of war, seemingly reducing the very act to a ‘game with rules’, when, in this modern day and age the aggressors seem to share a very different idea of what we might call or acknowledge as anything remotely civilised – if anything in a war can be called ‘civilised’.

    While we would describe their deliberate and intentional murder of the most defenceless in our societies as barbaric, they see it as just another tool of war, as defined by their religious beliefs.

    Our current enemies describe the consequential civilian deaths caused by the our attempt to destroy their military structure as equally barbaric despite their using civilians as a major part of their defensive structure.

    The ‘game’ has changed since 1945, no longer the full frontal battles of air, land and sea. Now we have the cowards way of scattered terrorist attacks on unprotected targets, and against which, by virtue of all that liberal interim politicking, we have become virtually defenceless, as was ably demonstrated to Blair and co. in the 70’s, and by all those aircraft hijackings which were once such a common phenomenon. For years it was quite common to see armed police on patrol at most UK international airports.

    Today the celebration of VJ day, the media full of front page excuses and ‘why’s and wherefores’ and parsimony, while page two describes the latter day invasion against which we seemingly have no defence, – pages also full of hypocrisy, excuses and betrayal.

    That famous poster – with a finger pointing general and a once meaningful slogan -‘Your country needs you!’, somehow seems more enigmatic than ever, while prompting the response – ‘What for?’

  3. The ‘truth’ is written by the victors – and that is absolute fact, but the truth gets out sooner or later, 70 years later:


    Despite the generally held belief that persists to this day, a belief which argues that all Japanese soldiers willingly, even eagerly, died for the emperor, relatively few young men embraced such an end if there was any hope of living. Like the American, British and Australian soldiers they were facing, most Japanese soldiers dreamed only of a day when the war was over; when they could return home in peace to family and friends; to marry a sweetheart; to raise a family; to tend a small garden; to enjoy life. Nevertheless, almost from the first, it soon became apparent to these young men that there would be, that there could be, no surrender. Wrote one American early in the war:

    “Japanese were known to come out of the jungle unarmed with their hands raised crying ‘mercy, mercy,’ only to be mowed down by machine-gun fire.”

    Time and again, on every contested island and every spit of sand, Japanese soldiers and sailors were slaughtered the instant they raised their hands and walked forward to surrender. After scores of such encounters in which breathless comrades in hiding watched, waited, then witnessed the massacre of their unarmed friends, fewer and fewer Japanese soldiers entertained even the slightest notion of giving up.

    Ironically, though murdering a helpless enemy may have brought some sadistic satisfaction to Allied soldiers, the failure to take prisoners insured that thousands of comrades would also be killed by an enemy now forced to dig in and fight to the death. It is also a fact that as the war wore on and defeat became certain, more and more Japanese soldiers would have gladly surrendered if only they could.

    “If men had been allowed to surrender honorably,” admitted one Japanese veteran late in the war, “everybody would have been doing it.”

    In addition to the murder of prisoners, numerous other atrocities occurred. When one marine battalion captured a Japanese field hospital containing over 400 unarmed men, including patients and medics, all were slaughtered on the spot.

  4. But how do you know that the stories in that link are true Allan ?

  5. They must be true Colm they state that Hitler was a good guy and the US were horrible.

  6. //Did she lie about the brutal fashion with which her brother was bayoneted, thrown off the truck and left to die, lingering in agony, for three days? Was she exaggerating about the pathetic diet handed to the over two thousand inmates, a diet which was the basic cause of so many deaths from malnutrition? //

    Look, someone must have told these British soldiers that the Japs were bad. But, no, they thought they’d go there anyway and do some good, the foolish buggers. I reckon they got exactly what they deserved.

  7. Noel,

    The military in WWII were not volunteers, they were conscripts, they were far from the ‘foolish buggers’ that your tiny mind imagines.

    The bulk of the British contingent were sent to the Far East at a fairly late stage in the conflict and their knowledge of Japanese brutality was already well known from our colonial forces that had previously been in contact with them. Not only were we a part of the Allied forces, we also had some colonial responsibility of our own in that area. Burma, Malaya, Hong Kong and Singapore being but a small sample.

    You had better get used to the idea that international war is a brutal thing, it can happen again, and probably will, so you had better stiffen up that weak spine and be prepared, – the inevitable may come sooner than we expect, and you may well get ‘what you deserve!’

  8. Ernest

    Noel was taking a swipe at Mike Cunnigham with that comment. It wasn’t his own opinion.

  9. Colm,

    Thanks for explaining that small detail.

  10. As concerns the war in the far east, one reads of Americans in the Phillipines, the French in Indo-China, the British pretty much everywhere that drug money can be made. Just look at the atlas and ask yourself in whose service were all these meddlesome whites. They had no business being there, yet they were there.

  11. Colm, on August 16th, 2015 at 11:31 AM Said:
    But how do you know that the stories in that link are true Allan ?

    Well Colm, I compare their credibility with this one:


  12. It is only since the war in the FE i.e. WWII, that drugs have become the global problem they are today. Yes there were addicts, ‘back then’ but certainly not the drivers of conflict as they appear to be today in places such as Afghanistan.

    Yes, it is easy to see, or assume, that America’s interest in Afghanistan is ‘poppy based’, – equally fascinating is that none of the super powers has yet to win a conflict, or instigate any change there, certainly not for several hundred years.