picture of the day

We protest

65 Comments

Right-wing Japanese activists protest, calling on Russia to return a group of islands, called Northern Territories by Tokyo and Southern Kuriles by Moscow, while police stand guard in front of the Russian embassy in Tokyo on Thursday.

© Japan Today

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


65 Comments
Login to comment

I can reach this high, I can only reach this high, my protest is higher than your's...!!!,.... What's with all the Island's?.....Japan better be on guard!...while America watches and wait's in silent lucidity...

2 ( +3 / -1 )

A protest?!? There's totally going to get Vladimir Putin's attention!

8 ( +8 / -0 )

All two of them?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

A boundary dispute!? ummm wonder why we need a lot of borderlines on the earth...

3 ( +3 / -0 )

the "Y" in YMCA?

7 ( +8 / -1 )

All three of them, suppose they need to get employment. Still with the violation of Japanese airspace Russia has signaled it does not want peace with Japan.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Looks more like, "We Surrender!"

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Do they actually expect putin to listen to 3 middle age idiots who have nothing to do but yell every minute of every day, russia doesn't play likes china does japan better be careful

1 ( +3 / -2 )

2 people with their arms up in the air? That'll make the Russians change their minds.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

too funny

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Are you sure they don't praise Putin for something? It surely might look like that looking at the photo.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I wonder how much money the Abe administration is paying all these idiots behind the scenes to try to get the people behind his desire of being seen as "tough". You couldn't ask for better timing, and it's hard to believe that it's just a coincidence.

Does Abe really want to piss off BOTH China and Russia at the same time? I do believe if I were Obama I would be telling him to cool things down and shut up for a while and get your own house in order before stepping in the quagmire.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I thought this was at the Chinese Embassy. Was very noisy.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Nah, they are singing , "Hands up,baby hands up, give me you're heart gimme gimme your heart !"

6 ( +6 / -0 )

This is news worthy? All two of them? C'mon. Half the idiots of the Uyoku couldn't even tell you anything about their own country's past, all they do is drive around in their obnoxious black trucks singing war songs and shouting Tennnou heika!!

6 ( +7 / -1 )

These guys are breaching my airspace..

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Why Tokyo will never get the Northern Territories?

The "Northern Territories Day" has been celebrated in Japan since January 6, 1981. Despite the relatively short history of the holiday for the last 30 years the idea to reclaim the islands had grown strongly in the minds of many Japanese people, and even became a "political" tradition. "Returning of the Northern Territories" is a serious prerequisite of any election program, regardless of the political orientation of the candidate.

Despite the popularity of this slogan, its use demonstrates the Japanese politicians’ ability to act in defiance of the international legal environment on the issue of disputed islands. There is the strong impression that pursuing the artificially developed national idea the governance of Japan ignores the opinion of foreign experts on this problem. Though such behavior seems to be absurd, the cause is rather simple. During an international conference on the disputed territories in the Asia-Pacific region held in Vladivostok prior to the APEC summit 2012 a group of Russian and foreign researchers came to a sensational conclusion that Japan would never be able to return the Southern Kuriles.

This conclusion is based on a detailed study of a set of international law documents on the world reorganization after World War II. Exactly those political and legal decisions and agreements signed at the end of the hostilities and postwar period are the fundamental documents for the border line consideration between Russia and Japan. However, in the territorial claims Tokyo continues referring to the "Treaty of Shimoda" signed in the mid-19th century which force is repeatedly reversed by the later documents.

As we know, the basic policy principles concerning the postwar territorial settlement in the Asia-Pacific region were formulated in the "Agreement between the Three Great Powers on Questions of the Far East” signed at Yalta in February 1945 and consolidated in the Potsdam Declaration on August 14 of the same year. The documents stipulated seizure of all territories captured by Japan in modern history and abolition of post-war Tokyo legal succession to pre-war Japanese lands. Japan’s consent with the territorial changes was recorded in the emperor's prescript of August 14, 1945 and in the Japanese Instrument of Surrender signed on September 2, 1945. The Yalta and Potsdam conferences decisions were implemented by the Allied Powers Memorandum for Imperial Japanese Government № 677 of January 29, 1946. The provisions of this memorandum excluded from the jurisdiction of Japan all islands to the north of the coast of Hokkaido Island, including the Lesser Kuril Ridge – Ploskie (Habomai) islets and Shikotan.

Further distribution and consolidation of the territories seized from Japan was in accordance with the terms of the Peace Treaty between Japan and the coalition of 48 countries-winners signed on September 8, 1951 in San Francisco. According to clause "C" of Article 2 of the Treaty "Japan renounced all rights, legal foundations and claims to the Kuril Islands, and to that portion of Sakhalin and adjacent islands, the sovereignty over which Japan acquired by the Treaty of Portsmouth of September 5, 1905." It should be noted that by the time of the San Francisco Treaty signing the relations between the former allies the USSR and the USA had been significantly strained and the Korean War had broken out. The American diplomats who were developing the body of the instrument "forgot" to include in the Treaty the article on the transfer of southern Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands to the Soviet Union. The Soviet delegation refused to sign the document without promised territories in accordance with the decisions of the Yalta and Potsdam conferences. In addition to the Soviet Union, this agreement also was not signed by China because of non-participation in the peace conference that led to the escalation of regional tension between Tokyo and Beijing as well.

The result of the San Francisco Treaty signing was the legal conflict, on the one hand the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin were excluded from governance and jurisdiction of Japan, and on the other hand the power to control those territories was not assigned to the Soviet Union. However, in Japan for nearly a decade after the end of World War II, they believed that the Kuril Islands and southern Sakhalin unconditionally belonged to the Soviet Union. The jurisdiction of the USSR over the Kuriles and Sakhalin detailed in the Article 8 of the Treaty, in which Japan "recognized the legitimacy of all treaties signed by the Allied Powers ... to end the state of war, or any other agreements of the Allied Powers made to restore peace." Thus, by signing the Article 8 of the Treaty, Japan tacitly agreed with the decisions of the Yalta and Potsdam conferences, which assigned Sakhalin and Kuril Islands to the USSR.

However, today from the point of view of the modern Japanese such "not fully defined" legal status of the Kuril Islands does not satisfy the current Japanese government that seeks to score the political mileage by returning the territories.

Let’s assume that the government of Japan reaches an agreement with Moscow, whose main condition for the islands transfer would certainly be the American troops withdrawal from the territory of Japan, but not a peace treaty, as Tokyo wants. However, as per the reasoned opinion of the reputed expert on territorial disputes B.I.Tkachenko, with Russian attempt to transfer the islands to the possession of Japan the Article 2 of the San Francisco Treaty comes to effect, according to which no part of the Kuril Islands can belong to Japan, as it refused "all rights, titles and claims" to them for the time of indefinite term treaty.

Then, who may the Kuril Islands be transferred to? The answer is in the Article 26 of the Treaty, according to which "if Japan would negotiate a peaceful settlement or war claims settlement with any State ... the same benefits would be extended to the parties hereto." In this situation the islands transfer to Japan, legally waived the rights to them permanently, the islands shall automatically be placed under the joint jurisdiction of the 48 signatories to the Treaty. It is noteworthy that neither Russia (as we know, the Soviet Union did not sign the Treaty), nor Japan, which forever renounced the rights to the islands are among of them. The Article 22 of the Treaty also contains a similar provision, according to which all disputes relating to the implementation of this Treaty shall be settled by the International Court with the representatives of those 48 states.

Based on the foregoing, we can make several conclusions. For the indefinite term of the San Francisco Peace Treaty Japan renounced all Kuril Islands. The islands transfer to Japan will lead to the fact that the international control of the Treaty signatories will be established over the islands. Japan government attempts to resolve the territorial claims in the short term could lead to the fact that both countries (Russia and Japan) would lose the subject of a dispute forever because it would be placed under international jurisdiction. The way to resolve the current situation does not exist because the San Francisco Peace Treaty is an international indefinite term act in force.

Thus, at this stage, maintaining the status quo in the territorial dispute between Japan and Russia is in line with the national interest of both Russia and Japan. However, nothing impedes both countries to develop together the economy and infrastructure of the four islands, which finally will not be considered as the "apple of discord" and become one more link in the Russian-Japanese relations.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

I think they were singing a chris brown song . . .

Put your hands in the air If you want to freak sumthin down tonight Put your hands in the air All my ladies(repeat 3x) Do it just like that (repeats) All my ladies, just like that

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I am not for the right wingers of Japan. However, I know the history of the Northern Islands of Japan. I do not condemn what they are doing on this photo. They have a right to do so. The Islands were stolen by Russians.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Russia just did a fly by...same ole' rudeskie's!, again another prosecution technique, like pinging, harrasment without declaring war...Japan is a Regal and Strong Country, China and Russia are looking for more...can they take what they want from the Japanese? I say "NO"...Gamebatte Kudasai...!!!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The tom cruise movie showing a fighter jet, giving the russians the califorina bird, is very much like how I lived in the Navy...very much the same...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The islands were joined to Russia by the Directive of the Empress Catherine the Great in 1786. (See the wiki). And before it they were explored and inhabited by the Russian Cossacks and civilians. Japan occupied the islands in the mid of 19-th centure, And being engaged in the Krimea war the Russian goverment had just presented four islands to Japan in 1855. And then see point C Article 2 Treaty of Peace with Japan. Signed at San Francisco, 8 September 1951

(c) Japan renounces all right, title and claim to the Kurile Islands, and to that portion of Sakhalin and the islands adjacent to it over which Japan acquired sovereignty as a consequence of the Treaty of Portsmouth of 5 September 1905.

Japan had refused from all Kuril islands. So the Russia has all rights for the islands. why are you claiming em back now...

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Easier - they will never be able to take anything from Russia, unless Russia will not want it anymore or Japan will pay amazing amount of money for it. Russia have no reason or desire, and Japan can do absolutely nothing about it.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Get a job you bums!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

There is no dispute -- they are Russian controlled and administered islands, and in the eyes of Russia they are sovereign territory. Japan has no foot to stand on here, but I suppose they'll claim the opposite of what they do on the Senkakus: doesn't matter that they are Russian administered (it does when it's Senkakus!) and that they live on them, etc.

Unlike people like Ossan claiming the war was already over and Russia stole they islands, they took them over during the closing days of the war (ie. war was not over yet), and so these islands are the spoils. Japan ought to know about that, since at least one island they took themselves through war.

And that guy's calligraphy is terrible.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

Japan can make them an offer they can't refuse...Yen for nothing!!!...Russian's just trying to cash in on the "CHINA SCARE" of Island's of Doom... "dos' be' donnia" comrad's" ...da ,da,da, heh heh !!!....Russian's are like a hooker walking the street...looking for a "JAPANESE JOHN"..............Fight Back Nippon!!!

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

There is no dispute -- they are Russian controlled and administered islands, and in the eyes of Russia they are sovereign territory. Japan has no foot to stand on here, but I suppose they'll claim the opposite of what they do on the Senkakus: doesn't matter that they are Russian administered (it does when it's Senkakus!) and that they live on them, etc.

There is a dispute. Even the Russians acknowledge this. As to your comparison, I think you forgot to read Hikozaemon's post in response to you and others alike.

http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/abe-pledges-to-resolve-island-dispute-with-russia#comment_1502567

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Regardless of who these islands belonged to in ancient times, modern treaties have the last say in the matter. Who knows whose territory is this now, but it sure ain't Japanese, because they gave it up in the last treaty they signed.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Who was there first?

Ainu, probably.

And what happened to the Ainu?

Wiped out by the Yamato people coming up from Mainland Japan.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Well, besides the possible impending horrendous meterological event, and energetic particles. I hope I'm able to get out before this additional "situation" spirals into something that may occur at both ends of the archipelago.

PEACE

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The cop in the foreground lokks as if he's thinking ....... "Oh no, not these morons again !"

2 ( +4 / -2 )

looks

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

they should follow the korean guy and stab themselves in the stomach, It will make them famous!!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Russia has nukes and Japan should buy some from them.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

That fat guy holding the flag, I saw him once outside the Hakata Station with a loud speaker expressing his freedom of speach. He's a funny guy, can always work as a commedian if the protesting business goes under.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Green Panda, I think Japan should stricktly follow it's constitution restricting using of military forces and denying the posession of nuke arms.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

And that guy's calligraphy is terrible.

My japanese friends told me once about typical participants of such actions. They are unemployed people or bad students. They are getting money for their rallies from a special foundation, something like " Foundation for Returning our Northern Territories" or something like that. Of course, they have neither time nor desire to practice their calligraphy ....

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Russia: .. (laughter outburst)

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Get a job you bums!

Of course you'll say the same thing for the demonstrators protesting various "causes" of the residents of Okinawa? Don't get me wrong, I think these guys are nuts, I just find the double standard intriguing.

Unlike people like Ossan claiming the war was already over and Russia stole they islands, they took them over during the closing days of the war (ie. war was not over yet), and so these islands are the spoils.

So much fail in this post. The primary fail is of course your willingness to abide by the "spoils of war" system for determining territorial disputes only when it suits your particular umm, political persuasion.

Second, and I quote here from South Korean Harvard educated scholar Seokwoo Lee's paper published in The Pacific Rim Law and Policy Journal, your contention that the Soviet Union seized the territories in question during the war in demonstrably false.

The Soviet Union declared war on Japan on August 8, 1945. The Russian invasion of Shimushu, the northernmost island of the Kurile Archipelago, began on August 18, three days after Japan surrendered. By September 5, Soviet troops had taken possession of the entire Kurile Archipelago, including Etorofu, Kunashiri, Shikotan, and the Habomais.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Who was there first? Ainu, probably. And what happened to the Ainu? Wiped out by the Yamato people coming up from Mainland Japan.

Its the sad truth Wooster-san, and a point that should not be ignored.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

hidingoutFeb. 08, 2013 - 07:04PM JST ... began on August 18, three days after Japan surrendered. ...

This is the questionable point, which everybody argues, in all terms: (1) the date; (2) the form; (3) to whom Japan surrendered; (4) who accepted the surrender; (5) Why Japan and Russia are technically at war if the surrender is in effect. Everything else is secondary. We've been over this numerous times. Your Korean scholar just takes the "key" interpretation as an axiom and builds the rest of his stuff on it, like a basic JT forum user. Cheap. Not worth citing.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Do 3 blokes grinding an axe really make a protest?

And is it news?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Actually, this is a deodorant commercial.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

to nigelboy There is a dispute. Even the Russians acknowledge this

No This is Russian national feature - escape a conflict if it is possible...

not to increase the conflict but to avoid it .....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Your Korean scholar just takes the "key" interpretation as an axiom and builds the rest of his stuff on it, like a basic JT forum user. Cheap. Not worth citing.

Yeah, you know what? I'm going to go with the guy who was selected a visiting scholar by Harvard Law school and has Masters and Doctorate degrees in law over "a basic JT poster".

I agree with much of what seems to be your stance on the issue of territorial disputes with Russia, but there's no point resorting to belittling recognized expert sources just because they don't agree with your stand.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

In recent years, Tokyo decided to promote the strategic partnership with Russia, including a joint economic activity in the Kuril Islands. Thus, the former head of the Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba said it would be possible, if the consulted parties will not be applied harm to the legal position of Japan. Until the last moment the Japanese were going to address the issue of joint investment projects only after passing under the jurisdiction of the South Kuril Islands to Japan, it is really a positive fact. Thus, a proposal for cooperation between Russia Japan and the Kuril Islands is a compromise.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

These guys' armpits not withstanding, those are Russian islands. Japan lost the war it started. So finders keepers, losers weepers. Same goes for the those miserable rocks south of Kyushu. Japan's got them, Japan gets to keep them. Instead of protesting, these right-wing idiots ought to thank Russia for not taking Hokkaido.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Russian Embassy, next time be prepared. Install loudspeakers around the embassy. And if protestors show up, declare that same day a Russian cultural day. Then blast them with Russian patriotic or cultural songs like Katyusha, Kalinka and some Balalaikas. The least they can do is start dancing to the beat.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

As far as I know, these islands belong to Russia and should never be surrendered. Those who play with fire get burned and should learn a lifetime lesson too.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

"in the eyes of Russia they are sovereign territory"

No doubt.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And a reasonable question appears: who were these islands belong to? Who was the first who found them?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If Japan didn't start the wars in the Pacific, maybe they wouldn't have lost the islands? When Germany lost the war that they started and lost big chunks of their territory to their neighbors, they didn't try to get them back. Why are Japanese so stubborn and unrepentant? Now Japan wants to pick fights with all her neighbors, it's getting ridiculous.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

chucky3176, I agree with you... I can not imagine how they will have a good mind to return them?! it is imposible reaally... they just should accept reality as it is...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

"OH"...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is a question of nationality. Those Japanese who recognize the northern territories are real Japanese , but those who do not recognize they are not real one. But it is absolutly incorrect Kuril Islands are Russian territory, which is confirmed by international legal acts, and the Russian Federation has no reason to change its position on the territorial issue related to the ownership of islands.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

It's time for Japan to rethink its geopolitics. The U.S. may be the alternative to Russia in natural gas supply.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

If Japan did not bother to communicate the surrender to Soviets, why does the Korean scholar assume that Japan surrendered and Soviets must abruptly stop their 5 successful offensives.

Konsta,

Japan acceptance of Potsdam Declaration was communicated to the respective Allied nations (including the Soviets) on August 14 via Japanese Embassy in Sweden and Switzerland. However, Soviets continued advancement, in my opinion, is that 1) Stalin feared U.S. occupation/administration in the area in the future 2) Eventual soverignty back to Japan based on the legal strengths that the said territories were not taken by "greed and violence" but were peacefully acquired/exchanged with Russia (1855 and 1875 treaties). It's also worth noting that Stalin intended to go beyond the agreed Yalta agreement with the intention of occupied Northeast potion of Hokkaido as well but U.S. refused.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

everybody is right of course! but there is a rule " that was conquered is hallowed" i mean if smth was conquered in the battle it would be the most expensive because of the people who were sacrificed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hidingout, first I want to mention that -1 is not from me. I dislike this grading system and try to not use it.

Don't sweat it. I post what I think not what I hope will be popular.

Now, about the matter. PhD or not, Harward or not, he assumed: 1) Japan surrendered to Russia (this is important) August 15, 1945 and immediately stopped all offensive.

I believe Soviets signed the Yalta agreement on February 11.1945 - reneging on their neutrality pact with Japan. Now I realize it was not the age of cellphones and the internet, but it is unthinkable that Japan was unaware that the Soviets had joined the Allied cause and were now aligned against them. Therefore, yes, Japan was surrendering to the Soviets along with the other Allies even though the Soviets refused to sign the SF document.

It is also implausible to say that the Soviets didn't realize Japan had surrendered on the 15th of August (only a week after the Soviets officially declared war on Japan). While the average Japanese person may have been astounded to hear "god" surrender, I doubt the Allied powers were similarly affected . Yet the Soviets allowed three days to pass before beginning their invasion of Shimushu. So yes, the Soviets should have immediately ceased all military actions on the 15th of August rather than continuing with their campaign in the Kuriles for a further two weeks (September 5th being the date accepted by even Russian scholars as to when the Soviets had taken control of all the territories in question).

It is worth noting that the Soviets had surely elicited promises from the other Allies before signing Yalta agreement that they (the Soviets) would receive Sakhalin Island and the Kurile Islands upon Japan's surrender. Perhaps, and this seems likely to me, the Soviets did not trust their "Allies" and wanted to physically control the territories in question, rather than relying on, or waiting for, the details of surrender to be worked out.

2) Thus, Soviet Union must accept it and stop its offensive immediately, since it becomes illegal.

I agree as I said above. However it seems likely that the Soviets, in continuing their takeover of Sakhalin Island and the Kurile Islands, were only ensuring that they got what they felt was coming to them.

I believe that the Russians and Japanese have a history prior to WWII of being able to negotiate their disagreements regarding these territories. The Treaty of Shimoda, Treaty of St. Petersburg and The Treaty of Portsmouth were all agreements that spoke to the division of these territories and their surrounding waters between Japan and Russia. This gives me some hope that the Russians are not completely opposed to negotiating a settlement . Of course concessions will have to be made by the Japanese side, and there is no way that they are going to get everything the gentlemen pictured above are hoping for. Still some agreement along the lines of the three treaties I mention above should be within reach if Mr Abe is seriously ready to negotiate.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

This is my favourite protest of all time. Russia have a great attitude to other countries protesting them... They just don't give a fxxx.

If Right wing protesters all jump in a boat and ytravel to the disputed area ( Any Right-wing Japanese politician should please consider doing this) the Russians will happily shoot you and let the birds clear up the mess. Anyone else notice how terrorist/protest etc attempts in Russia usually end with a life sentence or multiple deaths (civilians, perps ..whoever). Go ahead and protest Japan!!! Protest to your hearts content!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hidingout

( This gives me some hope that the Russians are not completely opposed to negotiating a settlement . Of course concessions will have to be made by the Japanese side, and there is no way that they are going to get everything the gentlemen pictured above are hoping for. Still some agreement along the lines of the three treaties I mention above should be within reach if Mr Abe is seriously ready to negotiate.)

in the begining of my observing the problem I aslo really have hoped and belived that it is possible to find mutually beneficial solution in disputes between Russia and Japan... but while i was serfing internet I stumbled upon one notye like this: "Yesterday, on February 7, the Japanese citizens celebrated national holiday called The Day of Northern Territories which is related to Russian-Japanese territorial dispute over The Kuril Islands.

It’s worth mentioning that every year the celebration of the holiday is accompanied with the protest actions of the Japanese national activists demanding to return the islands. This year is not the exception.

Several weeks before the celebration they have created special website and started transmitting their videos via internet, calling everybody to join them and support the Japanese government by lightning the real candles in the center of their city or virtual at special website. This action was called “The Lights of Northern Territories” and took place on February 6, on the eve of the national holiday." by Steve Williams 1975 which makes me think different.... so in that way I'm sure that Japan pursues another aims anything but negotiating....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A message to our right wing friends.

Russia, China the US and most Japanese do not care what you want.

While it may sound fun to you to go to war against Russia, China, the US and whoever else is on your list, just imagine all those grass eating, fashionable, perfect hair ordinary Japanese 18-25 year olds trying to fight Chinese and Russian soldiers. Not a pretty picture.

You do realize you live on an island right? Last war how did that point work out for you guys? I know the sacred Tsunami saved Japan when China had flat boats, but Russia and China both learned to make better boats since then. Not to mention aircraft.

Really "Godzilla" theme song playing from your vans? How dare you?!?!? You have violated one of Japan's most sacred institutions! You heathens! Godzilla is not for politics. He is a global uniting factor to remind of what we can all strive to be if we are irradiated. So hands off Godzilla!!! Or you will need to go to war with me! :)

Do be peach and turn the truck speaker volume down. Thanks!
6 ( +6 / -0 )

tkoind2, huh)))) It Is the comment...) you make a some scheme for them)))))) they should be grateful to you...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

as in all wars territory is lost and gained, Japan should be thankful that it was only those islands that were taken, Japan lost a war they started, suck it up and move on period.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Russian soldiers watching this, ”little man I will break you harharhar!!!"

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites