ONE YEAR AGO: WE'LL ALWAYS REMEMBER
A MEMORIAL OF THE 2009 EARTHQUAKE & TSUNAMI
September 29th, 2010
7pm
Best Western Lighthouse
Pacifica, CA
Please join us as we remember our Homelands of American Samoa & Samoa and the Kingdom of Tonga. This is a FREE EVENT!
We look forward to you joining us and appreciate your assistance in spreading the word.
The Host Organizations are:
Samoan Solutions
Together Samoa
Tongan Interfaith Council
SF SAMOA/Samoan Parents In Action
Monday, September 27, 2010
Friday, September 24, 2010
We Are Guahan Call to Action
Community Response to the Record of Decision
We Are Guahan
WeAreGuahan.com
Friday, October 1, 2010
4:30 pm - 6:30 pm
Adelup
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 23, 2010; Guam- With the release of the DoD’s Record of Decision, it has become evident that the Department of Defense will continue to disregard concerns voiced by the people of Guam. Guam’s local residents will be the demographic most severely impacted by plans to increase the US military’s presence within the region through one of the largest peacetime military relocations in modern history. We Are Guahan will be hosting a rally on Oct. 1 to unite the community in response.
The island participated actively within the NEPA process, with over 10,000 comments submitted in response to the Draft EIS from the community and Government of Guam agencies. Despite the outpouring of community involvement, the Final EIS failed to incorporate many of the island’s concerns into their final plans.
Guam’s community and local leaders presented a united front in opposition to the condemnation of land and the taking of more sites considered culturally and historically significant to the island’s indigenous people. However, the Department of Defense’s Record of Decision (ROD) indicates that the condemnation of land through eminent domain is still a possibility. Although decisions regarding the use of Pågat, an ancient Chamorro village and burial site, have been delayed, the site remains affected by the Department of Defense’s preferred alternatives for live-ammunition exercises.
Guam boasts one of the highest rates of enlistment into the United States Armed Forces per capita. Guam’s soldiers have fought and defended American values at rates higher than any other state within the Continental US, but remain excluded from discussions that greatly determine their futures. As a United States colony, residents of Guam lack any real control of their home and its resources. The lack of Democracy involved in the processes surrounding the military build-up in Guam have prompted residents to demand a role in the decision making process.
Plans to realign US troops stationed in Okinawa highlight a critical moment in the island’s history. Residents are uniting in efforts to empower themselves, protect their home’s resources, and shape their futures.
We Are Guahan invites all residents to participate in an island-wide rally to demonstrate unity, commemorate the island’s many sacrifices, and to empower the community to prepare for their home’s future. The rally is scheduled for Friday, October 1st from 4:30pm to 7:30pm at Adelup.
###
Not For Publication
Media Contact/For more information:
Moñeka De Oro, We Are Guåhan
Events Coordinator
Please contact for any concerns at 678-3240
Our islands and our people are bracing themselves for a massive change in tides. We Are Guåhan is a multi-ethnic collective of individuals, families and grassroots organizations concerned with the future of our islands. We Are Guåhan aims to inform and engage our community on the various issues concerning the impending military build up. We Are Guåhan aims to unite and mobilize our people to protect and defend our resources and our culture. We Are Guåhan promotes peaceful, positive and prosperous change for our island. We envision a sustainable future for all of Guåhan’s people.
We Are Guahan
WeAreGuahan.com
Friday, October 1, 2010
4:30 pm - 6:30 pm
Adelup
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 23, 2010; Guam- With the release of the DoD’s Record of Decision, it has become evident that the Department of Defense will continue to disregard concerns voiced by the people of Guam. Guam’s local residents will be the demographic most severely impacted by plans to increase the US military’s presence within the region through one of the largest peacetime military relocations in modern history. We Are Guahan will be hosting a rally on Oct. 1 to unite the community in response.
The island participated actively within the NEPA process, with over 10,000 comments submitted in response to the Draft EIS from the community and Government of Guam agencies. Despite the outpouring of community involvement, the Final EIS failed to incorporate many of the island’s concerns into their final plans.
Guam’s community and local leaders presented a united front in opposition to the condemnation of land and the taking of more sites considered culturally and historically significant to the island’s indigenous people. However, the Department of Defense’s Record of Decision (ROD) indicates that the condemnation of land through eminent domain is still a possibility. Although decisions regarding the use of Pågat, an ancient Chamorro village and burial site, have been delayed, the site remains affected by the Department of Defense’s preferred alternatives for live-ammunition exercises.
Guam boasts one of the highest rates of enlistment into the United States Armed Forces per capita. Guam’s soldiers have fought and defended American values at rates higher than any other state within the Continental US, but remain excluded from discussions that greatly determine their futures. As a United States colony, residents of Guam lack any real control of their home and its resources. The lack of Democracy involved in the processes surrounding the military build-up in Guam have prompted residents to demand a role in the decision making process.
Plans to realign US troops stationed in Okinawa highlight a critical moment in the island’s history. Residents are uniting in efforts to empower themselves, protect their home’s resources, and shape their futures.
We Are Guahan invites all residents to participate in an island-wide rally to demonstrate unity, commemorate the island’s many sacrifices, and to empower the community to prepare for their home’s future. The rally is scheduled for Friday, October 1st from 4:30pm to 7:30pm at Adelup.
###
Not For Publication
Media Contact/For more information:
Moñeka De Oro, We Are Guåhan
Events Coordinator
Please contact for any concerns at 678-3240
Our islands and our people are bracing themselves for a massive change in tides. We Are Guåhan is a multi-ethnic collective of individuals, families and grassroots organizations concerned with the future of our islands. We Are Guåhan aims to inform and engage our community on the various issues concerning the impending military build up. We Are Guåhan aims to unite and mobilize our people to protect and defend our resources and our culture. We Are Guåhan promotes peaceful, positive and prosperous change for our island. We envision a sustainable future for all of Guåhan’s people.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Events This Weekend
SEPTEMBER 25, SATURDAY
International Coastal Clean-up @ Marbo Cave
Please Join We Are Guahan for the 16th Annual Guam International Coastal Clean Up this Saturday Sept. 25 from 7 to 9 am!
We Are Guahan and Rotaracts are sponsoring the the Marbo Cave clean up site in Mangilao. Marbo Cave has been identified in the final EIS as a buffer and safety zone for the proposed live firing range at Pagat. It is important that we connect with these lands while we still can.
All volunteers recieve a FREE coastal clean Shirt, entry to Fish Eye Observatory in Piti and a discounted lunch at Sea Grille Restaurant in Tumon (that comes with Underwater World entry ticket).
All clean up materials will be provided. We'll also have light breakfast items available, but bring sun screen, mosquito repellant, water, your friends and family.
DIRECTIONS TO MARBO CAVE: Coming from Mangilao, take Route 15 (or Back Road) north until you hit the four way intersection. Turn right. This is also the intersection where Jackson's Titiyas is located. We'll have some signs posted as well to let you know you're on the right track. ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEPTEMBER 26, SUNDAY
Sella and Cetti Bays Sunset Boat Tour
Join other WAG members for a FREE boat tour to see Sella Bay, the site of critical Chamoru and Guamanian history.
SELLA/CETTI BAYS SUNSET BOAT TOUR
on Sunday, September 26, from 3pm-6pm
Meeting at 2:30pm at the Agat Marina. The boat will return to the marina by 6pm at the latest.
Join Dr. Michael Lujan Bevacqua (and other speakers to be confirmed) as we see Sella Bay, a pristine region where in the 70s the Navy wanted to build an ammunition wharf. We'll learn about the political, social, and environmental history of this area, which is home to ancient artifacts, an old Chamoru village, and the beautiful Spanish bridge. If you've never made the time to make the hike down to the bay, now is the time to do it.
We'll also be able to stop off at some point to go swimming and see Cetti Bay, so get ready to get a history lesson, cool off, and enjoy our island's beauty.
Wear comfortable clothes and bring a swimsuit/snorkel gear if you have.
YOU MUST RSVP to marie@weareguahan.com to reserve a space. Due to passenger capacity, We Are Guahan MUST have a solid headcount.
International Coastal Clean-up @ Marbo Cave
Please Join We Are Guahan for the 16th Annual Guam International Coastal Clean Up this Saturday Sept. 25 from 7 to 9 am!
We Are Guahan and Rotaracts are sponsoring the the Marbo Cave clean up site in Mangilao. Marbo Cave has been identified in the final EIS as a buffer and safety zone for the proposed live firing range at Pagat. It is important that we connect with these lands while we still can.
All volunteers recieve a FREE coastal clean Shirt, entry to Fish Eye Observatory in Piti and a discounted lunch at Sea Grille Restaurant in Tumon (that comes with Underwater World entry ticket).
All clean up materials will be provided. We'll also have light breakfast items available, but bring sun screen, mosquito repellant, water, your friends and family.
DIRECTIONS TO MARBO CAVE: Coming from Mangilao, take Route 15 (or Back Road) north until you hit the four way intersection. Turn right. This is also the intersection where Jackson's Titiyas is located. We'll have some signs posted as well to let you know you're on the right track. ;)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEPTEMBER 26, SUNDAY
Sella and Cetti Bays Sunset Boat Tour
Join other WAG members for a FREE boat tour to see Sella Bay, the site of critical Chamoru and Guamanian history.
SELLA/CETTI BAYS SUNSET BOAT TOUR
on Sunday, September 26, from 3pm-6pm
Meeting at 2:30pm at the Agat Marina. The boat will return to the marina by 6pm at the latest.
Join Dr. Michael Lujan Bevacqua (and other speakers to be confirmed) as we see Sella Bay, a pristine region where in the 70s the Navy wanted to build an ammunition wharf. We'll learn about the political, social, and environmental history of this area, which is home to ancient artifacts, an old Chamoru village, and the beautiful Spanish bridge. If you've never made the time to make the hike down to the bay, now is the time to do it.
We'll also be able to stop off at some point to go swimming and see Cetti Bay, so get ready to get a history lesson, cool off, and enjoy our island's beauty.
Wear comfortable clothes and bring a swimsuit/snorkel gear if you have.
YOU MUST RSVP to marie@weareguahan.com to reserve a space. Due to passenger capacity, We Are Guahan MUST have a solid headcount.
Labels:
Hita Guahan,
Kanton Tasi,
Miget,
Sella Bay,
Tour
Thursday, September 9, 2010
War Reparations Petition
September 10, 2010
For Immediate Release
Hagåtña, Guam – In an effort to ensure Guam’s World War II survivors finally receive war reparations, the people of Guam are being urged to sign an online petition to Congress by the end of next week.
In the weeks ahead, the US Senate will begin their process on the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act. The House of Representatives approved the Act with an amendment that adds to the bill the text of the Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act, granting reparations to the island’s war survivors. However, there is a threat that some senators may not allow the reparations to remain in the final version of the bill that the Senate will vote on later this year. If that happens, Guam’s war survivors will have to continue to wait for justice.
The Office of Senator Frank F. Blas, Jr. launched the website www.guamwarsurvivorstory.com on August 31, 2010 that includes an online petition to Congress urging senators to keep Guam’s war reparations in the final version of the defense bill, and to approve the bill when it is voted on. Thus far, the petition has garnered about 200 signatures, but many more are needed to make Guam's voice loud and clear, and to grab the Senate's attention.
The people of Guam are being asked to visit www.guamwarsurvivorstory.com today and click on the “Petition2Congress” link at the top of the menu on the left side of the home page to sign the petition. It takes only one minute to sign and could make a tremendous difference for Guam’s war survivors, many of whom have died before ever receiving restitution for the atrocities they suffered during World War II. There were more than 22,000 people who lived through the war on Guam. Of that group, less than 1,000 are alive today, and more continue to die.
“When we started our war survivors series entitled ‘Real People. Real Stories,’ 29 of our featured 30 war survivors were alive,” said Senator Frank F. Blas, Jr. “Since our series launch in November 2009, we have lost three of our featured man'amko (Dr. Rosa Carter, Mr. Jesus Perez Sablan, and Mr. Juan Unpingco). How many more will pass away before they receive their just and deserved recognition?”
For more details, please call Senator Blas on his cell at 687-1483, or his office at 472-2527.
Labels:
Congress,
Petition,
War Reparations,
Websites
Saturday, September 4, 2010
National Historic Preservation Act - NHPA: Section 106 Requires Review & Consultation of "Undertaking"
The NHPA-Naional Historic Preservation Act: Section 106 requires the review & consultation of the Joint Guam and CNMI Military Relocation and Buildup by consulting parties and the public. A Programmatic Agreement between DoD and the Guam Department of Parks and Recreation Historic Resources Division was released on August 20, 2010 for review with comments due five (5) days later, on August 25, 2010.
Comments Submitted Regarding the Draft Programmatic Agreement for the Joint Guam and CNMI Military Relocation and Buildup
Senator vicente c. pangelinan - The Programmatic Agreement Will Become Problematic for the People of Guam
The signatories to the PA agree that DoD will satisy its Section 106 responsibilities for the Undertaking (ROD) according to the PA, and thus have effectuated a shortcut to Section 106 review, which allows the agency's decision to move forward without any more review or consultation for all the buildup projects, except Apra dredging and possibly Pagat, depending on the final version.
Denny Taimanglo - A Decision for Your People and the Future of Our Children
I understand that the Programmatic Agreement has placed an immense weight on your shoulders. You should not bear that weight alone. Listen to your people and let us help you make this invaluable decision.
Dipattamenton I Kaohao Guinahan Chamorro / Department of Chamorro Affairs
As noted in DCA's DEIS comments, the cultural name of the project areas would be beneficial in determining their cultural significance. Project numbers make it difficult to ascertain the exact location. A detailed map would be helpful of all project areas, noting village names, sub-villages (e.g., Ipan, Sasayan, Oka, etc). At least 6 months of review time is needed to provide a thorough report.
DCA recommends that "Access Plans" be completed before signing of PA.
National Trust for Historic Preservation, Western Office
The purpose of this letter is to summarize the general concerns of the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Guam Preservation Trust regarding the current status of the Section 106 consultation by the Department of Defense ("DoD") for the proposed military relocation and buildup on Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (the "Buildup"). In addition, we offer several specific comments on the draft Programmatic Agreement ("PA") dated 20 August 2010 in an accompanying attachment to this letter.
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
We appreciate Navy's commitment to further consultation regarding the proposal to site multiple firing ranges in the area of the ancient village of Pagat. This proposal has met with significant opposition from consulting parties, and we are pleased that the language in the PA with regard to the firing ranges provides an opportunity for the parties to continue consultation on both the appropriate location of such ranges and the potential for effects to historic properties.
Dipattamenton Plaset Yan Dibuetsion / Department of Parks and Recreation
Mr. Schregardus, throughout our conversations, we felt you to be sincere in your efforts to amicably bring this Agreement to conclusion, recognizing the fact that this Buildup, a first of its kind in the nation, brings with it valid concerns raised by not just our office, but by the community, who in fact are the very ones that we are obligated to serve. We are confident that we can work with you to find ways to address each and every concern so that DoD's mission can proceed with the knowledge that we all played a part, in good faith, to protect and preserve Guam's heritage.
We Are Guahan
In the Programmatic Agreement, however, Pagat is identified in Appendix A as part of the Undertaking. Furthermore, Appendix D identifies land acquisition for firing ranges as a site that has "Further Evaluation Required." Stipulation V.C.3 governs all projects in the Undertaking requiring additional evaluation to determine effects. Assuming that DoD agreed there would be adverse effects to Pagat, the remedy would be to comply with Stipulation V.C.2. This does not appear to reflect the intent of the revision.
Additional Public Comments
1 Chamorro Tribe
3 Therese Terlaje
5 Therese Terlaje
9 Vivian Dames
11 Joe Duenas
12 Charissa Aguon
13 Alison Rae Causay
14 Resolution Objecting to Draft PA
19 West Coast Famoksaiyan
21 Dave Lotz
22 Guam Boonie Stompers
5 Therese Terlaje
We agree with the 'Whereas" clauses in the draft PA which state that there are historic properties that will be adversely affected by the planned projects for the military buildup on Guam; that the cumulative effects of the projects will be island wide on Guam and Tinian. We object to the adoption of Appendix D by the PA, and specifically to all properties listed by approximately 216 separate military project names, where conclusion is that there is no adverse effect or no historic property affected. We request additional time to review the studies underlying these determinations and consultation with our community as to these findings. Notwithstanding the many studies that DoD insisted at the meeting were done to arrive at the conclusions on this Appendix, and DoD's insistence at the meeting that we should TRUST them to make accurate determinations, it is not consistent with the spirit of NHPA that these be determined without consultation with the Chamorro people. This is especially true in light of the large population of Chamorros before the arrival of the Spanish and their documented habitation or use of different areas of Guam, which is 30 miles long and 4 to 12 miles wide. In other words, it is hard to trust immediately and conclude in five days that Chamorros placed no value on the listed properties in their 4000 year long history of veneration and celebration, or in their quest for food, clothing, and shelter, or by their fishing, hunting, and gathering in this limited land mass, which is smaller than many national parks and national monuments, given the proximity of these properties already recognized historical and traditional cultural properties on Guam. Also, we are unable to concur at this time with the specific adverse effects cited for some projects as we are not privy to Appendix C, and thus unable to concur immediately with the specific mitigation proposed for destruction of said sites at this time.
Comments Submitted Regarding the Draft Programmatic Agreement for the Joint Guam and CNMI Military Relocation and Buildup
Senator vicente c. pangelinan - The Programmatic Agreement Will Become Problematic for the People of Guam
The signatories to the PA agree that DoD will satisy its Section 106 responsibilities for the Undertaking (ROD) according to the PA, and thus have effectuated a shortcut to Section 106 review, which allows the agency's decision to move forward without any more review or consultation for all the buildup projects, except Apra dredging and possibly Pagat, depending on the final version.
Denny Taimanglo - A Decision for Your People and the Future of Our Children
I understand that the Programmatic Agreement has placed an immense weight on your shoulders. You should not bear that weight alone. Listen to your people and let us help you make this invaluable decision.
Dipattamenton I Kaohao Guinahan Chamorro / Department of Chamorro Affairs
As noted in DCA's DEIS comments, the cultural name of the project areas would be beneficial in determining their cultural significance. Project numbers make it difficult to ascertain the exact location. A detailed map would be helpful of all project areas, noting village names, sub-villages (e.g., Ipan, Sasayan, Oka, etc). At least 6 months of review time is needed to provide a thorough report.
DCA recommends that "Access Plans" be completed before signing of PA.
National Trust for Historic Preservation, Western Office
The purpose of this letter is to summarize the general concerns of the National Trust for Historic Preservation and the Guam Preservation Trust regarding the current status of the Section 106 consultation by the Department of Defense ("DoD") for the proposed military relocation and buildup on Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (the "Buildup"). In addition, we offer several specific comments on the draft Programmatic Agreement ("PA") dated 20 August 2010 in an accompanying attachment to this letter.
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
We appreciate Navy's commitment to further consultation regarding the proposal to site multiple firing ranges in the area of the ancient village of Pagat. This proposal has met with significant opposition from consulting parties, and we are pleased that the language in the PA with regard to the firing ranges provides an opportunity for the parties to continue consultation on both the appropriate location of such ranges and the potential for effects to historic properties.
Dipattamenton Plaset Yan Dibuetsion / Department of Parks and Recreation
Mr. Schregardus, throughout our conversations, we felt you to be sincere in your efforts to amicably bring this Agreement to conclusion, recognizing the fact that this Buildup, a first of its kind in the nation, brings with it valid concerns raised by not just our office, but by the community, who in fact are the very ones that we are obligated to serve. We are confident that we can work with you to find ways to address each and every concern so that DoD's mission can proceed with the knowledge that we all played a part, in good faith, to protect and preserve Guam's heritage.
We Are Guahan
In the Programmatic Agreement, however, Pagat is identified in Appendix A as part of the Undertaking. Furthermore, Appendix D identifies land acquisition for firing ranges as a site that has "Further Evaluation Required." Stipulation V.C.3 governs all projects in the Undertaking requiring additional evaluation to determine effects. Assuming that DoD agreed there would be adverse effects to Pagat, the remedy would be to comply with Stipulation V.C.2. This does not appear to reflect the intent of the revision.
Additional Public Comments
1 Chamorro Tribe
3 Therese Terlaje
5 Therese Terlaje
9 Vivian Dames
11 Joe Duenas
12 Charissa Aguon
13 Alison Rae Causay
14 Resolution Objecting to Draft PA
19 West Coast Famoksaiyan
21 Dave Lotz
22 Guam Boonie Stompers
5 Therese Terlaje
We agree with the 'Whereas" clauses in the draft PA which state that there are historic properties that will be adversely affected by the planned projects for the military buildup on Guam; that the cumulative effects of the projects will be island wide on Guam and Tinian. We object to the adoption of Appendix D by the PA, and specifically to all properties listed by approximately 216 separate military project names, where conclusion is that there is no adverse effect or no historic property affected. We request additional time to review the studies underlying these determinations and consultation with our community as to these findings. Notwithstanding the many studies that DoD insisted at the meeting were done to arrive at the conclusions on this Appendix, and DoD's insistence at the meeting that we should TRUST them to make accurate determinations, it is not consistent with the spirit of NHPA that these be determined without consultation with the Chamorro people. This is especially true in light of the large population of Chamorros before the arrival of the Spanish and their documented habitation or use of different areas of Guam, which is 30 miles long and 4 to 12 miles wide. In other words, it is hard to trust immediately and conclude in five days that Chamorros placed no value on the listed properties in their 4000 year long history of veneration and celebration, or in their quest for food, clothing, and shelter, or by their fishing, hunting, and gathering in this limited land mass, which is smaller than many national parks and national monuments, given the proximity of these properties already recognized historical and traditional cultural properties on Guam. Also, we are unable to concur at this time with the specific adverse effects cited for some projects as we are not privy to Appendix C, and thus unable to concur immediately with the specific mitigation proposed for destruction of said sites at this time.
Labels:
Ben Pangelinan,
Chamorro Tribe,
Comments,
DCA,
Hita Guahan,
Military Buildup,
Preservation,
Reports
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Thursday, August 12, 2010
The Lies of Hiroshima are the Lies of Today
The Lies Of Hiroshima Are The Lies Of Today
By John Pilger
Information Clearing House
06/08/08 “ICH” — – On the anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, John Pilger describes the ‘progression of lies’ from the dust of that detonated city, to the wars of today – and the threatened attack on Iran.
When I first went to Hiroshima in 1967, the shadow on the steps was still there. It was an almost perfect impression of a human being at ease: legs splayed, back bent, one hand by her side as she sat waiting for a bank to open. At a quarter past eight on the morning of August 6, 1945, she and her silhouette were burned into the granite. I stared at the shadow for an hour or more, then walked down to the river and met a man called Yukio, whose chest was still etched with the pattern of the shirt he was wearing when the atomic bomb was dropped.
He and his family still lived in a shack thrown up in the dust of an atomic desert. He described a huge flash over the city, “a bluish light, something like an electrical short”, after which wind blew like a tornado and black rain fell. “I was thrown on the ground and noticed only the stalks of my flowers were left. Everything was still and quiet, and when I got up, there were people naked, not saying anything. Some of them had no skin or hair. I was certain I was dead.” Nine years later, when I returned to look for him, he was dead from leukaemia.
In the immediate aftermath of the bomb, the allied occupation authorities banned all mention of radiation poisoning and insisted that people had been killed or injured only by the bomb’s blast. It was the first big lie. “No radioactivity in Hiroshima ruin” said the front page of the New York Times, a classic of disinformation and journalistic abdication, which the Australian reporter Wilfred Burchett put right with his scoop of the century. “I write this as a warning to the world,” reported Burchett in the Daily Express, having reached Hiroshima after a perilous journey, the first correspondent to dare. He described hospital wards filled with people with no visible injuries but who were dying from what he called “an atomic plague”. For telling this truth, his press accreditation was withdrawn, he was pilloried and smeared – and vindicated.
The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate “good war”, whose “ethical bath”, as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.
The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. “Even without the atomic bombing attacks,” concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, “air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that … Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.”
The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including “capitulation even if the terms were hard”. Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was “fearful” that the US air force would have Japan so “bombed out” that the new weapon would not be able “to show its strength”. He later admitted that “no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb”. His foreign policy colleagues were eager “to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip”. General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: “There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis.” The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the “overwhelming success” of “the experiment”.
Since 1945, the United States is believed to have been on the brink of using nuclear weapons at least three times. In waging their bogus “war on terror”, the present governments in Washington and London have declared they are prepared to make “pre-emptive” nuclear strikes against non-nuclear states. With each stroke toward the midnight of a nuclear Armageddon, the lies of justification grow more outrageous. Iran is the current “threat”. But Iran has no nuclear weapons and the disinformation that it is planning a nuclear arsenal comes largely from a discredited CIA-sponsored Iranian opposition group, the MEK – just as the lies about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction originated with the Iraqi National Congress, set up by Washington.
The role of western journalism in erecting this straw man is critical. That America’s Defence Intelligence Estimate says “with high confidence” that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 has been consigned to the memory hole. That Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad never threatened to “wipe Israel off the map” is of no interest. But such has been the mantra of this media “fact” that in his recent, obsequious performance before the Israeli parliament, Gordon Brown alluded to it as he threatened Iran, yet again.
This progression of lies has brought us to one of the most dangerous nuclear crises since 1945, because the real threat remains almost unmentionable in western establishment circles and therefore in the media. There is only one rampant nuclear power in the Middle East and that is Israel. The heroic Mordechai Vanunu tried to warn the world in 1986 when he smuggled out evidence that Israel was building as many as 200 nuclear warheads. In defiance of UN resolutions, Israel is today clearly itching to attack Iran, fearful that a new American administration might, just might, conduct genuine negotiations with a nation the west has defiled since Britain and America overthrew Iranian democracy in 1953.
In the New York Times on July 18, the Israeli historian Benny Morris, once considered a liberal and now a consultant to his country’s political and military establishment, threatened “an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland”. This would be mass murder. For a Jew, the irony cries out.
The question begs: are the rest of us to be mere bystanders, claiming, as good Germans did, that “we did not know”? Do we hide ever more behind what Richard Falk has called “a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted violence”? Catching war criminals is fashionable again. Radovan Karadzic stands in the dock, but Sharon and Olmert, Bush and Blair do not. Why not? The memory of Hiroshima requires an answer.
www.johnpilger.com
By John Pilger
Information Clearing House
06/08/08 “ICH” — – On the anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, John Pilger describes the ‘progression of lies’ from the dust of that detonated city, to the wars of today – and the threatened attack on Iran.
When I first went to Hiroshima in 1967, the shadow on the steps was still there. It was an almost perfect impression of a human being at ease: legs splayed, back bent, one hand by her side as she sat waiting for a bank to open. At a quarter past eight on the morning of August 6, 1945, she and her silhouette were burned into the granite. I stared at the shadow for an hour or more, then walked down to the river and met a man called Yukio, whose chest was still etched with the pattern of the shirt he was wearing when the atomic bomb was dropped.
He and his family still lived in a shack thrown up in the dust of an atomic desert. He described a huge flash over the city, “a bluish light, something like an electrical short”, after which wind blew like a tornado and black rain fell. “I was thrown on the ground and noticed only the stalks of my flowers were left. Everything was still and quiet, and when I got up, there were people naked, not saying anything. Some of them had no skin or hair. I was certain I was dead.” Nine years later, when I returned to look for him, he was dead from leukaemia.
In the immediate aftermath of the bomb, the allied occupation authorities banned all mention of radiation poisoning and insisted that people had been killed or injured only by the bomb’s blast. It was the first big lie. “No radioactivity in Hiroshima ruin” said the front page of the New York Times, a classic of disinformation and journalistic abdication, which the Australian reporter Wilfred Burchett put right with his scoop of the century. “I write this as a warning to the world,” reported Burchett in the Daily Express, having reached Hiroshima after a perilous journey, the first correspondent to dare. He described hospital wards filled with people with no visible injuries but who were dying from what he called “an atomic plague”. For telling this truth, his press accreditation was withdrawn, he was pilloried and smeared – and vindicated.
The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate “good war”, whose “ethical bath”, as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.
The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. “Even without the atomic bombing attacks,” concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, “air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey’s opinion that … Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.”
The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including “capitulation even if the terms were hard”. Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was “fearful” that the US air force would have Japan so “bombed out” that the new weapon would not be able “to show its strength”. He later admitted that “no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb”. His foreign policy colleagues were eager “to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip”. General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: “There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis.” The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the “overwhelming success” of “the experiment”.
Since 1945, the United States is believed to have been on the brink of using nuclear weapons at least three times. In waging their bogus “war on terror”, the present governments in Washington and London have declared they are prepared to make “pre-emptive” nuclear strikes against non-nuclear states. With each stroke toward the midnight of a nuclear Armageddon, the lies of justification grow more outrageous. Iran is the current “threat”. But Iran has no nuclear weapons and the disinformation that it is planning a nuclear arsenal comes largely from a discredited CIA-sponsored Iranian opposition group, the MEK – just as the lies about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction originated with the Iraqi National Congress, set up by Washington.
The role of western journalism in erecting this straw man is critical. That America’s Defence Intelligence Estimate says “with high confidence” that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 has been consigned to the memory hole. That Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad never threatened to “wipe Israel off the map” is of no interest. But such has been the mantra of this media “fact” that in his recent, obsequious performance before the Israeli parliament, Gordon Brown alluded to it as he threatened Iran, yet again.
This progression of lies has brought us to one of the most dangerous nuclear crises since 1945, because the real threat remains almost unmentionable in western establishment circles and therefore in the media. There is only one rampant nuclear power in the Middle East and that is Israel. The heroic Mordechai Vanunu tried to warn the world in 1986 when he smuggled out evidence that Israel was building as many as 200 nuclear warheads. In defiance of UN resolutions, Israel is today clearly itching to attack Iran, fearful that a new American administration might, just might, conduct genuine negotiations with a nation the west has defiled since Britain and America overthrew Iranian democracy in 1953.
In the New York Times on July 18, the Israeli historian Benny Morris, once considered a liberal and now a consultant to his country’s political and military establishment, threatened “an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland”. This would be mass murder. For a Jew, the irony cries out.
The question begs: are the rest of us to be mere bystanders, claiming, as good Germans did, that “we did not know”? Do we hide ever more behind what Richard Falk has called “a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted violence”? Catching war criminals is fashionable again. Radovan Karadzic stands in the dock, but Sharon and Olmert, Bush and Blair do not. Why not? The memory of Hiroshima requires an answer.
www.johnpilger.com
Labels:
Anniversary,
Dinagi,
Gera,
Nuclear War,
Radiation,
WWII
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
