hairforest comments

Y80,000 for a new toy?

TPOJ,

I'm not arguing with you here, just want to know what you mean by, "...that keeping convicted war criminals in a place of honor is wrong."

There are no graves, burial grounds, or anything like that at Yasukuni... Just, ahem, "spirits"... Whose names are written in a book.

Not being one to disrespect anyone's else's religion, but I wonder, and have wondered for a very long time, three things about Yasukuni:

1) How are US soldiers, Navy, & airmen - some who did commit war crimes -whose remains are actually buried at Arlington to be treated if we are using the same logical and rationale that we use to criticize Yasukuni?

2) How does a place where remains are buried (Arlington), contrast to a place that has none of the things (as recognized by a Judeo-Christian tradition)including headstones, burial grounds, cemetary, etc.?

3) If Yasukuni holds "spirits" how is that accomplished? And, if one is not Shinto, how can one consider these rituals any different from, say, another exotic religion, or Indian rites, etc.,?

Yasukuni was built in the 1800's to honor all war dead, humans, animals, people from othe countries, whose to say that some old folks whose families died in some wrong-headed war (Can you spell, "IRAQ") should not have the respect given to them by the government?

The logical solution is a true separation of church and state... Start with eliminating the State and then we can get rid of the wars, and won't have to deal with this sort of nonsense anymore.

Horrid. So far nothing on this hot story:

"Georgia may recall its 35 Olympic team members from the Beijing Games because they can't afford to have half the country's military forces abroad at a time of war"

-and-

"China up on medals already, USA down one tourist"

Perhaps a bit presumptive for a woman to know what men want and/or admire, no? Same can be said for vice versa.

Since I am a man, I think I have a tad bit better idea about what men think than most women would. I reckon it would be foolish if I told you what women think/want.

Here's what I think (in my own possibily convoluted thinking): Japanese women are popular the world over for whatever reason. If anyone has a complex issue it's probably Japanese men...

Never heard of Riyo Mori?

Yeah, when you dated the girl, you were both 20 and in love, she always said, "...that she loves you and money doesn't matter..." But you break up one day and meet her again, by chance, 15 years later,... Now, she's married to the president of a big company and driving a Ferarri.

All us guys know this story... Chuckle.

94% of all 64-year-old guys would jump on a 32 year-old in a minute, if given half a chance.

Whatever your gripes are, they miss the point. This is just another example of government interference in the free market screwing things up for everybody.

The market should decide how many taxis there are and what the rates are, including service, etc., etc.,

If the market were allowed to operate freely, the number of taxis would go down, prices would also probably decrease as competition would be promoted; and, if non-smoking taxis were profitable, then a company would provide them.

Just look at Starbucks and/or Doutor Coffee as a good examples of what I'm talking about; one offers smoking, the other is no smoking... All this free market glory without an iota of government interference.

As it stands now, more and more government regulation has made the current messed up system as it is.

When people ask, "Why doesn't the government do something about (it)?" I just chuckle... Figure it out people: The government HAS been doing something that's why it's a mess.

This is too difficult a question to answer in short. If there are no US military bases in Japan, Japan will have to rearm. I think Japan should.

In order for Japan to repent completely for past deeds and war crimes while returning to the fold as an equal partner in peace with her Asian neighbors, a seemingly monstrous contradiction must occur. Japan will be obliged to renounce her pacifist constitution – specifically Article 9 of the constitution – and create her own standing army so that she can become a normal independent nation, pursuing her own independent foreign policy and interests.

Until Japan does renounce Article 9, she will never be able to come out from under the US security umbrella and, in turn, be able to create and maintain relations with her neighbors on an equal footing. Japan must create her own military again in order to rid herself of US occupation and control.

Nevertheless, the notion of renouncing her pacifist constitution understandably causes Japan’s neighbors to become very nervous due to Japan’s past Asian aggression. This is the paradox of Japanese remilitarization.

Today’s Japan is at a crossroads. The US security umbrella that Japan has lived under these past 60 years often hampers relations between Japan and her neighbors. Japan’s economic relations with those neighbors hum along at a fantastic rate, while her political relations are constantly hindered by political stumbling at home and Japan’s security agreement with America. Even though many Japanese are beginning to think that staunchly supporting the United States is not a good idea with over 75 percent "quite dissatisfied" with Japan’s support of the illegal invasion of Iraq, Japan today is at the beck and call of the American empire.

But what can Japan do about the current situation? Many people in Japan feel that the US-Japan security agreement is an outdated and ill-fitting rented suit that must be changed. But how?

One solution was presented by the former Japanese Prime Minister, Junichiro Koizumi. Koizumi wwanted to revise Article 9 of the constitution that renounces Japan maintaining a standing military. As former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone said, "(Revising Article 9) would make Japan a ‘normal country’ that can share responsibilities and cooperate with the world …" Even though some politicians like Nakasone are also against prime ministerial visits to Yasukuni Shrine, this policy of revising the Japanese constitution has drawn much criticism from China, Korea, and the Japanese Left.

Also, though many countries and groups object to any proposed changes to Japan’s pacifist constitution, would these changes signal a hard-right shift in Japanese politics? Would these revisions put still more strain on a China already under enormous pressure from a very belligerent United States? Would a remilitarized Japan be what the US empire really wants?

Not necessarily. Incredibly, in the long run, a Japan with a foreign policy independent of the United States just might be much better at reducing Asian-Pacific tensions than a Japan that is a lap-dog of the USA.

In many ways, this entire matter is merely a problem of semantics. Japan’s Self-Defense Force is currently called Jieitai; the name of this force is to be changed to Jieigun, which translates into Self-Defense Army. To westerners, this may seem like a minor detail. But in a country that is filled with contradictions and has a language that holds hundreds of words meaning the same thing, albeit with slightly different nuances, this minor change can lead to major changes, depending on how it is interpreted. Would this change confirm that Japan is rearming and could pose a threat to her Asian neighbors once again? Or is this just another enigmatic problem of modern Japan that requires deeper consideration of the psyche and linguistics of today’s Japanese nation?

Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution states:

"Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. 2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized."

As of 2004, Japan is already in the world’s top five in military spending. Will changing Japan’s military status make any real difference? Does Japan having her own military spell trouble for China or Korea? Leftists and some critics say that it does. But after researching this issue, I have to conclude that it does not. I have become convinced that the only way Japan will ever be able to free herself from US control and handle her own foreign affairs with all of her Pacific neighbors as an equal partner will be to renounce Article 9.

Many of Japan’s neighbors complain that Japan accedes to the USA’s every wish and whim. I’d have to agree with that; in fact I complain about it as much as anyone. But I would add that if Japan’s Asian neighbors want Japan to get away from the US security umbrella, then they have to expect that Japan will want to be treated as an equal partner in all discussions and problems.

Thus, Japan escaping from the US security agreement is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, an independent Japan can take a dissenting opinion to the USA on Asian disputes. On the other hand, Japan will have to have her own military to do so. To this very day, Japan is treated as a junior in all aspects of her relations with all of her Pacific neighbors. China, Korea, and the rest of Asia will have to realize that they cannot have their cake and eat it too.

The Japanese are a very pragmatic people. An independent Japan will require an independent Japanese military. To expect Japan to leave the US security agreement without having a standing military of her own is absurd. No politicians in any country would last in office for an hour if they allowed their country to fall into the precarious position whereby its national or economic interests could not be protected in an emergency. To think that any country's politicians could is completely ignorant.

In spite of what you may read in the mass media, Japan is still under US occupation. Undeniable evidence of this can be found in the fact that Japan doesn’t even fully control her own airspace or her own territorial waters.

For example, for over the last 22 years Japan has been begging the United States to give her back the airspace above and around areas of Tokyo. Here is an extract from an article entitled U.S. to return part of Yokota airspace that appeared in the Japan Times on March 12, 2006.

"The United States has basically agreed to return part of the airspace over Yokota Air Base in Tokyo as part of the realignment of U.S. military forces in Japan, informed sources said Saturday.

"The basic agreement is expected to alleviate the overcrowding caused by the 470 commercial flights that must take detours around the so-called ‘Yokota RAPCON (Radar Approach Control)’ area each day.

"The Yokota RAPCON covers the airspace above Tokyo and eight prefectures – Tochigi, Gunma, Saitama, Kanagawa, Yamanashi, Niigata, Nagano and Shizuoka. The military airspace is 7,000 meters high at its northern part and 3,700 to 5,500 meters in its southern part near Tokyo.

"Flights bound for western regions, such as Chugoku and Kyushu, have to ascend to avoid entering the banned airspace, while flights originating from those regions must make a detour south of Yokota, according to the transport ministry.

"The agreement, however, will effectively shelve Japan’s request for the complete return of the airspace, which it has been seeking since the 1980s."

You’ve heard of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq having an illegal "no-fly zone" imposed on it, but I bet you didn’t know until now that the USA still enforces one over Japan.

After reading the above, is there anyone who believes that US occupation of Japan ended in 1952? Today, there are over 50,000 US troops stationed in Japan. In a recent survey, 63 percent of the Japanese people wanted the US troops out. The US military is a huge financial strain on Japan.

Another article that appeared on Japan’s Kyodo newswires on March 12, 2006 reported that the US was returning three military bases on Okinawa to Japan. Kyodo also reported that Japan looks set to cover the broken down empire’s $8 billion estimated cost of removing 7,000 US marines from Okinawa and sending them to Guam. (I calculate that at $1.14 million per marine.) Many Japanese wonder why Japan must pay for the removal of US troops from Japanese territory to another US colony in the Pacific.

The choice is clear: the only way Japan can become a normal country, treated as an equal by her Pacific neighbors, is to walk along the very same road her neighbors do. It would be a wonderful thing if every nation in the world would have a constitution that renounced military force and prohibited a standing army; it would be fantastic if war were abolished forever, but that is not the way things are. Japanese pacifists will blast me for stating this opinion, but as I have written about many times, the Japanese are, in many ways, very romanticist. It is a lovely and artful, heartwarming way to be, but unfortunately it is not the way the world works.

Would a remilitarized Japan, free of US control, become more neighborly with China and Korea? Considering economic trends and business ties, one would hope and strongly suspect so. But, either way, in order to investigate those possibilities, Japan must escape from the grasp of the US.

Japan’s goal should be to rid herself of US occupation and control. After that, in order to maintain peace, Japan will have to negotiate with her Asian neighbors on an equal footing in an atmosphere of trust and mutual respect. Unfortunately, because of the way things are done, to do so will require Japan to change her pacifist constitution more in line with the way everyone else does things. In order for Japan to become friendlier with her Asian sisters, she will once again have to support a military, like a normal country. It is fact-of-life. It is unfortunate that Japan must support a military to do so. It is most fortunate if doing so allows her to return to her Asian family.

In this insane world, every normal country has a military. A normal country honors its military dead. That is the tightrope walk for Japan’s politicians today: Japan must fulfill the requirements of any normal country while reassuring her neighbors of peaceful intentions.

This is the huge paradox of Japanese remilitarization.

So the question "Does the U.S. need to have military bases anywhere in Japan?" and "Does Japan need to have US military bases" is, without a doubt, an entirely different question, of course.

Mojibake,

Regardless of what your contracts states, an illegal clause is still illegal. For example, even if your contrac said, "The employee agrees to be a slave, etc.," Slavery is illegal, therefore this clause in the contract is null.

You should check labor laws for your case. I suspect that this was put in your contract by someone who is not a bonafide lawyer (That, by the way, happens all the time).

serendipity,

Please!"..the obscurity of murders in Japan are definitely increasing." What does that mean?

How about facts and data to support arguments? Without these, and all their warts, it's all just conjecture and opinion... Basically worthless.

Yeah, Avril's still a real punk! The real thing! Sure! A coming show at the Dome for the real punks... What!? It's not selling? Well, call Puffy and, well, do something!!!

Another victim-less crime of which the public will be forced to pay their taxes to handle.

It's called freedom. If a woman wants to seel pictures of herself, nude or not, it's none of our damned business.

Japan is crowded enough. Anywhere but Tokyo, please!

I don't work for the production company that makes this show. I already told you that.

I never said that Good Morning Garage was even a good show. All I said is that their ratings were #1 and they beat J-Wave & FM-Tokyo. Now, if you want to compare to AM. FM never beats AM. InterFM is a Rock station, for the target they are going at, Good Morning Garage is #1. To that there is no doubt. You made the claim first, then you keep changing the subject... Now radiootaku proves he has his info wrong. Now, you want to compare all age groups? Duh! How many taxis have you ridden in that even have FM radios?

If you get to overall ratings from 12 - 69 years old, no they don't. A qualified, intelligent, judgement would show that there's no way a 10 year old station is going to beat out a 30 year old station for overall ratings.

Good Morning Garage is the best on InterFM and is, perhaps, not original at all (like some have alluded to) but is typical of American & British morning radio style.... Which, I gather, that they try to mirror.

warispeace and radiootaku just don't like it and present their opinions as facts... Just as they claim McDonalds is crap, yet eats there every-so-often. And wears Uniqlo stuff, like eveybody else does.

I wish my company did make shows that got ratings like Good Morning Garage does in their market... Then we wouldn't be hurting for cash flow all the time.

Hi radiootaku,

No, it is not generally common use of information that FM ratings are compared with AM ratings. AM stations, generally speaking, show higher ratings than FM stations do. Just as TV shows higher than radio, and satellite TV ratings are not compared with terrestrial.

I use the ratings from that time in that format because:

1) If it is found out who I am, I won't get into trouble. And; 2) All ratings systems use age groups and gender.

If your ratings are not so divided into catgeories, then your information is wrong. It is the way it is done.

If you use the overall ratings system, then, no, Good Morning Garage does not beat out Nippon Hoso, etc., Good Morning Garage beats FM Tokyo and J-Wave in ratings, generally speaking across the board. That was what was being discussed, now you are changing the subject. FM is not compared to AM. We're are not comparing apples to oranges.

You might also be using data not from Video Research (the Japan industry standard...) The latest data, from the second week of April, has not been released. So it is impossible that you would have it.

By the way, NHK ratings are never released, nor researched. NHK is not a private station, they are government run, they have no use for ratings.

Yes, IFM ratings are all low. Excepting Good Morning Garage. Do you realize that Dairiten has their own preferred clients and stations? Unless your friend works at Dentsu, Hakuhodo, or ADK, they will not push InterFM....

Look at Good Morning Garage's sponsor list. Some of the biggest copmanies in the country. They have the same info. If it were so low, why would they spend the money? Doesn't add up. Sorry.

I have the ratings from Feb. 2008 (the last ratings currently available)...My information is correct.

By the way:

Mixi community:

Good Morning Garage (InterFM's #1) community is 780 days old; 4919 members. Averaging 6.3 new members a day (The largest FM progam related Mixi community in all of Japan - even though Good Morning Garage is local - Even more members than Morning Musume has!)

J-Wave Groove line (J-Wave's #1) community is 1102 days old; 4321 members. Averaging 3.92 new members a day.

This is real data, not opinions, or heresay, radiootaku, go check it for yourself.

Radiootak,

You are absolutely wrong. According to the data research results of Video Research, the ratings system that all the stations use, Good Morning Garage is dominate. Do your research.

Since Feb of 2007, Good Morning Garage has consistently beat J-Wave and FM Tokyo.

In that month, Good Morning Garage blew the rival station's door out:

2/19/07 - 2/25/07) 12 - 29 Male & Female

7:00 - 8:00 InterFM: 0.8 FM Tokyo: 0.4 J-Wave: 0.7 8:00 - 9:00 InterFM: 0.8 FM Tokyo: 0.0 J-Wave: 0.7 8:00 - 9:00 InterFM: 0.6 FM Tokyo: 0.1 J-Wave: 0.0

2/19/07 - 2/25/07) 25 - 34 Male & Female

7:00 - 8:00 InterFM: 0.4 FM Tokyo: 0.8 J-Wave: 0.5 8:00 - 9:00 InterFM: 0.6 FM Tokyo: 0.2 J-Wave: 0.1 8:00 - 9:00 InterFM: 0.8 FM Tokyo: 0.7 J-Wave: 0.5

And the ratings gap has increased considerable every quarter.

How do I know this? I get the data directly from Dentsu and Hakuhodo. I work for one of the major networks. And Good Morning Garage is, by far, InterFM's highest rated show... You'd know that if you knew how to read a ratings chart, which I doubt since it seems you are talking out of your hat.

For InterFM's ratings to not drop from a, say, 0.8 at 8:00 in the morning, the 4:00 in the afternoon ratings would have to hit a 3.6 considering the effect of potential audience. InerFM never even comes close to that. Never has.

Think. If Good Morning Garage was not the highest rated show, then how is it possible that it has all of InterFM's big sponsors?