THE NANKING MASSACRE: Fact Versus Fiction
De GA.
| Ligne 1 : | Ligne 1 : | ||
| - | <br> | + | <br> Let us assume that there were three days in February on which burials could not take place, and that in March, work proceeded continuously. On December 14, two days after Nanking fell, the Japanese commenced their sweep of the Safety Zone. They had already taken off their military uniforms. They are to be used for information-gathering and propaganda purposes. Second, they did not contribute articles specifically for What War Means, but their letters to their friends happened to be used as the manuscripts for it. When we paraphrase this regulation, we have, "When there are a small number of prisoners, release them after obtaining the necessary information through interrogation, e.g., their unit, the number of soldiers in that unit, and their operation plan. There are two parts to this pedagogical example. However, it is extremely unlikely that the Division issued different orders to the two brigades. According to a battalion order issued at 2:30 p.m. According to the battle report, upon receipt of the aforementioned order, the commander of the 1st Battalion assembled the commanders of the 1st, 3rd, and 4th companies, with whom he consulted about the execution of the prisoners.<br><br><br> Did the regimental commander issue the execution order, arbitrarily, to the 1st Battalion? According to the 1st Battalion’s battle report, the order instructing that "all prisoners are to be killed in compliance with brigade orders" was relayed to the 1st Battalion by the regimental commander. According to this record, at least, neither the Nanking Special Agency nor the Self-Government Committee was aware of this duplication. This was recorded by the International Committee as Case No. The account in Documents of the Nanking Safety Zone, published approximately 18 months subsequent to the incident, contains a very important note, which refers to the inquiry into the incident conducted by the International Committee. Even at that historic important meeting of minds, there was no discussion of Japanese executions of civilians and military personnel in violation of international law. Japanese military personnel were never ordered or instructed to kill civilians. Accordingly, it is doubtful that Hora’s interpretation, i.e., that "it was reasonable for Japanese military personnel in China to perceive the notice as instructing them not to recognize the existence of prisoners, and as giving them permission, or even license, to kill them," is valid. The first one is the "War Journal of Endo Takaaki." In it he writes that on or about December 16, "It seems that orders were received from the Division regarding the disposition of prisoners."37 Thus, 2nd Lieutenant Endo knew that the brigade commander, in issuing an order instructing that all prisoners were to be killed, had made a decision that was very painful for him (see (3) abo<br>r><br>r>p> When he received his orders, the 65th Regiment and the 3rd Battalion, 19th Mountain Artillery Regiment departed, at 5:00 p.m. 4 wrote the following in the Battle Report for the 1st Battalion, 66th Infantry Regiment, which appears in Source Material Relating to the Battle of Nanking, Vol. In that case, why did the words "all prisoners are to be killed in compliance with brigade orders" appear in the battle report prepared by the 1st Battalion, 66th Infantry Regiment? We still do not know, however, why Steele wrote that the Japanese executed 300 Chinese rather than 300 Chinese soldiers. That is why there were two separate instructions relating to the treatment of prisoners of war, in accordance with their numbers. Both frontline regiments shall concentrate their resources on gaining entrance into the city, and annihilating the enemy, using any and all means. Both flanks shall invade the city, and shall use bombardment and whatever other means necessary to annihilate the enemy. 200 photographs, though of course he will not use anything like that number in the book. We will discuss the regulations of international law that apply to prisoners of war later on in this b<br>r><br>r>p> This roundup was a result of the census conducted by the Japanese on December 24 and thereafter. "Yamazaki Masao nikki" entry dated December 14, 1937 in SMBN, vol. "Morozumi Gyosaku shuki" in SMBN, vol. Every issue of The China Weekly Review included a "day-to-day summary constituting a complete record of outstanding events in the war on all fronts." The following descriptions of the movements of Chinese soldiers appeared in the January 29, 1938 issue. 193. This article also appeared in the May 1938 issue of Revue des deux mondes. However, this passage was omitted when the monitor read McCallum.s testimony at the tribunal. 1 Since a battle report is an official record, this was a shocking revelation. Bayonetting ended at approximately 1930 hours, at which time a report was submitted to the Regiment. The 1st Battalion’s battle report reads: "The main strength of the Regiment is in the process of sweeping the city … Another document that addresses the treatment of prisoners of war is a notice issued by the Vice-Minister of War (Lieutenant-General Umezu Yoshijiro), entitled "Application of Battle Regulations" (Top Secret China Army Notice No. Therefore, they were to refrain from making any public mention of the application of battle regulations, or of prisone<br>f<br>. |
