no appeal to decency works (A-bombing) ...

  .. no hope for truth and justice ...

    .. no honour among murdering thieves

-=*=-

Preamble: I am by profession no historian, rather I have become a 'seeker of truth (and justice)' by force of events. By the same token, neither is the 'scribe' known as Max Hastings by profession an historian, rather he was mainly a newspaper person and was also born after WW2. As for the troll calling her/himself variously 'spinifex,' 'C Parsons' and 'Eliot Ramsey,' we may judge only by what s/he writes. Finally, WD ethics: what ethics?

Purpose: IMHO, we the sheople® are being propagandised, on a massive scale. What is presented, by politicians (from both 'sides'), via the corporate MSM, in a well-integrated web of deceit, is a propaganda effort aimed at both shoring up some sort'a élite and enabling that élite to rip us off, as they continue to enrich themselves ever more obscenely beyond avarice. My intent is to illustrate aspects of these lies, with the hope that others may see and understand, then demand - as I do - justice for all.

-=*=-

Even 'Blind Freddy' ort'a have realised by now, that the B, B & H invasion of Iraq was not what it was initially 'promoted' as. If you think that 'promoted' is not the correct expression, then I'd remind you of one 'joke' made at the time (2002), something like one doesn't "introduce new products in August"[1]. Long story short and in clear text: they lied to us (a sample of 935 lies documented here.) I define this 'they' as not 'just' the (lying!) politicians themselves but also the (venal!) MSM (incl. big bits'a the AusBC & SBS, boo! Hiss!) So far, nothing new. But before 'moving on,' I must emphasize: the politicians - on both 'sides' - are not properly representing us (rather, they toe the 'big end of town' line), and the 4th estate, by relaying and amplifying the politicians' lies are traitors to us, we the sheople - just as both lying politicians and venal MSM are traitors to 'our' (US, UK, Aus & Israel) putative but failed democracies.

The 'joke' at [1] is headed "Why now?" and one could well ask "Why this, why now?" - Q: Why should I consider the lies currently being pushed by some ugly troll, when I usually scream totally ignore? A: Because some lies are simply too egregious to stand unchallenged. (Yes, sadly hooked. Again. Still. Looping; Q: Who/what can set me free? A: The truth, leading (eventually) to justice!)

-=*=-

A veritable flood of lying propaganda forms a common background to these four events of interest (as of course to far more), two from the past and two from the (possible) future:

1. The A-bombing of Japan.

2. The (illegal) invasion of Iraq.

3. The (much threatened) invasion of Iran.

4. The (possible, probable) excess-CO2 induced greedastrophe®.

-=*=-

The A-bombing of Japan.

Old: The topic was well treated here, "Is All Fair In Love and War?"

A curious oddity: The commenter C Parsons repeatedly alleged that the Japanese emperor had 'sacked' his cabinet. On being challenged (by Bob Wall, g'day!) - no response whatsoever was ever forthcoming.

New: The topic is now getting a re-run here, "While truth regrows its torn-off limbs."

An even greater oddity: The commenter Eliot Ramsey has taken up the C Parsons allegation of 'cabinet sacking' with a vengeance. Ramsey now gives as reference a book by one Sir Max Hastings, as if this was some sort'a be-all and end-all. Perhaps the 'flavour' of Hastings may be sampled here [2,3,4]. My comment: the flavour of Hastings is uncannily similar to that of the Parsons/Ramsey construct itself; no wonder Ramsey is pushing Hastings like mad. Keyword: unbalanced, to say the least, and NB: still no substantiation for "sacked."

To do: any WD pretence that Eliot Ramsey is not the same commenter as C Parsons must be abandoned (as I have done long ago), and WD might explain exactly why the banned Parsons is now allowed, even actively encouraged, to comment as Ramsey. Otherwise, Q: WD ethics: what ethics? A: Well, as we see; as good as none.

Conclusion on CP/ER: The deploying of at least one undeclared alias marks Parsons/Ramsey as a liar and violator of the WD commenter ethics. As such a liar, should s/he to be extended the benefit of the doubt on any matter? If so then why? I say not; once a (premeditated!) liar, always a liar. That CP/ER is a pushed-paradigm propagandist is just too obvious, even for 'Blind Freddy.' That s/he is actually encouraged by WD is scandalous.

Q: Any more lies and liars? A: More than a few. First off is an obvious lie from Truman, that Hiroshima was a military target. In both cities, the overwhelming majority of the dead were civilians. Then there was a cover-up. Lies and cover-ups; same old same old.

  "The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base. That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians."
[9Aug’45: Excerpt from public statement by President Truman]

Patently false, then:
  «Three days after publication of Mr. Burchett's shocking dispatch, Mr. Laurence had a front-page story in the Times disputing the notion that radiation sickness was killing people. His news story included this remarkable commentary: "The Japanese are still continuing their propaganda aimed at creating the impression that we won the war unfairly, and thus attempting to create sympathy for themselves and milder terms. ... Thus, at the beginning, the Japanese described 'symptoms' that did not ring true."»
[Goodman&Goodman/The Hiroshima Cover-Up]

Backing up a bit:
  «Months before the end of the war, Japan's leaders recognized that defeat was inevitable. In April 1945 a new government headed by Kantaro Suzuki took office with the mission of ending the war.»
[Mark Weber/Was Hiroshima Necessary]

Going back even further:
  «... on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials.
...
This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor.»
[ibid.] Citation posted by Bob Wall on July 14, 2006 - 10:25am.

(Note: January 20, 1945 preceded both the battles for Iwo Jima and Okinawa, hardly minor matters. Yet surrender overtures already existed... hmmm?)

My comment: One might think, that the way to reduce *all* casualties, would be to stop the war as soon as possible - yes, also consistent with some sort'a 'justice,' i.e. not letting anyone get away with any nefarious goings-on - say. The Japanese were clearly seeking to surrender - but *none* of their efforts were even acknowledged, let alone explored - that we can see. The one absolute sticking-point for the Japanese, namely the preservation of the person of the Emperor, was *accentuated* by the US throughout in the negative, right up to and past the bombing - then abruptly conceded. Can we theorise as to why? To keep the war going until the bombs were ready, say?

Let me be perfectly clear: I do not dispute, even for the smallest part of a pico-sec, that the Japanese acted in extremely barbarous ways. The real questions vis-à-vis the A-bombing are two: (1) was the end of the war delayed so as to enable the deployment of the A-bombs (my answer: yes), and (2) was the A-bombing a war crime (my answer: also yes).

One more thing for now:
  «Every year during the first two weeks of August the mass news media and many politicians at the national level trot out the "patriotic" political myth that the dropping of the two atomic bombs on Japan in August of 1945 caused them to surrender, and thereby saved the lives of anywhere from five hundred thousand to one million American soldiers, who did not have to invade the islands. Opinion polls over the last fifty years show that American citizens overwhelmingly (between 80 and 90%) believe this false history which, of course, makes them feel better about killing hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians (mostly women and children) and saving American lives to accomplish the ending of the war.»
[John V Denson/The Hiroshima Myth]

My comment: They'd have to deploy some excuse, even if 'only' to avoid mass cognitive dissonance. And so the lies are propagated, also by filthy trolls. My tip: read all the linked articles, compare to reality, decide for yourselves.

-=*=-

Fazit: That lying propaganda is deployed at all is a disgrace on our so-called leaders, and a damnable failing of our MSM. That apparent amateurs are 'in the game' too is perplexing; what could possibly be in it for them? One might think that combating lies everywhere they manifest would be the democratic duty of all citizens - but obviously a duty not taken up by all. Some of the worst may be the enablers, those who are presumed to be smart enough to detect bullshit, but nevertheless fail to proscribe it. Too bad.

Nothing can be done about the past, but if the lying propaganda is not exposed and effectively countered, we will not be able to avoid some real nasties like the (much threatened) invasion of Iran and 'the biggie,' the (possible, probable) excess-CO2 induced greedastrophe®.

All hands to the pump!

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] CNN.com - Marketing Iraq: Why now? - September 12, 2002
White House chief of staff Andrew Card told The New York Times last week, ``From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August.'' ...
[archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/12/schneider.iraq/]

[2] Why we had to use the bomb on Japan
By MAX HASTINGS
Last updated at 11:01 18 September 2007
[dailymail.co.uk/Why-use-bomb-Japan]

[3] Sunday, Feb. 17, 2008
THE BATTLE FOR JAPAN
Max Hastings' analysis in a bombshell
By KEVIN RAFFERTY
[japantimes]

[4] Mutinous jibe angers veterans
Frank Walker
December 2, 2007
[theage.com.au/mutinous-jibe-angers-veterans]