Saturday, July 28, 2012

ATTN: Mark Kappelhoff and Eric Holder

Let's recap a point or two with respect to the Department of Justice of the United States of America.

I submitted a complaint detailing illegal activities of officers of the government of the USA--CIA officers--violating the laws of the USA by basically carrying out espionage activities against an American citizen (thereby violating his civil rights and other rights) whose presence they found inconvenient to their unlawful covert mission. 

The offending officers are being removed one-at-a-time, as I expose them when another one surfaces anew to try and subvert my life here.

In the DOJ complaint, I demanded that a particularly flawed statute in the legal code--the Intelligence Identities Protection Act--which had been adapted in 1982 and was subsequently revised to require mandatory sentencing for offenders in recent years at the impetus of a former CIA officer serving in congress (who appears in one of Michael Moore's films and was subsequently head of the CIA under none other than GW Bush) be addressed as such (i.e., flawed), be redressed.  That was simply because its scope was unclear, and it was restraining me from posting information about the CIA officers that were harassing me. 

Here is a little about that law, its enforcement, or not, as the case may be.

Porter Goss, that's the guy made famous by Michael Moore. And to follow up his act pushing through the following amendment in the congress:


H.AMDT.87 (A002) 
Sponsor: 
Rep Sweeney, John E. [NY-22] (offered 5/13/1999)
AMENDMENT DESCRIPTION:
Amendment increases the criminal penalty for individuals who expose covert agents and expands the Intelligence Identities Protection Act to protect the identities of former agents as well. As amended by the Goss amendment (A003) the mandatory sentencing requirements were strengthened.
AMENDMENT PURPOSE:
An amendment numbered 10 and printed in the Congressional Record to protect the identities of present or retired covert agents and impose criminal penalties on those who willfully disclose these identities.


Mr. Goss, acting in his capacity as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee refused to open a congressional committee investigation into the Bush administration disclosure of CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA officer. And she and her husband would seem to have been gathering intelligence that negated the fabricated "threat construction" claims related to WMB that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq, but this is old news... 

It is should be pointed out, however, that Goss has also been exposed as a member of a Yale secret society, called "Book and Snake", which included Les Aspin (Secretary of Defense under Clinton for one year) in the same senior class. It seems that there are a series of revolving doors offering access to these secret society types in American government, and in Goss's case, it is easy to examine the ways in which he attempted to use the power of his office in the congress to subvert congressional oversight of the CIA while shielding the CIA from media exposure. And on the other hand, when appointed as head of the CIA he was tied to congressional representatives connected to the defense industry that lost their seats in weapons procurement scandals.

Apparently they continue to use it as a loophole through which to circumvent the both laws prohibiting the CIA from interfering with the lives of American citizens residing in countries outside the USA, and the laws to which "federal law enforcement officials" are subject. As we have seen in the response from the DOJ, the officers of the CIA are not technically regarded as "federal law enforcement officials. That is obvious, however, because they do not have "police powers" under the National Security Act. 

So why would the DOJ procrastinate in the face of a serious complaint detailing multiple incidents of misconduct by CIA officers instead of directing me to file the complaint with another agency, such as the Office of the Inspector General at the Central Intelligence Agency?


The response I received demonstrates a clear relationship of collusion and complicity on the part of the DOJ with the CIA.  Rather than investigating the CIA, the DOJ has put me off for about a year and then misrepresented my complaint or simply didn't even address the specifics.

At any rate, I'm going to do everything I can to expose this high-level coverup, which is exactly what it is an attempt to do.



CIA, MI6, yakuza et al. trying to colonize Kyoto???

a thought, to be continued... but for the time being, i'll say that


at this point it seems they have embarked on a strategy of trying to co-opt me as an excuse to increase the presence of the foreign security establishment, etc. ('if you can't beat 'em join 'em?')

but once the yakuza have been eliminated, there will be no need for a presence of the foreign security establishment. 

perhaps that presents the CIA with a bit of a strategic conundrum? 

that is to say, "how do we infiltrate and covertly colonize other countries when there is no internal enemy or disequilibrium to justify our presence?"

hmmm

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Eisenhower, Philip of France, Truman: War & Economics; Religion & Economics; Religion & War

This is a preliminary post outlining a series of historically important actors and the lessons to be learned from what they have bequeathed to us through their acts, both positive and negative. It is a complex historical study that I will fill out and expand as I have time. Since I have broached the topic of the Freemasons and secret societies, and asserted that they have a pernicious influence on democracy and open society, this is a historical study in that it aims to address aspects of that assertion with reference to concrete historical actors and events. 



Dwight Eisenhower was a battle tested general that eventually became president who, though a religious man himself, perhaps in light of the strife he had seen brought about by those espousing dogma in the form of particularistic ideologies with a nationalist hue, such as Nazism, issued a famous warning to beware of the "military industrial complex" in his farewell address as president.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ike.htm.


In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.



In light of the fact that Eisenhower lived during a period when communism had been swept to power in both the Russia and China, it can be presumed that to a certain degree his repeated references to prayer and God in part represented an appeal to a universal and benevolent force that could help unite people to overcome differences that separated them. It can be seen as a message to Americans that even though the communists are avowed atheists, they are in fact the same as us in respect of this universality, and should not be excluded from democratic dialog and processes on the basis of an espoused ideology. 



Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.


His message is clearly highly nuanced and humanistic, not dogmatic. He values intellectual endeavor and individual effort and achievement, and counterposes that to a sort of bureaucratization of the halls of intellectual inquiry and research. 


Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity.

Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.


You and I – my fellow citizens – need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nations' great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.


And with regard to the Freemasons, Eisenhower had long been tasked with making up for mistakes by Truman's megalomaniac commander MacArthur from the time of WWII. So there is no question that he was familiar with that aspect of the American political environment. MacArthur had apparently been the head of the same Freemason lodge as Truman had, in Missouri.



Philip IV of France was a king that found himself caught between the countermanding claims of differerent forces during a transitional period toward the end of the Crusades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_the_fair


From Wikipedia:

He relied, more than any of his predecessors, on a professional bureaucracy of legalists...His reign marks the French transition from a charismatic monarchy – which could all but collapse in an incompetent reign – to a bureaucratic kingdom, a move, under a certain historical reading, towards modernity.


Philip was hugely in debt to the Knights Templar, a monastic military order that had been acting as bankers for some two hundred years. As the popularity of the Crusades had decreased, support for the Order had waned, and Philip used a disgruntled complaint against the Order as an excuse to disband the entire organization, so as to free himself from his debts.


http://www.amazon.com/The-Trial-Templars-Malcolm-Barber/dp/0521856396

Reader's comments from reviews of the above book:

The Templars have always fascinated me, an order founded on a vow of poverty that rose to become one of the richest and most powerful organisations of their time, a religious order, yet it was politics and money that sealed their fate and brought about their destruction.

Malcolm Barber examines the trial and supression of the Poor Knights of Christ of the Temple of Solomon, also known as the Knights Templars, as the trial unfolded in France and other countries. The account of the positional jockeying between the French King Philip IV and Pope Clement V is fascinating.



Harry Truman was a high-ranking Freemason part of a political machine out of the Midwest who had been picked as a surprise choice of running mate by FDR in his reelection bid.

http://www.amazon.com/Counsel-President-Richard-Holbrooke/dp/0385423985/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343365086&sr=8-1&keywords=clark+clifford

http://www.amazon.com/Friends-High-Places-Clark-Clifford/dp/0316291625/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1343365086&sr=8-3&keywords=clark+clifford



Law suit against Kyoto mayor, and confluence of DoJ letter, Bray, and Dalsky


I have been waiting to discuss the lawsuit against the mayor because it is a somewhat involved matter and requires time to preset adequately. So, for the time being, I’ll just elaborate on the possibility of an indirect relationship between the mayor and the CIA, via their common tool of the burakumin groups associated with yakuza organized crime groups.

I have already discussed connections between CIA officers and Koreans and people of burakumin descent that are members (or affiliates) of yakuza crime groups. With respect to the burakumin in Kyoto, Dan Douglass and Preston Houser have been discussed in conjunction with the CIA staffed (and student populated?) “Global College”, in addition to Glenn Paquette and his student recruits from Kyoto University. Elsewhere, there is the connection between JapanToday and the former Osaka governor turned mayor, Toru Hashimoto, with respect to whom they were not only giving some favorable press, but deleting critical comments by the readership, largely composed of foreign residents.

The current mayor of Kyoto was the head of the department of education before being elected mayor, in a pattern that repeats that of his predecessor. He has been sued twice for actions while in the post of head of the board of education. The largest of the two suits Kadokawa has been ordered to repay 72 million yen for illicitly paying out public funds in the form of research grants that were used by favored personnel connected to the board of education for overseas trips and the like. In another case, he was one of the officials responsible for conducting invalid elections for officials that were undemocratic, etc., and illicitly paying to a burakumin support organization 800 million yen of public funds for travel of board of education board personnel to hot springs resorts, of which it seems he has been ordered to repay 1.17 million yen (from the somewhat vague Wikipedia description).

These pages are in Japanese, but eventually I will post details in English, once I have time to translate portions of a book that has been published in relation to this topic.
A somewhat more detailed account:

At any rate, he was also the head of the department of education at a time when illegal criteria for use in the selection process for determining entrance into nursery schools were implemented, while at the same time, a law suit similar to the one I have filed was being conducted in the city of Higashi Osaka, which the city lost resoundingly, and didn’t even bother to appeal.

This is in Japanese (日本語のサイト), but here is an analysis of that case:
東大阪市保育所入所保留処分国家賠償請求事件について

The school in our neighborhood which I had to sue to get us into is attended by the children of several other foreign residents, with Dave Dalsky’s daughter attending once a week on a part time attendance program they have.

To cut to the chase, although I had moved into the apartment a year ago, I had never seen Dave and his daughter at the riverside until about 2 months ago. Our son started attending the nursery school in April, about 4 month ago.

The letter that finally arrived from the DoJ, after more than eight months had passed since initiated the complaint, arrived in the second week of May.

Although I didn’t make much of it until reflecting on the subsequent bizarre behavior of Dalsky, there is a phrase in the letter that makes it sound like my complaint was trifling and bordering on irrational. That phrase reads,
“You further state that the CIA and their agents have infringed your rights and used propaganda against your blog.”

First, the letter does mention that I sent a substantial number of pages of faxes (76 on one occasion), without mentioning that I subsequently doubled that amount in emails sent to an address for the Special Litigation Department of the Criminal Division of the DoJ that the paralegal named K. Callahan eventual provided me, the letter is dismissive and doesn’t address the main complaints, or mention any actions that have been taken against the perpetrators, such as Glenn Paquette, who had been “retired” from the university, for example. Bear in mind that not only was Glenn Paquette retired from Kyoto University, but from academia in general, as he had also been teaching at Brown University and University of N.C. Chapel Hill, and now he has a company in Minnesota called, Paquette Research & Language:

Sasha Peterka is also no longer connected to academia, apparently, and has deleted his facebook page, etc.

At any rate, I had been mulling this scenario over when Dalsky appears on the scene, thinking maybe this was a positive sign. However, he evinced the same type of subterfuge of hostility in the form of untoward comments of a subtle psychologically caustic nature, while not seeming to know that I had been causing certain CIA officers substantial problems, terminal problems, at least as far as their careers in academia were concerned. So, as I mentioned, after I broached the issue of intelligence officers and a case pending with the DoJ, he dropped out of site for a couple of weeks.

When he reappeared, as I have described in an earlier entry, he was acting somewhat disturbed, and claimed that he was suffering from bipolar disease, offering to share his medications—two or three different types—eventually asking that I return them because they were expensive at 500 yen apiece. He seems to have been seeking to gain my sympathy for his being ill, and for his not having any money because his wife was in charge of the funds and they were on a tight budget.

Next, the story of his apparent breakdown at the university, where he says he pulled a fire alarm because he feared that the Chinese students were spying on him. That story was told somewhere in the flow of conversation where I had mentioned intelligence operatives again, just to keep him aware of the fact that I was only listening to his performance for the sake of hearing him out, basically.

From there, however, he seemed to be implying that I might be delusional, like him (and didn’t I want to seek treatment or try some of his medication, etc.), after responding that the Chinese student weren’t really spying on him in response to my question as to why he thought that the Chinese students would want to spy on him.

That is the point that I want to focus on here in conjunction with the appearance of Eric Bray, and the context of the ensuing court date for the law suit that enabled me to gain admittance in the first place.

First, why would an unaccomplished English teacher like Eric Bray (BA in psychology from UC Santa Cruz) try to give me his loser sob story about his failed marriage and disappointing son to convince me in a psychologically manipulative way that I didn’t really want to send my children to the schools in the neighborhood, even though there has been a public television documentary made about them.

Second, after I receive a letter from the DoJ which basically attempts not only to deny the merit of my claims, but insinuates that I have made superfluous and perhaps irrational claims about the CIA “using propaganda against my blog”, an individual with a PhD in psychology appears and starts trying to manipulate me psychologically, eventually trying to convince me that the CIA is not spying on me, while he himself is almost certainly an officer in the CIA. 

Let me rephrase that: 
if, as I suspect, Dave Dalsky is a CIA officer, 
the scenario is accordingly one characterized by the fact that
a CIA officer was trying to convince me that I was delusional in asserting that the CIA had been harassing me, intruding and interfering with my life, spying on me in the form of hacking my computer, etc.

In short, that is a form of 
psychological warfare
of a very disturbing sort.

Moreover, it is a demonstration of the same type of hyper duplicitous disposition based on a subterfuge of hostility that spurred me to tell Glenn Paquette that I would kill him, twice. 

These people either have an extremely inflated opinion of themselves and their abilities, or they think that I am psychologically weak and susceptible to such ploys.

What is most disturbing, of course, is the apparent complicity of the DoJ in this ploy, in the form of the ludicrous response that they have supplied. I have already posted several pages of the documents that I have faxed to them, and will be posting more in the near future. 

The DoJ response amounts to an attempt to provide further cover to the CIA, not to redress illegal activity on the part of its officers.

Well, I will be reporting the actions of Mr. Dalsky to the Kyoto police, and requesting that they investigate, particularly with respect to his attempt to provide me with anti-psychotic medications. That in itself is probably a felony here, but if he is in fact suffering from bipolar disease, maybe that will be taken into consideration. 

And that leads to the conclusion that, if you can fake it, mental health issues might provide a modicum of cover for an intelligence operative. 



Tuesday, July 24, 2012

An email I sent to Dave Dalsky, receiving no reply

I may have mentioned that David Dalsky expressed an unwillingness to exchange email addresses, which, under the circumstances, is something I assume is a sign of an "unfriendly" element. By that I mean intelligence operatives that are attempting to shield themselves from communicating with me in writing, leaving a record of text that I can subsequently use against them vis-a-vis the authorities or a court of law. I have submitted email communications with CIA officers such as Glenn Paquette, Anthony Blackman, Sasha Peterka, and on this blog I've even posted an exchange with Jamie Roughan.

Anyway, the following is a message I sent to David Dalsky--at the email address posted on the Kyoto University website--after one of a number of recent conversations along the banks of the Kamogawa river. He wasn't aware that I had looked up his information on the Kyoto University website, unless the people I'd informed at the American consulate let him know that I'd reported him and indicated a link in the message I sent to the consulate. 

In any case, he didn't respond to the message for several days, and without further ado, I decided to post an account of my encounters with this individual.

Had he responded to the email, it may have shown that a degree of openness and non-hostile intentions had evolved, but alas, no response.

The email mentions Jews and Israelis as there have been several incidents involving American and British Jews that I have reported to the consulate in the past, and there is a connection between Freemasonry and Judaism, which I will examine in a separate post. There is connection between Freemasons and the yakuza, and there used to be a readily apparent connection between Israelis and the yakuza on the streets of Kyoto (briefly described in the email). In all fairness, there is a well-known connection between Iranians and the yakuza, too. 

I've avoided posting an entry on "The Jewish Connection", for example, as I've done with respect to the "Irish Connection", but there are thematic elements in common that are in need of explication, something I will get around to. There's always a bit of a chilling effect when one says anything critical about the "Jewish Sate" of Israel, for example, so I've been holding off on posting the substantial amount of material about Israeli organized crime collaboration with the yakuza and connections I've noticed to the "intelligence community" here, along with the victim-hood and entitlement conjunction that seems to inform a psychological dimension of their ideology. Furthermore, the problem with the Israelis and Jews I'd encountered in Kyoto ceased several years ago, and there have been more pressing matters at hand. 

At any rate, the three books relating to Japan's preeminent early statesman, scholar and proponent of Buddhism all involve bigoted anti-Buddhist slants of one sort or another, some of which I've briefly analyzed in previous posts. The point to here is that there is a persistent emphasis on exploiting religion demonstrated by the vast majority of the intelligence operatives, and it shares a generally anti-Buddhist character that parallels that of the authors of the books in question. 

With regard to the intelligence operatives, I take that to signify that either they are Freemasons, or that exploiting religion is a core component of the CIA/MI6 modus operandi.

In this regard, the connection of Harry Truman, the 33-degree Freemason that betrayed his Secretary of State, George Marshall, by unilaterally recognizing a "Jewish State of Israel", thereby short-circuiting the United Nations process, which was being coordinated for the USA by Marshall, on the disposition of the former British territory of Palestine, is a topic of the utmost importance. That is a complicated and involved story, but represents a watershed moment in the history of the United States, as from that point onward, a tremendous amount of American resources have been spent on propping up a state with theocratic tendencies, and restarting the type of hostilities between Christians and Muslims that hadn't been seen since the days of the Knights Templar and the Crusades.




Please excuse the sudden intrusion via email.

My mind is a little blunted at present due to whatever physical ailment I have, which seems to be affecting my brain a little, so your big question about religion wasn’t processed as quickly as it might otherwise have been.

Anyway, you asked me if I was religious, and I thought I should write this out while it was on my mind. I certainly can’t say that I am religious compared to some people—like Muslims that pray five times a day—though I guess I’m more religious than others. I am not necessarily against religion per se. On the other hand, with respect to the religion in which I am currently most interested—Mahayana Buddhism--one important teaching relates to the accommodation of the thoughts of others, including religious beliefs. In that manner, Buddhism is a fairly open religion, and what is sometimes referred to as a “doctrine of accommodation” is an aspect of Buddhism that contributed to the development of a syncretic belief system in Japan. There is, perhaps, a built-in recognition (some might call it an insight) of the anthropological origins of religion, in that doctrine. Maybe that is an aspect in which I find resonance.

At any rate, you seem to show a little aversion to my talking critically about the incomprehensible publishing of highly flawed research by Americans that are putting out a bigoted agenda against Buddhism, sometimes anti-Japan overall. Anyway, here is a link to the now retired professor whose book I recommended to you.
Maybe I’m stereotyping, but it seems likely to me that he is Jewish. I’ve met many Jews in academia. As I mentioned though, he is a normal scholar whose research does not reflect a warped epistemology or attempt to manipulate the reader by withholding information, etc. His work has opened up the horizon or students of the relevant subject matter, and in a manner that critically examines the misuse of superstition and lies by what was in effect a politically powerful priest caste family against a scholar. That is also noteworthy, because the pseudo-scholars I am trashing would seem intent on fashioning themselves as a sort of priest caste.

Anyway, the point is that religious bias probably has no place in scholarship. That is not to say that research supporting or elaborating a certain belief system is not valid. That is not the type of content that I am addressing with respect to the three individuals connected to Columbia University. And I have already addressed some similar problems in the work of a PhD from Oxford, so there is a pattern. That guy is a British MI6 agent, who recently published a book on Christians in Japanese history. His PhD is in Slavic studies, however, so it is little wonder that his knowledge of Japan is limited.

Incidentally, there used to be a problem in Kyoto with transient Israelis selling cheap jewelry, etc., on the streets, working through an Israeli guy that was connected to the yakuza. They were eventually shut down about 6-7 years ago. I don’t know if you had arrived in Kyoto before they were already gone. They had basically colonized the walkways, glad to see them gone.

By the way, here is another link, to the talk by the other author, Robert Whiting on the yakuza, the CIA, etc.

The historical connection between the CIA and the yakuza / right wing nationalists is also not something that I have imagined. 



  

Sunday, July 22, 2012

Who is David Dalsky (aka Dave Dalsky)? Associate professor at Kyoto University

Dave Dalsky is the most recent American to approach me and make untoward, basically hostile comments with a psychological warfare slant to them. That immediately gives rise to the suspicion that he is an officer in the CIA, probably connected to the network I've been breaking down.

David Dalsky has a BA in Psychology and PhD in social psychology. He's fairly well armed for psychological warfare.

I have reported him to the Osaka Consulate as yet another suspected CIA officer that has approach me and behaved in an untoward manner. That did modify his behavior; however, seeing as the some other aspects of the scenario remain the same, as others deteriorate further, it's time to go public with this account.

Update
http://interculturallab.weebly.com/about-the-professor.html (old and obsolete, and even the archived page is gone:https://web.archive.org/web/20170515105103/http://interculturallab.weebly.com/about-the-professor.html)
This is the current set of pages (as of July 2019):https://www.h.kyoto-u.ac.jp/en_f/faculty_f/162_dalsky_d_0/ https://www.interculturallab.com/david-dalsky-phd.htmlhttps://www.interculturallab.com/lab-members.htmlhttps://kyouindb.iimc.kyoto-u.ac.jp/j/oB2hM
I will have to post some archived material eventually...


I first encountered Dave at the riverside where I practice the shakuhachi and take my son to play. He was there with his daughter. I had come down with a particularly virulent cold, so wasn't playing the shakuhachi that day, just taking a walk to get some air and sunshine, enjoy the splendid nature that we are privileged to have so close to our home.

I mentioned to Dave that I was ill and didn't want to shake hands because had just been to the doctor and received two type of antibiotics, to which he responded with an comment to the effect that:
"oh, so it's curable."  
The comment was delivered in a manner such as to suggest that maybe it wouldn't be a curable common respiratory infection, but a terminal illness. Needless to say, it was an entirely untoward comment to make to someone you have just met for the first time and is very ill. I was immediately taken aback and put on my guard. I had been somewhat hopeful that his presence would either be simply that of a normal resident, or maybe even a more positive sign from the government of the United States of America.

Instead, he was another hostile CIA officer, with daughter in tow.

The next time I saw Dave was at the nursery school I had to sue the city in order to gain admission. Dave's daughter was only granted a one-day a week attendance at the school because it is crowded, and it seemed in order that I mention that I had been forced by circumstances to sue the city of Kyoto to get my son into the nursery school. 

That discussion worked its way around to the topic of history and Kyoto, I mentioned Marius Jansen's book on the Meiji Ishin, and offered to send David Dalsky and another guy whose daughter goes to the same nursery school a link. In another response--this time from both individuals--that seemed rather unusual, neither of them wanted to exchange email addresses. In retrospect, there are two possible reasons I can think of for that, which I will go into further below.

In conjunction with the discussion of the suit--and the mayor of the city's previous loss of two civil suits for illicitly supplying city funds to two organizations affiliated with organized crime groups (with which members of the CIA are colluding), I mentioned that I had been having problems with intelligence operatives that I had been compelled to report to the American Consulate and Department of Justice.  

He seemed to be caught off-guard when I mentioned intelligence operatives and the CIA, and I didn't see him again for a few weeks after that.


When he did show up, again along the banks of the Kamogawa river, his disposition was of a noticeably altered state, and after talking for a few minutes, during which he somehow issue of the or two the conversation shifted to Kyoto University and some problems he addressed relating a mental disorder with which he claimed to be afflicted; that is to say, he said that he was suffering from bipolar disorder. I offered my sympathies, and he started talking about his medications, saying that they helped take the edge off. He offered the medications to me, two or three different types, saying that they helped take the edge off. I responded that I needed my edge, and politely declined, but accepted a few pills from him when he insisted, saying that I would look them up on the Internet to see what they were. 

The conversation then turned to an episode that he described having at Kyoto University, where he mentioned that the name of an intramural sports team was "the gangsters" or something like that, and claimed that he had once pulled a fire alarm at school because he thought that the Chinese students in the next room were spying on him. He presented the story in a convincing manner, emoting a palpable degree of instability and edge, and I was concerned for a moment or two as to whether I was going to have to defend myself from a dangerously delusional individual, but also thought in the back of my mind that he was engaged in some sort of performance. 

I asked him why the Chinese students would want to be spying on him. He evinced a  sort of change of expression of recognition, saying, "that's just it, they weren't", I was delusional, or something to that effect. 

I then mentioned that there certainly were problems at Kyoto University, and described my experience in dealing with one Glenn Paquette, former associate professor of physics at Kyoto University in some detail. I explained how Mr. Paquette had been recruiting students with Burakumin and Korean backgrounds to work as agents for the CIA and had been deploying them against me in the Starbucks. 

At this point, Mr. Dalsky said something to insinuate that when I talked about the CIA and what not he thought that maybe I was demonstrating that I was out of touch with reality. I responded that I was certainly not delusional, and repeated that I had to resort to filing a complaint with the DOJ to have Mr. Paquette removed. 

Mr. Dalksy seemed to get reflective for a moment, and eventually asked that I return his medications, because they were expensive, and that his wife didn't give him much pocket money since they had bought a condominium. 

He then emphasized that he was "all in, man".

I don't know what to think about this scenario, but the likelihood that Dalsky was being deployed to use his expertise in psychology to make me think I was delusional because I thought that the CIA was intruding in my life and causing me tremendous grief and actual loss and damages is enough to motivate me to post this entry on the blog, and add Mr. David Dalsky to the list of CIA officers that have attempted to interfere with life here in Kyoto.

So, this post is a performative speech act of a sort, constituting, along with the several emails I've sent to the Osaka Consulate and the Special Litigation section of the Criminal Division of the DOJ an addition to the complaint that the DOJ has already attempted to brush under the rug, so to speak. 

The DOJ will face a civil complaint in relation to this issue, with the appearances of Mr. Eric Bray and Mr. David Dalsky--both with degrees in psychology--after the fact of the complaint and the issuance of the letter denying the complaint amounting to an egregious violation of the laws of the United States of America with the complicity of a negligent Department of Justice.

    


Saturday, July 21, 2012

Response from USA Department of Justice, dated May 8, 2012

This response is kind of disturbing, in that it does not mention, let alone answer, any of the substantive claims against individual CIA officers that I have made, in detail.

It mentions the gray media front company claim, but somewhat distorts my statements in relation to that, and makes an outlandish remark of a claim I am supposed to have made about "propaganda" against my blog. It sounds rather childish and trifling, as if they are trying to belittle the complaints of substance I have made.

Aside from that, it is an outright fabrication, and its inclusion here is curious, to say the least. Note that it is only recently that I have started opening this blog up to a wider community. For the first couple of years I only informed a couple of people that I was writing it, outside of the people at the American consulate (i.e., the CIA) and the Department of Justice. 

Perhaps the people at the DOJ are insinuating that my complaint was incoherent.

One implicit point in the letter is interesting, however, in that its authors have indirectly asserted that CIA officers are not "federal law enforcement officials". That may be a loophole they are trying to exploit; however, I believe that there are express provisions in the legal statutes that prohibit CIA officers from interfering in the lives of American citizens living abroad. The do not have "police powers" over American citizens overseas, for example.


At any rate, they do mention the many pages of emails and statements that I faxed them, and I will have to start posting more of those on this blog while I take steps to initiate a civil action against the Department of Justice, first of all, as their assertion that CIA officers do not fall under the category of federal law enforcement officers, while ignoring the transgressions against me that should otherwise be prevented under the National Security Act (?) could pose a constitutional question, meaning a question for the Supreme Court to resolve. Maybe not, I'm not an attorney, but there is no question that a conspiratorial cover up involving the DOJ has been carried out. 


Here is the letter.




Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Recent talk by Robert Whiting on post WWII US-Japan ties, etc.

For those of you not familiar with this author's book on aspects of post WWII history of Japan related to organized crime, politics, and the American security establishment, here is a readily accessible introduction. 




They took down the entire website! Bastards....Fortunately, some of it was archived, including this video:

https://web.archive.org/web/20161007060017/http://library.fora.tv/2012/02/16/Tokyo_Underworld_2012_An_Evening_with_Robert_Whiting/


Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Who is Sasha Peterka?


He is a (former?) CIA officer,first and foremost, if I'm correct in assuming that he has been permanently decommissioned after I reported his actions against me to the USA DoJ. Secondly, for what its worth, I believe that he is a member of the Freemasons. One of a couple of people in that category that I've written of here.

Sasha Peterka is someone that I happened to meet in philosophy classes and cafes at UC Berkeley.

Sasha Peterka was apparently deployed by the CIA on a mission attempting to have me leave Kyoto and return to Tokyo. It should be mentioned that he was engaged in this activity while pursuing graduate studies-a PhD in math-at the University of California, Berkeley.

Sasha appeared out of of nowhere one day when I was visiting the USA in Berkeley. We exchanged email addresses, and I eventually put him up when he visited Kyoto.

He visited a number of times, staying at hotels when my place became to crowded. He befriended the American expat crowd at the Starbucks, including Glenn Paquette. Maybe Sasha had his eye on a position at Kyoto University, too.

He eventually arranged a meeting between myself and some friends of his in Tokyo working for Goldman Sachs. A friend of his named John--formerly an architect who had worked in Hong Kong--was there working on buying up real estate investment properties.

Mr. Peterka apparently thought that the allure of an inflated paycheck at a corrupt company would entice me to move.

During the time while I was entertaining him as a guest in Kyoto I introduced him to my girlfriend at the time. She had a brother that was living in the UK at the time who was back for a visit. I introduced them and they exchanged contacts. He later recruited the girl (as a CIA 'agent')--after she had moved to Tokyo for work--to act against me in order to break up my relationship with my then fairly long-term girlfriend in Kyoto. 
    

She eventually decided to quit her job and move back to Kyoto, ostensibly to be with me, and got pregnant. Against my wishes, she decided to get an abortion--something that she had long held was against her religion. That was one of the more stressful times I've known.

At any rate, the multiple efforts in which Mr. Peterka played an active role in attempting to displace me from Kyoto failed, and here we are.

Monday, July 2, 2012

Michael Como: Another of Columbia's University's finest gets published!!


This is another post that is in somewhat incomplete form, but I think that some readers should be able to get enough out of it as is to justify my putting it up now and moving on to other issues related to these topics that should generate some synergy when addressed in unison. 


So before I get back to Mr. Bialock’s publication, I’m going to address another publication by another apparent disciple of Mr. Faure’s, Mr. Michael Como. Again, please excuse some of the formatting/text coloring issues, as I do not have a handle on that.

Mr. Como is the:
Toshu Fukami Associate Professor of Shinto Studies, Columbia University

In relation to Bialock’s writing, too, I was compelled to point out what appear to be unscholarly disrespectful and perhaps outright bigoted slights directed at Shotoku Taishi, and with Como, the case is exacerbated by the fact that he has written an entire volume that seems to be an attempt to discredit perhaps the most prominent early Japanese scholar, statesman and historical figure. Mr. Como’s book is called
Shotoku: Ethnicity, Ritual and Violence in the Japanese Buddhist Tradition:

Even though I’m only about 80% through the book, the amount of content that calls for commentary and critique has reached a threshold that prompted this preliminary post.

Throughout his book, Como repeatedly uses terms such as “cultic practices” in relation to Korean immigrants to Japan that he attempts to place in positions of covert authority in the Yamato political sphere, portraying them as a sort of priest caste that he refers to as “intellectuals” employing their “cultic practices” of divination and the like to exert influence over the ruling class of the backwater Japanese kingdom of Yamato.

In short, Como attempts to discount the efforts of a singular Japanese individual whose achievements have merited his being feted as a historic figure, discrediting him as a later construction, in fact, as a fictitious figure fabricated by “immigrant kinship groups”. He attempts to neglect or discredit the big picture of history in order to promote some esoteric hermeneutic based on the “cultic practices” of said immigrant groups, and in a similar manner to Bialock, thereby attempts to degrade, discount or deny the role of reason and intellect in Japanese history..

It is unclear whether the miscellany of circumstantial connections presented by Como makes a clear case regarding the spreading of miraculous tales about Shotoku that cast him as a mythological figure as opposed to a historical figure. It is likely, however, that there is a degree of truth with respect to the mythologizing of Shotoku by into a quasi-cult status figure by the individuals and groups of people among the immigrant kinship groups seeking to advance their position in society as members of some sort of priest caste; alas, do I sense the presence of a Freemason?

It would seem, however, that this point should be addressed more directly in comparative terms examining the immigrant groups from the Korean Kingdom of Paekche, with whom Shotoku had collaborated and been affiliated, to the later immigrant groups from the rival Korean kingdom of Shilla, which it seems basically attempted to appropriate Shotoku when they took over areas that had been associated with the immigrant groups associated with Paekche and which had been displaced. It is only under examination in that context that the divergence in presentations of Shotoku by the respective groups at different points in time can emerge in a manner that might shed light on the motivation for attempting to rewrite history, or to do away with history by couching Shotoku in textual figurations that make him appear more of a mythological than human figure. That in turn could lead to analysis of different strains of thought in Buddhism, as well as the syncretic embodiment of other forms of religious thought and practice with Buddhism in order to spread the teachings of Buddhism to a wider swath of the population. It is clear that only then would such a line of questioning lead to insights that might help us better understand the politico-religious developments and struggles surrounding the figure of Prince Shotoku.

It bears mentioning, come to think of it, that there may be parallels here to the construction of the tales about Jesus. Refer to my post in relation to Jesus as a historical figure. Thankfully, in the case of Shotoku, he remains firmly embedded in the Japanese conscious for his historical deeds, and is therefore regarded primarily as a historic figure rather than a religious figure--thought the history and religion converge in his case--whereas in the case of Jesus, the opposite holds true--Jesus is probably regarded almost exclusively as a religious figure.

Several premises of Como’s texts basically assume—and insinuate—that the Japanese never were capable of learning anything on their own, having to rely on immigrant kinship groups and their “cultic practices” to confer culture on the people. Como would have us believe that, unlike the rest of humanity, the Japanese were impervious to the timeless universals found in texts such as the early Chinese histories, the Analects, and so on. Of course, that assumption runs counter to the central belief in Buddhism that all human beings can attain enlightenment, if they make a sustained effort, live according to the precepts, etc. Perhaps there is some room for overlap between the Confucian gentleman scholar and the enlightened Buddhist.

Let me reiterate a point that I made in an earlier post with respect to literacy in Japan and the establishment of the phonetic alphabets (kana). The Japanese developed a phonetic writing system very early (starting in the 5th century), which probably became of increasing importance in connection with facilitating the transmission of the Buddhist sutras to monks and nuns. The kana syllabary could be used to transliterate sutras written in Sanskrit, for example, whereas it was prohibitively costly and time consuming to educate people in classical Chinese, which was the official writing system used by the Confucian scholars of the court.

The phonetic alphabet spread through the general populous, and the Japanese became a highly literate people. By the 17th century, in fact, Japan is said to have had the highest rate of literacy of any country in the world—far surpassing that of Europe. The Koreans, incidentally, didn’t take up the idea of developing a phonetic alphabet until the 15th century, some 800 years after the full scale use of phonetic alphabets by the Japanese. In Korea, literacy remained a prerogative of the ruling class, like in the West. The data on literacy in Japan in the 17th century is from a book by Marius Jansen, if I recall correctly.

Note that I am aware that there has been a yet another book published by an Associate Professor at Columbia University, David Lurie,
on the Japanese writing system, which I intend to get a copy of and see what he has to say. On the basis of a comment I found of his online in relation to Shotoku Taishi, as well as the emphasis on Korean scribes and the like in the Amazon blurb, I do not expect to be impressed with the book, even though it was published by Harvard University Press, called Realms of Literacy, Early Japan and the History of Writing:
In light of the following comment in a forum for academics doing research related to Japan, the following comment by Lurie (which appears to be smugly dismissive of Shotoku), gives reason to believe that he is another member of the kabal at Columbia under Bernard Faure.
I briefly examined the early Shotoku cult in my dissertation, and plan on putting together a more extensive study of his significance (or lack thereof) in early Japan

It is simply astonishing that an American scholar at an Ivy League institution could make such a derogatory statement regarding perhaps the most universally renowned figure in Japanese history.

At any rate, although I haven’t discussed Taira no Kiyomori with respect to what Bialock has to say about him. Shotoku Taishi is a much more important figure in Japanese history overall, and Como treats him in a similar manner that Bialock treats Kiyomori, if not worse. That is to say, Como claims that Shotoku was a man of violence, that he couldn’t have possibly written the Seventeen-Article Constitution attributed to him, and that the historical figure we know as Prince Shotoku is in fact a fictional fabrication brought about by a group of immigrant kinship groups that served as an intellectual class of diviners checking the powers of the Yamato rulers, and has very little to do with the actual person, who was called Prince Kamitsumiya.

Perhaps I overestimate my level of knowledge, but it seems fairly easy to debunk this shameful and rhetorical overloaded screed by Como, and it is startling that it appears to have received no critical treatment from any of the academics in America that have written reviews on it. That shows the utterly debased state of affairs in American academia.

Note that in light of the harshness of the criticism I have made already, it is only fair to American academia (and British academia) that I quote a brief passage from The Cambridge History of Japan below to preface the analysis of some passages of Como’s text. Delmer Brown, a distinguished American Japan scholar, edited the volume. The point that I would like people to bear in mind is that not only have the current crop of “Associate Professors” whose writings I’m looking at not addressed the work of the preceding generation of distinguished scholars in their field, they have basically ignored it and tried to gloss it over with a pseudo mystical, esoteric diatribe couched in rhetoric loaded with religious tropes. That is hardly the type of writing that one would expect be coming out of prestigious Ivy League institutions like Columbia University or being published by Stanford University and University of Hawaii. So, I do indeed find it shocking and offensive, and thus the irascible tone of my critique.

On pp. 457-8 in chapter 9 of the The Cambridge History of Japan: Ancient Japan, Edwin Cranston writes: 
The training in Chinese classics that began with Wani in the early fifth century must have been cumulative, though greatly accelerated owing to the political and cultural ramifications of seventh-century contacts with the Asian continent. When Prince Shotoku ((574-622) produced his so-called Seventeen Injunctions (preserved in the Nihon shoki) in 604, he composed the text in kambun as a matter of course and displayed familiarity with fifteen different Chinese literary, historical, an philosophical works. As Japan’s earliest scholar-statesman and the most important patron of Buddhism of his day, Shotoku represents the new directions in which he wished to lead his country…

Further in the same paragraph another pertinent point is made.
…And yet, Prince Shotoku was also interested in the past. Indeed, it was inevitable that he would be, for among the Chinese writings that he studied were histories such as the Shih chi (Records of the historian) and the Han shu (Dynastic history of the Han). In 620, according to the Nihon shoki, Shotoku together with Shima no Oomi (Soga no Umako) compiled the first Japanese history of which we have record.



On p. 86 of his book on Shotoku Taishi, Como writes:
By the time of the composition of the Nihon shoki in 720, these conceptions of sage kingship had gained widespread currency at the Nara court. Perhaps the most extended statement of such views can be found in the Seventeen-Article Constitution attributed to Shotoku. This text, which is filled with quotations and allusions from classical Chinese sources, represents the best statement on the concept of the sage ruler in early Yamato literature. The importance attached to this document by the time of the writing of the Nihon shoki can be seen from the inclusion of the entire text within the Nihon shoki. Although the Nihon shoki attributes authorship of the text to Shotoku, it is far more prudent to treat it as reflecting the views of the immigrant kinship groups associated with the early Shotoku cult. Even if we do accept the rather dubious assertion that Kamitsumiya was the author of the text, the prince’s approach to the Chinese textual tradition would have doubtless have been greatly shaped by his immigrant teachers.
              Ono Tatsunosuke has analyzed the Constitution from the standpoint of its Chinese conceptual background. He concludes that, in addition to Buddhist influences, the text closely resembles the Kuan-tzu. An important apocryphal compilation from the fourth century that purports to record the teachings of the sage counselor Kuan-tzu. This affinity with a text that claims to be the work of a Chinese sage counselor reflects the Constitution’s pre-occupation with delineating the role of the counselors and ministers of Yamato rulers.

It is apparent from the opening statement of this passage that Como, like Bialock, is preoccupied with notions of ‘conceptions of royal authority’, as evidence by the reference to “these conceptions of sage kingship”.

Before analyzing what I consider to be basically bigoted as well as intellectually bereft and ludicrous assertions (some of which I’ve highlighted), let me simply dissect the seemingly innocuous portion about Kuan-tzu, as it borders on being plain and simple disinformation, the dissemination of which is a practice he seems to share in common with Mr.Bialock.
The Guanzi is an encyclopedic compilation of Chinese philosolphical materials named after the 7th century BCE philosopher Guan Zhong, Prime Minister to Duke Huan of Qi. The Han Dynasty scholar Liu Xiang edited the received Guanzi text circa 26 BCE, largely from sources associated with the 4th century BCE Jixia Academy in the Qi capital ofLinzi.
Guǎn Zhòng was a chancellor and reformer of the State of Qi during the Spring and Autumn Period of Chinese history.
Guan Zhong started multiple reforms in the State of Qi. Politically, he centralized power and divided the state into different villages, each carrying out a specific trade… He also developed a better method for choosing talent to be governors. Under Guan Zhong, Qi shifted administrative responsibility from hereditary aristocrats to professional bureaucrats…

The following quotes are from a German researcher (link found on Wikipedia page) whose English is not perfect, but the points are presented in a readily accessible manner.
Although Guan Zhong is renowned as the first Chinese legalist state philosopher the chapters of the Guanzi also deal with matters and display ideas that are traditionally attributed to Confucians or Daoist philosophy or to the Yin-Yang theory, the dialecticians, agronomists or to military theoreticians... It was seen as an important writing encompassing both the Confucian ritual and the legalist order by law as bases for an effective government. It might be that the paragraphs containing other thought were added to the Guanzi only later, presumably by Liu Xiang.
He is listed as the author of the Guanzi encyclopedia, actually a much later (of the late Warring States Period) compilation of works from the scholars of the Jixia Academy.

Both of the above quoted passages emphasize the historical importance of Guan Zhong, with the degree to which the text he is credited with being composed of actual writings by him a point of questioning. It doesn’t appear that there is any disagreement with respect to his status as the first philosopher of legalism in China, and the fact that he was a chancellor who implemented broad ranging institutional reforms, many of which promoted one form or another of meritocracy at their core, would certainly provide a contextual background supporting the production of such intellectual work.

In this regard, it is somewhat incomprehensible why Como would make such controversial remarks on the basis of two pages cited from an obscure Japanese scholar's work, and characterize the Kuan-tzu as an apocryphal work related to a sage counselor. Both of these seem to represent a simplification and mystification of the topical matter at hand, with the apparent aim of deceiving the reader in order to discredit Shotoku the scholar. I would suggest that Mr. Como discredits himself as an aspiring (albeit well-funded) scholar.

At any rate, I have briefly discussed meritocracy in relation to the Cap-ranks system in a previous blog post on Bialock, and the parallels are obvious. To imagine that Shotoku would not be familiar with the writings of (or about) an intellectual and reformist figure of the stature of Guan Zhong is simply preposterous.

I believe that I’ve posted this link already on another post (along with some actual Articles from the Seventeen, but for the sake of convenience, I’m posting it again here, with a comment or two.
The Seventeen-article constitution is, according to Nihon Shoki published in 720, a document authored by Prince Shōtoku in 604… The emphasis of the document is not so much on the basic laws by which the state was to be governed, such as one may expect from a modern constitution, but rather it was a highly Buddhist document that focused on the morals and virtues that were to be expected of government officials and the emperor's subjects to ensure a smooth running of the state, where the emperor was to be regarded as the highest authority. It is one of the earliest moral dictatorial documents in history.

Although the Seventeen articles have a legalistic framework, they are set forth more in terms of moralistic admonishments and duties (and thus are referred to as injunctions by some scholars), including, conspicuously, a requirement that Buddhism and the Three Treasures be not only respected by revered. This is most significant in light of the fact that Prince Kamitsumiya stood with the Soga in subjugating the Mononobe due to their unprovoked, and essentially irrational and bigoted attacks on the Buddhist community. The Seventeen-article Constitution secured religious freedom for Buddhism in Yamato era Japan. 

In fact, the subsequent establishment of a full-blown syncretic system by Kukai attests to the need for such vigilance. And it should be pointed out that irrational nativism was again responsible for motivating the attacks on Buddhism after the Meiji Restoration with the adoption of the official policies—Shin-Butsu Bunri—targeting the Buddhist community nominally with the purposed of separating Buddhism and Shinto, ending a thousand years of syncretism. The continuous importance and gravity of the themes addressed by Shotoku to the specific circumstances adhering in the Yamato polity and through to the present era are unmistakable.

Moreover, I have highlighted in green a point made by Wikipedia that this document is of historical significance of a world-wide scope. Though I am not well informed about the history of “moral dictatorial documents”, I would imagine that the admonition to revere Buddhism and the Three Treasures represents one of the earliest institutionalized guarantees of freedom of religion for an imported religion. In doing so, it thereby officially embraces a form of religious pluralism. Moreover, Shotoku’s Seventeen-Article Constitution can be seen as an monumental synthesis of Buddhist and Confucian values, which were two major sources of the cultural tradition in East Asia, and that fact is something that punctuates the ascension of Yamato era Japan as a matured member of the polities forming the East Asian cultural sphere. It is no exaggeration to state that Shotoku’s work represents an intellectual achievement of the highest level within the East Asian cultural sphere. In fact, I would be curious to know if there are any extant texts in Chinese and Korean from that period that proffer commentaries on Shotoku’s Seventeen-article Constitution.

With regard to another aspect in relation to the Chinese intellectual tradition, Como attempts to cast it in terms of esoteric knowledge for use in divination, as opposed to historical records and teachings aimed at promoting moral self-cultivation, with the convergent aim at various levels of generating feedback from said cultivation back into society and benefiting society.

p. 79
…In effect, the Chinese textual tradition allowed Yamato rulers to lay claim to a new type of cosmic sanction that could be verified for all to see.
    There was along with this, however, one significant danger for any Yamato ruler claiming the status of sage ruler—by relying upon propitious omens and placing the virtue of the ruler at the center of political discourse, Yamato rulers also opened themselves up to potential critique… In China, such critique served as one of the main checks on the Son of Heaven’s power; indeed, the authority to make such critiques was the quid pro quo extracted by Chinese intellectuals for supporting would-be rulers. With the adoption of this intellectual framework in Yamato, the hermeneutics of divination soon became an important arena for the contestation of power. No faction that aimed to seize power could ignore the political uses of omens and divination, nor could they neglect the textual tradition and intellectuals with whom authority for interpreting omens rested.
             

Como’s casting those engaged in the practice of divination as “intellectuals” is a gross distortion of both the meaning of the term intellectual, and an apparently deliberate over simplification of the historical context in which Chinese classics were studied, and applied in Yamato period Japan.

As I have mentioned in earlier posts, the contact between the continent and Japan is preserved in various historical accounts in Chinese (as well as Korean) records, which predate literacy in Japan. In particular, relations between the Chinese court and Himiko would seem to have been on rather good, so much so that the Chinese court agreed to provide her military assistance to quell a rebellion, and bestowed a number of the ubiquitous Chinese bronze mirrors on her, as well, which were a symbol of culture and wisdom.

The extent of interaction in terms of cultural exchange is a matter for speculation; however, since the records tell us that the Chinese had an interpreter, then it is readily apparent that there were Chinese who were fluent in Japanese, which can only mean that linguistic study and exchanges were ongoing. It can be assumed that the individuals in Himiko’s court that were counterparts to the Chinese interpreters had acquired a degree of familiarity with spoken Chinese, at any rate. Of course this predates the introduction of writing in Japan, but any student of language can surmise that linguistic exchanges such as that described above probably encompassed the informal introduction of Chinese writing to the Japanese counterparts to the Chinese interpreters.

I don’t know when the archeological record dates the introduction of wet-paddy rice agriculture to Japan, but it was almost certainly brought over from the continent. And one can only assume that a certain degree of knowledge relating to the timing of planting and harvesting cycles was introduced concurrently; furthermore, such knowledge may have been provided within a framework having an affinity with divinatory practices, involving astronomical observation, etc. As such, divinatory practices were originally introduced along with an agricultural practice that became core to the material sustenance and growth of the population on the Japanese archipelago.

One reason that the Chinese classics were accepted in Japan was that they had a universal appeal. The legends of the Chinese historical figures transmitted in the classics had something to teach the Japanese, and once the Japanese were able to read the language, they could understand the lessons that the classics were conveying. In other words, the classics contained stories embodying teachings having a substantial degree of universal applicability in human societies crossing the bounds of historical period and place.

In this regard, there are at least two assertion made by Como that are troubling. First, he seems to claim that Shotoku could not possibly have learned enough from the Chinese classics he had been studying for many years to pen the Seventeen Injunctions (Seventeen-Article Constitution) credited to him in the Nihon shoki. Second, Como attempts to cast the Chinese classics in terms exclusively of the yin-yang divination or alchemical Daoist sort.

Again, here, a simple examination of the Kuan-tzu text that he refers to via an obscure Japanese scholar is described by general sources primarily as a text that represents the first treatise on legalism in China, containing peripheral elements relating to Daoism and the like that ere likely added at a later date by the compilers. Therefore, in drawing up his Seventeen-article Constitution, as a quasi-legalistic document, that Shotoku should have been influenced by what we can only assume to have been a very important treatise by Guan Zhong et al. at the time relating to the development of Chinese socio-political normativity and social institutions, would seem to be a given.

In fact, Shotoku's teachers would have been remiss had they not introduced such an apparently important text into Japan, and it is therefore inconceivable that Shotoku wouldn't have studied such the Kuan-tzu and incorporated aspects of the teachings that he found pertinent in his Seventeen-article Constitution, which is indisputably the first substantial Japanese contribution to the East Asian textual tradition, which of course has its origins in Ancient China. 

Shotoku's Seventeen-article Constitution contributes at a very high level to the evolution of society in the East Asian cultural sphere, and therefore marks Japan’s coming of age in the long established intellectual and cultural tradition in the sphere of East Asia. Furthermore, the fact that he also instituted a Cap-ranks system similar to that used in Confucian China clearly demonstrates his affinity and deep familiarity with that tradition. It is not a mystery!

In fact, one could also point to the fact that Como attempts to divert the attention of his reader to some phantom formalistic aspect relating to a purported similarity between the actual text of the Seventeen-article Constitution and that of the Kuan-tzu, which appear to be entirely different types of documents, whereas he completely neglect the overlap between the reforms enacted by the historical figure of Guan Zhong in the capacity of chancellor and the concomitant societal effects of the promulgation of the Seventeen-article Constitution and Cap-ranks system by the historical figure of Shotoku in the capacity of regent. 

The parallels are obvious, and it cannot be said that it would have been difficult for Shotoku the scholar and statesman to grasp the meaning of the actions of Guan Zhong the chancellor, applying some of those principles to the sociopolitical scenario he faced in Yamato period Japan in the capacity of regent. 

Furthermore, although Como may be ithin bounds in characterizing the Kuan-tzu as an apocryphal work, it's main theme of legalism as propounded by Guan Zhong is not a topic than can be said to be esoteric. And though I haven't read the Kuan-tzu, I would imagine that the doctrine of legalism set forth therein has nothing to do with divination. 

The fact of the matter is that Shotoku's work addressed problems  associated with religion and politics that were generating conflict and making society dysfunctional. 
On the one hand, with the Cap-ranks system, he  attempted to negate the counterproductive system of hereditary privilege embodied in the Kabane class, which was often associated with being a member of a Shinto priest caste--such as the Mononobe and Nakatomi. The Cap-ranks system served to instill a work ethic among the educated elite class and inject a degree of rationalization into the exercise of political power through the implementation of policies promoting meritocracy. Aside from fairness and reward for efforts aptly applied, meritocracy serves to promote a form of mutual intelligibility across society, and thereby helps prevent attempts at mystification or mass deception aimed at the public sphere. 
On the other hand, he explicitly promulgated in the Seventeen-article Constitution what amounts to a prohibition against attacking the Buddhist community and teachings, closing off any further recourse to violence that might be sought be former members of the Shinto establishment that felt their livelihoods tied to a monopoly over all matters religious was threatened by Buddhism. 

Moreover, I believe that Shotoku was also responsible for ending the relationship of suzerainty that existed between Japan and China up till that point. That clearly demonstrates that he was not a subservient weakling being used as a proxy by his immigrant kinship group teachers, nor was he beholden to China. He was acting in the interests of Yamato period Japan, as its defacto ruler in the capacity of regent. The occasion was marked by the apparently inconsequential courtesies paid to his counterpart in the greeting of equally famous message that Shotoku sent to the Chinese Sui court, in which he wrote,
"From the sovereign of the land of the rising sun to the sovereign of the land of the setting sun."
As the Wikipedia page states, this is the first known instance in which Japan is referred to as “the land where the sun rises”. I seem to recall reading somewhere that the Sui emperor was not very pleased with the comeuppance of Shotoku in this regard, feeling somewhat slighted by being referred to as the sovereign of the land where the sun sets, but the message was sent when Shotoku dispatched a mission to the Sui court, so it cannot be regarded to have been intended as a slight against the Sui emperor; it should be regarded as a somewhat indirect assertion of equality and independence. It should be noted that it was sent several years after the promulgation of the Seventeen-article Constitution. Again, it would be interesting to examine the Chinese records of this period with respect to relations with Japan during the regency of Shotoku.

Here is about where I should start to take Como to task for his offensive remarks:
Although the Nihon shoki attributes authorship of the text to Shotoku, it is far more prudent to treat it as reflecting the views of the immigrant kinship groups associated with the early Shotoku cult. Even if we do accept the rather dubious assertion that Kamitsumiya was the author of the text, the prince’s approach to the Chinese textual tradition would have doubtless have been greatly shaped by his immigrant teachers.  

But I will leave this post as is for now, as it is already fairly long and some of the criticism should be readily apparent on the basis of statements I’ve made above.

I will get around to more thoroughly critiquing this book at a later date, after I’ve completed reading it, etc.

However, I may post another preliminary critique of the book by Mr. Lurie first, depending what I he has written.

There remains the discussion of Kiyomori with respect to Bialock’s book as well.

As a closing remark, I would like to point out that Como is an Associate Professor whose position is funded by a Shinto group that has an obvious religious bias. Please refer to the following link. In that regard, because Como seems to be attacking one of the most renowned figures in Japanese history, who, in addition to the forgoing discussion of the Seventeen-article Constitution and Cap ranks system, is also revered for having been a staunch defender of Buddhism in the public sphere, and having written commentaries on several Sutras, one can only point at a bias against Buddhism in this text. In fact, that is even evidence in the baffling title, which makes recourse to ethnicity and refers to “Violence in the Japanese Buddhist Tradition”.

Who is Toshu Fukami, well I found this website about the organization with which he is affiliated, in fact, which he heads:
Toshu Fukami Professorship of Shinto Studies at Columbia University
One of the major activities of the International Shinto Foundation is funding the establishment of chairs specializing in studies of Japanese religion, specifically focused on Shinto as the core of Japanese cultural values
(my emphasis), at prestigious universities abroad. In 1997, the first Shinto chair was endowed at the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) under the leadership of Prof. Allan Grapard. Another chair was set up, in 1998, for a graduate studies degree in "Shinto and Japanese Culture" at Zhejiang University in Hangzhou, China. ISF began providing funds for the London University School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) to establish the Center for the Study of Japanese Religions (CSJR) and start a Masterfs degree course from 1999. In 2001 Dr. Toshu Fukami, ISF President, agreed to provide endowment funds to establish the Toshu Fukami Professorship of Shinto Studies at Columbia University’s Department of Religion. Prof. Michael Como was nominated the chair in 2006. In responding to the proposal of Prof. Nicholas B. Dirks, Vice President for Arts and Sciences of Columbia University Dr. Fukami pledged to increase the fund of this endowment for the full professorship covering not only the Department of Religion, but also the Department of East Asian Languages and Cultures. The new Gift Agreement was signed by both parties of the ISF and Columbia University on April 10, 2008.

In other words, it would seem that Columbia University is happy to receive money from an organization that has a religious bias, and to place someone in the position funded by that organization that is willing to attack another religion in a groundless manner with the aim of promoting the interest of the sponsor’s religious bias. Personally, I find that to be a disgraceful position for a prestigious institute of higher education—even a private institution—in the United States of America to adopt.

Perhaps I am idealizing the field, but it seems to me that religious bias has no place in scholarship. Note that I am not opposed to the activities of the aforementioned organization per se, and welcome their funding of libraries, etc. It is simply the apparent corruption of the practice of scholarship, and the publication of misleading and basically bigoted texts to which I object.