More children's drawings displayed in the subway., The second time is just like the first.

Err, Cheesenip, you’re a bit late. Unless you're holding back something no one knows about, the debate's over in that respect. We're now just discussing the finer details of what led to what. You may be well-inspired to read all that has been said about the subject in these two separate threads:
http://aog.2y.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1603
http://aog.2y.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1557

Now that it is obvious you’re not good at creative, colourful insults, which I’m disappointed, perhaps you should bust out the research that supports your position since you're going to such lengths to defend it.

There are also quote tags. Use them.

This post has been edited by Lyrt on Jul 21 2005, 11:55 PM

Quothe Lyrt

Yes, and I will go out on a limb to say that unless you bring something profound and still unstated to the discussion the only people who are going to care what you say are those whom you insult and then only long enough to rub your nose in your own poo. If not, you waste our time.

This post has been edited by Patrick Lee on Jul 21 2005, 11:22 PM

I do believe that pictures calling for the deaths of innocents falls falls afoul of many laws in Korea. As well, Korea's libel laws are very strict and are used quite frequently with punishments that include jailtime rather just financial penalties as in most modern countries. So, technically, the children who drew these pictures could end up sitting in jail under the laws of Korea.

Please do not suggest that I have not read your responses when I clearly responded to most of what you claimed with links as you requested.

I do believe the time has come for you to do the same as most of what you say is either questionable, contradicted by outside sources (either before or after), or is you misquoting me. Links are your friends, please use them.

No, it's not. The issue is that students are advocating violence and anger over an issue that nearly 100% of the artists were ignorant of and is in clear violation of several of Korea's laws as part of a publically displayed school project in clear contrast to the "year of friendship" that the schools are supposed to be encouraging.

I'm saying that it's hard to argue eating beef is immoral but eating pork is fine.

Personally, neither memorial bothers me. I think it's a good thing to rememeber the past and to learn from it. I'm more bothered by Korea's decision to marginalize the contributions of other countries in bringing an end to Japanese aggression in WW2 and to treat as taboos discussion about how Japan saved the people of the Korean Empire and that Koreans were on the forefront of the Japanese expansion into Asia rather than the victim.

During my stay in Korea, I have visited multiple memorials. I was impressed to see that the UN Memorial in Busan was well maintained given its rather large size compared to most memorials in Korea. Though things like the Incheon Memorial tended to just make shit up:



It seems they believe that the Ameicans forced North Korea to invade.

What I find offensive is when Unification Minister Chung heads to Noth Korea and enjoys a seven-course, two-hour meal with the "Dear Leader" and invites the press to take pictures of the event while millions of North Koreans are starving due to mismangement and the decision to keep the border shut to much outside aid because they want to just have the food dropped off at the border.

Sadly, I could not find the picture I saw of them laughing and having a great time (though they were common last month (June 17 I believe)), so instead I'll have to use this picture of him boozing it up with the North Koreans until I find it.



I can't visualize Hitler and Churchill having a party together for some reason.

Why are you continually misrepresenting what I say? The link in question was to demonstrate that most sites do not say that Korean freedom fighters were involved in liberating Korea while Korean government handouts used to state the very opposite.

Up until March of this year, the South Korean government also claimed that Japan never paid reparations for SK citizens until the SK courts ordered documents relating to the 1965 normalization agreements unsealed. Suddenly it turns out that Japan had given a lot of cash to Korea and that the Korean government had "redirected" the money into infastructure projects.

When I head back to the high school classes in late August, I should see if the books still say that Japan did not pay as the court-ordered unsealing happened three weeks after the current school year began.

Could you please point out where you said you learned about them? I can't seem to find it.

You're citing "must have been convicted as being a war criminal" while refusing to condemn people who did the exact same acts. That's a very silly position to take. For example, Hitler is not a convicted war criminal yet you have made it clear that he is not someone you want remembered. How very hypocritical of you.

The only time that name has come up is when you mentioned it. I will, again, ask you to please stop crediting me with things you wish I had said so you can insult me over it.

The point being that some people are very nationalistic and make accusations based on what they want to believe rather than on merit.

Horrible lies. I've demonstrated why pretty much everything you've said is wrong, quoted multiple sources while you are yet to link to anything, and demonstrated that you tend to just write works of fiction in support of what you want to believe.

I find great amusement in your requests that we stay within the continually changing parameters you randomly assign. You demand that I support my claims with links, and then when I do you nay-say them while failing to demonstrate why you would be correct.

I too find that extremely offensive... similiarly, in America too, where millions go hungry here and we are supposed to be the richest country? i'm not sure what kind of mismanagement we have here... but ah thank gawd for the food channel! BAM!

It's a worthy question to consider whose interests leaders of every nation serve. And when they serve them, how they serve them, why they serve them?

o_o; Oh dear sweet jebus!

I never saw anything like those pictures before in my entire life! Ever! They were so violent for children! As for the Corea part, my older Korean cousin taught me that Japan made Corea change its name so that it would come after Japan when spelled in the English way, but now I am not sure and rather confused. x.x; This entire thing is just so shocking to me.

Hello Gord,
I'm a 36 yrs old Japanese living in Tokyo. It's my honor to write some informations here.

Let me show two significant evidence, many of your readers may already know, though.
--
Korea brainwashes its pupils by using just one kind of national textbook, while Japan let the educational committee to choose from many kind of.

Korean only accept anti-Japanese words and get mad when some Korean say pro-Japanese words, while Japanese accept both pro- and anti- Japanese words, as Japanese take this freedom of speech as the base of their democracy.
--
now. let goody-oldy altavista work

한국은 국가 교과서의 다만 1개의 종류를 사용해서 그것의 눈동자를 세뇌한다 일본은 교육 위원회를 많았n에서 종류를의 선택하는 시켰는 그러나. 일본어는 직업, 반대로 일본 낱말을 모두 받아들이는 그러나, 한국사람 단 수락 반대로 일본 낱말 및 때 몇몇 한국 할말 직업 일본 낱말 언론의 자유 이 그들의 민주주의의 기초로 일본 사람 포획으로 화내.

--

BTW did you notice that Google Earth renames Sea of Japan to East Sea?
This issue is not suitable for this topic, so I'm going to make another one.

Good, now we have biased, propoganda based, opinions from both sides of the fence.

What makes you think Ropponies's opinion is baced on propoganda??

Star wrote

A perfectly legitimate question, which needs a thoughtful answer.

Why Ropponies post is linked to propoganda:

Several factors link information to propoganda. These include:

systematic distribution -- i.e. information that is spread through institutional means serve the needs, beliefs, and biases of that institution.

hasty-generalization -- when select information is held to represent a complicated situation or whole...not to mention other inductive fallacies.

appeals to motives in place of support -- when information appeals to threats, emotions, prejudices, etc. rather than acceptable evidence.

intent to persuade -- when information generated through above means is distributed to persuade rather than inform.

intent to harm -- when information generated through above means is meant to degrade, injure, or otherwise harm people or institutions.


This is just a laundry list to get us started.

So when Ropponies says (I paraphrase):

"I have significant evidence, that most of you already know, that Korea brainwashes its children with national education, but Japan allows choice. "

The denotation is that Korea brainwashes children but Japan doesn't. The connotation is that everyone already knows Korea's government and institutional practices are evil (and evil must be eliminated), but Japan is good and Japanese students enjoy freedom so we should all support Japan and destroy Korea. Ropponies goes on to say that Korea (not just a Korean, or a few Koreans, or this or that part of Korean instutional government, but KOREA) "only accept anti-Japanese words" but that Japan allows people to say whatever they want.

Even if this were absolutely 100% true, which of course, it cannot be, it would still be propoganda, because it is information that is intended to harm a people, culture, country rather than provide the receivers of the information with a clearer, more complex, understanding of the complicated situation that is being discussed.

Is this the same guy who suggested i place a propane tank inside a server and shoot at it with a high powered rifle?

Don't knock it. Not only is it a suggestion for a great fireworks display finale, but it's also certainly more productive help than you'd receive from Gateway tech support.

Guns don't kill people. Shooting high-powered rifles at propane tanks inside servers kills people.

This post has been edited by Vash the Stampede on Aug 25 2005, 07:12 PM

It's true that Korea only have state-written text books and schools don't have any choice but to use them. In other words, Korean children are taught only one (and heavily biased and fabricated) interpretation of history. And people like Cho Yeong-nam and Han Seung-jo who expressed pro-Japanese opinions and criticized Korea's attitude toward Japan were condemned and even had to quit their jobs. Is this information that is intended to harm and destroy Korea? I think If children grow up to be adults who focus their energy on hate, it would be more harmful to their own country.

What is the information intending to do?

P.S. I was joking about the propane bit. Go ahead and shoot the server, but if you load it with propane you are going to get a noise you can hear for miles -- it'll draw unwelcome attention.

haha, you've certainly put a lot of thought into this.

I'm guessing that you make this determination through a careful reading of an obtained copy of said textbook in question, yes? Or did you just take your government/media's word for it? That's what I thought. Bring us evidence, perhaps specific passages that are in error, or an itemized list of the errors discovered. Don't just say, "Hey this has propoganda, I discovered this fact through osmosis." Because we are getting awful sick of that.

Japanese people can buy the Japanese language edition of Korea's history textbook at bookstores, and there are sites that show the textbook　content. http://members.tripod.com/textbook_korea/fr_2.htm
What is biased and fabricated interpretation of history? For example, they don't even recognize the fact that Korea (under the Joseon Dynasty) had traditionally been a tributary state to China, and as a result of Sino-Japanese War Korea became an independent state. If you want to see evidence, you should read Korea's history textbook and judge it yourself.

Hello Gord,
I'm a 36 yrs old American living in New York. It's my honor to write some informations here.

Let me show two significant evidence, many of your readers may already know, though.
--
McDonalds brainwashes its customers by using just one kind of Ketchup, while Hardees let the condiment committee to choose from many kind of.

McDonalds only accept anti-Hunts words and get mad when some McDonaldian say pro-Hunts words, while Hardees accept both pro- and anti- Hunts/Heinz words, as the Hardeesese take this freedom of speech as the base of their democracy.
--
now. let goody-oldy google translate work:

Eu sou ir justo fazer acima algo, não é como qualquer um compreenderá ou importar-se-á. O tradutor compreenderá meus muitos erros?
--

BTW did you notice that Google Earth renames Sea of Mustard to Gross Sea?
This issue is not suitable for this topic, so I'm going to make another one, bugging the hell out of all who stopped caring in May.

Star wrote:

"Interpretations" of history, by definition, are artful in their support of the interests of a particular group. History is political and always contextualized according to the needs of the culture formulating it. What you and your friends/family/countrymen consider as "fact", is the "baseless claim" of another. Your baseless claim is their fact. This is not relativism, this is a reality of political and cultural power struggles. If you are going to appear to be an authority on this issue, you are going to have to do much better than posting a few inflammatory "facts" and expecting everyone to nod their heads in agreement. You are going to have to a better investigator and rhetor.

In that regard, Star, I think the real issue here isn't necessarily that you have supported propaganda in this discussion, though you have done this and it has diminished your credibility. The issue is that you are misunderstanding your audience. Most of the readers of this forum are highly educated, many with college and/or advanced degrees and/or specialized training in some field or another. You yourself are probably in this group. Most of the active contributers of this forum, however, have indicated that they want to hear opinions that are inviting and informative.

Posts that have an air of cultural hostility, such as the one you are defending (and frankly, your own as well) are generally regarded with impatience, treated as ignorant, and ridiculed through some form of satire or mockery. This happens because these posts don't teach us anything, except that the poster is unable or unwilling to step away from his/her own cultural/political/national point-of-view. Opinions are easy to come by. "Facts" are easy to come by. Informative arguments and good fellowship seem to be in short supply.

Better luck next time, okay?