#to the point where he's been written about in many national korean newspapers about him trying to spread his imperialist agenda and ideas | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

xf-2 · 5 years

Link

Tetsuhide Yamaoka, Australia-Japan Community Network July 4, 2019 11:19 pmfujioka nobukatsu, graduate project, Kent Gilbert, miki dezaki, shunichi fujiki, shusenjo, sophia university, the main battle ground of the comfort women issues, tony marano

On June 15, five people who appeared in a documentary called “Shusenjo: The Main Battleground of the Comfort Women Issue” (Tofu Films) sued the director and the production company for the film, bringing the battleground from the big screen to the courtroom.

Graduate Project Gone Awry

Kent Gilbert, Tony Marano, Nobukatsu Fujioka, Shunichi Fujiki and Yumiko Yamamoto filed charges against a young man who called himself Miki Dezaki for using footage of them in a commercial film without their consent.

The story goes that in 2016, Miki Dezaki approached several people for interviews on the comfort women Issue as part of his graduation project at Sophia University. For that purpose, Dezaki secured the consent of several people, including the five people involved in the case.

After his graduate school project, he apparently proceeded to do more filming, add music and further edits, making it into a commercial film shown publicly for the first time on October 7, 2018.

The plaintiffs have charged that the consent they gave was for Dezaki’s non-commercial graduation project and not for any other purpose, including a commercial film. The charges further accused Dezaki of uploading footage of Marano to Youtube without his consent.

The plaintiffs have sued to stop the film from showing. In addition, they have sought damages of ¥ 5,000,000 JPY ($ 46,420 USD) to Kent Gilbert and Tony Marano, and ¥ 1,000,000 JPY (¥ 9,284 USD) for each of the other three people.

How it Started

Let’s take a step back to 2016, when Miki Dezaki approached several well-known conservative opinion leaders, introducing himself as a graduate student of Sophia University. He asked for interviews with them in order to make a documentary film focused on the comfort women issue. He said the project was to complete his master’s degree.

One of Dezaki’s emails said, “As I researched, I found the comfort women issue was more complex than I had read in the Western liberal media. In researching, I found there was little evidence that the women were coerced to become comfort women, and that the lives of the comfort women were not as bad as some activists or experts would argue. I have to admit that I had believed the media reports, but now I have doubts…. As a graduate student, I have an ethical obligation to conduct interviews with you with respect and fairness. Also, since this is academic research, there are certain academic standards and conditions which must be met, so it will not be biased journalism.”

He approached Kent Gilbert, Yoshiko Sakurai, Nobukatsu Fujioka, Mio Sugita, Yumiko Yamamoto, Tony Marano (also known as the “Texas Daddy”), Shunichi Fujiki (Texas Daddy Japan secretariat), among others.

All of them took Dezaki at his word and expected he would make a fair and neutral documentary film as promised. On that basis, they agreed to interviews with him.

The Product Is Not What Was Promised

Time passed. On March 27, 2019, I headed for a small theater in Shibuya, where I had heard that a preview of the film would be screened. By then, I had also heard that all of the above-mentioned people Dezaki interviewed regretted cooperating with him on the film, which, contrary to their expectations, turned out to be another propaganda film about the comfort women.

I wondered what went wrong. The film was supposed to be a fair debate between those who claim the comfort women were sex slaves and those who say they were not.

Advanced information on the film indicated that advocates of the “comfort women are sex slaves” view who appear would include Yoshiaki Yoshimi, Etsuro Totsuka, Hirofumi Hayashi, Koichi Nakano, and Takashi Uemura.

Mihyang Yun, a representative of The Korean Council for the Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan, and Park Yu-ha, a professor at Sejong University in Seoul who wrote The Comfort Women of the Empire (2013, in South Korea, now banned) and was prosecuted for it in South Korea, were also said to make an appearance in the film. I wanted to see the film for myself to learn what was actually said.

The title of the film was Shusenjo: The Main Battleground of the Comfort Women Issue (Independent, 2019). The credits said it was written and directed by Miki Dezaki, who was billed as a Japanese American YouTuber in a leaflet on the movie. The flyer promised that the movie would be “Surprisingly thrilling!!!! This is the most aggressive documentary film today.”

As I watched, speakers appeared one after another making various claims. But was it “surprisingly thrilling,” as Dezaki’s flyer had promised? No, and the reason was clear: this film was far from fair.

Dezaki Set the Tone

The film’s tone made it clear that Dezaki was not neutral at all. Rather, he stood by those who claimed comfort women were sex slaves. While saying he would explore the issue from a neutral position, he started by expressing disdain for the views of those who said comfort women were not sex slaves, calling them “revisionists” and “denialists” right from the beginning.

His tone was very rude to those who cooperated from the opposition side. It raised questions about his motives, and I could not help but suspect that his email promises to those whose views he disdained were simply a trap to induce them to appear in the film.

Another point that caught my attention was that Dezaki avoided interviewing the most prominent scholars on the comfort women issue when their views did not fit with his conclusion.

Since Dezaki included in the film’s debate interviews with Yoshiaki Yoshimi and Hirofumi Hayashi, experts who have long been proponents of the sex slave story, he should have interviewed scholars with comparable qualifications on the other side, such as Ikuhiko Hata and Tsutomu Nishioka. This failure alone demonstrates the lack of balance in his work.

I was able to ask Dezaki in person about this point on April 4 at The Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan, where a preview of the film and an interview were held. He answered like this: “As for Nishioka, I saw his views on the internet. I thought he was not adding much more than others say and did not contact him.”

Then did the film offer any meaningful argument at all?

Were Comfort Women Coercively Recruited?

At one point, the film showed a 2007 clip of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe answering questions in the Diet. He said: “There were no such cases as government authorities intruding into private houses and forcibly taking women away. There was no coercion.”

Then Totsuka Etsuro appeared for the purpose of criticizing Abe. He was the lawyer who coined the word “sex slave” and spread it in the United Nations. He said: “Abe claims that the women were not coerced because they were not forcibly taken away against their will and tied with ropes. But, legally speaking, ‘coercive’ means ‘against their will.’ Then, ‘being deceived’ is categorized into ‘coerced’ because it is ‘against their will.’ Most Korean women at that time were deceived.”

In other words, since there was no coercion and there were no reported cases of forcible removal of women in the Korean Peninsula under the Japanese governance, he expanded the definition to include the feeling of “being deceived.”

Gilbert and Fujiki said: “The women were recruited mainly by Korean dealers. There would have been cases in which women were deceived by the [private] dealers.”

Mio Sugita added, “Newspapers at that time reported on many cases in which malicious dealers were arrested by the Japanese police.”

In the film, though, Hayashi Hirofumi refuted them, saying, “Reports in newspapers at that time had nothing to do with the coercive recruitment of comfort women. Certainly, the police arrested malicious dealers who deceived women and prostituted them. But the police overlooked dealers who were requested to do so by the military.”

I wish Hayashi had explained his statement by providing specific evidence in the film. How could the police distinguish malicious dealers from those who had received a request from the military?

I had heard of such claims before, but they were found to be groundless. If the police had been so discriminatory, it would have been very difficult to maintain security.

Who Called Them Sex Slaves?

Next, those who believe the comfort women were not sex slaves spoke in the movie, showing that the comfort women were well paid. They were able to save and/or send their money to their families. When their contract came to an end, they were free to go home. They enjoyed shopping. They went to sporting events and parties with Japanese soldiers. They were far from sex slaves.

But the advocates of the sex slave viewpoint counter the argument by claiming that, according to international law today, they were slaves.

Sex slave advocate Yoshiaki Yoshimi’s claim was particularly interesting. He refuted the argument that the comfort women had time for recreation with a convoluted reference to American Negro slaves, saying: “I think their daily lives were so hopeless that they couldn’t live without such recreation. For example, American Negro slaves gathered and had concerts or dance parties on Saturdays and Sundays. They also went hunting. They were so hopeless that slave owners had to allow them to do so to survive.”

He and other sex slave advocates failed to mention, however, that some Japanese soldiers fell in love with comfort women and married them, and that there were former comfort women who cherished the memory of Japanese soldiers who were their former lovers. The advocates of the sex slave argument in the film instead appear to want simply to disgrace Japanese by all means.

Kohki Abe, a member of the faculty of international studies at Meiji Gakuin, appeared next in the film. He claims that, based on international law, the comfort women are defined as sex slaves.

He said: “Slavery is a situation in which someone is utterly under the control of another. Even if the comfort women were able to earn lots of money and go out for pleasure, they were under another’s control and had to get permission to do so. Therefore, they were slaves.”

If that’s true, then it sounds like today’s ordinary salaried workers are all slaves!

If he wanted to make a claim based on international law, the claim should be either “It is technically possible to define them as slaves according to international law,” or “All prostitutes throughout history, not only the wartime comfort women of Japanese military, are defined as sex slaves according to international law.”

Nippon Kaigi (The Japan Conference)

This film was so long that I started feeling tired. Then, unexpectedly, the words “Japan Conference” suddenly appeared on the screen and woke me up. The Japan Conference has nothing to do with the comfort women.

Setsu Kobayashi, professor emeritus at Keio University and a constitutional scholar, began to talk. According to him, the Japan Conference has the power to influence the Abe administration as it intends to revive the constitution of the empire of Japan to return the country to an era where basic human rights are denied. And, in his view, Yoshiko Sakurai is leading their campaign.

He continued guessing, “The Japan Conference is supported by Shinto shrines, including the Yasukuni Shrine. Sakurai Yoshiko probably has an office for free within the shrine’s grounds.”

He then came to a very strange conclusion: “The Japan Conference’s doctrine of getting back to the pre-war Japan is terrifying. But I am determined to fight against it even if I get murdered in the battle.”

What a delusion! The Japan Conference and Yoshiko Sakurai have never expressed the slightest intention to revive the constitution of the empire of Japan.

And I have very good news for Kobayashi. His name is seldom mentioned around the Japan Conference. There is no one who has a reason to kill him. He is 120% safe.

I asked the Japan Conference whether or not Dezaki made a request to interview them while making the film. The answer was no. The Japan Conference also released a statement denying Dezaki’s accusation.

After all, The Main Battleground of the Comfort Women Issue is a video made by a YouTuber who cheated the people who were willing to help him with his supposed graduation thesis. Instead, he hid his true intentions of promoting a conspiracy theory which he never verified.

All Dezaki has successfully achieved is to deepen the conflict and distrust between people who have different opinions on the comfort women issue.

Author: Tetsuhide Yamaoka

#special reports

1 note · View note

go-redgirl · 4 years

Photo

By Cathy Burke | Sunday, 12 July 2020 09:08 AM

Trump Still the Only One Who Can Salvage US Leadership

Almost all observers of the current presidential election campaign, regardless of their leanings, recognize that the national political media is overwhelmingly hostile to the president.

The results of this election will determine whether their determination to evict Donald Trump from the White House will enhance the reputation of the national political press corps for invincibility when united, or whether they are brought into severe disrepute as a monolithic paper tiger.

Historians of both the presidency and of the American media will opine for many years on why this overwhelming partisanship developed.

My own supposition has been that when Trump announced his candidacy in the spring of 2015, and made clear that he was running to drain the Washington swamp — specifically including what he identified as the rot in the national political media — they all saw him first as a joke, and then as a threat.

It is piquant that Trump, to this point, has outsmarted them largely by recourse to talk radio and to social media, even though the corporate heads of the social media companies are ostentatiously anti-Trump limousine liberals.

It is hard not to admire, at least to some degree, someone who has analyzed the complex political system of the country intensively for many years, changed parties seven times in 13 years, and who — looking for a channel where he could transform his great fame as a businessman, reality television star, impresario, and social figure, into the highest political office — outwitted and completed an end-run against the whole system; a system whose shortcomings were the motive and the basis of his campaign.

He is a pioneer.

Most of the Washington press corps are accustomed to presidents and presidential candidates who show greater deference to them and avoid ill-tempered direct exchanges with random members of the public such as those in which this president regularly engages through his nearly 200 million social media contacts.

And even the president’s supporters, who find his bluntness and his informality a refreshing change from the evasions and pomposity of much of recent presidential history, will acknowledge that there is sometimes a gap between the dignity expected of his great office and this president’s conduct of it.

But that does not make the relentless professional dishonesty of most of the national political media in the United States any more acceptable.

The New York Times, appropriately to its status for over a century as the country’s leading newspaper, led the way with a 2016 declaration that its goal was not to report impartially on national affairs, but rather to contribute to Trump’s defeat.

In some respects, the Times’ candor is welcome and commendable, but it is also disgraceful. It has been followed by virtually all of the influential traditional media, all of whom are guilty of unprofessional conduct. Whether they win or lose their war with this president, all polling indicates they have forfeited the credibility that the sound functioning of a democracy requires the press to retain.

In systematically destroying the believability of their craft, the press is undermining democracy and reducing the likelihood of an electorate adequately informed to vote as sensibly as the national interest of a great nation requires. Trump gains considerable support for holding his own against such a barrage of malicious disinformation from the media.

More worrying than the abrasive groupthink of the national political media are the failings of today’s commentariat. The modern and edgy, the woke and provocative, are not people from whom much could be expected and so their failure is more complete than it is disappointing.

More distressing by far are the lapses of the deans of comment, worldly, educated, highly intelligent people, elegant writers, and fluent speakers, who on the subject of the incumbent president dissolve into embittered sloppiness and mythmaking.

One of the most saddening exposures I have had to this syndrome came when I watched my esteemed friend of 40 years, George F. Will, speak by Zoom last week to another friend, Tom Switzer, of the Australian Centre for Independent Studies.

George rewrites the past as well as the present. He claims that Barry Goldwater completely routed the Republican establishment in 1964, when in reality he narrowly defeated Nelson Rockefeller and then was massacred at the polls by Lyndon Johnson.

But Richard Nixon brought the Republican establishment back to power four years later and Johnson and Nixon ended segregation, a matter that Goldwater was prepared to leave to the states, which would have led to a guerrilla reenactment of the Civil War.

Ronald Reagan temporarily replaced the old country club Republican elite and specifically the world-weary Nixon-Kissinger view with the determined optimism of California. Reagan, with the help of George Shultz and Caspar Weinberger and others, won the Cold War.

George Will publicly despised the Bushes, regarded Bill Clinton as "a sociopath," and was suitably unimpressed by Barack Obama.

I understand how such an academic gentleman finds Donald Trump unsuitable as president, but it is discouraging that he gives him no credit for eliminating unemployment prior to the COVID-19 shutdowns, oil imports, and 90 percent of illegal immigration.

Similarly, Trump gets no credit from Will for causing a general western recognition of the Chinese threat, for stalling the Iranian and North Korean nuclear military programs; for rebuilding the armed forces, or for causing the lower 20% of income-earners to enjoy a larger percentage increase in income than the top 10%, the first serious beginning anywhere to address the income disparity problem.

Will completely whitewashes Joe Biden’s mental incompetence and his capitulation to the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democratic Party in a straight Marxist unity agreement. He overlooks the Democrats’ assault on the election process in their attempts to bypass the Electoral College legislatively and to make the District of Columbia a state so they could pick up two senators.

He is unconcerned about the Democrats’ plan to reopen the southern borders and enfranchise everyone who comes in, and overlooks their obvious desire to top-up in 2020 as required with harvested mail-in ballots.

George Will must know that a Biden victory on a Sanders platform would be the beginning of the possibly irreversible decline of the United States and of the prolonged supremacy of China.

He knows Biden has enriched his family through public office, that special prosecutor John Durham is probably about to indict important members of the Obama administration, and he knows Biden is in the hands of the far-left of his party.

George Will and some of the other eminent commentators know that, whatever his failings, Trump is the only person capable of resurrecting American leadership in the world. Trump has, contrary to what Will has said, shaped up America’s alliances in Europe and Asia.

No one with an IQ in triple figures expects anything worthwhile from the Stelter-Tapper-Lemon-Cuomo-Scarborough-Maddow dunciad, and the non-tabloid written press, except for The Wall Street Journal, is hopeless. George Will is a great man and has some duty to sound like one, ahead of what he acknowledges to be a very important election.

Otherwise, he would be complicit in the Biden-Sanders debacle that will ensue.

0 notes

tego-nie-ma · 4 years

Text

The Persecution of Daniel Lee

An Internet smear campaign nearly destroyed the South Korean star, but he fought back with the only weapon he had: the truth.

July/August 2011

Photo: Timothy Archibald; Hair and makeup: Veronica Sjoen/Artist Untied

By Joshua Davis

On August 19, 2010, Dan Lee stood on the steps of Meyer Library and pointed to a nearby patch of grass.

"The Rodin statue," he said nervously. "It was here."

The Korean television crew following him noted that there was nothing there, just a well-mowed lawn. Students on bikes zipped past, paying no attention to the cameras or the skinny, dark-haired 30-year-old they were filming. In Seoul, it was hard for Lee to walk down the street without being mobbed. To Koreans, he was known as Tablo, a chart-topping rapper who was also married to one of the country's most prominent movie stars. Until recently, he had been one of Korea's biggest celebrities. Now his career was in tatters, he'd parted ways with his record label, and his family was receiving death threats.

The reason? Hundreds of thousands of Koreans refused to believe that Lee, '02, MA '02, graduated from Stanford.

The cameraman for the television crew closed in on Lee as he looked at the empty lawn. They were here to document for Korean national TV whether or not Lee was a liar.

"It's not here anymore," Lee said, staring at the spot where he knew The Thinker had been. He rubbed his face and wondered if maybe he was going crazy.

When the program aired two months later in Korea, this was the opening moment.

In 2001, when Lee told his parents that he was going to be a hip-hop musician, they were horrified. They were thinking doctor or lawyer, not rapper. In Korea at the time, hip-hop was not a popular genre. The music scene was dominated by attractive young people assembled into groups by record labels. They belted out sugary sweet songs—dubbed K-Pop—and strived to sound upbeat and happy. Critics saw no room for a guy who produced his own lyrically complex music, particularly when it dealt with issues like discrimination and class warfare.

Lee formed a band with two other musicians. They called themselves Epik High and released their first album—Map of the Human Soul—in 2003. It begins with a swirl of harps and what sounds like a 1950s-era ballroom dance class: "We're now going to progress to some steps which are a bit more difficult," an instructor says in English. Then there's an explosion of lyrics, beats and a dense overlay of sounds.

It was infectious and Epik High went on to release seven albums during the next seven years—an astounding burst of productivity. Five of those albums reached No. 1 on the Korean charts and they scored six No. 1 singles. As if that weren't enough, Lee published a collection of short stories in both English and Korean in 2008. It sold 50,000 copies in its first week and became a bestseller in Korea.

Lee's music had such broad appeal that he began to attract fans outside of Korea. He launched a series of U.S. tours starting in 2006, playing Caesars Palace in Las Vegas and the Hollywood Bowl in Los Angeles. In March 2010, Epik High became the first Korean group to reach No. 1 on the iTunes U.S. hip-hop sales charts, topping Jay-Z, Kayne West and the Black Eyed Peas. Korean hip-hop had broken through.

It seemed like a modern fairy tale, complete with a match made in celebrity heaven. In 2009, Lee married Kang Hye Jung, a beautiful actress with a string of hit movies. Celebrity blogs in Korea breathlessly reported news of the wedding in October 2009 and hundreds posted comments of support.

"OMG!!!!!! CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!" one fan wrote deliriously. "OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG."

"Way to break a girl's heart," wrote another more ominously.

In the summer of 2010, Korea was reeling from a streak of fake diploma scandals. It began in 2007, when the chief curator of a modern art museum in Seoul was found to have fabricated her Yale PhD. (It didn't help that Yale initially confirmed the degree.) She was jailed for 18 months on forgery charges, and a nationwide hunt for other offenders ensued. Prosecutors investigated at least 120 cases of diploma fraud, ensnaring celebrities, politicians and even a monk.

"There are definitely more people out there," one of the prosecutors told the Bloomberg news service in 2007. "We just can't spot them."

While this was happening, Lee regularly appeared on Korean television shows and was asked about his credentials. He said that he had not only graduated from Stanford in 3 ½ years, but that he also had received a master's degree in that time. He said he had written his book, Pieces of You, while he was an undergrad and that he had received a creative writing award for one of the stories from author and Stanford professor Tobias Wolff, MA '78.

In May 2010, a group of Internet users created an online forum titled "We Request the Truth from Tablo," better known by its Korean acronym TaJinYo. The group didn't buy Lee's story. They started referring to him as "God-blo" because only God could have accomplished as much as Lee. The members of the group participated anonymously and attacked Lee from behind user names such as Whatbecomes and Spongebobo.

To many in Korea, TaJinYo's questions were legitimate. For instance, it usually takes four years to complete a bachelor's degree. A master's normally takes another two. Students typically also write a thesis to attain a master's and yet Lee said that he never wrote one.

Lee hesitated to respond. The whole thing was absurd to him. He was a musician. What did his degree matter?

To his detractors, it mattered a lot. "What is it good for in rapping? Nothing," says Hyungjin Ahn, a vocal critic. "But Koreans still said, 'Wow, he is great. If we listen to his rap, we could get in touch with something genius and holy.' Mothers in Korea worshipped him. He was a role model for every child in Korea at that time."

Entertainment gossip sites reported the existence of the anti-Tablo site and membership swelled to nearly 200,000, many of whom launched their own investigations into Lee's past. Tobias Wolff and Stanford registrar Thomas Black were barraged by emails from Koreans who questioned Lee's educational background. Black alone received 133 emails on the subject. Everybody wanted to know one thing: Was Lee lying?

When online hecklers started to criticize his wife for marrying him, Lee realized something had to be done to protect his family's reputation. On June 11, he released his transcript to the JoonAng Daily, a newspaper in Seoul. That same week, Black issued an official letter.

"Daniel Seon Woong Lee entered Stanford University in the Autumn Quarter of 1998-99 and graduated with a BA in English and an MA in English in 2002. Any suggestions, speculations or innuendos to the contrary are patently false. Daniel Seon Woong Lee is an alumnus in good standing of Stanford University."

That should have been the end of it. Instead, it was just the beginning.

As the members of TaJinYo began to dissect Lee's public statements and dig further into his past, an elaborate conspiracy theory took hold. Forum members were willing to accept that a man named Dan Lee graduated from Stanford, but they weren't willing to accept that the rapper they knew as Tablo was the same person. They argued that Tablo had taken over Dan Lee's identity in order to parlay a Stanford credential into fame and fortune.

"He just paid a lot of money to do this, lied about it and still became famous," one forum member told a Korean TV crew, who blurred her face. "It represents a total loss of hope for people who work hard."

The conspiracy theorists did not just accuse Lee, they implicated his entire family. An anonymous researcher uncovered a newspaper clipping from 1995 that stated that Lee's mother had won a gold medal at an international hairstyling competition in 1968. The researcher posted it online and pointed out that Lee's mother did not actually win the medal, implying that Lee's family had been lying about their achievements for decades.

"Can anybody give me the phone number of Tablo's mom's hair salon?" wrote one Internet user. "I would like to ask her how it feels to be a criminal."

Lee's mother began to receive threatening phone calls. At a family dinner, she answered her cell phone and heard a man's voice. "You're a whore," he said. "You and your family should leave Korea."

The attacks spread. Posts appeared that questioned Lee's brother David, who had begun a master's at Columbia but never finished. A researcher found a web page that indicated that David had completed the master's and calls flooded into the public broadcasting channel in Seoul where he worked. He was fired.

David's home address and phone numbers were published and he also started to receive worrisome calls. One caller threatened to stab him to death for his alleged transgressions. The tenor of the anonymous mob was turning decidedly more violent.

"If #blobyblo doesn't leave Korea, something bad might happen to him," one heckler warned on Twitter, referring to Lee by his Twitter handle.

Lee felt that his recording label, Woolim Entertainment, was doing little to counter the accusations against him and his family. "We have nothing to say about allegations against Tablo that he had fake education qualifications," the agency stated on June 7. Two days later, it publicly pledged to help, but Lee felt that his representatives never followed through. He left the label later that month.

"It broke my heart," he says. "They abandoned me."

In the midst of the controversy, Lee's wife gave birth to their first child. It was a moment of joy, but as Lee walked the corridors of the hospital, he saw people looking at him coldly and he panicked.

"Since my attackers were all anonymous, there was no way for me to know who was after me," Lee says. "I didn't know if the doctor, who's putting needles in my baby, is one of those people. It was terrifying."

On the streets, strangers would shout at him, calling him a liar and a cheat. "It was like I had stepped into the middle of a modern-day witch hunt," he says.

Lee stopped going out—the environment had become too hostile. Still, he did his best to respond to the attacks. Fifteen years prior, Lee's mother had contacted the author of the newspaper article that incorrectly stated that she had won the medal. She had told him that it was an error and he apologized. Now the reporter issued a statement confirming the mistake and Lee forwarded it to the press.

He also tried to explain that his brother did not maintain the web page that indicated he had completed a master's. Whoever had typed the information made the error. Lee pointed to other online résumés that correctly stated David's credentials.

The conspiracy theorists online dismissed all this as simply part of the conspiracy. They argued that the reporter had been paid to defend Lee and didn't believe that the error in David's résumé was accidental. Lee's efforts to answer their questions were turned into evidence of how far he was willing to go to defend his false identity.

Part of their suspicion stemmed from the fact that Lee is not actually a Korean citizen. When he was 8, his family had moved to Canada; he became a Canadian citizen when he was 12. That meant he was exempt from compulsory military service, even while his two Epik High bandmates were drafted. Many forum commenters interpreted this as yet another example of how Lee had gamed the system.

The doubters scored what they believed was a major victory when they discovered a man on Facebook named Daniel Lee who got a degree from Stanford in 2002. This Daniel Lee lived in Wisconsin and worked as a mechanical engineer. Tablo, they claimed, had stolen his identity.

In the registrar's office, Black fielded a series of emails about this allegation. The truth: Two Daniel Lees received Stanford degrees in 2002. One got a BA and master's in English and became a rapper in Korea; the other got a master's in mechanical engineering and works at a product design firm in Wisconsin.

"One day I started getting random emails from people in Korea who were violently angry at me for allowing some rapper to steal my identity," says the other Daniel Lee, laughing at the recollection. "I had no idea what they were talking about."

Black repeatedly confirmed that Daniel Lee the English major was a graduate in good standing but that only seemed to create more agitation. Some emailed to question Black's integrity, suggesting that he was colluding with Lee. Black got angry. "These people don't want the truth," he says. "They dismiss everything that doesn't align with what they already believe."

Lee continued to fight back. On August 5, 2010, he released his Canadian citizenship certificate to the press. To his astonishment, he was promptly sued by four anonymous Koreans who charged him with forgery.

"I was doing everything they asked and it was never good enough," Lee says. "That's when I realized that they weren't looking for answers, they just wanted to destroy me."

Korean media widely reported the suit, which only served to further sow doubt about Lee's identity among the general population. Gossip-oriented celebrity sites pored over every detail of the charges; the mainstream press even covered the case. The fact that Stanford had officially confirmed Lee's diploma did not seem to check the flow of articles. By midsummer, Lee's travails had become one of the biggest news stories in the country.

Sean Lim, '01, MA '02, had a front-row seat to the drama. He was a morning news anchor for Arirang, an English-language network in Korea, and watched with horror as the story dominated the summer news. It was a surreal experience because he knew Lee wasn't lying: The two were friends from Stanford.

In fact, Lim could count himself as one of Lee's oldest fans. He lived with Lee in Okada, and was an enthusiastic member of the audience at the small dorm events Lee's first hip-hop group, 4n Objectz, played. So when people started to question Lee's background, Lim told everyone he could that Lee was a Stanford graduate.

"The problem was that it was just me and the people I ran into against the millions online," Lim says.

One man's word wasn't going to turn the tide so Lim contacted Kevin Woo, MS '92, the secretary of the Stanford Club of Korea. Lim asked the group to issue a statement in Korean vouching for Lee. He felt that part of the problem was that all of the evidence in support of Lee was in English and was coming from Stanford, an overseas source. Maybe if a trusted Korean organization such as the local alumni association took action, it would come in a form that ordinary Koreans could appreciate.

The president of the association, Joon Chung, MS '88, PhD '93, decided not to issue a statement. "It was an unusual situation," he says. "Some people believe it's not good to respond to irrationality."

According to Woo, Chung wanted to do something publicly to support Lee but alums in Korea warned him not to. These alums had never met Lee—he'd never attended an association meeting—so many felt that they couldn't be sure that he was who he said he was. They were afraid that their reputation as Stanford alumni in Korea would be tarnished if they erroneously vouched for the rapper.

Instead Chung sent an email to members urging them to take individual action on Lee's behalf. It would be up to each member to decide whether or not to do anything.

Lim was furious. "They left Dan hanging out to dry," he says. "They could have ended this but nobody wanted to get close to the fire."

It was an understandable fear. The online mob wanted blood, and anybody who stood up against them could incur their wrath. Lim himself admits he struggled with the decision to help. He had a job in broadcasting and relied on public goodwill. He could endanger his career if he spoke out. "I'm ashamed to say that I thought twice about helping Dan," he says. "I saw what they were doing to him and I was scared."

Lim met with his old friend at an out-of-the-way coffee shop in July. Lee looked exhausted and said he hadn't been sleeping. He was depressed and his emotions were getting the better of him. Only months earlier, he had played sold-out concerts and was besieged by requests for autographs on the street. Now, he had to sneak around just to meet a friend. "I was contemplating whether my life was actually worth living," Lee says.

Lim realized there was no choice: He had to do something. He started emailing friends from Lee's days at Stanford and, collectively, 22 of them formed a Facebook page in support of Lee.

"I don't want the memories Dan, I, and others shared to be erased by people seeking to prove that he never went to Stanford," wrote Eddy (Chi) Qi, '01. "Memories including him taking my drunk and occasionally vomiting self (once on his shoe) back to my dorm after a party."

"I remember suffering through some rough early performances at the AASA [Asian American Students' Association] talent shows and am glad to know his talent eventually caught up to his enthusiasm," wrote Tipatat Chennavasin, '00.

Although the Korean press reported that Lee's Stanford friends were rallying around him, TaJinYo members refused to believe it was real. Kang Han, '02, a friend from Lee's freshman year and the first to post on the Facebook site, received threats even though he lived in Los Angeles. "Watch your back," one person messaged him. Another peppered him with emailed insults and called him a liar.

In Korea, Lim received a call from the prosecutor investigating the charges against Lee. He was asked to come to the division headquarters in Seoul and bring his Stanford diploma. When he arrived, an investigator took the diploma and held it up to the light to determine if it was a forgery.

"You've got to be kidding me," Lim said. "You want to test the paper too?"

The investigator looked at him without smiling and told him he was going to send the document over to the forensics department to test the paper.

"I started to understand how Dan felt," Lim says.

When the attacks on Tablo began in the spring of 2010, Ki Yeon Sung received more than 200 emails requesting that she investigate Lee. She was a seasoned producer with a show called PD Note, something akin to 60 Minutes in Korea, and explored topics such as politics, organized crime and corruption. Celebrity gossip wasn't her beat so she ignored the requests.

"We have more important things to worry about in Korea," she thought at the time.

The situation changed when the attacks grew to include anybody who offered evidence that supported Lee. Reporters and their managers who published stories disputing TaiJinYo claims about Lee were flooded with outraged emails, calls and demands for the reporter's resignation. Nobody wanted to be threatened so, according to Sung, reporters stopped adequately questioning the validity of the claims. As the story became one of the top news items in the country that summer, she saw that the mob was have a chilling effect on the coverage. That's when it became something worth worrying about.

Not that Sung necessarily believed Lee. It did seem unusual to her that Lee had accomplished so much, so fast, and she could understand how people might have doubts. Many students studied extraordinarily hard to get into a top school and then worked even harder to do well once they were there. Lee appeared to have breezed through Stanford in a short amount of time and come away with a master's on top of it. His story had the power to make people feel stupid.

The dominant conspiracy theory suggested that Lee had appropriated someone's identity, so Sung decided to challenge him directly on this point. If Lee was who he said he was, then he should be able to travel to California and request a transcript in person. If he got it, the mystery would be solved.

Lee accepted the challenge.

It was the first time Lee had been back to campus since graduation and a lot had changed. For one, the damn Rodin sculpture had been moved, and that had the potential to make him look like a liar on Korean national TV. (When not on loan to other institutions, The Thinker now resides in the Cantor Arts Center.)

Luckily, when he walked into the English department, student services manager Judy Candell recognized him and gave him a hug. She'd heard about his troubles. "I hope all this goes away," she said. "Because we believe in you."

The camera crew followed him to the registrar's office where Thomas Black was waiting. Lee pulled his diploma and transcript out of his backpack and laid them down on a table for Black to inspect. He also handed Black his passport. Black printed Lee's transcript off his own server, compared the two and checked Lee's name against the name listed in the passport.

"It's exactly the same," Black concluded, holding up the two transcripts. "Line for line, word for word."

The footage would air as part of a two-part special on MBC, one of Korea's four national networks. Lee was vindicated, but all he could feel was numbness.

"The people who are doing this to me will never stop," he said. "They just won't believe me no matter what I do."

Lee filed suit against 20 of his most virulent attackers. By October, the prosecutor investigating both his claims and the allegations against him determined that Lee was who he said he was. The prosecutor demanded that a Korean Internet site divulge the true identities of the 20 attackers. Whatbecomes, the leading agitator, was revealed as Eung Kim, a 57-year-old Korean-American businessman living in Chicago. Korean police asked him to report for questioning.

"I posted in a fair manner, so I will not answer the summons," he told them.

The police then issued an international warrant for his arrest, which he has defied now for months. On the TaJinYo forum, Kim questioned whether defamation was an international crime and vented his frustration at being unjustly targeted. "I am so angry they are treating me like a suspect when they have not confirmed I am a criminal," he wrote.

To outside observers, the case was closed. At a cabinet meeting, Korean President Lee Myung-bak stated that what happened to Lee was a "witch hunt that should never happen again." Ashton Kutcher, who follows Lee on Twitter, chimed in. "Time to kill the evil eye on this guy," he tweeted.

Lee, however, hasn't recovered. He's still afraid to go out in public and doesn't know if he'll ever be able to perform for an audience again. This May, he returned to Stanford to give a speech to the Asian American Students' Association. It was his first public appearance since the controversy erupted and even though it was a friendly crowd, Lee was paralyzed by stage fright, something he'd never experienced before. He felt nauseated throughout the talk and periodically had to pause to catch his breath. It reinforced his fear that he'd never be able to dominate a stage as he once did.

"Honestly, I'm damaged," he says. "And I don't know if I'll ever be better."

The crowd didn't seem to mind. After the speech, Lee was surprised to see a long line of people waiting for his autograph. He posed for pictures and seemed to relax. He smiled and, for a moment, there was a glimmer of hope.

source: Stanford Magazine

0 notes

topworldhistory · 4 years

Link

Their account, recovered with the help of hypnosis, detailed extensive medical exams, including a crude pregnancy test.

Betty and Barney Hill, who claim to have been abducted by aliens in 1961, holding a book written about their experience circa 1967.

Is it chasing us? That thought coursed through Betty and Barney Hill’s minds as they drove down the empty winding country road in New Hampshire’s White Mountains. It was a September night in 1961, they hadn’t seen a car for miles, and a strange light in the sky seemed to follow them.

When they finally got home to Portsmouth at dawn, they were far from relieved. They felt dirty. Their watches stopped working. Barney’s shoes were strangely scuffed and Betty’s dress was ripped. There were two hours of the drive that neither one of them could remember. What had happened?

Betty and Barney Hill (TV-PG; 1:29)

With the help of a psychiatrist, the quiet couple eventually revealed a startling story: Gray beings with large eyes had walked them into a metallic disc as wide, Betty said, as her house was long. Once inside, the beings examined the couple and erased their memories.

Their experience would kick off an Air Force inquiry, part of the secretive initiative Project Blue Book that investigated UFO sightings across the country. The incident would also become the first-ever widely publicized alien-abduction account and shape how stories like it were told—and understood—from then on. Debate continues as to whether the husband and wife were liars, fantasists, crackpots or simply sleep-deprived people who later recovered seriously scrambled memories.

READ MORE: Interactive Map: UFO Sightings Taken Seriously by the U.S. Government

Strange lights in pursuit

The Hills’ road trip was spontaneous, a well-earned break Barney decided the couple needed, as explained in The Interrupted Journey, a 1966 book they collaborated on with author John G. Fuller. Barney worked a grueling night shift at the post office, driving 60 miles each way. Betty’s job handling state child-welfare cases was no easier. The little free time this biracial couple had was devoted to their church and activities related to the civil-rights movement. After 16 months of marriage, Betty and Barney saw this trip through Montreal and Niagara Falls as their delayed honeymoon. They left so impulsively they had no time to go to the bank before it closed for the weekend. They got in their car with less than $70 in their pockets.

On the last night of their three-day trip, the tired couple sipped coffee in a Vermont diner to recharge before driving back. Barney figured if they pushed through, they could beat the wind and rains from an approaching hurricane. They left the diner around 10 p.m., estimating they could reach their red-framed house in Portsmouth, New Hampshire between 2 a.m. and 3 a.m. at the latest.

READ MORE: Meet J. Allen Hynek, the Astronomer Who First Classified UFO 'Close Encounters.'

As they drove, strange light in the sky gave another reason to hurry. At first it looked like a falling star, but grew larger and brighter with each mile. Barney, an avid plane watcher and World War II vet, was sure they had nothing to worry about. It’s just a satellite, he assured Betty. It probably went off course.

The light seemed to move with the car as Barney steered down the curving mountain road. The light zigged and zagged, ducking past the moon and behind trees and mountain ridges, only to reappear moments later. Sometimes it seemed to move toward them in a game of cat-and-mouse. It had to be an illusion, they thought. Maybe the car’s movement made it seem like the light, too, was moving.

Curiosity overcame them. The couple pulled over at road stops and picnic turnouts to get a closer look. Through binoculars, Betty saw that the white light was really an object spinning in the air.

“Barney,” she told her husband, “if you think that’s a satellite or a star, you’re being completely ridiculous.”

The close encounter

He knew she was right. Barney had an IQ of 140, noted Fuller in his book. Barney was also a pragmatic man who wouldn’t give flying saucers a second thought, remembered his niece Kathleen Marden in her work, Captured: The Betty and Barney Hill Experience. The night was too quiet for a helicopter, a commercial plane or even military jet with a hotshot pilot. He didn’t want to spook Betty, but he was becoming concerned. What was this light and why was it toying with them?

About 70 miles past the diner, the object hovered just above the treetops, approximately 100 feet above them. Barney abruptly stopped the car, keeping the engine running. He shoved a handgun he’d hidden beneath the seat into his pocket and rushed into a dark field, leaving Betty in the car. What he saw was as big as a jet but as round and flat as a pancake. “My God, what is this thing?” he recalled thinking. “This can’t be real.”

READ MORE: This Scoutmaster Had a Run-in with a UFO. The Kids Saw it Too.

Behind rows of windows, gray uniformed beings seemed to look right at him, Barney recalled. He tried to lift his hand to his pistol but somehow couldn’t. A voice told him not to put down his binoculars.

He had a startling thought: We’re about to be captured. Yelling hysterically, he ran back to the car and barreled down the road as Betty tracked the craft, craning her head outside the car window. Without explanation, loud, rhythmic beeps sounded from the car’s trunk. The couple felt instantly drowsy and lost consciousness.

They came to around two hours later and 35 miles down the road.

Barney holding up a diagram explaining the alien abduction.

Recovering the memory

Back home in Portsmouth, they tried to make sense of the night. Barney felt compelled to examine his body’s lower half. Both seemed aware of a puzzling presence.

In the weeks and months after, Betty, an avid reader, checked out books from the library discovering the civilian UFO group National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP). She also reported the sighting to the Air Force, worried about radiation.

In coming years, with Betty suffering from disturbing dreams and Barney developing an ulcer and anxiety, the couple sought mental help. The two met with Benjamin Simon, a psychiatrist and neurologist who specialized in hypnosis, a mainstream technique at the time.

READ MORE: When Dozens of Korean War GIs Claimed a UFO Made Them Sick

Through months of weekly sessions, Simon helped the couple piece together what they think had happened: A vessel had landed on the Hill’s car, putting them to sleep. Afterward, gray beings walked them up a long ramp and into the spacecraft.

Once inside, the Hills were separated, taking turns in an examination room that had curved walls and a large light hanging from the ceiling. Each was asked to climb up on a metal table. The table was so short, Barney’s legs hung over the side.

During the examinations, the beings removed Betty and Barney’s clothes, plucked strands of their hair, took clippings of their nails and scraped their skin. Each sample was placed on a clear material, not unlike a glass slide. Needles, connected to long wires, probed their heads, arms, legs and spines. One large needle, around 4 to 6 inches long, was inserted into Betty’s belly. This pregnancy test left her twisting in pain. Throughout, a being Barney and Betty called “the leader” watched from the side.

After Betty’s examination ended, the beings rushed back into her room, excited. They discovered that Barney’s teeth could be removed. Betty laughed, explaining that Barney had dentures, a fact of human aging the beings struggled to understand.

Later, alone with the leader, Betty asked where the craft had flown, admitting she knew little of the universe. The being joked with her, saying “if you don’t know where you are, there wouldn’t be any point in telling you where I am.” Later, under hypnosis, she drew a star map shown to her on the ship.

In 1965, the Hills' story was picked up by a Boston newspaper. After that, everything changed. The quiet couple’s story became the subject of a best-selling book and a movie starring James Earl Jones. The upstanding civil servants had become celebrity abductees.

READ MORE: In 1952, the Flatwoods Monster Terrified 6 Kids, a Mom, a Dog—and the Nation

The model for alien abductions

The Hills weren’t the first to spot a UFO or even to report an abduction. But their story did capture the nation’s imagination and was so widely publicized, it has helped shape how we talk about alien encounters and abductions to this day.

Before the Hill’s story, alien encounters were friendly, according to Christoper Bader, a professor of sociology at California’s Chapman University. Some aliens even lived on earth and commuted back on weekends. But once the Hills’ story became better known, abduction accounts shared certain characteristics, such as medical examinations and missing time. Aliens with large heads and big eyes—dubbed “grays” in UFO circles—became classic sci-fi staples in personal accounts and pop culture, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and shows like the X-Files.

The Hills’ story—and those that came after—helped pave the way for a new understanding of human experience. Richard J. McNally, a Harvard psychologist, puts it this way: “The ‘alien-abduction’ phenomenon, in my opinion, shows how sincere, non-psychotic individuals can develop beliefs about, and false memories of, incredible experiences that never happened.”

Experts of all stripes have tried to explain why intelligent, otherwise mentally stable people came forward with these experiences. Many psychologists say sleep paralysis and hallucinations played a role. Leading questions during hypnosis—the main way most abductees unlock their stories—could also have been a factor.

Barney and Betty Hill holding a newspaper reporting about their alleged alien abduction in a rural portion of New Hampshire in late September 1961.

A view into the human brain

Those who report abduction might also see the world a little differently. According to research, one of the strongest predictors of false recall is a vivid imagination. This group scores high in “magical ideation” and is more likely to believe in ghosts and tarot readings, according to McNally.

Some believe the Hill’s story was simply a myth in the making, with the supernatural meetings, vulnerable protagonists and otherworldly journeys that are often the hallmarks of legend. Many point to the stress of being an interracial couple living in a predominantly white state in a turbulent era. (The year of their hypnosis, 1964, was marked by Cold War tensions and civil-rights unrest, with numerous urban riots erupting that summer.) “You have a biracial couple at a time where obviously it was not easy to be a biracial couple,” says Bader. “Look what those aliens were: a mixture of black and white. I find that very meaningful.”

READ MORE: The UFO Sightings that Launched ‘Men in Black’ Mythology

Abductee stories depend on first-hand accounts—the most vulnerable form of evidence. Memories can be distorted by stress or distraction, or even manufactured. When a false memory is in place, psychologists say, the brain works to fill in the details. Psychologist Michael Shermer points to ‘patternicity,’ the tendency to see patterns even when none exist, helping us to see faces in clouds or assume that one event caused another.

Past experience also shapes human perception. Barney, a World War II vet, thought the head “gray” looked like Hitler and seemed menacing. Betty, meanwhile, who had been excited to see the aliens, bantered with the affable gray who performed her medical examination. That alien even agreed to give her a book to bring to earth with her, she said, though other crew members would later overrule that decision.

In this way alien abduction and encounter stories have helped psychologists understand the human brain, its defects—and the weaknesses inherent in memory and first-hand accounts, according to Christopher French, a psychologist specializing in human experience related to the paranormal. “What we see and hear, especially under less than ideal observational conditions, can be heavily influenced by our prior beliefs and expectations,” wrote French in the The Guardian.

NICAP’s scientific advisor cross-examined the couple and found their account credible. The Air Force’s Project Blue Book would ultimately dismiss the story, determining the unexplained craft could be explained by “natural causes”—hinting that the couple hadn’t seen a spacecraft but only the planet Jupiter.

For his part, psychiatrist Simon never felt the Hills had made up their story. He concluded Betty had dreamed the abduction and Barney had absorbed her story, especially since many of the most vivid details matched descriptions of dreams Betty had jotted down after the event. “I believe implicitly in the honesty of these people,” he said on a ‘70s radio program.

Of course, another explanation is always possible: The abduction actually occurred. The Hills stuck by their story, despite years of skeptics and detractors. Like many abductees, the couple never felt false memory or sleep paralysis explained what they experienced. Betty became a known voice in UFO research and claimed she was visited multiple times in the decades to follow.

from Stories - HISTORY https://ift.tt/34jtiyX December 14, 2019 at 12:09AM

#Worldhistory

0 notes

maxwellyjordan · 6 years

Text

Before lecture on war powers, Gorsuch laments public’s lack of knowledge of the judiciary

On Wednesday night, the Supreme Court Historical Society hosted a lecture by Professor Matthew Waxman on Charles Evans Hughes’ evolving thoughts on the flexibility of constitutional restrictions on government during wartime and peacetime. As is typical of these events, a sitting justice introduced the lecturer. This time it was Justice Neil Gorsuch, the first time he has spoken at a historical society event. Generally, the justices speak briefly. They usually thank the society for hosting the lecture, praise the speaker for her work and perhaps crack a memorable joke. But Gorsuch used his time to deliver an impassioned defense of the judiciary and civility, while criticizing the American public’s ignorance of the structure of our government.

Gorsuch said he has been astonished to learn that “a lot of people in America just don’t understand the role of an independent judge. They don’t know the difference between judges and politicians. They assume judges make campaign promises, and should… And that judges are just politicians in robes.” He ascribed these feelings to a general lack of civic knowledge among the general public. He cited an Annenberg study showing that one third of Americans cannot name any branch of government. Gorsuch pointed to another study and said, “Almost nobody knows that James Madison wrote the Constitution, they all think it was Thomas Jefferson … and he was in France!” The justice noted that even law clerks who come to his office fail to recognize a portrait of Madison hanging above a fireplace.

Gorsuch spoke passionately about the benefits and importance of an independent judiciary. He said, “as difficult as our times sometimes seem, we are very blessed.” He asked rhetorically, “how many places in the world can you go where you can rest assured that you can have an independent judge decide your case?” Gorsuch singled out North Korea for having an expansive bill of rights that promises its citizens a right to free education, free medical and relaxation. He joked that he would enjoy a right to relaxation, but he argued that those North Korean rights are “not worth the parchment they’re written on because you don’t have judges to enforce them.”

Gorsuch then moved on to the second concern he has noticed during his time as a judge. He listed civility, human decency and kindness as “under assault in our society right now, and in our profession.” He criticized civil litigation specifically for its lack of civility and expressed concerns about civility becoming a bad word or passé. He wrapped up his point by stressing to the audience that people they may disagree with “love this country as much as you do.”

Gorsuch’s remarks were not all negative. He began with praise for the historical society and reflected positively on his first year and a half on the court. He admitted that he was surprised by how little the court has changed since he clerked for Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy 25 years ago. He joked that he was excited to have recently received his first email from one of his colleagues. It was not even work related: “[H]e was asking for directions to my house for dinner.” He was also excited to introduce Waxman, whom he described as “one of my very favorite people in the world.”

Waxman’s lecture focused on Justice Charles Evans Hughes. Hughes served two stints on the court: as an an associate justice from 1910 to 1916 and as chief justice from 1930 to 1941. Waxman focused, not on any rulings Hughes made on the court, but rather on a 1917 speech in which Hughes, speaking as a private lawyer five months after the United States entered World War I, introduced what Waxman defined as Hughes’ war powers axiom: “that the power to wage war is the power to wage war successfully.” In other words, Hughes argued that to achieve success in an overseas, industrial-scale war, constitutional restrictions on the federal government should be loosened during wartime. Hughes was a private citizen when he made this speech, but it had a significant impact nonetheless. He had just run for president as a Republican against President Woodrow Wilson, but he presented an analysis of why Wilson and the Democratic Congress were justified in pursuing expanded powers during wartime. The New York Times covered the speech on its front page, while many other newspapers printed the speech in full. Waxman said that Hughes’ influence was enhanced by the fact that, as Justice Robert Jackson once said, “Hughes looked like God and talked like God.”

According to Waxman, Hughes was specifically arguing that Congress should be allowed to take two controversial actions during wartime. First, it should be allowed to institute a selective service draft. At the time, Waxman pointed out, it was not settled law that the federal government could conscript citizens to join the army. Second, Congress should be allowed to regulate the national economy to fit the needs of the war effort. This was the height of the Lochner era, and any restrictions on economic freedoms were looked upon with skepticism by the courts. Hughes argued that the “necessary and proper” clause in Article I of the Constitution required that congressional powers must expand during wartime. Waxman noted that this theory of elasticity in constitutional powers during wartime eventually won out and has since been accepted by all three branches of government.

Hughes’ theory requires that there be clear lines between wartime and peacetime and that the expanded constitutional powers granted to the government are retracted once the war ends. As it turned out, Hughes began to speak out against the expanded rights of the federal government just a few years after he had advocated for those expanded powers. A November 1918 armistice effectively ended the fighting in Europe; to Hughes, this meant that the war was over and that normal constitutional restrictions on the federal government must return. But for Wilson, who in his request for a declaration of war defined his goals as “[preventing] the recurrence of war and to make the world safe for democracy,” the war was not over just because fighting had stopped. Waxman noted that Hughes was anxious over the continued use of wartime powers, saying that the country risked “losing its soul” if wartime powers were exercised in peacetime. Hughes even litigated against the government for seizing undersea cables operated by private companies after the armistice, arguing that the war was over and so the government should not have been allowed to seize the cables. Not only did Hughes lose, but the judge in the case even used Hughes’ own axiom, that “the power to wage war was the power to wage war successfully,” against him.

Later in his career Hughes’ thoughts evolved yet again. He “curiously seems to have backed off these worries” about wartime powers extending into peacetime, Waxman said. As Chief Justice, Hughes even quoted his war powers axiom in a seemingly unrelated case about state mortgage regulation during the Great Depression. Waxman theorized that Hughes may have reverted to his original position in part out of political expediency. Hughes served as secretary of state for President Warren Harding, who pledged a “return to normalcy,” and Hughes even negotiated the peace treaty that formally ended the war. To Waxman, it remains somewhat of a mystery how Hughes reconciled his theory of expansive wartime powers with his concerns about those powers extending into peacetime.

Waxman concluded by saying that World War I was the moment when “the differential between the federal government’s war powers and its peacetime powers reached its apex.” Although war powers provided the initial basis for Congress’ expanded power to regulate the economy, such regulation is justified now under a broader reading of the commerce clause. While war has grown more and more complex, “legislative war powers have not had to keep up, in part because other constitutional powers no do so much work,” Waxman said. Ultimately Waxman argued that there is no longer a large set of legislative powers for war to open up today, though a few do remain.

The post Before lecture on war powers, Gorsuch laments public’s lack of knowledge of the judiciary appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from Law http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/10/before-lecture-on-war-powers-gorsuch-laments-publics-lack-of-knowledge-of-the-judiciary/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

#law #justice

0 notes

newstfionline · 6 years

Text

Once ‘No Longer a Nuclear Threat,’ North Korea Now in Standoff With U.S.

By David E. Sanger and William J. Broad, NY Times, Aug. 10, 2018

WASHINGTON--North Korea is insisting that the United States declare that the Korean War is over before providing a detailed, written disclosure of all its atomic weapons stockpiles, its nuclear production facilities and its missiles as a first major step toward denuclearization.

Two months after President Trump declared his summit meeting in Singapore with Kim Jong-un a complete success, North Korea has not yet even agreed to provide that list during private exchanges with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, according to American and South Korean officials familiar with the talks.

Mr. Pompeo maintains progress is being made, although he has provided no details. But John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, this week said, “North Korea that has not taken the steps we feel are necessary to denuclearize.”

On Thursday, North Korea’s state-run newspaper, Rodong Sinmun, called the declaration of the end of the war “the demand of our time” and that would be the “first process” in moving toward a fulfillment of the June 12 deal struck between Mr. Trump and Mr. Kim. Pyonygang also wants peace treaty talks to begin before detailing its arsenal.

If the standoff over the parallel declarations remains, it is hard to see how the two countries can move forward with an agreement.

“The North Koreans have lied to us consistently for nearly 30 years,” Joseph Nye, who wrote one of the National Intelligence Council’s first assessments of the North’s weapons programs in 1993, said at the Aspen Institute on Tuesday.

“Trump is in a long tradition of American presidents who have been taken to the cleaners,” Mr. Nye said.

Neither Mr. Trump nor Mr. Pompeo has acknowledged the impasse. But officials said South Korea has quietly backed the North Korean position, betting that once Mr. Trump has issued a “peace declaration” it would be harder for him to later threaten military action if the North fails to disarm or discard its nuclear arsenal.

Against North Korea’s continuing nuclear buildup--and its threats to strike the United States--Washington has long refused to formally declare the end of the war, which was halted with a 1953 armistice but never officially brought to a close.

And fears remain that making concessions to Pyongyang--especially after Mr. Trump shelved annual American military exercises with South Korea that he called “war games,” the phrase used by the North--would outrage Republicans in Congress and open Mr. Trump to charges that he has been outmaneuvered by the North Korean leader.

The White House has never reconciled Mr. Trump’s post on Twitter after meeting Mr. Kim that “there is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea” with Mr. Bolton’s assessment that the Singapore agreement has so far yielded almost no progress in the nuclear arena. That view is shared by many in Congress and the American intelligence agencies.

For Mr. Trump and Mr. Pompeo, much rides on how this standoff is resolved--or whether it results in the collapse of what the president called his determination to “solve” the nuclear crisis.

Mr. Pompeo has told associates that he believes his tenure as secretary of state will be judged largely on how he handles the negotiations. In recent weeks he has softened some of his statements toward North Korea, saying the United States is open to a step-by-step approach that most officials had previously rejected.

“The ultimate timeline for denuclearization will be set by Chairman Kim,” Mr. Pompeo said last week--a stark contrast to Mr. Trump’s statements last year that North Korea should give up its weapons rapidly, or face tremendous, if unspecified, consequences.

Challenged about the lack of progress so far, officials at the White House and State Department pointed to three developments as signs that the strategy with North Korea is advancing.

They noted that North Korea has not conducted a missile or nuclear test since November. Since the Singapore summit, Pyongyang has returned the remains of about 55 Americans killed in the Korean War, which appear genuine, a good-will gesture though one unrelated to the nuclear program. And satellite evidence suggests North Korea has begun dismantling a test site where it has developed missile technologies and launched space satellite missions.

Experts cautioned, however, that all the steps taken so far are easily reversible, much as North Korea rebuilt a nuclear reactor after blowing up its cooling tower on television at the end of the George W. Bush administration.

But Mr. Trump has retained his enthusiastic tone, apparently convinced he can persuade Mr. Kim to give up his weapons as long as the personal line remains open between the two leaders.

American intelligence officials have found that the North is continuing to make long-range missiles at a sprawling manufacturing site just north of Pyongyang, according to news reports. Analysts who study satellite imagery say they see daily activity at the plant consistent with missile production.

Arms control experts say such work is unsurprising since North Korea has committed itself to few particular denuclearization steps. Stopping activity unilaterally, the experts say, would undermine its leverage in any coming arms negotiations.

#North Korea #north korean denuclearization

0 notes

investmart007 · 6 years

Text

SEOUL, South Korea | S. Korea probes army plan for troops to control protesters

New Post has been published on https://is.gd/o3z2Ly

SEOUL, South Korea | S. Korea probes army plan for troops to control protesters

SEOUL, South Korea — A group of army generals rolling tanks and troops into Seoul to seize power. Paratroopers firing at large crowds calling for democracy. Tanks and armored vehicles stationed at universities to intimidate student protesters.

Such scenes of military intervention in South Korea have been nonexistent since the country achieved democracy in the late 1980s. But revelations this past week of a document showing the military drafted plans to mobilize troops to suppress protests last year have struck a nerve among people in one of Asia’s most vibrant and wealthiest democracies. Some allege the plans even included a scenario for a coup.

The memories of brutal, military-backed dictatorships that imprisoned, tortured and executed dissidents remain vivid to many South Koreans. But most experts say the actual chances for another coup in South Korea are extremely low. A look at the explosive revelations and why a coup is nearly impossible to pull off today:

___

ERUPTION OF SCANDAL

A controversy over the military plans arose last week when a ruling party lawmaker disclosed a document drafted by a military intelligence unit that showed plans to deploy troops if protests grew violent following a court ruling in March 2017 that would determine the fate of conservative then-President Park Geun-hye. Lawmakers had impeached Park over broad corruption allegations in December 2016.

The document written by the Defense Security Command describes a military response to protests both in support of and against Park. After the Constitutional Court ruled to formally remove Park from office, fierce rallies erupted denouncing the court verdict but weren’t serious enough to pose a threat to national security. The plans for troop deployment weren’t carried out.

However, Lim Tae-hoon, an activist who analyzed the document, said the plans were clearly targeted at a much larger group of anti-Park protesters, who poured onto the streets in their millions to passionately but peacefully call for Park’s ouster.

Pointing out that the document included plans for martial law and contemplated how the army could bypass the military’s normal chain of command to quickly deploy large forces to Seoul, Lim raised suspicions that a closed group of army leaders plotted a coup to increase Park’s powers if she survived the attempt to oust her.

“There was no reason at all for the army to prepare plans to deploy troops and even consider martial law,” Lim said.

Following a public outcry, Park’s liberal successor, Moon Jae-in, who won the presidential election in May last year, ordered an investigation into the document. Baek Hye-ryun, a lawmaker from Moon’s party, said it would have been “no different than a coup” if army leaders had plotted to use drastic measures to crack down on anti-Park protesters.

Military experts downplay such views. Despite the peaceful nature of the protests, the military is obligated to prepare for exceptional situations where troop intervention is required to maintain order, they say.

Kim Dong-yub, a former South Korean military official, said it’s clear that the creators of the document “were held captive by the past.” Still, it would be excessive to say there were plans for a coup, he said.

“They were ready to make pathetic and frantic efforts to serve their interests if the court had rescued Park’s presidency,” said Kim, now an analyst at Seoul’s Institute for Far Eastern Studies.

___

IS A COUP EVEN POSSIBLE?

None of the five military experts interviewed by The Associated Press believed there was a real chance a coup could happen in 21st century South Korea. “There’s not even a 0.1 percent chance for that,” said Kim Taewoo, former president of the Korea Institute for National Unification in Seoul.

Here’s why experts find a coup virtually impossible:

__ Ubiquitous smartphones and internet services in South Korea would make it extremely difficult for rebels to keep their coup plans confidential and sneak troops to large population areas. South Korea is one of the world’s most wired nations, with about eight out of every 10 citizens having smartphones.

__ Coup forces would try to seize TV stations and newspapers to dictate the flow of information and force their message to the public. But that’s much harder to do in the age of live streams on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

__ Tanks and other military vehicles mobilized by coup forces would probably never reach Seoul in time, bogged down by the metropolitan area’s notorious traffic.

__ Most importantly, many young soldiers and officers, born and raised in a full-fledged democracy, likely wouldn’t follow orders if their commanders turn against their own citizens.

“The sense of citizenship by our soldiers is totally different from the past. If they got an unjust order to point their guns at their own citizens, not at North Korea, I doubt they would follow such orders,” said Seoul-based military expert Kim Dae-young.

South Korea has more than 600,000 troops, a majority of them men in their 20s drafted into a two-year mandatory service.

PAST MILITARY RULES

The fierce public reaction to the document is partly tied to Park’s family history. She is the daughter of staunch anti-communist dictator Park Chung-hee, a late general-turned-autocrat who ruled South Korea for nearly 20 years before he was assassinated by his own spy chief in 1979.

Park Chung-hee led several thousand marines, paratroopers and other combat forces that moved into Seoul in the early hours of May 16, 1961, in the country’s first successful coup. During his rule, he occasionally proclaimed martial law and other decrees to crack down on protests and jail critics.

He had previously survived two attempts on his life and justified his dictatorship with the threat posed by what he called belligerent North Korea. Proponents remember him as a hero who achieved a rapid industrialization and lifted the nation from the devastation of the 1950-53 Korean War, but opponents call him a ruthless leader with a bloody record of civilian oppression.

Less than two months after Park Chung-hee’s death, Maj. Gen. Chun Doo-hwan and his military cronies drove tanks and troops into Seoul in December 1979 in the country’s second successful coup. The next year, he orchestrated a brutal military crackdown on a pro-democracy uprising in the southern city of Gwangju, killing at least 200 people.

In the summer of 1987, massive street protests forced Chun’s government to accept direct presidential elections. However, his army buddy Roh Tae-woo, who had joined Chun’s 1979 coup, won the election held later in 1987 thanks largely to divided votes among liberal opposition candidates.

After leaving office, both Chun and Roh were arrested and spent time in prison on bribery, treason and other charges.

By Associated Press

#army plan #control protesters #Lim Tae-hoon #military intelligence #Park Geun-hye #probes #S. Kore #seoul #south korea #TodayNews

0 notes