Again Traum could not refrain himself and made an attack instead of a complaint. As shown in the later parts of the article by Manthorpe, the point was not about denying the occurrence of the Nanking Massacre, but the overuses of the event as political leverage-by the Chinese as well as the Japanese. The phrase "multiple interpretation" no doubt is controversial for those sensitive to the issue and perhaps should not had been used.
Thinking logically, interpretation is not the word to describe a person's stand if he is denying the existence of something. If the event does not exist, there is nothing to interpret! The article tried to present different views on the subject, and it is folly to fault the author if you strongly disagree with some of those views. May be Manthorpe should had presented the opinions of Chinese extremist radicals and not just of the Japaneses'. I doubt Manthorpe is trying to cleverly disguise his Nanking Denial sentiments when he wrote the title, nor does the article itself prove to be slanted to the levels of propaganda.
It seem this echo Truam previous excursion with columnists.
[ 本帖最後由 notgoddy 於 2007-12-14 23:57 編輯 ] |
發表於 2007-12-14 23:56
| 
