March 15, 2010

'We wanted to annihilate the Japanese because they were different'

Did you think that, back in World War II, the United States fought Japan because of Pearl Harbor, or because the Empire of the Rising Sun was trying to conquer the entire continent of Asia? Nah, if you think so, in the best case you are stupid and ignorant. The Truth is that the US “wanted to annihilate” the Japanese “because they were different,” and (as it was not enough) if that doesn’t sound familiar, by any chance, to “what’s going on today,” then, according to the Mouth of Truth, you must probably be even worse than stupid and ignorant, you are hypocrites and racists. And that’s also why—despite appearances to the contrary—the West is fighting in the Middle East nowadays, not because Islamists attacked us and want to destroy our way of living! Is the message clear enough, ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers?

PS: Ah, sorry, forgot to say the main thing: the Mind behind such inspiring Thoughts is that of Hollywood star—and “honourable man” par excellence—Tom Hanks. Let’s give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to Brutus what is Brutus’s ... (Via Michael van der Galien)



Recommend this post on Google!


5 comments:

  1. Perhaps Tom Hanks made such a sweeping statement with tongue in cheek.
    But unfortunately, there may well have been some truth in it.
    Today there may still be. The animal instinct still latent in us, especially during periods of war, nurtures a deep distrust for, and fear of, those who are 'different'. This might explain the ultra simple reasoning of 'if you're not with us, you're against us'.
    This by extension would be, 'if you don't share or respect our values, then you must be our enemy'.
    But assuming that this is still a part of human nature, then such 'enemies' might be far less tolerant, even with their own kind, their own families and their own children.

    ReplyDelete
  2. On the same subject I recently saw an old black and white film (1950) by Jean Negulesco "Captives à Borneo". About a prison camp detaining English women and children commanded by a cultured and gentlemanly Japanese officer. One of the women prisoners is a writer, whose books the Japanese officer has read and admired.

    At the time of the Japanese surrender, he hears that this wife and all his children were killed in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. He nevertheless sees four of the boys of the women prisoners scrounging for food, and offers to take them to place outside the camp where he has them served with everything that they could wish for.

    Considering the time the film was made, it strikes me as an astonishing example of what sometimes in war is a reality that at such a period most people would prefer to ignore, at least until feelings of hate and animosity have been sufficiently tempered.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is what Tom Hanks said:

    'Asked if they expect “The Pacific” to resonate with viewers when it comes to the conflicts America faces today, Hanks responded quickly.
    “We want it to resonate completely,” he said. “The war in the Pacific was a war of terror and racism, of suicide attacks.Both sides viewed the other side as being subhuman dogs, from a civilization that didn’t recognize the advancement of human kind.
    “Sound familiar? Sound like something that might be going on?” he asked, referring to the U.S.-Middle Eastern conflict."'

    Tom Hanks is an idiot. The Japanese attacked us. What doesn't he get about that? He's just a mindless progressive who wants to blame the U.S. for everything. I've admired Hanks because of his work to get the war memorial, et al. But this kind of silliness reminds me that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    ReplyDelete
  4. P.S. Rob, your sarcasm is legendary... :-)

    ReplyDelete
  5. He must be either insane or extremely ignorant.....

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts with Thumbnails