The Nanking Massacre and Iris Chang's Book The Rape of Nanking

Excuse me, Japan in the 30s was an imperialist state. They invaded China and murdered millions to feed their imperialist ambitions in Manchuria. America, FDR tried to stop that with a boycott and instead we got Pearl Harbor.

Don't tell that to Axis Mikey.. he thinks Japan invading China was the best thing that ever happened to it, and the Chinese need to stop whining about the 'Inappropriate Touching of Nanking".
 
THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE DEFENDING. . . . [low-class, gutter profanity deleted]

And just on a point of basic logic, not to mention common sense and decency, no one is “defending” the Nanking Massacre. What a ludicrous, idiotic claim for you to make. The fact that I do not accept the wild theory that 300,000 civilians were killed in Nanking, and that I believe the actual civilian death toll was around 10,000, does not mean I am “defending” the massacre. As you well know, I have said repeatedly that killing 10,000 civilians, as well as 20,000 to 30,000 Chinese POWs, was a terrible atrocity and a war crime. Not even a punk in the sixth grade would be stupid or foolish enough to claim that harshly condemning the killing of 10,000 civilians and 20K-30K POWs constitutes “defending” such a massacre. It is baffling to fathom how any sane person could make such a bizarre claim.

If anyone has defended mass slaughter, it is you with your repeated praising of the worst mass murderer in history, Mao Tsetung, who killed at least 30 million people after he came to power in China. Not only have you doubled-down on your shocking defense of that evil, sick mass killer, but you have complained about people “demonizing” Joseph Stalin, arguably the second worst mass murderer in history.
 
And just on a point of basic logic, not to mention common sense and decency, no one is “defending” the Nanking Massacre. What a ludicrous, idiotic claim for you to make. The fact that I do not accept the wild theory that 300,000 civilians were killed in Nanking, and that I believe the actual civilian death toll was around 10,000, does not mean I am “defending” the massacre. As you well know, I have said repeatedly that killing 10,000 civilians, as well as 20,000 to 30,000 Chinese POWs, was a terrible atrocity and a war crime. Not even a punk in the sixth grade would be stupid or foolish enough to claim that harshly condemning the killing of 10,000 civilians and 20K-30K POWs constitutes “defending” such a massacre. It is baffling to fathom how any sane person could make such a bizarre claim.

what's baffling to me is that anyone would come on here and try to claim that WAR CRIMINALS got a raw deal when they were executed for things like Nanking and Bataan, and even call those men 'Honorable" as you did.

This is up there with the Neo-Nazis who deny the Holocaust.

Then Again, you belong to a fucked up cult started by a two-bit con-man who was fucking teenage girls by convincing their parents they'd get to rule their own planets in the afterlife. A great day in history was when the fine people of my state did this.

upload_2020-2-29_5-28-55.jpeg


If anyone has defended mass slaughter, it is you with your repeated praising of the worst mass murderer in history, Mao Tsetung, who killed at least 30 million people after he came to power in China. Not only have you doubled-down on your shocking defense of that evil, sick mass killer, but you have complained about people “demonizing” Joseph Stalin, arguably the second worst mass murderer in history.

Yawn, buddy, the 1950's called, they want their Bircher Propaganda back. And Joe McCarthy's Corpse, before you baptize it into the Mormon Faith.
 
The claim that the Japanese army killed 300,000 people in Nanking, China, in 1937 became widely accepted with the publication of Chinese author Iris Chang’s book The Rape of Nanking: The Forgotten Holocaust of World War II in 1997.

Before we discuss this matter, one thing must be made clear: Killing 20 civilians and/or POWs, much less thousands or hundreds of thousands, is a war crime, and those who take part in such crimes should be severely punished. There is no credible doubt that many of the Japanese soldiers who fought in Nanking committed war crimes and deserved to be punished. What is a “massacre”? I think the killing of “just” a few dozen innocent people constitutes a massacre or an atrocity. I believe that about 40,000 people—soldiers plus civilians—were wrongfully killed in Nanking, so I have no problem with the term Nanking Massacre to describe the crime.

With these stipulations understood, let us look at some facts regarding the 300,000 figure and Chang’s book. The points below do not address all the problems with the 300,000 figure, but they are a decent introduction to the problems with Chang’s case.

* To provide some context and perspective, even if one assumes that the 300,000 figure is correct, it should be pointed out that the Chinese Nationalists killed at least 400,000 people in Xuzhou in 1938. When the Nationalists were retreating from Xuzhou in June 1938, they purposely breached the southern dyke of the Yellow River in order to flood the Japanese’s path to Wuhan (even though the Japanese were not advancing), and in so doing they killed a bare minimum of 400,000 civilians (Peter Harmsen, Storm Clouds Over the Pacific, 1931-1941, Casemate Publishers, 2018, locs. 1895-1907). This is still the largest, deadliest act of environmental warfare in history.

Some scholars conclude that at least 500,000 innocent civilians were killed in the Yellow River flood, calling 500,000 “the lowest estimate” (Diana Lary, "Drowned Earth: The Strategic Breaching of the Yellow River Dyke, 1938," War in History. April 1, 2001, pp. 191–207, SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals). Why didn’t FDR condemn this atrocity? Why haven’t the Nationalist Chinese been subjected to the same kind of withering criticism that the Japanese have endured over Nanking? Why isn’t there a memorial at Xuzhou to honor the 400,000-plus victims of Chinese Nationalist barbarism?

* Nearly all the photos in Chang’s book had nothing to do with the Nanking Massacre. Chang either did not know this or deliberately used irrelevant photos to mislead her readers. The Japanese scholar Dr. Ikuhiko Hata, who is widely respected even by some of Chang’s defenders, has done the most to work to discredit the photos. Dr. Joshua Fogel notes,

Hata is largely responsible for discrediting virtually every one of the photographs that adorn the pages of Iris Chang’s book. (“Response to Herbert Bix,” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, August 9, 2003, p. 4, https://apjjf.org/-Joshua-A--Fogel/1637/article.pdf)​

* The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), aka the Tokyo Tribunal and the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal, spent considerable time on the massacre, and the prosecution offered four figures for the death toll: 100,000, 127,000, 200,000, and 300,000-340,000. The IMTFE seemed to settle on the figure of 200,000.

* In February 1938, just two months after the massacre, the Nationalists’ Central News Agency stated that the Japanese had killed 60,000 to 70,000 POWs in Nanking (Masahiro Yamamoto, Nanking: Anatomy of an Atrocity, Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, 2000, p. 110). At the same time, an official Nationalist spokesman said that 20,000 civilians had been killed in Nanking (Ikuhiko Hata, "The Nanking Atrocities: Fact and Fable," Japan Echo, August 1998, pp. 47-57).

Yet, four years later, Chiang Kaishek, the Nationalist leader, claimed that 200,000 people had been killed in Nanking (Bob Tadashi Wakabayashi, "The Messiness of Historical Reality," in Wakabayashi, editor, The Nanking Atrocity, 1937-38: Complicating the Picture, New York: Berghahn Books, 2008, pp. 3-5).

* Months after the massacre, the Chinese Communists claimed that the Japanese had killed 42,000 people in Nanking.

* The burial records do not support a figure anywhere close to 300,000:

The Red Swastika Society, a charitable organization that was operating with the approval of both the Japanese occupiers and the International Safety Zone Committee, reported having buried 40,000 people. Another charitable group, which was called the Tsun-shan-tang but whose history is not well known, said it buried 110,000 bodies. The sum of these figures is 150,000. The average daily figure for the Red Swastika was 320 burials, and the average for the Tsun-shan-tang was 75 through March 1938. But in a three-week period of April, the latter society claimed to have buried an additional 105,000 corpses, or a staggering 5,000 per day; this is close to an impossible feat. I surmise that this group operated as a "subcontractor" of the Red Swastika and judge its count to be unreliable. Because the two charity organizations probably overlapped in their responsibilities at some of the burial sites, at least some of the corpses are likely to have been counted twice. Also, burials would have included those of soldiers killed in action and civilians who died either of illness or from being caught in the crossfire. (Hata, “The Nanking Atrocities: Fact and Fable,” Japan Echo, online reprint, available at A Japanese Perspective on the Nanjing Massacre - China Politics Links)​

* At the Tokyo Tribunal, the defense tried to enter evidence that the 300,000 figure could not be correct because Nanking’s population was only about 200,000 in December 1937, when the massacre occurred. Defense attorney Michael Levin said,

Mr. Brooks calls my attention to the fact that in another portion of the affidavit is contained the statement that 300,000 were killed in Nanking, and as I understand it the total population of Nanking is only 200,000 [at the time of the massacre]. (IMTFE, Proceedings, Court Reporter’s Transcript, August 29, 1946, p. 4551)​

The presiding judge, William Webb, refused to allow the defense to enter evidence of Nanking’s population at the time of the massacre.

Six contemporaneous records from Nanking support the figure of 200,000 for the population of Nanking when the Japanese army entered the city, and none suggest a higher figure:

Between December 13 (the day the Japanese breached the gates of Nanking) and February 9, 1938, the International Committee issued 61 missives addressed and hand-delivered to the Japanese, American, British, and German embassies, on an almost daily basis. Most of them are of complaints about misconduct on the part of Japanese military personnel or requests to military authorities for improved public safety or food supplies. These 61 documents are contemporaneous records, and should certainly be considered primary sources. . . . They were compiled by Dr. Hsü Shuhsi, a professor at Beijing University, under the title Documents of the Nanking Safety Zone. They also appear in their entirety in What War Means, edited by Manchester Guardian correspondent Harold Timperley, and were submitted as evidence to the IMTFE. As shown in the photograph on p. 4, the version edited by Hsü Shuhsi bears the imprimatur of the Nationalist government: “Prepared under the auspices of the Council of International Affairs, Chunking.” It was published by the Shanghai firm Kelly & Walsh in 1939. Any treatment of the Nanking Incident that disregards these valuable resources is suspect.​

There are four references to the population of Nanking in late 1937 in Documents of the Nanking Safety Zone; all of them state that the total refugee population was 200,000. A report written by James Espy, vice-consul at the American Embassy, and dispatched to the United States, and another report written by John Rabe, chairman of the International Committee, also mention that Nanking’s population was 200,000. (Masaaki Tanaka, What Really Happened in Nanking, Tokyo: Sekai Shuppan, Inc., 2000, pp. 3-5, available at http://www.sdh-fact.com/CL02_1/7_S4.pdf)​

Clearly, the Japanese army could not have killed 300,000 people in a city with a population of 200,000.

* In June 1938, six months after the massacre, John Rabe, a German business leader in Nanking and the chief of the International Committee for the Nanking Safety Zone, provided a written estimate of how many people were killed in Nanking, and it was far below Chang’s number. Rabe is famous and honored for sheltering Chinese citizens during the sacking of Nanking and for protesting to Japanese officials about the conduct of Japanese troops. In his letter to the German government, Rabe said the following:

According to Chinese claims, 100,000 civilians were killed; this, however, is probably somewhat of an overstatement. We foreigners view the figure as having been from about 50,000 to 60,000.​

* Japanese army field reports on the fighting in Nanking seem to indicate the total number of soldiers and civilians killed in Nanking was about 40,000, according to Dr. Hata:

Both the veterans' group KaikÙsha and I accordingly decided to shift our attention to a search for the field reports of the units involved. We managed to find reports from 16 of the 56 battalions directly involved in the battle for Nanking--in other words, just under 30% of the total. These documents of course do not use the word "massacre." But they record, as part of their military operations, the "annihilation" of the remnants of the defeated army, including soldiers who had changed into civilian clothes (a common practice in the Nationalist Army), and the "execution of prisoners." One reason such records were kept was to serve as future reference for the granting of medals. If those keeping them had had any sense that these acts were illegal killings, they would naturally not have put them down in writing.​

Fujiwara Akira has calculated that these field reports record the killing of 12,921 Chinese soldiers who were either prisoners or remnants of the defeated army.6 The figure for the Japanese Army as a whole can only be estimated by extrapolation. This is not such a simple task, however. A full 60% of the 12,921 killings recorded were carried out in two incidents involving just two units, namely, the execution of prisoners by the Yamada Detachment and the extirpation of those thought to be soldiers in civilian clothing in the International Safety Zone conducted by the Seventh Infantry Regiment. It is hard to reach a consensus on how the actions of the recorded battalions should be extrapolated to the battalions whose field reports cannot be found.​

Using the existing reports and adding in various estimations, I have come up with a figure of 40,000 for the total of soldiers and civilians killed. . . . (A Japanese Perspective on the Nanjing Massacre - China Politics Links).​

* Some people later claimed that they saw “mountains of dead bodies” near the Guanghua Gate, but other eyewitnesses dispute this claim:

In The Battle of Nanking, Vol. 6, former Asahi Shinbun correspondent Kondo states that “there were corpses of both Chinese and Japanese military personnel outside Guanghua Gate, the result of the bloody battle fought there. But I don’t recall there being a lot of them. I saw no dead civilians.” Also, Futamura Jiro, a photographer who worked for Hochi Shinbun and later Mainichi Shinbun, states, “Together with the 47th Infantry Regiment, I climbed over the wall into the city, but I saw very few corpses there.” (Tanaka, What Really Happened in Nanking, p. 14, http://www.sdh-fact.com/CL02_1/7_S4.pdf)​

* Many Japanese soldiers who were in Nanking during and/or just after the battle emphatically denied that “hundreds of thousands” of people were killed there. Most of them admitted that war crimes occurred and that some of their fellow soldiers behaved in a disgraceful manner, but they insisted that the number of wrongful deaths was nothing close to 300,000. Of course, many people will immediately dismiss their claims as self-serving lies. But one of those soldiers, a staff officer with the 10th Army, happened to have taken a picture of the Guangha Gate soon after the Japanese army captured the city, and Theodore and Heroka Cook confirmed that it showed no piles of dead bodies (Theodore and Heroka Cook, Japan At War: An Oral History, New York: The New Press, 1992, pp. 35-37).

* Very few books on the Nanking Massacre mention what the Chinese did to the Japanese in Tongzhou, a few months before the Japanese army captured Nanking. On July 29, 1937, when all but a handful of the Japanese soldiers in the small city of Tongzhou left the city to aid in the attack on Beijing, the city’s Chinese auxiliary police force attacked. They killed most of the few Japanese soldiers in the city and 63% of the Japanese and Korean civilians in the city, including many women and children (223 out of 385) (locs. 1384-1398).

The Chinese hung some of the victims’ heads in wicker baskets from the parapets of the city’s gates. One family of six was thrown into a well with their hands tied together and pierced with steel wire. A pregnant Japanese woman was stabbed with a bayonet, and a child had his nose pierced crosswise with wire—amazingly, both survived but were scarred for life. “Avenge Tongzhou” became of rallying cry for Japanese soldiers as they headed south toward Nanking (Harmsen, Storm Clouds Over the Pacific, 1931-1941 (Casemate Publishers, locs. 1384-1398). This does not excuse the Japanese army’s conduct in Nanking, but it does provide context.

For those who want to do more research on the Nanking Massacre, I have found the following sources to be valuable, especially Dr. Hata’s research. I don’t agree with all these sources contain, but I think they present important information on the subject:

A Japanese Perspective on the Nanjing Massacre - China Politics Links
Dr. Hata’s long article “The Nanking Atrocities: Fact and Fable”

http://www.sdh-fact.com/CL02_1/7_S4.pdf
Tanaka’s book What Really Happened in Nanking: The Refutation of a Common Myth. I think some of Tanaka’s conclusions are wrong, but he presents a great deal of important evidence that contradicts the 300,000 figure and that casts serious doubt on Iris Chang’s reliability.

https://apjjf.org/-Joshua-A--Fogel/1637/article.pdf
Dr. Joshua Fogel’s reply to Herbert Bix on the Nanking Massacre. Dr. Fogel says the following about Dr. Hata: “Hata, no matter how much one may disagree with him, is an eminent scholar who has for over forty years been writing numerous excellent studies of Japan at war. He was certainly writing about the Nanjing Massacre before Iris Chang or Lee En-han were, and his book on the subject, first published in 1986 and translated into Chinese, is still an authority in the field.”

https://www.amazon.com/Nanking-Anatomy-Atrocity-Masahiro-Yamamoto/dp/0275969045&tag=ff0d01-20
Masahiro Yamamoto’s book Nanking: Anatomy of an Atrocity. This book includes chapters written by authors from both camps in the debate.

THE NANKING MASSACRE: Fact Versus Fiction | Society for the Dissemination of Historical Fact
Shūdō Higashinakano’s book The Nanking Massacre: Fact vs. Fiction. Dr. Higashinakano is a professor of history at Asia University. I think his death toll estimates are far too low, but he presents a lot of valid information that you won’t find in most books on the subject.

The outrages Japan committed in China in the 30s was exactly WHY America embargoed oil exports to Japan that led to Pearl Harbor...

So that's your response to all the evidence that you quoted from the OP?

Why didn't FDR respond in the way to all the Soviet outrages? Why didn't Truman respond in the same way when the Maoist Communists started killing millions of people? It's not like he didn't know what was going on. Serious scholars have documented that the Japanese army's outrages in China resulted in far fewer deaths than the tens of millions of deaths caused by the Chinese Communists, as I've documented elsewhere in this thread.

The Japanese started Americas involvement in WWII and led to the nuking of Hiroshima.

Again, that's your answer to all the evidence presented in this thread? Aside from some very mild, token measures, FDR looked the other way when it came to Soviet aggression in Asia and Eastern Europe, but, oh wow, when Japan occupied Indochina, especially southern Indochina, he used that as an excuse to impose sanctions that any other country would consider an act of war; he rejected all of Japan's quite reasonable peace offers; and then he falsely claimed that the attack on Pearl Harbor was "unprovoked." The difference between how he reacted to Soviet aggression and brutality and how he reacted to Japanese aggression and brutality was striking.
 
Last edited:
So that's your response to all the evidence that you quoted from the OP?

Why didn't FDR respond in the way to all the Soviet outrages? Why didn't Truman respond in the same way when the Maoist Communists started killing millions of people? It's not like he didn't know what was going on. Serious scholars have documented that the Japanese army's outrages in China resulted in far fewer deaths than the tens of millions of deaths caused by the Chinese Communists, as I've documented elsewhere in this thread.

They did. There was very little trade with the USSR after the Bolsheviks won. In fact, the USSR had to make alliances with Weimar and later Nazi Germany until Hitler turned on them. You see, the dirty little secret about the Axis is that it was tolerated by the West because they were more afraid of the Communists killing rich people. The Nazis only wanted to kill Jews, and you got to have your priorities straight if you are rich and run things.

Again, that's your answer to all the evidence presented in this thread? Aside from some very mild, token measures, FDR looked the other way when it came to Soviet aggression in Asia and Eastern Europe, "

Okay, let's look at that. Prior to WWII, the only thing the USSR took was Mongolia AFTER the White Russian Forces took it from the flailing Republic of China which had pretty much broken into pieces at that point. In Europe, even with the Ribbentrop Molotov pact, the USSR ONLY took territories that had formerly belonged to Russia. So what was FDR supposed to do, exactly?

The thing was, between 1919 and 1941, the west was hostile towards the USSR.

but, oh wow, when Japan occupied Indochina, especially southern Indochina, he used that as an excuse to impose sanctions that any other country would consider an act of war and rejected all of Japan's quite reasonable peace offers, and then he falsely claimed that the attack on Pearl Harbor was "unprovoked."

Again, Japan was taking things that didn't belong to it... I'm not sure why you think their position was "reasonable". There was a time when Russia owned Moldava or Latvia... there was never a time when Japan had any claim to Vietnam.
 
...
The thing was, between 1919 and 1941, the west was hostile towards the USSR. ....


The scumbag fdr wasn't.

Uh, yeah, actually, he kind of was.

The only thing he really did before 1941 was actually recognize the USSR as the legitimate government of Russia, and the goal there was to see if they could get back some of the money the US had loaned the Tsar.
 
I wonder what Iris Chang thought about Chairman Mao's ten year cultural revolution (1966-1976) that killed ten times more than the Japanese did. Maybe Ms. Chang was one of the victims.

Chang lived in the US, and had no first hand info for her works of fiction.
 
Right. So immediately after that, they decided this war with China was silly and negotiated a fair and just peace..

Um. No? They continued their invasion of China until 1945 and then attacked the United States when they objected to the whole thing?

Wrong.
The US had orchestrated a takeover of China by the US, years before the war started between Chinese factions.
And the Japanese had the Emperor of China on their side.
The US was supporting Chaing Kai Shek, who was a military dictator and very unpopular.
 
Chang lived in the US, and had no first hand info for her works of fiction.

BY that logic, no one can write a book about history unless they experienced it first hand...

Are you always this stupid or do you take special pills?

Wrong.
The US had orchestrated a takeover of China by the US, years before the war started between Chinese factions.
And the Japanese had the Emperor of China on their side.
The US was supporting Chaing Kai Shek, who was a military dictator and very unpopular.

Uh, nobody respected the gay puppet Emperor of China.

What the Japanese did to China was unacceptable.
 
Excuse me, Japan in the 30s was an imperialist state. They invaded China and murdered millions to feed their imperialist ambitions in Manchuria. America, FDR tried to stop that with a boycott and instead we got Pearl Harbor.

However, if you go back, Japan was NOT normally imperialist at all, but was frightened and intimidated into it by the visit by Admiral Perry, who spend a lot of time demonstrating our superior ship cannons.

The Allies then not only snubbed the Japanese during WWI, but also the Treaty of 5-5-2 was a humiliating act of war.

The boycotts the US imposed were not really "boycotts" at all, but illegal embargos of iron, oil, coal, food, etc., from Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, etc.

So the reality is that the US was the primary and deliberate cause of WWII.
The Japanese actually were the victims.

Think about it for a second even, what the heck is the US doing in Pearl Habor at all?
 
Or that the Jap bastards slaughtered those people in the safe zone, outside the safe zone, in the surrounding countryside and anywhere else they found them. Which is pretty much what they did.

Wrong.
That is the Iris Chang version, which has no relationship to reality.
For example, in her book, "The Rape of Nanking", she posts an article from a Japanese newspaper, and claims it is about a contest over who could behead the most POWs with a sword.
When you actually read the Japanese script however, it says that the Japanese were disgusted by firearms, and preferred to fight with a sword instead of a gun, because it was more honorable.
And the contest was about how many enemy soldiers they killed in battle, not execute as POWs.
So basically, Iris Chang had no idea at all what really happened, and just lied.
 
BY that logic, no one can write a book about history unless they experienced it first hand...

Are you always this stupid or do you take special pills?



Uh, nobody respected the gay puppet Emperor of China.

What the Japanese did to China was unacceptable.

That is silly, Iris Chang has ZERO knowledge of anything going on in China at the time.
She made it all up, and deliberately lied.

What Japan did to China was unacceptable, but what the US, England, etc., was doing was even worse.
 
Iris Chang was a respected scholar... you, not so much.



Nope, I don't waste my time on bullshit Bircher Propaganda... To hear you guys tell it, there would be no Russians left at all Because Stalin supposedly killed all of them.



I wasn't talking about Korea or Taiwan... I was talking about the Rape of Nanking, which is documented.

I'll criticize America when it deserves to be criticized, but the Japanese were real bastards in their wars in Asia, which is why no one really trusts them today, 70 years later.
When you say “no one” trusts the Japanese you are really talking about libs

Progressives, socialists, marxists and the usual America haters see Japan as an ally of the US and that makes them Enemy #2 after America itself
 
We really had no idea how bad the Holocaust was, either, until after the war was over.

Wrong again.
While 6 million deaths of Jews is incredible, once you realize the WWII death toll was over 50 million, and mostly civilians, then it is not significant any more.
You just are not putting anything into perspective.
 
what's baffling to me is that anyone would come on here and try to claim that WAR CRIMINALS got a raw deal when they were executed for things like Nanking and Bataan, and even call those men 'Honorable" as you did.

This is up there with the Neo-Nazis who deny the Holocaust.

Then Again, you belong to a fucked up cult started by a two-bit con-man who was fucking teenage girls by convincing their parents they'd get to rule their own planets in the afterlife. A great day in history was when the fine people of my state did this.

View attachment 309446



Yawn, buddy, the 1950's called, they want their Bircher Propaganda back. And Joe McCarthy's Corpse, before you baptize it into the Mormon Faith.

That is totally ignorant.
What actually happened at Nanking is that tens of thousands of retreating Khang Kai Shek troops tried to blend into the civilian population, and continued to shoot Japanese, instead of honorably surrendering.
Making Nanking into an insurgency, and NOT the massacre of innocents claimed by liars like Iris Chang.

And while I do not like religions or have any connection to Mormons, they are one of the most honorable of the religions anyone could pick.
The claim Joseph Smith was rapping teens likely is a lie, as Mormons are more sexually repressed than any other religion I know of.
Polygamy is not underage sex, but more than one wife, exactly as the Bible describes, and common in Judaism until recently.
 
That is totally ignorant.
What actually happened at Nanking is that tens of thousands of retreating Khang Kai Shek troops tried to blend into the civilian population, and continued to shoot Japanese, instead of honorably surrendering.
Making Nanking into an insurgency, and NOT the massacre of innocents claimed by liars like Iris Chang.

And while I do not like religions or have any connection to Mormons, they are one of the most honorable of the religions anyone could pick.
The claim Joseph Smith was rapping teens likely is a lie, as Mormons are more sexually repressed than any other religion I know of.
Polygamy is not underage sex, but more than one wife, exactly as the Bible describes, and common in Judaism until recently.
That is a bald faced lie.

What happened at Nanking wass that no Chinese troops were present and ther Japanese merely raped and slaughtered innocent civilians.

It was noty an insurgency and you manufactured your claim out of thin air as you always do you scummy lying sack of trash
 
When you say “no one” trusts the Japanese you are really talking about libs

Progressives, socialists, marxists and the usual America haters see Japan as an ally of the US and that makes them Enemy #2 after America itself

This is true.
 

Forum List

Back
Top