China is extremely evil, but the U.S. was too stupid to see it.

The following is from an article by Nobuhiko Sakai, former professor of the University of Tokyo's Institute of Archives, which appears in this month's issue of Themis, a monthly magazine for subscribers.
It is a must-read not only for the Japanese people but also for people around the world.
Amidst the growing "China is the culprit" theory of the new Corona
Asahi Shimbun comes to China's defense with "WHO investigation report
A report on the slavery in China that cleverly covered up for Xi Jinping and Tedros and turned it into a criticism of Trump and a confrontation between the U.S. and China.
International Organizations Swept Away by China 
On the occasion of the first anniversary of the WHO pandemic declaration, the Asahi Shimbun wrote a comprehensive article about WHO in the "Time and Time" column on March 10.
First, in Reed, "Although it was expected to be a command tower for infection control, it was swayed by international politics without sufficient authority. The unprecedented infectious disease that crosses national borders highlights the limits of international organizations blocked by national walls. " but this is entirely incorrect.
It is not "swept away by international politics," but "swept away by China," or more correctly, "dominated by China.
In other words, it is Asahi Shimbun's reticence and speculation about China, which naturally leads to its defense of Tedros.
Already here, the keynote of this article is clearly expressed.
At the beginning of the article, it says, "We issued the highest level of warning on January 30 last year, when we said it was a 'public health emergency of international concern,' not on March 11, when we said it was a pandemic. During that time, we continued to issue warnings, but only a few countries responded," he said.
At a press conference on March 8, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom emphasized this and introduced Tedros' one-sided argument, saying, "We have checked the criticism of the delay in recognizing a pandemic.
But here lies a severe deception by Tedros and the Asahi Shimbun.
As Tedros points out, the emergency declaration was more critical than the pandemic declaration. Still, the biggest problem with the January 30 emergency declaration was eliminating the recommendation to restrict the movement of people and goods at China's request.
It was clearly stated in the Asahi Shimbun on February 23, 2020.
On the 28th, just before the 30th, Tedros went to Beijing and must have been ordered by Xi Jinping.
Thus, Chinese Spring Festival tourists traveled around the world and spread the coronavirus.
This crucial fact is not pointed out in this article, nor is it mentioned in the chronology attached to this article.
The article then states: In the early days of the outbreak, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences and other events. In the early days of the epidemic, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences. He did not change his stance even when the international community began to distrust the Chinese government for withholding information, such as when a doctor who warned of the spread of the disease before the authorities did was punished. Then U.S. President Trump criticized him as a puppet of China. As the spread of the disease in the U.S. spread, he stepped up his attacks on the WHO to dodge criticism of himself and finally announced his withdrawal from the organization."
The Asahi Shimbun introduces a U.S. expert's argument in defense of China. 
President Trump is right about what is being said here.
There is no doubt that Tedros is a puppet, as he removed the restrictions on the movement of people and goods from the emergency declaration at the behest of Xi Jinping.
However, in the Asahi article, "Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law at Georgetown University in the U.S. who cooperates with the WHO's expert committees, said, 'I don't think the WHO is pro-China, just polite to a mighty country.
As shown above, the Asahi Shimbun carries a comment by a U.S. university official denying the WHO's pro-China stance.
Asahi's article then went on to investigate the origin of the coronavirus, saying, "The deepening US-China conflict has also affected the investigation of the source of the virus WHO puts this investigation first to prevent the next pandemic. Positioned as an issue, China also showed a cooperative attitude at the WHO annual meeting in May last year.
However, when the Trump administration emphasized the "China responsibility theory," such as the alleged virus leak from the Wuhan Institute, the Chinese side stiffened its attitude. It has been a long time since the WHO advance team entered China in July without being included in the investigation, " Asahi said, replacing the delay in the research with the responsibility of the Trump administration.
"Professor Antoine Freiholt (Public Health) of the University of Geneva commented on the difficulty of investigating WHO, saying, 'We have to negotiate with the target countries one by one when who, what to look for, and where to visit. It is the same in Japan and Britain, and the United States does not want foreigners to investigate their own country, not just in authoritative China. "Asahi even introduces a complete defense against China.
The above is the analysis of the Asahi article on March 10, but on March 30, WHO published a research report on the source of the coronavirus.　The report was questioned, and 14 countries around the world expressed common concerns.
In the first place, the WHO is entirely under the control of China, so there is no way they can produce a proper report.
Whether it is the laboratory or the seafood market, there is no doubt that the outflow came from Wuhan, and the frozen food theory is obviously Chinese bullshit.
Regarding this report, the Asahi Shimbun wrote an unfocused editorial on April 2. 
In the beginning, Asahi says, "Infectious diseases are a universal threat. In order to clarify it, all politics should be eliminated, and science-based research should be exhausted." Still, the spread of the virus was caused by the ultimate political plot of bioterrorism by China, which was politics from the beginning.
Asahi added, "The previous Trump administration had suggested that the virus had leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, but the report largely dismissed this. On the other hand, the report did not rule out the possibility of China's claim that the virus was attached to frozen food and brought to Wuhan.
It resulted from the WHO's slavery to China, but the way it was also written clearly shows the slavery to China of the Asahi Shimbun itself.
Used as a tool to promote hegemony 
"In the first place, the confrontation between the United States and China has cast a shadow over Corona and WHO. The United States, which criticizes WHO as being closer to China, has made a fuss about withdrawal. This report also had such an effect. It is said that the announcement was delayed. It would be an outrageous folly if a great power could use the elucidation of Corona as a tool for supremacy amid a global crisis, "Asahi's article said.
However, it is a well-known fact around the world that the delay was caused by China's refusal to conduct an investigation.
Rather than using the elucidation of the Corona as a tool for hegemony, as we have said many times, China used the coronavirus itself to promote China's hegemony, or more precisely, as a weapon.
Near the end of the editorial, it says.
"We need a robust system based on universal humanitarianism that is not swayed by the agendas of the major powers. In particular, measures to combat infectious diseases are a long-term challenge facing the world. We must take steps to reform the functions of the WHO and other organizations fundamentally."
I have no objection to this part. 
However, there is one thing that must thoroughly recognize.
The fact that China is not based on "universal humanism" at all.
China's domination of the WHO and the entire U.N. has been established while the U.S. has been careless. 
While the United States was alert, it established China's control system for the WHO and the entire United Nations.
China is extremely evil, but the U.S. was too stupid to see it.

 

 

 

 

 

C'est un livre très lisible mais véridique.

Les livres suivants sont une lecture incontournable non seulement pour les Japonais, mais aussi pour que les gens du monde entier connaissent le monde avant, pendant et après la guerre.
L'auteur, le «Testament aux Japonais» de M. Henry Stokes, est lourd et précieux.
Je suis convaincu que la quatrième vague de la catastrophe corona actuelle, le virus de Wuhan, était une arme biologique, mais j'en discuterai plus tard.
Ce serait une bénédiction déguisée de souscrire à ce livre alors que GW déclare l'état d'urgence.
Les citoyens japonais doivent se rendre dès maintenant dans la librairie la plus proche pour s'abonner.
C'est un livre très lisible mais véridique.
p167-p169
Un acte d'agression des puissances blanches appelé l'Intervention des Trois Pouvoirs.
Après la restauration Meiji, le Japon a concentré ses efforts sur la construction d'une armée riche et robuste sous la menace des puissances occidentales.
C'était parce que c'était le seul moyen de protéger l'indépendance du Japon.
Dans le même temps, il est devenu une tâche urgente de réviser les traités inégaux avec les puissances blanches qui avaient conclu entre la fin de la période Edo et le début de la période Meiji.
Par exemple, les traités commerciaux que le shogunat d'Edo avait conclus avec les États-Unis, la Russie, les Pays-Bas, le Royaume-Uni et la France en 1858 (le traité à cinq parties de l'Ansei) étaient extrêmement désavantageux pour le Japon, car ils:
Accorder la juridiction consulaire aux pays étrangers et empêcher l'application des lois et décisions judiciaires japonaises aux crimes étrangers (extraterritorialité).
Il n'a donné au Japon aucune autonomie en matière de tarifs.
Clauses NPF inconditionnelles et unilatérales approuvées.
Le gouvernement Meiji a dépensé énormément d'énergie pour essayer de résoudre ces problèmes, mais les puissances occidentales ne renonceraient pas aux traités avantageux qu'elles avaient acquis.
La guerre sino-japonaise a eu lieu dans une telle situation.
Le monde n'avait jamais imaginé que le Japon, une nation nouvellement émergente dans le coin de l'Asie, vaincrait la dynastie Qing, une puissance importante en Asie.
Le résultat, cependant, a été une série de victoires pour le Japon sur terre et en mer.
Le Japon et l'Empire Qing ont appelé à une trêve le 20 mars 1985 et ont immédiatement entamé des pourparlers pour la paix.
Le 17 avril, la conférence de paix s'est tenue à Shunpanro à Shimonoseki, en présence du Premier ministre Hirobumi Ito et du ministre des Affaires étrangères Munemitsu Mutsu du côté japonais, et Li Hongzhang et d'autres du côté des Qing.
Le traité de Shimonoseki a été conclu, mettant fin à la guerre.
Le contenu principal du traité Shimonoseki était le suivant
Premièrement, la Chine a reconnu l'indépendance de la Corée et l'hommage, les offrandes et les cérémonies de la Corée à la dynastie Qing, qui ont entravé son indépendance, ont été abolis à jamais.
2. La péninsule de Liaodong, Taiwan et les îles Penghu devaient être transférées au Japon.
3. La dynastie Qing paiera 300 millions de Ryo (queue) au Japon.
4. Le Japon bénéficiera des mêmes privilèges que les autres pays de l'Empire Qing.
Cette victoire dans la guerre sino-japonaise a dynamisé le peuple japonais. Ils ont commencé à rechercher une relation plus uniforme avec les puissances occidentales et à œuvrer pour une révision complète des traités inégaux.
Cependant, ce sont les puissances blanches qui ont intercepté la victoire du Japon là-bas.
La Russie, en collaboration avec la France et l'Allemagne, a exercé des pressions sur le Japon.
Le 23 avril 1895, les ministres des trois pays ont envoyé une lettre au Japon disant qu'il serait préférable de ramener la péninsule de Liaodong à la dynastie Qing, la soi-disant interférence des trois puissances.
Le Japon, avec sa faible puissance nationale, ne pouvait pas gagner une guerre contre les trois puissances blanches. Il n’a pas eu d’autre choix que d’accepter la recommandation.
Le Japon n'avait d'autre choix que d'accepter la recommandation. ...... Le Japon était déterminé à endurer toutes sortes de difficultés pour se racheter de cette humiliation.
Soit dit en passant, trois ans plus tard, les trois pays ont demandé au gouvernement Qing de payer pour cela.
La Russie a loué Lushun et Dalian, l'Allemagne a loué la baie de Jiaozhou et la France a loué la baie de Guangzhou.
Incidemment, les Britanniques ont loué Weihaiwei et la péninsule de Kowloon.
À travers ces trois interventions, le Japon a dû ressentir la menace des puissances blanches, dont la Russie, envahissant l'Asie.

China used the coronavirus itself to promote China's hegemony, or more precisely, as a weapon.

The following is from an article by Nobuhiko Sakai, former professor of the University of Tokyo's Institute of Archives, which appears in this month's issue of Themis, a monthly magazine for subscribers.
It is a must-read not only for the Japanese people but also for people around the world.
Amidst the growing "China is the culprit" theory of the new Corona
Asahi Shimbun comes to China's defense with "WHO investigation report
A report on the slavery in China that cleverly covered up for Xi Jinping and Tedros and turned it into a criticism of Trump and a confrontation between the U.S. and China.
International Organizations Swept Away by China 
On the occasion of the first anniversary of the WHO pandemic declaration, the Asahi Shimbun wrote a comprehensive article about WHO in the "Time and Time" column on March 10.
First, in Reed, "Although it was expected to be a command tower for infection control, it was swayed by international politics without sufficient authority. The unprecedented infectious disease that crosses national borders highlights the limits of international organizations blocked by national walls. " but this is entirely incorrect.
It is not "swept away by international politics," but "swept away by China," or more correctly, "dominated by China.
In other words, it is Asahi Shimbun's reticence and speculation about China, which naturally leads to its defense of Tedros.
Already here, the keynote of this article is clearly expressed.
At the beginning of the article, it says, "We issued the highest level of warning on January 30 last year, when we said it was a 'public health emergency of international concern,' not on March 11, when we said it was a pandemic. During that time, we continued to issue warnings, but only a few countries responded," he said.
At a press conference on March 8, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom emphasized this and introduced Tedros' one-sided argument, saying, "We have checked the criticism of the delay in recognizing a pandemic.
But here lies a severe deception by Tedros and the Asahi Shimbun.
As Tedros points out, the emergency declaration was more critical than the pandemic declaration. Still, the biggest problem with the January 30 emergency declaration was eliminating the recommendation to restrict the movement of people and goods at China's request.
It was clearly stated in the Asahi Shimbun on February 23, 2020.
On the 28th, just before the 30th, Tedros went to Beijing and must have been ordered by Xi Jinping.
Thus, Chinese Spring Festival tourists traveled around the world and spread the coronavirus.
This crucial fact is not pointed out in this article, nor is it mentioned in the chronology attached to this article.
The article then states: In the early days of the outbreak, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences and other events. In the early days of the epidemic, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences. He did not change his stance even when the international community began to distrust the Chinese government for withholding information, such as when a doctor who warned of the spread of the disease before the authorities did was punished. Then U.S. President Trump criticized him as a puppet of China. As the spread of the disease in the U.S. spread, he stepped up his attacks on the WHO to dodge criticism of himself and finally announced his withdrawal from the organization."
The Asahi Shimbun introduces a U.S. expert's argument in defense of China. 
President Trump is right about what is being said here.
There is no doubt that Tedros is a puppet, as he removed the restrictions on the movement of people and goods from the emergency declaration at the behest of Xi Jinping.
However, in the Asahi article, "Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law at Georgetown University in the U.S. who cooperates with the WHO's expert committees, said, 'I don't think the WHO is pro-China, just polite to a mighty country.
As shown above, the Asahi Shimbun carries a comment by a U.S. university official denying the WHO's pro-China stance.
Asahi's article then went on to investigate the origin of the coronavirus, saying, "The deepening US-China conflict has also affected the investigation of the source of the virus WHO puts this investigation first to prevent the next pandemic. Positioned as an issue, China also showed a cooperative attitude at the WHO annual meeting in May last year.
However, when the Trump administration emphasized the "China responsibility theory," such as the alleged virus leak from the Wuhan Institute, the Chinese side stiffened its attitude. It has been a long time since the WHO advance team entered China in July without being included in the investigation, " Asahi said, replacing the delay in the research with the responsibility of the Trump administration.
"Professor Antoine Freiholt (Public Health) of the University of Geneva commented on the difficulty of investigating WHO, saying, 'We have to negotiate with the target countries one by one when who, what to look for, and where to visit. It is the same in Japan and Britain, and the United States does not want foreigners to investigate their own country, not just in authoritative China. "Asahi even introduces a complete defense against China.
The above is the analysis of the Asahi article on March 10, but on March 30, WHO published a research report on the source of the coronavirus.　The report was questioned, and 14 countries around the world expressed common concerns.
In the first place, the WHO is entirely under the control of China, so there is no way they can produce a proper report.
Whether it is the laboratory or the seafood market, there is no doubt that the outflow came from Wuhan, and the frozen food theory is obviously Chinese bullshit.
Regarding this report, the Asahi Shimbun wrote an unfocused editorial on April 2. 
In the beginning, Asahi says, "Infectious diseases are a universal threat. In order to clarify it, all politics should be eliminated, and science-based research should be exhausted." Still, the spread of the virus was caused by the ultimate political plot of bioterrorism by China, which was politics from the beginning.
Asahi added, "The previous Trump administration had suggested that the virus had leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, but the report largely dismissed this. On the other hand, the report did not rule out the possibility of China's claim that the virus was attached to frozen food and brought to Wuhan.
It resulted from the WHO's slavery to China, but the way it was also written clearly shows the slavery to China of the Asahi Shimbun itself.
Used as a tool to promote hegemony 
"In the first place, the confrontation between the United States and China has cast a shadow over Corona and WHO. The United States, which criticizes WHO as being closer to China, has made a fuss about withdrawal. This report also had such an effect. It is said that the announcement was delayed. It would be an outrageous folly if a great power could use the elucidation of Corona as a tool for supremacy amid a global crisis, "Asahi's article said.
However, it is a well-known fact around the world that the delay was caused by China's refusal to conduct an investigation.
Rather than using the elucidation of the Corona as a tool for hegemony, as we have said many times, China used the coronavirus itself to promote China's hegemony, or more precisely, as a weapon.
Near the end of the editorial, it says.
"We need a robust system based on universal humanitarianism that is not swayed by the agendas of the major powers. In particular, measures to combat infectious diseases are a long-term challenge facing the world. We must take steps to reform the functions of the WHO and other organizations fundamentally."
I have no objection to this part. 
However, there is one thing that must thoroughly recognize.
The fact that China is not based on "universal humanism" at all.
China's domination of the WHO and the entire U.N. has been established while the U.S. has been careless. 
While the United States was alert, it established China's control system for the WHO and the entire United Nations.
China is extremely evil, but the U.S. was too stupid to see it.

 

 

 

 

 

Es ist ein sehr lesbares, aber wahrheitsgemäßes Buch.

Die folgenden Bücher sind nicht nur ein Muss für Japaner, sondern auch für Menschen weltweit, um die Welt vor, während und nach dem Krieg zu kennen.
Der Autor, Henry Stokes '"Testament an die Japaner", ist schwer und kostbar.
Ich bin überzeugt, dass die vierte Welle der aktuellen Koronakatastrophe, das Wuhan-Virus, eine biologische Waffe war, aber ich werde dies später diskutieren.
Es wäre ein Segen, dieses Buch zu abonnieren, da GW den Ausnahmezustand erklärt.
Japanische Bürger sollten sich jetzt zum nächstgelegenen Buchladen begeben, um sich anzumelden.
Es ist ein sehr lesbares, aber wahrheitsgemäßes Buch.
p167-p169
Ein Akt der Aggression der weißen Mächte, der als Drei-Mächte-Intervention bezeichnet wird.
Nach der Meiji-Restauration konzentrierte sich Japan auf den Aufbau eines reichen und robusten Militärs unter der Bedrohung der Westmächte.
Es war, weil es der einzige Weg war, Japans Unabhängigkeit zu schützen.
Gleichzeitig wurde es zu einer dringenden Aufgabe, die ungleichen Verträge mit den weißen Mächten zu überarbeiten, die zwischen dem Ende der Edo-Zeit und dem Beginn der Meiji-Zeit geschlossen worden waren.
Zum Beispiel waren die Handelsverträge, die das Edo-Shogunat 1858 mit den Vereinigten Staaten, Russland, den Niederlanden, dem Vereinigten Königreich und Frankreich geschlossen hatte (der Fünf-Parteien-Vertrag von Ansei), für Japan äußerst nachteilig, da sie:
Gewährt die konsularische Zuständigkeit des Auslandes und verhindert, dass japanische Gesetze und Gerichtsentscheidungen auf ausländische Verbrechen angewendet werden (Extraterritorialität).
Es gab Japan keine Autonomie über Zölle.
Genehmigte bedingungslose und einseitige MFN-Klauseln.
Die Meiji-Regierung gab enorm viel Energie aus, um diese Probleme zu lösen, aber die westlichen Mächte würden die vorteilhaften Verträge, die sie erworben hatten, nicht aufgeben.
Der chinesisch-japanische Krieg fand in einer solchen Situation statt.
Die Welt hätte nie gedacht, dass Japan, eine neu entstehende Nation in der Ecke Asiens, die Qing-Dynastie, eine bedeutende Macht in Asien, besiegen würde.
Das Ergebnis war jedoch eine Reihe von Siegen für Japan an Land und auf See.
Japan und das Qing-Reich haben am 20. März 1985 einen Waffenstillstand geschlossen und sofort Friedensgespräche aufgenommen.
Am 17. April fand in Shunpanro in Shimonoseki die Friedenskonferenz statt, an der Premierminister Hirobumi Ito und Außenminister Munemitsu Mutsu auf japanischer Seite sowie Li Hongzhang und andere auf Qing-Seite teilnahmen.
Der Vertrag von Shimonoseki wurde geschlossen und der Krieg beendet.
Der Hauptinhalt des Shimonoseki-Vertrags war wie folgt
Erstens erkannte China die Unabhängigkeit Koreas an, und die Ehrungen, Opfergaben und Zeremonien Koreas an die Qing-Dynastie, die seine Unabhängigkeit behinderten, wurden für immer abgeschafft.
2. Die Liaodong-Halbinsel, Taiwan und die Penghu-Inseln sollten nach Japan verlegt werden.
3. Die Qing-Dynastie zahlt 300 Millionen Ryo (Schwanz) an Japan.
4. Japan erhält die gleichen Privilegien wie andere Länder des Qing-Reiches.
Dieser Sieg im Chinesisch-Japanischen Krieg hat das japanische Volk mit Energie versorgt. Sie begannen, ein gleichmäßigeres Verhältnis zu den westlichen Mächten anzustreben und sich für eine vollständige Überarbeitung der ungleichen Verträge einzusetzen.
Es waren jedoch die weißen Mächte, die Japans Sieg dort abfingen.
Russland übte in Zusammenarbeit mit Frankreich und Deutschland Druck auf Japan aus.
Am 23. April 1895 schickten die Minister der drei Länder einen Brief nach Japan, in dem sie sagten, es sei besser, die Liaodong-Halbinsel in die Qing-Dynastie, die sogenannte Drei-Macht-Interferenz, zurückzubringen.
Japan mit seiner geringen nationalen Macht konnte keinen Krieg gegen die drei weißen Mächte gewinnen. Es blieb nichts anderes übrig, als die Empfehlung anzunehmen.
Japan hatte keine andere Wahl, als die Empfehlung anzunehmen. ...... Japan war entschlossen, alle Arten von Schwierigkeiten zu ertragen, um sich von dieser Demütigung zu befreien.
Übrigens forderten die drei Länder drei Jahre später die Qing-Regierung auf, dafür zu zahlen.
Russland hat Lushun und Dalian gepachtet, Deutschland hat die Bucht von Jiaozhou gepachtet und Frankreich hat die Bucht von Guangzhou gepachtet.
Übrigens haben die Briten Weihaiwei und die Kowloon-Halbinsel gepachtet.
Durch diese drei Interventionen muss Japan die Bedrohung durch die weißen Mächte, einschließlich Russland, gespürt haben, die Asien überrannt haben.

Es un libro muy legible pero veraz.

Los siguientes libros son de lectura obligada no solo para los japoneses sino también para que personas de todo el mundo conozcan el mundo antes, durante y después de la guerra.
El autor, "Testament to the Japanese" del Sr. Henry Stokes, es pesado y precioso.
Estoy convencido de que la cuarta ola del actual desastre de la corona, el virus de Wuhan, fue un arma biológica, pero lo discutiré más adelante.
Sería una bendición disfrazada suscribirse a este libro ya que GW declara el estado de emergencia.
Los ciudadanos japoneses deben dirigirse a la librería más cercana ahora mismo para suscribirse.
Es un libro muy legible pero veraz.
p167-p169
Un acto de agresión de las potencias blancas llamado Intervención de las Tres Potencias.
Después de la Restauración Meiji, Japón centró sus esfuerzos en construir un ejército rico y robusto bajo la amenaza de las potencias occidentales.
Fue porque era la única forma de proteger la independencia de Japón.
Al mismo tiempo, se convirtió en una tarea urgente revisar los tratados desiguales con las potencias blancas que habían concluido entre el final del período Edo y el comienzo del período Meiji.
Por ejemplo, los tratados comerciales que el shogunato Edo había celebrado con los Estados Unidos, Rusia, los Países Bajos, el Reino Unido y Francia en 1858 (el Tratado de las Cinco Partes de Ansei) eran extremadamente desventajosos para Japón, ya que:
Concedió jurisdicción consular a países extranjeros e impidió que las leyes y decisiones judiciales japonesas se aplicaran a delitos extranjeros (extraterritorialidad).
No le dio a Japón ninguna autonomía sobre los aranceles.
Aprobación de cláusulas NMF incondicionales y unilaterales.
El gobierno de Meiji gastó una enorme cantidad de energía tratando de resolver estos problemas, pero las potencias occidentales no renunciaron a los ventajosos tratados que habían adquirido.
La guerra chino-japonesa tuvo lugar en tal situación.
El mundo nunca había imaginado que Japón, una nación emergente en la esquina de Asia, derrotaría a la dinastía Qing, una potencia significativa en Asia.
El resultado, sin embargo, fue una serie de victorias para Japón en tierra y mar.
Japón y el Imperio Qing pidieron una tregua el 20 de marzo de 1985 e inmediatamente comenzaron las conversaciones por la paz.
El 17 de abril, la conferencia de paz se llevó a cabo en Shunpanro en Shimonoseki, a la que asistieron el Primer Ministro Hirobumi Ito y el Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores Munemitsu Mutsu del lado japonés, y Li Hongzhang y otros del lado Qing.
Se concluyó el Tratado de Shimonoseki, poniendo fin a la guerra.
El contenido principal del Tratado de Shimonoseki fue el siguiente
Primero, China reconoció la independencia de Corea, y los tributos, ofrendas y ceremonias de Corea a la dinastía Qing, que obstaculizaron su independencia, fueron abolidos para siempre.
2. La península de Liaodong, Taiwán y las islas Penghu debían ser transferidas a Japón.
3. La dinastía Qing pagará 300 millones de Ryo (cola) a Japón.
4. Japón tendrá los mismos privilegios que otros países del Imperio Qing.
Esta victoria en la guerra chino-japonesa energizó al pueblo japonés. Comenzaron a buscar una relación más pareja con las potencias occidentales y trabajaron por una revisión completa de los tratados desiguales.
Sin embargo, fueron las potencias blancas las que interceptaron la victoria de Japón allí.
Rusia, en colaboración con Francia y Alemania, presionó a Japón.
El 23 de abril de 1895, los ministros de los tres países enviaron una carta a Japón diciendo que sería mejor devolver la península de Liaodong a la dinastía Qing, la llamada Interferencia de las Tres Potencias.
Japón, con su bajo poder nacional, no pudo ganar una guerra contra las tres potencias blancas. No tuvo más remedio que aceptar la recomendación.
Japón no tuvo más remedio que aceptar la recomendación. ... Japón estaba decidido a soportar todo tipo de dificultades para redimirse de esta humillación.
Por cierto, tres años después, los tres países exigieron que el gobierno de Qing pagara por esto.
Rusia arrendó Lushun y Dalian, Alemania arrendó la bahía de Jiaozhou y Francia arrendó la bahía de Guangzhou.
Por cierto, los británicos alquilaron Weihaiwei y la península de Kowloon.
A través de estas tres intervenciones, Japón debe haber sentido la amenaza de las potencias blancas, incluida Rusia, invadiendo Asia.

Asahi said, replacing the delay in the research with the responsibility of the Trump administration.

The following is from an article by Nobuhiko Sakai, former professor of the University of Tokyo's Institute of Archives, which appears in this month's issue of Themis, a monthly magazine for subscribers.
It is a must-read not only for the Japanese people but also for people around the world.
Amidst the growing "China is the culprit" theory of the new Corona
Asahi Shimbun comes to China's defense with "WHO investigation report
A report on the slavery in China that cleverly covered up for Xi Jinping and Tedros and turned it into a criticism of Trump and a confrontation between the U.S. and China.
International Organizations Swept Away by China 
On the occasion of the first anniversary of the WHO pandemic declaration, the Asahi Shimbun wrote a comprehensive article about WHO in the "Time and Time" column on March 10.
First, in Reed, "Although it was expected to be a command tower for infection control, it was swayed by international politics without sufficient authority. The unprecedented infectious disease that crosses national borders highlights the limits of international organizations blocked by national walls. " but this is entirely incorrect.
It is not "swept away by international politics," but "swept away by China," or more correctly, "dominated by China.
In other words, it is Asahi Shimbun's reticence and speculation about China, which naturally leads to its defense of Tedros.
Already here, the keynote of this article is clearly expressed.
At the beginning of the article, it says, "We issued the highest level of warning on January 30 last year, when we said it was a 'public health emergency of international concern,' not on March 11, when we said it was a pandemic. During that time, we continued to issue warnings, but only a few countries responded," he said.
At a press conference on March 8, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom emphasized this and introduced Tedros' one-sided argument, saying, "We have checked the criticism of the delay in recognizing a pandemic.
But here lies a severe deception by Tedros and the Asahi Shimbun.
As Tedros points out, the emergency declaration was more critical than the pandemic declaration. Still, the biggest problem with the January 30 emergency declaration was eliminating the recommendation to restrict the movement of people and goods at China's request.
It was clearly stated in the Asahi Shimbun on February 23, 2020.
On the 28th, just before the 30th, Tedros went to Beijing and must have been ordered by Xi Jinping.
Thus, Chinese Spring Festival tourists traveled around the world and spread the coronavirus.
This crucial fact is not pointed out in this article, nor is it mentioned in the chronology attached to this article.
The article then states: In the early days of the outbreak, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences and other events. In the early days of the epidemic, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences. He did not change his stance even when the international community began to distrust the Chinese government for withholding information, such as when a doctor who warned of the spread of the disease before the authorities did was punished. Then U.S. President Trump criticized him as a puppet of China. As the spread of the disease in the U.S. spread, he stepped up his attacks on the WHO to dodge criticism of himself and finally announced his withdrawal from the organization."
The Asahi Shimbun introduces a U.S. expert's argument in defense of China. 
President Trump is right about what is being said here.
There is no doubt that Tedros is a puppet, as he removed the restrictions on the movement of people and goods from the emergency declaration at the behest of Xi Jinping.
However, in the Asahi article, "Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law at Georgetown University in the U.S. who cooperates with the WHO's expert committees, said, 'I don't think the WHO is pro-China, just polite to a mighty country.
As shown above, the Asahi Shimbun carries a comment by a U.S. university official denying the WHO's pro-China stance.
Asahi's article then went on to investigate the origin of the coronavirus, saying, "The deepening US-China conflict has also affected the investigation of the source of the virus WHO puts this investigation first to prevent the next pandemic. Positioned as an issue, China also showed a cooperative attitude at the WHO annual meeting in May last year.
However, when the Trump administration emphasized the "China responsibility theory," such as the alleged virus leak from the Wuhan Institute, the Chinese side stiffened its attitude. It has been a long time since the WHO advance team entered China in July without being included in the investigation, " Asahi said, replacing the delay in the research with the responsibility of the Trump administration.
"Professor Antoine Freiholt (Public Health) of the University of Geneva commented on the difficulty of investigating WHO, saying, 'We have to negotiate with the target countries one by one when who, what to look for, and where to visit. It is the same in Japan and Britain, and the United States does not want foreigners to investigate their own country, not just in authoritative China. "Asahi even introduces a complete defense against China.
The above is the analysis of the Asahi article on March 10, but on March 30, WHO published a research report on the source of the coronavirus.　The report was questioned, and 14 countries around the world expressed common concerns.
In the first place, the WHO is entirely under the control of China, so there is no way they can produce a proper report.
Whether it is the laboratory or the seafood market, there is no doubt that the outflow came from Wuhan, and the frozen food theory is obviously Chinese bullshit.
Regarding this report, the Asahi Shimbun wrote an unfocused editorial on April 2. 
In the beginning, Asahi says, "Infectious diseases are a universal threat. In order to clarify it, all politics should be eliminated, and science-based research should be exhausted." Still, the spread of the virus was caused by the ultimate political plot of bioterrorism by China, which was politics from the beginning.
Asahi added, "The previous Trump administration had suggested that the virus had leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, but the report largely dismissed this. On the other hand, the report did not rule out the possibility of China's claim that the virus was attached to frozen food and brought to Wuhan.
It resulted from the WHO's slavery to China, but the way it was also written clearly shows the slavery to China of the Asahi Shimbun itself.
Used as a tool to promote hegemony 
"In the first place, the confrontation between the United States and China has cast a shadow over Corona and WHO. The United States, which criticizes WHO as being closer to China, has made a fuss about withdrawal. This report also had such an effect. It is said that the announcement was delayed. It would be an outrageous folly if a great power could use the elucidation of Corona as a tool for supremacy amid a global crisis, "Asahi's article said.
However, it is a well-known fact around the world that the delay was caused by China's refusal to conduct an investigation.
Rather than using the elucidation of the Corona as a tool for hegemony, as we have said many times, China used the coronavirus itself to promote China's hegemony, or more precisely, as a weapon.
Near the end of the editorial, it says.
"We need a robust system based on universal humanitarianism that is not swayed by the agendas of the major powers. In particular, measures to combat infectious diseases are a long-term challenge facing the world. We must take steps to reform the functions of the WHO and other organizations fundamentally."
I have no objection to this part. 
However, there is one thing that must thoroughly recognize.
The fact that China is not based on "universal humanism" at all.
China's domination of the WHO and the entire U.N. has been established while the U.S. has been careless. 
While the United States was alert, it established China's control system for the WHO and the entire United Nations.
China is extremely evil, but the U.S. was too stupid to see it.

 

 

 

 

 

But here lies a severe deception by Tedros and the Asahi Shimbun.

The following is from an article by Nobuhiko Sakai, former professor of the University of Tokyo's Institute of Archives, which appears in this month's issue of Themis, a monthly magazine for subscribers.
It is a must-read not only for the Japanese people but also for people around the world.
Amidst the growing "China is the culprit" theory of the new Corona
Asahi Shimbun comes to China's defense with "WHO investigation report
A report on the slavery in China that cleverly covered up for Xi Jinping and Tedros and turned it into a criticism of Trump and a confrontation between the U.S. and China.
International Organizations Swept Away by China 
On the occasion of the first anniversary of the WHO pandemic declaration, the Asahi Shimbun wrote a comprehensive article about WHO in the "Time and Time" column on March 10.
First, in Reed, "Although it was expected to be a command tower for infection control, it was swayed by international politics without sufficient authority. The unprecedented infectious disease that crosses national borders highlights the limits of international organizations blocked by national walls. " but this is entirely incorrect.
It is not "swept away by international politics," but "swept away by China," or more correctly, "dominated by China.
In other words, it is Asahi Shimbun's reticence and speculation about China, which naturally leads to its defense of Tedros.
Already here, the keynote of this article is clearly expressed.
At the beginning of the article, it says, "We issued the highest level of warning on January 30 last year, when we said it was a 'public health emergency of international concern,' not on March 11, when we said it was a pandemic. During that time, we continued to issue warnings, but only a few countries responded," he said.
At a press conference on March 8, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom emphasized this and introduced Tedros' one-sided argument, saying, "We have checked the criticism of the delay in recognizing a pandemic.
But here lies a severe deception by Tedros and the Asahi Shimbun.
As Tedros points out, the emergency declaration was more critical than the pandemic declaration. Still, the biggest problem with the January 30 emergency declaration was eliminating the recommendation to restrict the movement of people and goods at China's request.
It was clearly stated in the Asahi Shimbun on February 23, 2020.
On the 28th, just before the 30th, Tedros went to Beijing and must have been ordered by Xi Jinping.
Thus, Chinese Spring Festival tourists traveled around the world and spread the coronavirus.
This crucial fact is not pointed out in this article, nor is it mentioned in the chronology attached to this article.
The article then states: In the early days of the outbreak, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences and other events. In the early days of the epidemic, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences. He did not change his stance even when the international community began to distrust the Chinese government for withholding information, such as when a doctor who warned of the spread of the disease before the authorities did was punished. Then U.S. President Trump criticized him as a puppet of China. As the spread of the disease in the U.S. spread, he stepped up his attacks on the WHO to dodge criticism of himself and finally announced his withdrawal from the organization."
The Asahi Shimbun introduces a U.S. expert's argument in defense of China. 
President Trump is right about what is being said here.
There is no doubt that Tedros is a puppet, as he removed the restrictions on the movement of people and goods from the emergency declaration at the behest of Xi Jinping.
However, in the Asahi article, "Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law at Georgetown University in the U.S. who cooperates with the WHO's expert committees, said, 'I don't think the WHO is pro-China, just polite to a mighty country.
As shown above, the Asahi Shimbun carries a comment by a U.S. university official denying the WHO's pro-China stance.
Asahi's article then went on to investigate the origin of the coronavirus, saying, "The deepening US-China conflict has also affected the investigation of the source of the virus WHO puts this investigation first to prevent the next pandemic. Positioned as an issue, China also showed a cooperative attitude at the WHO annual meeting in May last year.
However, when the Trump administration emphasized the "China responsibility theory," such as the alleged virus leak from the Wuhan Institute, the Chinese side stiffened its attitude. It has been a long time since the WHO advance team entered China in July without being included in the investigation, " Asahi said, replacing the delay in the research with the responsibility of the Trump administration.
"Professor Antoine Freiholt (Public Health) of the University of Geneva commented on the difficulty of investigating WHO, saying, 'We have to negotiate with the target countries one by one when who, what to look for, and where to visit. It is the same in Japan and Britain, and the United States does not want foreigners to investigate their own country, not just in authoritative China. "Asahi even introduces a complete defense against China.
The above is the analysis of the Asahi article on March 10, but on March 30, WHO published a research report on the source of the coronavirus.　The report was questioned, and 14 countries around the world expressed common concerns.
In the first place, the WHO is entirely under the control of China, so there is no way they can produce a proper report.
Whether it is the laboratory or the seafood market, there is no doubt that the outflow came from Wuhan, and the frozen food theory is obviously Chinese bullshit.
Regarding this report, the Asahi Shimbun wrote an unfocused editorial on April 2. 
In the beginning, Asahi says, "Infectious diseases are a universal threat. In order to clarify it, all politics should be eliminated, and science-based research should be exhausted." Still, the spread of the virus was caused by the ultimate political plot of bioterrorism by China, which was politics from the beginning.
Asahi added, "The previous Trump administration had suggested that the virus had leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, but the report largely dismissed this. On the other hand, the report did not rule out the possibility of China's claim that the virus was attached to frozen food and brought to Wuhan.
It resulted from the WHO's slavery to China, but the way it was also written clearly shows the slavery to China of the Asahi Shimbun itself.
Used as a tool to promote hegemony 
"In the first place, the confrontation between the United States and China has cast a shadow over Corona and WHO. The United States, which criticizes WHO as being closer to China, has made a fuss about withdrawal. This report also had such an effect. It is said that the announcement was delayed. It would be an outrageous folly if a great power could use the elucidation of Corona as a tool for supremacy amid a global crisis, "Asahi's article said.
However, it is a well-known fact around the world that the delay was caused by China's refusal to conduct an investigation.
Rather than using the elucidation of the Corona as a tool for hegemony, as we have said many times, China used the coronavirus itself to promote China's hegemony, or more precisely, as a weapon.
Near the end of the editorial, it says.
"We need a robust system based on universal humanitarianism that is not swayed by the agendas of the major powers. In particular, measures to combat infectious diseases are a long-term challenge facing the world. We must take steps to reform the functions of the WHO and other organizations fundamentally."
I have no objection to this part. 
However, there is one thing that must thoroughly recognize.
The fact that China is not based on "universal humanism" at all.
China's domination of the WHO and the entire U.N. has been established while the U.S. has been careless. 
While the United States was alert, it established China's control system for the WHO and the entire United Nations.
China is extremely evil, but the U.S. was too stupid to see it.

 

 

 

 

 

In other words, it is Asahi Shimbun's reticence and speculation about China

The following is from an article by Nobuhiko Sakai, former professor of the University of Tokyo's Institute of Archives, which appears in this month's issue of Themis, a monthly magazine for subscribers.
It is a must-read not only for the Japanese people but also for people around the world.
Amidst the growing "China is the culprit" theory of the new Corona
Asahi Shimbun comes to China's defense with "WHO investigation report
A report on the slavery in China that cleverly covered up for Xi Jinping and Tedros and turned it into a criticism of Trump and a confrontation between the U.S. and China.
International Organizations Swept Away by China 
On the occasion of the first anniversary of the WHO pandemic declaration, the Asahi Shimbun wrote a comprehensive article about WHO in the "Time and Time" column on March 10.
First, in Reed, "Although it was expected to be a command tower for infection control, it was swayed by international politics without sufficient authority. The unprecedented infectious disease that crosses national borders highlights the limits of international organizations blocked by national walls. " but this is entirely incorrect.
It is not "swept away by international politics," but "swept away by China," or more correctly, "dominated by China.
In other words, it is Asahi Shimbun's reticence and speculation about China, which naturally leads to its defense of Tedros.
Already here, the keynote of this article is clearly expressed.
At the beginning of the article, it says, "We issued the highest level of warning on January 30 last year, when we said it was a 'public health emergency of international concern,' not on March 11, when we said it was a pandemic. During that time, we continued to issue warnings, but only a few countries responded," he said.
At a press conference on March 8, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom emphasized this and introduced Tedros' one-sided argument, saying, "We have checked the criticism of the delay in recognizing a pandemic.
But here lies a severe deception by Tedros and the Asahi Shimbun.
As Tedros points out, the emergency declaration was more critical than the pandemic declaration. Still, the biggest problem with the January 30 emergency declaration was eliminating the recommendation to restrict the movement of people and goods at China's request.
It was clearly stated in the Asahi Shimbun on February 23, 2020.
On the 28th, just before the 30th, Tedros went to Beijing and must have been ordered by Xi Jinping.
Thus, Chinese Spring Festival tourists traveled around the world and spread the coronavirus.
This crucial fact is not pointed out in this article, nor is it mentioned in the chronology attached to this article.
The article then states: In the early days of the outbreak, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences and other events. In the early days of the epidemic, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences. He did not change his stance even when the international community began to distrust the Chinese government for withholding information, such as when a doctor who warned of the spread of the disease before the authorities did was punished. Then U.S. President Trump criticized him as a puppet of China. As the spread of the disease in the U.S. spread, he stepped up his attacks on the WHO to dodge criticism of himself and finally announced his withdrawal from the organization."
The Asahi Shimbun introduces a U.S. expert's argument in defense of China. 
President Trump is right about what is being said here.
There is no doubt that Tedros is a puppet, as he removed the restrictions on the movement of people and goods from the emergency declaration at the behest of Xi Jinping.
However, in the Asahi article, "Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law at Georgetown University in the U.S. who cooperates with the WHO's expert committees, said, 'I don't think the WHO is pro-China, just polite to a mighty country.
As shown above, the Asahi Shimbun carries a comment by a U.S. university official denying the WHO's pro-China stance.
Asahi's article then went on to investigate the origin of the coronavirus, saying, "The deepening US-China conflict has also affected the investigation of the source of the virus WHO puts this investigation first to prevent the next pandemic. Positioned as an issue, China also showed a cooperative attitude at the WHO annual meeting in May last year.
However, when the Trump administration emphasized the "China responsibility theory," such as the alleged virus leak from the Wuhan Institute, the Chinese side stiffened its attitude. It has been a long time since the WHO advance team entered China in July without being included in the investigation, " Asahi said, replacing the delay in the research with the responsibility of the Trump administration.
"Professor Antoine Freiholt (Public Health) of the University of Geneva commented on the difficulty of investigating WHO, saying, 'We have to negotiate with the target countries one by one when who, what to look for, and where to visit. It is the same in Japan and Britain, and the United States does not want foreigners to investigate their own country, not just in authoritative China. "Asahi even introduces a complete defense against China.
The above is the analysis of the Asahi article on March 10, but on March 30, WHO published a research report on the source of the coronavirus.　The report was questioned, and 14 countries around the world expressed common concerns.
In the first place, the WHO is entirely under the control of China, so there is no way they can produce a proper report.
Whether it is the laboratory or the seafood market, there is no doubt that the outflow came from Wuhan, and the frozen food theory is obviously Chinese bullshit.
Regarding this report, the Asahi Shimbun wrote an unfocused editorial on April 2. 
In the beginning, Asahi says, "Infectious diseases are a universal threat. In order to clarify it, all politics should be eliminated, and science-based research should be exhausted." Still, the spread of the virus was caused by the ultimate political plot of bioterrorism by China, which was politics from the beginning.
Asahi added, "The previous Trump administration had suggested that the virus had leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, but the report largely dismissed this. On the other hand, the report did not rule out the possibility of China's claim that the virus was attached to frozen food and brought to Wuhan.
It resulted from the WHO's slavery to China, but the way it was also written clearly shows the slavery to China of the Asahi Shimbun itself.
Used as a tool to promote hegemony 
"In the first place, the confrontation between the United States and China has cast a shadow over Corona and WHO. The United States, which criticizes WHO as being closer to China, has made a fuss about withdrawal. This report also had such an effect. It is said that the announcement was delayed. It would be an outrageous folly if a great power could use the elucidation of Corona as a tool for supremacy amid a global crisis, "Asahi's article said.
However, it is a well-known fact around the world that the delay was caused by China's refusal to conduct an investigation.
Rather than using the elucidation of the Corona as a tool for hegemony, as we have said many times, China used the coronavirus itself to promote China's hegemony, or more precisely, as a weapon.
Near the end of the editorial, it says.
"We need a robust system based on universal humanitarianism that is not swayed by the agendas of the major powers. In particular, measures to combat infectious diseases are a long-term challenge facing the world. We must take steps to reform the functions of the WHO and other organizations fundamentally."
I have no objection to this part. 
However, there is one thing that must thoroughly recognize.
The fact that China is not based on "universal humanism" at all.
China's domination of the WHO and the entire U.N. has been established while the U.S. has been careless. 
While the United States was alert, it established China's control system for the WHO and the entire United Nations.
China is extremely evil, but the U.S. was too stupid to see it.

 

 

 

 

 

Asahi Shimbun comes to China's defense with "WHO investigation report

The following is from an article by Nobuhiko Sakai, former professor of the University of Tokyo's Institute of Archives, which appears in this month's issue of Themis, a monthly magazine for subscribers.
It is a must-read not only for the Japanese people but also for people around the world.
Amidst the growing "China is the culprit" theory of the new Corona
Asahi Shimbun comes to China's defense with "WHO investigation report
A report on the slavery in China that cleverly covered up for Xi Jinping and Tedros and turned it into a criticism of Trump and a confrontation between the U.S. and China.
International Organizations Swept Away by China 
On the occasion of the first anniversary of the WHO pandemic declaration, the Asahi Shimbun wrote a comprehensive article about WHO in the "Time and Time" column on March 10.
First, in Reed, "Although it was expected to be a command tower for infection control, it was swayed by international politics without sufficient authority. The unprecedented infectious disease that crosses national borders highlights the limits of international organizations blocked by national walls. " but this is entirely incorrect.
It is not "swept away by international politics," but "swept away by China," or more correctly, "dominated by China.
In other words, it is Asahi Shimbun's reticence and speculation about China, which naturally leads to its defense of Tedros.
Already here, the keynote of this article is clearly expressed.
At the beginning of the article, it says, "We issued the highest level of warning on January 30 last year, when we said it was a 'public health emergency of international concern,' not on March 11, when we said it was a pandemic. During that time, we continued to issue warnings, but only a few countries responded," he said.
At a press conference on March 8, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom emphasized this and introduced Tedros' one-sided argument, saying, "We have checked the criticism of the delay in recognizing a pandemic.
But here lies a severe deception by Tedros and the Asahi Shimbun.
As Tedros points out, the emergency declaration was more critical than the pandemic declaration. Still, the biggest problem with the January 30 emergency declaration was eliminating the recommendation to restrict the movement of people and goods at China's request.
It was clearly stated in the Asahi Shimbun on February 23, 2020.
On the 28th, just before the 30th, Tedros went to Beijing and must have been ordered by Xi Jinping.
Thus, Chinese Spring Festival tourists traveled around the world and spread the coronavirus.
This crucial fact is not pointed out in this article, nor is it mentioned in the chronology attached to this article.
The article then states: In the early days of the outbreak, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences and other events. In the early days of the epidemic, Tedros praised the Chinese leadership's response at press conferences. He did not change his stance even when the international community began to distrust the Chinese government for withholding information, such as when a doctor who warned of the spread of the disease before the authorities did was punished. Then U.S. President Trump criticized him as a puppet of China. As the spread of the disease in the U.S. spread, he stepped up his attacks on the WHO to dodge criticism of himself and finally announced his withdrawal from the organization."
The Asahi Shimbun introduces a U.S. expert's argument in defense of China. 
President Trump is right about what is being said here.
There is no doubt that Tedros is a puppet, as he removed the restrictions on the movement of people and goods from the emergency declaration at the behest of Xi Jinping.
However, in the Asahi article, "Lawrence Gostin, a professor of public health law at Georgetown University in the U.S. who cooperates with the WHO's expert committees, said, 'I don't think the WHO is pro-China, just polite to a mighty country.
As shown above, the Asahi Shimbun carries a comment by a U.S. university official denying the WHO's pro-China stance.
Asahi's article then went on to investigate the origin of the coronavirus, saying, "The deepening US-China conflict has also affected the investigation of the source of the virus WHO puts this investigation first to prevent the next pandemic. Positioned as an issue, China also showed a cooperative attitude at the WHO annual meeting in May last year.
However, when the Trump administration emphasized the "China responsibility theory," such as the alleged virus leak from the Wuhan Institute, the Chinese side stiffened its attitude. It has been a long time since the WHO advance team entered China in July without being included in the investigation, " Asahi said, replacing the delay in the research with the responsibility of the Trump administration.
"Professor Antoine Freiholt (Public Health) of the University of Geneva commented on the difficulty of investigating WHO, saying, 'We have to negotiate with the target countries one by one when who, what to look for, and where to visit. It is the same in Japan and Britain, and the United States does not want foreigners to investigate their own country, not just in authoritative China. "Asahi even introduces a complete defense against China.
The above is the analysis of the Asahi article on March 10, but on March 30, WHO published a research report on the source of the coronavirus.　The report was questioned, and 14 countries around the world expressed common concerns.
In the first place, the WHO is entirely under the control of China, so there is no way they can produce a proper report.
Whether it is the laboratory or the seafood market, there is no doubt that the outflow came from Wuhan, and the frozen food theory is obviously Chinese bullshit.
Regarding this report, the Asahi Shimbun wrote an unfocused editorial on April 2. 
In the beginning, Asahi says, "Infectious diseases are a universal threat. In order to clarify it, all politics should be eliminated, and science-based research should be exhausted." Still, the spread of the virus was caused by the ultimate political plot of bioterrorism by China, which was politics from the beginning.
Asahi added, "The previous Trump administration had suggested that the virus had leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, but the report largely dismissed this. On the other hand, the report did not rule out the possibility of China's claim that the virus was attached to frozen food and brought to Wuhan.
It resulted from the WHO's slavery to China, but the way it was also written clearly shows the slavery to China of the Asahi Shimbun itself.
Used as a tool to promote hegemony 
"In the first place, the confrontation between the United States and China has cast a shadow over Corona and WHO. The United States, which criticizes WHO as being closer to China, has made a fuss about withdrawal. This report also had such an effect. It is said that the announcement was delayed. It would be an outrageous folly if a great power could use the elucidation of Corona as a tool for supremacy amid a global crisis, "Asahi's article said.
However, it is a well-known fact around the world that the delay was caused by China's refusal to conduct an investigation.
Rather than using the elucidation of the Corona as a tool for hegemony, as we have said many times, China used the coronavirus itself to promote China's hegemony, or more precisely, as a weapon.
Near the end of the editorial, it says.
"We need a robust system based on universal humanitarianism that is not swayed by the agendas of the major powers. In particular, measures to combat infectious diseases are a long-term challenge facing the world. We must take steps to reform the functions of the WHO and other organizations fundamentally."
I have no objection to this part. 
However, there is one thing that must thoroughly recognize.
The fact that China is not based on "universal humanism" at all.
China's domination of the WHO and the entire U.N. has been established while the U.S. has been careless. 
While the United States was alert, it established China's control system for the WHO and the entire United Nations.
China is extremely evil, but the U.S. was too stupid to see it.

 

 

 

 

 

Det är en mycket läsbar men sanningsenlig bok.

Följande böcker är en måste-läs inte bara för japanska människor utan också för människor världen över att känna världen före, under och efter kriget.
Författaren, Henry Stokes "testamente för japanerna", är tung och värdefull.
Jag är övertygad om att den fjärde vågen av den nuvarande koronakatastrofen, Wuhan-viruset, var ett biologiskt vapen, men jag kommer att diskutera detta senare.
Det skulle vara en välsignad välsignelse att prenumerera på den här boken eftersom GW förklarar undantagstillstånd.
Japanska medborgare bör gå till närmaste bokhandel just nu för att prenumerera.
Det är en mycket läsbar men sanningsenlig bok.
p167-p169
En aggression av de vita makterna som kallas Three Power Intervention.
Efter Meiji-restaureringen fokuserade Japan sina ansträngningar på att bygga en rik och robust militär under hotet från västmakterna.
Det berodde på att det var det enda sättet att skydda Japans oberoende.
Samtidigt blev det en brådskande uppgift att se över de ojämna fördragen med de vita makterna som ingåtts mellan slutet av Edo-perioden och början av Meiji-perioden.
Till exempel var de handelsavtal som Edo-shogunatet ingått med USA, Ryssland, Nederländerna, Storbritannien och Frankrike 1858 (Ansei-fempartsfördraget) extremt ofördelaktiga för Japan, eftersom de:
Beviljade utländska konsulära jurisdiktion och förhindrade att japanska lagar och rättsliga beslut tillämpades på utländska brott (extraterritorialitet).
Det gav Japan ingen autonomi över tullar.
Godkända ovillkorliga och ensidiga MFN-klausuler.
Meiji-regeringen tillbringade en enorm mängd energi för att lösa dessa problem, men västmakterna skulle inte ge upp de fördelaktiga fördragen de hade förvärvat.
Det kinesisk-japanska kriget ägde rum i en sådan situation.
Världen hade aldrig föreställt sig att Japan, en nyligen framväxande nation i hörnet av Asien, skulle besegra Qing-dynastin, en betydande makt i Asien.
Resultatet blev dock en serie segrar för Japan på land och till sjöss.
Japan och Qing-riket kallade till en vapenvila den 20 mars 1985 och började omedelbart samtal för fred.
Den 17 april hölls fredskonferensen i Shunpanro i Shimonoseki, där premiärminister Hirobumi Ito och utrikesminister Munemitsu Mutsu deltog på japansk sida och Li Hongzhang och andra på Qing-sidan.
Shimonoseki-fördraget ingicks och avslutade kriget.
Huvudinnehållet i Shimonoseki-fördraget var följande
Först erkände Kina Koreas självständighet, och hyllningen, erbjudandenen och ceremonierna från Korea till Qing-dynastin, som hindrade dess självständighet, avskaffades för alltid.
2. Liaodonghalvön, Taiwan och Penghuöarna skulle överföras till Japan.
3. Qing-dynastin betalar 300 miljoner Ryo (svans) till Japan.
4. Japan kommer att beviljas samma privilegier som andra länder i Qing-riket.
Denna seger i det kinesisk-japanska kriget gav det japanska folket energi. De började söka ett jämnare förhållande till västmakterna och arbeta för en fullständig översyn av de ojämna fördragen.
Det var dock de vita makterna som fångade upp Japans seger där.
Ryssland utövade i samarbete med Frankrike och Tyskland Japan.
Den 23 april 1895 skickade ministrarna i de tre länderna ett brev till Japan om att det skulle vara bättre att återföra Liaodonghalvön till Qing-dynastin, den så kallade Three Power Interference.
Japan, med sin låga nationella makt, kunde inte vinna ett krig mot de tre vita makterna. Det hade inget annat val än att acceptera rekommendationen.
Japan hade inget annat val än att acceptera rekommendationen. ...... Japan var fast besluten att uthärda alla slags svårigheter för att återlösa sig från denna förödmjukelse.
För övrigt krävde de tre länderna tre år senare att Qing-regeringen skulle betala för detta.
Ryssland hyrde Lushun och Dalian, Tyskland hyrde Jiaozhou Bay och Frankrike hyrde Guangzhou Bay.
För övrigt hyrde britterna Weihaiwei och Kowloon-halvön.
Genom dessa tre insatser måste Japan ha känt hotet från de vita makterna, inklusive Ryssland, som överträffar Asien.

È un libro molto leggibile ma veritiero.

I seguenti libri sono una lettura obbligata non solo per i giapponesi, ma anche per le persone di tutto il mondo per conoscere il mondo prima, durante e dopo la guerra.
L'autore, "Testament to the Japanese" del signor Henry Stokes, è pesante e prezioso.
Sono convinto che la quarta ondata dell'attuale disastro della corona, il virus Wuhan, fosse un'arma biologica, ma ne parlerò più avanti.
Sarebbe una benedizione sotto mentite spoglie iscriversi a questo libro poiché GW sta dichiarando lo stato di emergenza.
I cittadini giapponesi dovrebbero andare subito alla libreria più vicina per iscriversi.
È un libro molto leggibile ma veritiero.
p167-p169
Un atto di aggressione da parte delle potenze bianche chiamato Three Power Intervention.
Dopo la Restaurazione Meiji, il Giappone concentrò i suoi sforzi sulla costruzione di un esercito ricco e robusto sotto la minaccia delle potenze occidentali.
Perché era l'unico modo per proteggere l'indipendenza del Giappone.
Allo stesso tempo, è diventato un compito urgente rivedere i trattati ineguali con le potenze bianche che si erano conclusi tra la fine del periodo Edo e l'inizio del periodo Meiji.
Ad esempio, i trattati commerciali che lo shogunato di Edo aveva concluso con gli Stati Uniti, la Russia, i Paesi Bassi, il Regno Unito e la Francia nel 1858 (l'Ansei Five-Party Treaty) erano estremamente svantaggiosi per il Giappone, in quanto:
Ha concesso la giurisdizione consolare di paesi stranieri e ha impedito l'applicazione delle leggi e delle decisioni giudiziarie giapponesi ai crimini stranieri (extraterritorialità).
Non ha dato al Giappone alcuna autonomia sulle tariffe.
Approvate clausole NPF incondizionate e unilaterali.
Il governo Meiji ha speso un'enorme quantità di energia per cercare di risolvere questi problemi, ma le potenze occidentali non rinuncerebbero ai trattati vantaggiosi che avevano acquisito.
La guerra sino-giapponese ha avuto luogo in una situazione del genere.
Il mondo non avrebbe mai immaginato che il Giappone, una nazione emergente all'angolo dell'Asia, avrebbe sconfitto la dinastia Qing, una potenza significativa in Asia.
Il risultato, tuttavia, fu una serie di vittorie per il Giappone a terra e in mare.
Il 20 marzo 1985 il Giappone e l'Impero Qing chiamarono una tregua e iniziarono immediatamente i colloqui per la pace.
Il 17 aprile si è tenuta a Shunpanro a Shimonoseki la conferenza di pace, alla presenza del primo ministro Hirobumi Ito e del ministro degli Esteri Munemitsu Mutsu dalla parte giapponese, e da Li Hongzhang e altri dalla parte di Qing.
Il trattato di Shimonoseki è stato concluso, ponendo fine alla guerra.
I contenuti principali del trattato Shimonoseki erano i seguenti
In primo luogo, la Cina ha riconosciuto l'indipendenza della Corea e il tributo, le offerte e le cerimonie dalla Corea alla dinastia Qing, che hanno ostacolato la sua indipendenza, sono stati aboliti per sempre.
2. La penisola di Liaodong, Taiwan e le isole Penghu dovevano essere trasferite al Giappone.
3. La dinastia Qing pagherà 300 milioni di Ryo (coda) al Giappone.
4. Al Giappone verranno concessi gli stessi privilegi degli altri paesi dell'Impero Qing.
Questa vittoria nella guerra sino-giapponese ha dato energia al popolo giapponese. Cominciarono a cercare un rapporto più equilibrato con le potenze occidentali e ad adoperarsi per una revisione completa dei trattati ineguali.
Tuttavia, sono state le potenze bianche che hanno intercettato la vittoria del Giappone lì.
La Russia, in collaborazione con Francia e Germania, ha esercitato pressioni sul Giappone.
Il 23 aprile 1895, i ministri dei tre paesi inviarono una lettera al Giappone dicendo che sarebbe stato meglio restituire la penisola di Liaodong alla dinastia Qing, la cosiddetta interferenza delle tre potenze.
Il Giappone, con la sua bassa potenza nazionale, non poteva vincere una guerra contro le tre potenze bianche. Non aveva altra scelta che accettare la raccomandazione.
Il Giappone non ha avuto altra scelta che accettare la raccomandazione. ...... Il Giappone era determinato a sopportare ogni tipo di difficoltà per riscattarsi da questa umiliazione.
Per inciso, tre anni dopo, i tre paesi chiesero che il governo Qing pagasse per questo.
La Russia ha affittato Lushun e Dalian, la Germania ha affittato la baia di Jiaozhou e la Francia ha affittato la baia di Guangzhou.
Per inciso, gli inglesi hanno affittato Weihaiwei e la penisola di Kowloon.
Attraverso questi tre interventi, il Giappone deve aver sentito la minaccia delle potenze bianche, inclusa la Russia, che invadeva l'Asia.

إنه كتاب مقروء للغاية ولكنه صادق.

الكتب التالية يجب قراءتها ليس فقط لليابانيين ولكن أيضًا للأشخاص في جميع أنحاء العالم لمعرفة العالم قبل الحرب وأثناءها وبعدها.
المؤلف ، السيد هنري ستوكس "العهد لليابانيين" ثقيل وثمين.
أنا مقتنع بأن الموجة الرابعة من كارثة كورونا الحالية ، فيروس ووهان ، كانت سلاحًا بيولوجيًا ، لكنني سأناقش هذا لاحقًا.
ستكون نعمة مقنعة أن تشترك في هذا الكتاب بينما يعلن GW حالة الطوارئ.
يجب على المواطنين اليابانيين التوجه إلى أقرب مكتبة لبيع الكتب في الوقت الحالي للاشتراك.
إنه كتاب مقروء للغاية ولكنه صادق.
ص 167 - ص 169
عمل عدواني من قبل القوى البيضاء يسمى تدخل القوى الثلاث.
بعد استعادة ميجي ، ركزت اليابان جهودها على بناء جيش ثري وقوي تحت تهديد القوى الغربية.
كان ذلك لأنها كانت الطريقة الوحيدة لحماية استقلال اليابان.
في الوقت نفسه ، أصبحت مهمة ملحة مراجعة المعاهدات غير المتكافئة مع القوى البيضاء التي أبرمت بين نهاية فترة إيدو وبداية فترة ميجي.
على سبيل المثال ، كانت المعاهدات التجارية التي أبرمها شوغون إيدو مع الولايات المتحدة وروسيا وهولندا والمملكة المتحدة وفرنسا في عام 1858 (معاهدة أنسي الخماسية) ضارة جدًا باليابان ، حيث أنها:
منح الدول الأجنبية الاختصاص القنصلي ومنع تطبيق القوانين والقرارات القضائية اليابانية على الجرائم الأجنبية (خارج الحدود الإقليمية).
ولم يمنح اليابان أي حكم ذاتي بشأن الرسوم الجمركية.
الموافقة على شروط الدولة الأولى بالرعاية الأحادية وغير المشروطة.
أنفقت حكومة ميجي قدرًا هائلاً من الطاقة في محاولة حل هذه المشكلات ، لكن القوى الغربية لن تتخلى عن المعاهدات المفيدة التي حصلت عليها.
وقعت الحرب الصينية اليابانية في مثل هذه الحالة.
لم يتخيل العالم أبدًا أن اليابان ، الدولة الناشئة حديثًا في زاوية آسيا ، ستهزم أسرة تشينغ ، وهي قوة مهمة في آسيا.
كانت النتيجة ، مع ذلك ، سلسلة من الانتصارات لليابان في البر والبحر.
دعت اليابان وإمبراطورية تشينغ إلى هدنة في 20 مارس 1985 ، وبدأت على الفور محادثات السلام.
في 17 أبريل ، عقد مؤتمر السلام في شونبانرو في شيمونوسيكي ، بحضور رئيس الوزراء هيروبومي إيتو ووزير الخارجية مونيميتسو موتسو من الجانب الياباني ، ولي هونغ تشانغ وآخرين من جانب تشينغ.
تم إبرام معاهدة شيمونوسيكي ، منهية الحرب.
كانت المحتويات الرئيسية لمعاهدة شيمونوسيكي كما يلي
أولاً ، اعترفت الصين باستقلال كوريا ، وألغيت الجزية والعروض والاحتفالات من كوريا إلى أسرة تشينغ ، والتي أعاقت استقلالها ، إلى الأبد.
2. كان من المقرر نقل شبه جزيرة لياودونغ وتايوان وجزر بينغو إلى اليابان.
3. ستدفع أسرة تشينغ 300 مليون ريو (ذيل) لليابان.
4. ستمنح اليابان نفس الامتيازات الممنوحة للدول الأخرى في إمبراطورية تشينغ.
أدى هذا الانتصار في الحرب الصينية اليابانية إلى تنشيط الشعب الياباني. بدأوا في البحث عن علاقة أكثر تكافؤًا مع القوى الغربية والعمل من أجل مراجعة كاملة للمعاهدات غير المتكافئة.
ومع ذلك ، كانت القوى البيضاء هي التي اعترضت انتصار اليابان هناك.
مارست روسيا ، بالتعاون مع فرنسا وألمانيا ، ضغوطًا على اليابان.
في 23 أبريل 1895 ، أرسل وزراء الدول الثلاث خطابًا إلى اليابان يقولون فيه إنه سيكون من الأفضل إعادة شبه جزيرة لياودونغ إلى أسرة تشينغ ، ما يسمى بتداخل القوى الثلاثة.
لم تستطع اليابان ، بقوتها الوطنية المنخفضة ، الفوز في حرب ضد القوى البيضاء الثلاث. ولم يكن أمامه خيار سوى قبول التوصية.
ولم يكن أمام اليابان خيار سوى قبول التوصية. ...... كانت اليابان مصممة على تحمل كل أنواع المصاعب لتخليص نفسها من هذا الذل.
بالمناسبة ، بعد ثلاث سنوات ، طالبت الدول الثلاث حكومة تشينغ بدفع ثمن ذلك.
استأجرت روسيا لوشون وداليان ، واستأجرت ألمانيا خليج جياوزو ، واستأجرت فرنسا خليج قوانغتشو.
بالمناسبة ، استأجر البريطانيون ويهايوي وشبه جزيرة كولون.من خلال هذه التدخلات الثلاثة ، لا بد أن اليابان شعرت بتهديد القوى البيضاء ، بما في ذلك روسيا ، التي تجتاح آسيا.

Dit is 'n baie leesbare, maar waaragtige boek.

Die volgende boeke is 'n moet-lees, nie net vir Japannese nie, maar ook vir mense wêreldwyd om die wêreld voor, tydens en na die oorlog te ken.
Die skrywer, mnr. Henry Stokes, se 'Testament aan die Japannese', is swaar en kosbaar.
Ek is oortuig dat die vierde golf van die huidige koronaramp, die Wuhan-virus, 'n biologiese wapen was, maar ek sal dit later bespreek.
Dit sal 'n bedekte seën wees om op hierdie boek in te teken, aangesien GW 'n noodtoestand verklaar.
Japannese burgers moet dadelik na hul naaste boekwinkel gaan om in te teken.
Dit is 'n baie leesbare, maar waaragtige boek.
p167-p169
'N Daad van aggressie deur die blanke magte genaamd die Three Power Intervention.
Na die Meiji-herstel het Japan sy pogings toegespits op die bou van 'n ryk en robuuste weermag onder die bedreiging van die Westerse moondhede.
Dit was omdat dit die enigste manier was om Japan se onafhanklikheid te beskerm.
Terselfdertyd het dit 'n dringende taak geword om die ongelyke verdrae met die blanke magte wat tussen die einde van die Edo-periode en die begin van die Meiji-periode gesluit het, te hersien.
Die handelsverdrae wat die Edo-shogunaat in 1858 met die Verenigde State, Rusland, Nederland, die Verenigde Koninkryk en Frankryk gesluit het, was byvoorbeeld uiters nadelig vir Japan, aangesien hulle:
Toegekende buitelandse lande is konsulêre jurisdiksie en het verhoed dat die Japannese wette en geregtelike beslissings op buitelandse misdade toegepas word (ekstraterritorialiteit).
Dit het Japan geen outonomie oor tariewe gegee nie.
Goedgekeurde onvoorwaardelike en eensydige MFN-klousules.
Die regering van Meiji het 'n enorme hoeveelheid energie bestee om hierdie kwessies op te los, maar die Westerse moondhede wou nie die voordele wat hulle verkry het, prysgee nie.
Die Sino-Japannese oorlog het in so 'n situasie plaasgevind.
Die wêreld het nooit gedink dat Japan, 'n nuut opkomende nasie in die hoek van Asië, die Qing-dinastie, 'n belangrike moondheid in Asië, sou verslaan nie.
Die resultaat was egter 'n reeks oorwinnings vir Japan op land en op see.
Japan en die Qing-ryk het op 20 Maart 1985 'n wapenstilstand geroep en onmiddellik met vrede begin praat.
Op 17 April is die vredeskonferensie in Shunpanro in Shimonoseki gehou, bygewoon deur premier Hirobumi Ito en die minister van buitelandse sake, Munemitsu Mutsu aan die Japannese kant, en Li Hongzhang en ander aan die Qing-kant.
Die Verdrag van Shimonoseki is gesluit om die oorlog te beëindig.
Die hoofinhoud van die Shimonoseki-verdrag was soos volg
Eerstens het China die onafhanklikheid van Korea erken, en die huldeblyk, aanbiedinge en seremonies van Korea aan die Qing-dinastie, wat die onafhanklikheid daarvan belemmer het, is vir ewig afgeskaf.
2. Die Liaodong-skiereiland, Taiwan en die Penghu-eilande sou na Japan oorgedra word.
3. Die Qing-dinastie sal 300 miljoen Ryo (stert) aan Japan betaal.
4. Japan sal dieselfde voorregte verleen as ander lande in die Qing-ryk.
Hierdie oorwinning in die Sino-Japannese Oorlog het die Japannese bevorder. Hulle het begin om 'n egaliger verhouding met die Westerse moondhede te soek en hulle beywer vir 'n volledige hersiening van die ongelyke verdrae.
Dit was egter die wit moondhede wat Japan se oorwinning daar onderskep het.
Rusland het in samewerking met Frankryk en Duitsland druk op Japan uitgeoefen.
Op 23 April 1895 stuur die ministers van die drie lande 'n brief aan Japan om te sê dat dit beter sou wees om die Liaodong-skiereiland aan die Qing-dinastie terug te gee, die sogenaamde Three Power Interference.
Japan, met sy lae nasionale mag, kon nie 'n oorlog teen die drie blanke magte wen nie. Dit het geen ander keuse gehad as om die aanbeveling te aanvaar nie.
Japan het geen ander keuse gehad as om die aanbeveling te aanvaar nie. ...... Japan was vasbeslote om allerhande ontberinge te verduur om homself van hierdie vernedering te verlos.
Terloops, drie jaar later het die drie lande geëis dat die Qing-regering hiervoor moet betaal.
Rusland huur Lushun en Dalian, Duitsland huur Jiaozhou Bay, en Frankryk huur Guangzhou Bay.
Terloops, die Britte het Weihaiwei en die Kowloon-skiereiland gehuur.
Deur hierdie drie ingrypings moes Japan die bedreiging van die blanke moondhede, waaronder Rusland, wat Asië oorheers het, gevoel het.

沒有對華的對策

以下摘錄自高岡角田（Takamasa Kadota）的一篇文章，該文章出現在4月30日產經新聞的“聲音爭論”中。
他是當今日本最活躍的作家和新聞工作者之一。
這篇文章不僅是日本人民的必讀，也是全世界人民的必讀。
憲法第九條已成為人民的“生命敵人”。
《憲法》第9條否認擁有陸，海，空部隊以及該國參與戰爭的權利，已被左翼部隊神聖化，作為《和平憲法》的象徵。
但是，我想討論一下這篇文章如何成為人民的“生命敵人”。
在國際形勢急劇變化之中
日本憲法即將頒布74年，是日本自成立以來從未改變過一個詞的意義上的“世界上最古老的憲法”。
在第二次世界大戰中，另一個戰敗的國家德國克服了盟軍的干預，並於1949年5月在由政客和律師組成的議會中起草了《憲法》，確立了《德意志聯邦共和國基本法》。
從那時起，它已被修改了六十多次，以應對國內和國際環境的變化。
從這個意義上講，它是日本憲法的對應部分，它完全沒有改變。
那麼，為什麼日本憲法成為人民的“生命敵人”呢？
第二次世界大戰結束以來的76年間，國際形勢發生了難以想像的變化。
但是最近十年，尤其是最近五年，發生了巨大的變化。
原因在於中國的“武力改變現狀”。
我應該承認，在這種急劇變化之前，我不是熱切的憲法修訂倡導者。
在戰後持續了很長時間的冷戰期間，修改憲法的需求不像今天那麼高。
這是因為冷戰的前線是在歐洲。
但是，隨著1989年柏林牆的倒塌，共產主義國家接連倒下，最後，我們的盟友蘇聯解散，成為了俄羅斯。
通過向美國投入安全，日本得以在其核保護傘下享有和平。
但是，最終出現了一個破壞國際秩序的國家。
沒有對華的對策
它是中華人民共和國。
自1949年成立以來，它已將西藏，維吾爾族和蒙古南部納入其領土，踐踏了香港的人權，並且毫不掩飾其入侵台灣的意圖。
在南中國海，通過在其他國家的專屬經濟區開墾礁石，它已成為軍事基地。它已將尖閣列為日本領土，並每天屢屢入侵該領土。
“我們準備在必要時動用武力保護我們的領土（*尖閣閣）。”
軍方高管經常說的這個詞，無非是隨時奪取尖閣閣的意圖的表述。
換句話說，東亞的每個國家都受到中國的威脅。
關鍵是習近平主席自2013年以來一直宣稱的“中華民族偉大復興”。
這意味著到2049年，即中國成立一百週年之際，中國將搶占全球霸權。
它是對歷代王朝吹噓的“中央集權主義”的堅實參考。
中華帝國位於世界的中心，周圍的野蠻人效法該國並向之致敬。
對於中國人來說，這是世界的理想形式。
這些詞是第一部分。
這是消除百年來恥辱感的一種方式。
自鴉片戰爭清除以來的100年屈辱之後，它將實現偉大的中華民族的複興。
大城市建立了特許權，滿洲成立，大陸統治則由超過一百萬的軍隊投入。
我們決不能忘記，日本是中國釋放怨恨的主要敵人。
但是，日本沒有針對中國入侵的對策。
它仍然僅依靠美國。
1949年，歐洲成立了北約組織（北大西洋公約組織），並採取了以集體自衛的威懾力量對付蘇聯的措施。
這個想法是，如果蘇聯攻擊一個成員國，那將被視為對整個國家的攻擊，“整個世界都會反擊。
這種集體安全制度使歐洲免受蘇聯和俄羅斯的侵略已有72年。
我的修訂建議以通過威懾保護和平
自2000年以來，加入北約的國家之間有成敗。

這些是波羅的海國家，烏克蘭和格魯吉亞。
儘管在俄羅斯的干預下苦苦掙扎，但拉脫維亞，立陶宛和愛沙尼亞的波羅的海國家已加入北約。
另一方面，烏克蘭和格魯吉亞由於其國家中強大的親俄羅斯勢力以及無法樹立輿論而無法加入北約。
我們記憶猶新的是烏克蘭遭受了克里米亞的吞併，而格魯吉亞則遭受了兩個國家的獨立。
它不是很令人欣慰，因為它與日本非常相似，日本在中國破壞了政治，商業，政府和大眾媒體。
集體自衛的威懾力量將維持和平。
我們必須通過通過一系列國家（而不僅僅是美國）創建亞洲版本的北約來製止中國以武力改變現狀。
但是，由於憲法第9條否認集體自衛權，在日本這是不可能的。
這就是憲法成為人民“生命的敵人”的原因。
獲得集體自衛權是當務之急，同時，自衛隊的憲法化也至關重要。
基於這兩點，我提議對《憲法》第9條進行具體修正。
憲法第9條
日本人民將真誠地尋求基於正義與秩序的國際和平。
為了維護國際和平並保護人民的生命，財產和領土，日本應維持自衛隊，不允許任何國家的侵略或乾涉，並應永遠保持獨立。
為了保護我們的家庭和後代的生命，我們必須履行我們的歷史使命。

没有对华的对策

以下摘录自高冈角田（Takamasa Kadota）的一篇文章，该文章出现在4月30日产经新闻的“声音争论”中。
他是当今日本最活跃的作家和新闻工作者之一。
这篇文章不仅是日本人民的必读，也是全世界人民的必读。
宪法第九条已成为人民的“生命敌人”。
《宪法》第9条否认拥有陆，海，空部队以及该国参与战争的权利，已被左翼部队神圣化，作为《和平宪法》的象征。
但是，我想讨论一下这篇文章如何成为人民的“生命敌人”。
在国际形势急剧变化之中
日本宪法即将颁布74年，是日本自成立以来从未改变过一个词的意义上的“世界上最古老的宪法”。
在第二次世界大战中，另一个战败的国家德国克服了盟军的干预，并于1949年5月在由政客和律师组成的议会中起草了《宪法》，确立了《德意志联邦共和国基本法》。
从那时起，它已被修改了六十多次，以应对国内和国际环境的变化。
从这个意义上讲，它是日本宪法的对应部分，它完全没有改变。
那么，为什么日本宪法成为人民的“生命敌人”呢？
第二次世界大战结束以来的76年间，国际形势发生了难以想象的变化。
但是最近十年，尤其是最近五年，发生了巨大的变化。
原因在于中国的“武力改变现状”。
我应该承认，在这种急剧变化之前，我不是热切的宪法修订倡导者。
在战后持续了很长时间的冷战期间，修改宪法的需求不像今天那么高。
这是因为冷战的前线是在欧洲。
但是，随着1989年柏林墙的倒塌，共产主义国家接连倒下，最后，我们的盟友苏联解散，成为了俄罗斯。
通过向美国投入安全，日本得以在其核保护伞下享有和平。
但是，最终出现了一个破坏国际秩序的国家。
没有对华的对策
它是中华人民共和国。
自1949年成立以来，它已将西藏，维吾尔族和蒙古南部纳入其领土，践踏了香港的人权，并且毫不掩饰其入侵台湾的意图。
在南中国海，通过在其他国家的专属经济区开垦礁石，它已成为军事基地。它已将尖阁列为日本领土，并每天屡屡入侵该领土。
“我们准备在必要时动用武力保护我们的领土（*尖阁阁）。”
军方高管经常说的这个词，无非是随时夺取尖阁阁的意图的表述。
换句话说，东亚的每个国家都受到中国的威胁。
关键是习近平主席自2013年以来一直宣称的“中华民族伟大复兴”。
这意味着到2049年，即中国成立一百周年之际，中国将抢占全球霸权。
它是对历代王朝吹嘘的“中央集权主义”的坚实参考。
中华帝国位于世界的中心，周围的野蛮人效法该国并向之致敬。
对于中国人来说，这是世界的理想形式。
这些词是第一部分。
这是消除百年来耻辱感的一种方式。
自鸦片战争清除以来的100年屈辱之后，它将实现伟大的中华民族的复兴。
大城市建立了特许权，满洲成立，大陆统治则由超过一百万的军队投入。
我们决不能忘记，日本是中国释放怨恨的主要敌人。
但是，日本没有针对中国入侵的对策。
它仍然仅依靠美国。
1949年，欧洲成立了北约组织（北大西洋公约组织），并采取了以集体自卫的威慑力量对付苏联的措施。
这个想法是，如果苏联攻击一个成员国，那将被视为对整个国家的攻击，“整个世界都会反击。
这种集体安全制度使欧洲免受苏联和俄罗斯的侵略已有72年。
我的修订建议以通过威慑保护和平
自2000年以来，加入北约的国家之间有成败。

这些是波罗的海国家，乌克兰和格鲁吉亚。
尽管在俄罗斯的干预下苦苦挣扎，但拉脱维亚，立陶宛和爱沙尼亚的波罗的海国家已加入北约。
另一方面，乌克兰和格鲁吉亚由于其国家中强大的亲俄罗斯势力以及无法树立舆论而无法加入北约。
我们记忆犹新的是乌克兰遭受了克里米亚的吞并，而格鲁吉亚则遭受了两个国家的独立。
它不是很令人欣慰，因为它与日本非常相似，日本在中国破坏了政治，商业，政府和大众媒体。
集体自卫的威慑力量将维持和平。
我们必须通过通过一系列国家（而不仅仅是美国）创建亚洲版本的北约来制止中国以武力改变现状。
但是，由于宪法第9条否认集体自卫权，在日本这是不可能的。
这就是宪法成为人民“生命敌人”的原因。
获得集体自卫权是当务之急，同时，自卫队的宪法化也至关重要。
基于这两点，我提议对《宪法》第9条进行具体修正。
宪法第9条
日本人民将真诚地寻求基于正义与秩序的国际和平。
为了维护国际和平并保护人民的生命，财产和领土，日本应维持自卫队，不允许任何国家的侵略或干涉，并应永远保持独立。
为了保护我们的家庭和后代的生命，我们必须履行我们的历史使命。