私の紹介を素直に聞いて本当の本物である古田博司氏の最新刊、「統一朝鮮は日本の災難」、を最寄りの書店で購入した人たちは、これまでの人生で最高の有難うを私に呟いているはずである。
この本ほど凄い本は、そうそうあるものではないからだ。
先日も書いたように、私は4年前の8月まで朝日新聞を購読・精読していたから、私は彼の名前すら知らなかった。
彼を読みだしたのは、わりと最近である。以来、彼の論文は出来るだけ目を通すようにしている。
今回の彼の本は何もかもが素晴らしい。
これまで私が読んで来た彼の、どの論文よりも簡潔で知の力に満ちている。
この本には彼の覚悟がある。
彼の天才を惜しみなく明らかにし、日本と世界を変える…日本と世界に真実を知らしめる、という一世一代の意志に溢れているのである。
天才が覚醒し、日本と世界に、これ以上ないほど、見事に、永遠に残る真実を書いている。
これは21世紀に生きている最高の知性の持ち主の一人である古田博司が、自らの研鑽を、渾身の力を込めて、日本と世界のために書いた…世のため、人のために書いた、真実の本である。
私の紹介を素直に聞いて本当の本物である古田博司氏の最新刊、「統一朝鮮は日本の災難」、を最寄りの書店で購入した人たちは、これまでの人生で最高の有難うを私に呟いているはずである。
この本ほど凄い本は、そうそうあるものではないからだ。
先日も書いたように、私は4年前の8月まで朝日新聞を購読・精読していたから、私は彼の名前すら知らなかった。
彼を読みだしたのは、わりと最近である。以来、彼の論文は出来るだけ目を通すようにしている。
今回の彼の本は何もかもが素晴らしい。
これまで私が読んで来た彼の、どの論文よりも簡潔で知の力に満ちている。
この本には彼の覚悟がある。
彼の天才を惜しみなく明らかにし、日本と世界を変える…日本と世界に真実を知らしめる、という一世一代の意志に溢れているのである。
天才が覚醒し、日本と世界に、これ以上ないほど、見事に、永遠に残る真実を書いている。
これは21世紀に生きている最高の知性の持ち主の一人である古田博司が、自らの研鑽を、渾身の力を込めて、日本と世界のために書いた…世のため、人のために書いた、真実の本である。
私の紹介を素直に聞いて本当の本物である古田博司氏の最新刊、「統一朝鮮は日本の災難」、を最寄りの書店で購入した人たちは、これまでの人生で最高の、有難うを、私に呟いているはずである。
この本ほど凄い本は、そうそうあるものではないからだ。
先日も書いたように、私は4年前の8月まで朝日新聞を購読・精読していたから、私は彼の名前すら知らなかった。
彼を読みだしたのは、わりと最近である。以来、彼の論文は出来るだけ目を通すようにしている。
今回の彼の本は何もかもが素晴らしい。
これまで私が読んで来た彼の、どの論文よりも簡潔で知の力に満ちている。
この本には彼の覚悟がある。
彼の天才を惜しみなく明らかにし、日本と世界を変える…日本と世界に真実を知らしめる、という一世一代の意志に溢れているのである。
天才が覚醒し、日本と世界に、これ以上ないほど、見事に、永遠に残る真実を書いている。
これは21世紀に生きている最高の知性の持ち主の一人である古田博司が、自らの研鑽を、渾身の力を込めて、日本と世界のために書いた…世のため、人のために書いた、真実の本である。
The following is from ‘Sankei extract’ of the Sankei Shimbun this morning.
It is an admirable article.
Emphasis is on me.
"We also abandoned the war as the trigger of the right of self-defense and the belligerence."
Shigeru Yoshida Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida explained in Article 9 of the new Constitution at the 1946 Constitutional Council.
Because it does not even admit the self-defense war, there is no reason why the SDF can be recognized under this interpretation.
I would like to keep in mind that this was the initial constitutional interpretation of the government
▼ Interestingly, the Communist Party strongly opposed Article 9.
Mr. Nosaka Sanzo, who also served as Chairman for 24 years, later expelled, on behalf of the party, appealed.
"This is only one empty sentence" "There is a danger of renouncing the right of self-defense of Japan and compromising the independence of the people"
▼At present, the adapting to new circumstances of the Communist Party which advocates article 9 protection, too, is skillfully.
But, our government, too, is not defeated.
Ohmura Seiichi Defense Agency Director general of the Defense Agency in 1954 announced the government's unanimous opinion that ‘exercising armed force as a means of defending the national land in case of armed attack does not violate the Constitution’
▼ Prime Minister Yoshida had to answer with ‘Many of the recent years of the war was carried out at the name of the Self-defence in international law,’ but, constitutional interpretation of the government were converted one hundred eighty degrees.
In the background, there is a circumstance that the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ) tried to fill the strategic space caused by the dispatch of troops of the US occupation forces accompanying the Korean War, in Japan itself
▼ "It is needless to say that this ideal (Article 9) has to give way to the rule of self-preservation too obvious."
MacArthur Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers was emphasizing that this is a yearly message given to Japanese citizens in 1951.
It is the extreme of expediency while he kept forcing Article 9 to Japan by himself.
▼ The Constitution, the enactment process, the deliberation process and the interpretation of the provision, including the fact that it is actually made of GHQ, has continued to deceive the makeshift so far.
While watching the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election debate sponsored by the Japanese press club on February 14, I felt keenly that it could not leave this situation again.
The following is from ‘Sankei extract’ of the Sankei Shimbun this morning.
It is an admirable article.
Emphasis is on me.
"We also abandoned the war as the trigger of the right of self-defense and the belligerence."
Shigeru Yoshida Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida explained in Article 9 of the new Constitution at the 1946 Constitutional Council.
Because it does not even admit the self-defense war, there is no reason why the SDF can be recognized under this interpretation.
I would like to keep in mind that this was the initial constitutional interpretation of the government
▼ Interestingly, the Communist Party strongly opposed Article 9.
Mr. Nosaka Sanzo, who also served as Chairman for 24 years, later expelled, on behalf of the party, appealed.
"This is only one empty sentence" "There is a danger of renouncing the right of self-defense of Japan and compromising the independence of the people"
▼At present, the adapting to new circumstances of the Communist Party which advocates article 9 protection, too, is skillfully.
But, our government, too, is not defeated.
Ohmura Seiichi Defense Agency Director general of the Defense Agency in 1954 announced the government's unanimous opinion that ‘exercising armed force as a means of defending the national land in case of armed attack does not violate the Constitution’
▼ Prime Minister Yoshida had to answer with ‘Many of the recent years of the war was carried out at the name of the Self-defence in international law,’ but, constitutional interpretation of the government were converted one hundred eighty degrees.
In the background, there is a circumstance that the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ) tried to fill the strategic space caused by the dispatch of troops of the US occupation forces accompanying the Korean War, in Japan itself
▼ "It is needless to say that this ideal (Article 9) has to give way to the rule of self-preservation too obvious."
MacArthur Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers was emphasizing that this is a yearly message given to Japanese citizens in 1951.
It is the extreme of expediency while he kept forcing Article 9 to Japan by himself.
▼ The Constitution, the enactment process, the deliberation process and the interpretation of the provision, including the fact that it is actually made of GHQ, has continued to deceive the makeshift so far.
While watching the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election debate sponsored by the Japanese press club on February 14, I felt keenly that it could not leave this situation again.
The following is from ‘Sankei extract’ of the Sankei Shimbun this morning.
It is an admirable article.
Emphasis is on me.
"We also abandoned the war as the trigger of the right of self-defense and the belligerence."
Shigeru Yoshida Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida explained in Article 9 of the new Constitution at the 1946 Constitutional Council.
Because it does not even admit the self-defense war, there is no reason why the SDF can be recognized under this interpretation.
I would like to keep in mind that this was the initial constitutional interpretation of the government
▼ Interestingly, the Communist Party strongly opposed Article 9.
Mr. Nosaka Sanzo, who also served as Chairman for 24 years, later expelled, on behalf of the party, appealed.
"This is only one empty sentence" "There is a danger of renouncing the right of self-defense of Japan and compromising the independence of the people"
▼At present, the adapting to new circumstances of the Communist Party which advocates article 9 protection, too, is skillfully.
But, our government, too, is not defeated.
Ohmura Seiichi Defense Agency Director general of the Defense Agency in 1954 announced the government's unanimous opinion that ‘exercising armed force as a means of defending the national land in case of armed attack does not violate the Constitution’
▼ Prime Minister Yoshida had to answer with ‘Many of the recent years of the war was carried out at the name of the Self-defence in international law,’ but, constitutional interpretation of the government were converted one hundred eighty degrees.
In the background, there is a circumstance that the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ) tried to fill the strategic space caused by the dispatch of troops of the US occupation forces accompanying the Korean War, in Japan itself
▼ "It is needless to say that this ideal (Article 9) has to give way to the rule of self-preservation too obvious."
MacArthur Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers was emphasizing that this is a yearly message given to Japanese citizens in 1951.
It is the extreme of expediency while he kept forcing Article 9 to Japan by himself.
▼ The Constitution, the enactment process, the deliberation process and the interpretation of the provision, including the fact that it is actually made of GHQ, has continued to deceive the makeshift so far.
While watching the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election debate sponsored by the Japanese press club on February 14, I felt keenly that it could not leave this situation again.
The following is from ‘Sankei extract’ of the Sankei Shimbun this morning.
It is an admirable article.
Emphasis is on me.
"We also abandoned the war as the trigger of the right of self-defense and the belligerence."
Shigeru Yoshida Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida explained in Article 9 of the new Constitution at the 1946 Constitutional Council.
Because it does not even admit the self-defense war, there is no reason why the SDF can be recognized under this interpretation.
I would like to keep in mind that this was the initial constitutional interpretation of the government
▼ Interestingly, the Communist Party strongly opposed Article 9.
Mr. Nosaka Sanzo, who also served as Chairman for 24 years, later expelled, on behalf of the party, appealed.
"This is only one empty sentence" "There is a danger of renouncing the right of self-defense of Japan and compromising the independence of the people"
▼At present, the adapting to new circumstances of the Communist Party which advocates article 9 protection, too, is skillfully.
But, our government, too, is not defeated.
Ohmura Seiichi Defense Agency Director general of the Defense Agency in 1954 announced the government's unanimous opinion that ‘exercising armed force as a means of defending the national land in case of armed attack does not violate the Constitution’
▼ Prime Minister Yoshida had to answer with ‘Many of the recent years of the war was carried out at the name of the Self-defence in international law,’ but, constitutional interpretation of the government were converted one hundred eighty degrees.
In the background, there is a circumstance that the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ) tried to fill the strategic space caused by the dispatch of troops of the US occupation forces accompanying the Korean War, in Japan itself
▼ "It is needless to say that this ideal (Article 9) has to give way to the rule of self-preservation too obvious."
MacArthur Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers was emphasizing that this is a yearly message given to Japanese citizens in 1951.
It is the extreme of expediency while he kept forcing Article 9 to Japan by himself.
▼ The Constitution, the enactment process, the deliberation process and the interpretation of the provision, including the fact that it is actually made of GHQ, has continued to deceive the makeshift so far.
While watching the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election debate sponsored by the Japanese press club on February 14, I felt keenly that it could not leave this situation again.
The following is from ‘Sankei extract’ of the Sankei Shimbun this morning.
It is an admirable article.
Emphasis is on me.
"We also abandoned the war as the trigger of the right of self-defense and the belligerence."
Shigeru Yoshida Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida explained in Article 9 of the new Constitution at the 1946 Constitutional Council.
Because it does not even admit the self-defense war, there is no reason why the SDF can be recognized under this interpretation.
I would like to keep in mind that this was the initial constitutional interpretation of the government
▼ Interestingly, the Communist Party strongly opposed Article 9.
Mr. Nosaka Sanzo, who also served as Chairman for 24 years, later expelled, on behalf of the party, appealed.
"This is only one empty sentence" "There is a danger of renouncing the right of self-defense of Japan and compromising the independence of the people"
▼At present, the adapting to new circumstances of the Communist Party which advocates article 9 protection, too, is skillfully.
But, our government, too, is not defeated.
Ohmura Seiichi Defense Agency Director general of the Defense Agency in 1954 announced the government's unanimous opinion that ‘exercising armed force as a means of defending the national land in case of armed attack does not violate the Constitution’
▼ Prime Minister Yoshida had to answer with ‘Many of the recent years of the war was carried out at the name of the Self-defence in international law,’ but, constitutional interpretation of the government were converted one hundred eighty degrees.
In the background, there is a circumstance that the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ) tried to fill the strategic space caused by the dispatch of troops of the US occupation forces accompanying the Korean War, in Japan itself
▼ "It is needless to say that this ideal (Article 9) has to give way to the rule of self-preservation too obvious."
MacArthur Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers was emphasizing that this is a yearly message given to Japanese citizens in 1951.
It is the extreme of expediency while he kept forcing Article 9 to Japan by himself.
▼ The Constitution, the enactment process, the deliberation process and the interpretation of the provision, including the fact that it is actually made of GHQ, has continued to deceive the makeshift so far.
While watching the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election debate sponsored by the Japanese press club on February 14, I felt keenly that it could not leave this situation again.
The following is from ‘Sankei extract’ of the Sankei Shimbun this morning.
It is an admirable article.
Emphasis is on me.
"We also abandoned the war as the trigger of the right of self-defense and the belligerence."
Shigeru Yoshida Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida explained in Article 9 of the new Constitution at the 1946 Constitutional Council.
Because it does not even admit the self-defense war, there is no reason why the SDF can be recognized under this interpretation.
I would like to keep in mind that this was the initial constitutional interpretation of the government
▼ Interestingly, the Communist Party strongly opposed Article 9.
Mr. Nosaka Sanzo, who also served as Chairman for 24 years, later expelled, on behalf of the party, appealed.
"This is only one empty sentence" "There is a danger of renouncing the right of self-defense of Japan and compromising the independence of the people"
▼At present, the adapting to new circumstances of the Communist Party which advocates article 9 protection, too, is skillfully.
But, our government, too, is not defeated.
Ohmura Seiichi Defense Agency Director general of the Defense Agency in 1954 announced the government's unanimous opinion that ‘exercising armed force as a means of defending the national land in case of armed attack does not violate the Constitution’
▼ Prime Minister Yoshida had to answer with ‘Many of the recent years of the war was carried out at the name of the Self-defence in international law,’ but, constitutional interpretation of the government were converted one hundred eighty degrees.
In the background, there is a circumstance that the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ) tried to fill the strategic space caused by the dispatch of troops of the US occupation forces accompanying the Korean War, in Japan itself
▼ "It is needless to say that this ideal (Article 9) has to give way to the rule of self-preservation too obvious."
MacArthur Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers was emphasizing that this is a yearly message given to Japanese citizens in 1951.
It is the extreme of expediency while he kept forcing Article 9 to Japan by himself.
▼ The Constitution, the enactment process, the deliberation process and the interpretation of the provision, including the fact that it is actually made of GHQ, has continued to deceive the makeshift so far.
While watching the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election debate sponsored by the Japanese press club on February 14, I felt keenly that it could not leave this situation again.
The following is from ‘Sankei extract’ of the Sankei Shimbun this morning.
It is an admirable article.
Emphasis is on me.
"We also abandoned the war as the trigger of the right of self-defense and the belligerence."
Shigeru Yoshida Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida explained in Article 9 of the new Constitution at the 1946 Constitutional Council.
Because it does not even admit the self-defense war, there is no reason why the SDF can be recognized under this interpretation.
I would like to keep in mind that this was the initial constitutional interpretation of the government
▼ Interestingly, the Communist Party strongly opposed Article 9.
Mr. Nosaka Sanzo, who also served as Chairman for 24 years, later expelled, on behalf of the party, appealed.
"This is only one empty sentence" "There is a danger of renouncing the right of self-defense of Japan and compromising the independence of the people"
▼At present, the adapting to new circumstances of the Communist Party which advocates article 9 protection, too, is skillfully.
But, our government, too, is not defeated.
Ohmura Seiichi Defense Agency Director general of the Defense Agency in 1954 announced the government's unanimous opinion that ‘exercising armed force as a means of defending the national land in case of armed attack does not violate the Constitution’
▼ Prime Minister Yoshida had to answer with ‘Many of the recent years of the war was carried out at the name of the Self-defence in international law,’ but, constitutional interpretation of the government were converted one hundred eighty degrees.
In the background, there is a circumstance that the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ) tried to fill the strategic space caused by the dispatch of troops of the US occupation forces accompanying the Korean War, in Japan itself
▼ "It is needless to say that this ideal (Article 9) has to give way to the rule of self-preservation too obvious."
MacArthur Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers was emphasizing that this is a yearly message given to Japanese citizens in 1951.
It is the extreme of expediency while he kept forcing Article 9 to Japan by himself.
▼ The Constitution, the enactment process, the deliberation process and the interpretation of the provision, including the fact that it is actually made of GHQ, has continued to deceive the makeshift so far.
While watching the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election debate sponsored by the Japanese press club on February 14, I felt keenly that it could not leave this situation again.
The following is from ‘Sankei extract’ of the Sankei Shimbun this morning.
It is an admirable article.
Emphasis is on me.
"We also abandoned the war as the trigger of the right of self-defense and the belligerence."
Shigeru Yoshida Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida explained in Article 9 of the new Constitution at the 1946 Constitutional Council.
Because it does not even admit the self-defense war, there is no reason why the SDF can be recognized under this interpretation.
I would like to keep in mind that this was the initial constitutional interpretation of the government
▼ Interestingly, the Communist Party strongly opposed Article 9.
Mr. Nosaka Sanzo, who also served as Chairman for 24 years, later expelled, on behalf of the party, appealed.
"This is only one empty sentence" "There is a danger of renouncing the right of self-defense of Japan and compromising the independence of the people"
▼At present, the adapting to new circumstances of the Communist Party which advocates article 9 protection, too, is skillfully.
But, our government, too, is not defeated.
Ohmura Seiichi Defense Agency Director general of the Defense Agency in 1954 announced the government's unanimous opinion that ‘exercising armed force as a means of defending the national land in case of armed attack does not violate the Constitution’
▼ Prime Minister Yoshida had to answer with ‘Many of the recent years of the war was carried out at the name of the Self-defence in international law,’ but, constitutional interpretation of the government were converted one hundred eighty degrees.
In the background, there is a circumstance that the Allied Forces General Headquarters (GHQ) tried to fill the strategic space caused by the dispatch of troops of the US occupation forces accompanying the Korean War, in Japan itself
▼ "It is needless to say that this ideal (Article 9) has to give way to the rule of self-preservation too obvious."
MacArthur Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers was emphasizing that this is a yearly message given to Japanese citizens in 1951.
It is the extreme of expediency while he kept forcing Article 9 to Japan by himself.
▼ The Constitution, the enactment process, the deliberation process and the interpretation of the provision, including the fact that it is actually made of GHQ, has continued to deceive the makeshift so far.
While watching the Liberal Democratic Party presidential election debate sponsored by the Japanese press club on February 14, I felt keenly that it could not leave this situation again.
以下は今朝の産経新聞の「産経抄」からである。
実に見事な論文である。
文中強調は私。
「自衛権の発動としての戦争も、又交戦権も放棄した」。
吉田茂首相は昭和21年の憲法制定議会で、新憲法９条についてこう説明した。
自衛戦争すら認めないのだから、この解釈の下で自衛隊が認められる道理がない。
これが当初の政府の憲法解釈だったことを、まず押さえておきたい
▼興味深いことに、９条に強く反対したのは共産党だった。
24年間も議長を務めた野坂参三氏（後に除名）は、党を代表して訴えた。
「これは一個の空文に過ぎない」「わが国の自衛権を放棄して民族の独立を危うくする危険がある」
▼現在では９条護持を唱える共産党の変わり身も、見事である。
ただ、政府も負けてはいない。
大村清一防衛庁長官は29年、「武力攻撃を受けた場合に、国土を防衛する手段として武力を行使することは、憲法に違反しない」とする政府統一見解を表明した
▼吉田首相は「近年の戦争の多くは国家防衛権の名に於いて行われた」とも答弁していたが、政府の憲法解釈は百八十度転換した。
背景には、連合国軍総司令部（ＧＨＱ）が朝鮮戦争に伴う米占領軍出兵で生じた戦略的空白を、日本自身で埋めさせようとした事情がある
▼「この理想（９条）があまりにも当然な自己保存の法則に道を譲らなければならぬことはいうまでもない」。
マッカーサー連合国軍最高司令官は26年の日本国民に与えた年頭のメッセージで、こう強調していた。
９条を自ら押しつけておきながら、ご都合主義の極みである
▼憲法は制定経緯も審議過程も条文解釈も、実はＧＨＱ製である点も含め、その場しのぎのごまかしを続けてここまできた。
14日の日本記者クラブ主催の自民党総裁選討論会を見ながら、改めてこのまま放置はできないと痛感した。
以下は今朝の産経新聞の「産経抄」からである。
実に見事な論文である。
文中強調は私。
「自衛権の発動としての戦争も、又交戦権も放棄した」。
吉田茂首相は昭和21年の憲法制定議会で、新憲法９条についてこう説明した。
自衛戦争すら認めないのだから、この解釈の下で自衛隊が認められる道理がない。
これが当初の政府の憲法解釈だったことを、まず押さえておきたい
▼興味深いことに、９条に強く反対したのは共産党だった。
24年間も議長を務めた野坂参三氏（後に除名）は、党を代表して訴えた。
「これは一個の空文に過ぎない」「わが国の自衛権を放棄して民族の独立を危うくする危険がある」
▼現在では９条護持を唱える共産党の変わり身も、見事である。
ただ、政府も負けてはいない。
大村清一防衛庁長官は29年、「武力攻撃を受けた場合に、国土を防衛する手段として武力を行使することは、憲法に違反しない」とする政府統一見解を表明した
▼吉田首相は「近年の戦争の多くは国家防衛権の名に於いて行われた」とも答弁していたが、政府の憲法解釈は百八十度転換した。
背景には、連合国軍総司令部（ＧＨＱ）が朝鮮戦争に伴う米占領軍出兵で生じた戦略的空白を、日本自身で埋めさせようとした事情がある
▼「この理想（９条）があまりにも当然な自己保存の法則に道を譲らなければならぬことはいうまでもない」。
マッカーサー連合国軍最高司令官は26年の日本国民に与えた年頭のメッセージで、こう強調していた。
９条を自ら押しつけておきながら、ご都合主義の極みである
▼憲法は制定経緯も審議過程も条文解釈も、実はＧＨＱ製である点も含め、その場しのぎのごまかしを続けてここまできた。
14日の日本記者クラブ主催の自民党総裁選討論会を見ながら、改めてこのまま放置はできないと痛感した。
以下は今朝の産経新聞の「産経抄」からである。
実に見事な論文である。
文中強調は私。
「自衛権の発動としての戦争も、又交戦権も放棄した」。
吉田茂首相は昭和21年の憲法制定議会で、新憲法９条についてこう説明した。
自衛戦争すら認めないのだから、この解釈の下で自衛隊が認められる道理がない。
これが当初の政府の憲法解釈だったことを、まず押さえておきたい
▼興味深いことに、９条に強く反対したのは共産党だった。
24年間も議長を務めた野坂参三氏（後に除名）は、党を代表して訴えた。
「これは一個の空文に過ぎない」「わが国の自衛権を放棄して民族の独立を危うくする危険がある」
▼現在では９条護持を唱える共産党の変わり身も、見事である。
ただ、政府も負けてはいない。
大村清一防衛庁長官は29年、「武力攻撃を受けた場合に、国土を防衛する手段として武力を行使することは、憲法に違反しない」とする政府統一見解を表明した
▼吉田首相は「近年の戦争の多くは国家防衛権の名に於いて行われた」とも答弁していたが、政府の憲法解釈は百八十度転換した。
背景には、連合国軍総司令部（ＧＨＱ）が朝鮮戦争に伴う米占領軍出兵で生じた戦略的空白を、日本自身で埋めさせようとした事情がある
▼「この理想（９条）があまりにも当然な自己保存の法則に道を譲らなければならぬことはいうまでもない」。
マッカーサー連合国軍最高司令官は26年の日本国民に与えた年頭のメッセージで、こう強調していた。
９条を自ら押しつけておきながら、ご都合主義の極みである
▼憲法は制定経緯も審議過程も条文解釈も、実はＧＨＱ製である点も含め、その場しのぎのごまかしを続けてここまできた。
14日の日本記者クラブ主催の自民党総裁選討論会を見ながら、改めてこのまま放置はできないと痛感した。
以下は今朝の産経新聞の「産経抄」からである。
実に見事な論文である。
文中強調は私。
「自衛権の発動としての戦争も、又交戦権も放棄した」。
吉田茂首相は昭和21年の憲法制定議会で、新憲法９条についてこう説明した。
自衛戦争すら認めないのだから、この解釈の下で自衛隊が認められる道理がない。
これが当初の政府の憲法解釈だったことを、まず押さえておきたい
▼興味深いことに、９条に強く反対したのは共産党だった。
24年間も議長を務めた野坂参三氏（後に除名）は、党を代表して訴えた。
「これは一個の空文に過ぎない」「わが国の自衛権を放棄して民族の独立を危うくする危険がある」
▼現在では９条護持を唱える共産党の変わり身も、見事である。
ただ、政府も負けてはいない。
大村清一防衛庁長官は29年、「武力攻撃を受けた場合に、国土を防衛する手段として武力を行使することは、憲法に違反しない」とする政府統一見解を表明した
▼吉田首相は「近年の戦争の多くは国家防衛権の名に於いて行われた」とも答弁していたが、政府の憲法解釈は百八十度転換した。
背景には、連合国軍総司令部（ＧＨＱ）が朝鮮戦争に伴う米占領軍出兵で生じた戦略的空白を、日本自身で埋めさせようとした事情がある
▼「この理想（９条）があまりにも当然な自己保存の法則に道を譲らなければならぬことはいうまでもない」。
マッカーサー連合国軍最高司令官は26年の日本国民に与えた年頭のメッセージで、こう強調していた。
９条を自ら押しつけておきながら、ご都合主義の極みである
▼憲法は制定経緯も審議過程も条文解釈も、実はＧＨＱ製である点も含め、その場しのぎのごまかしを続けてここまできた。
14日の日本記者クラブ主催の自民党総裁選討論会を見ながら、改めてこのまま放置はできないと痛感した。
