Occidentalism
Duc, sequere, aut de via decede!

Fake Atrocity Photos III

October 28th, 2005 . by Matt

After warning about fake atrocity photos here and here, it appears that some people are still willing to post links to these and other fake atrocity photos on this blog.

One of the photos was of the Japanese leaving a Chinese baby to die on the train tracks in China. The photo really does look terrible.
baby
Here a crying chinese baby has been left in the middle of some train tracks. Surely this proves that the Japs are evil… and yet…

baby
This was a faked picture taken by a Chinese American working for a newspaper. They put the baby on the train tracks then blamed it on the Japanese. Why should the Japanese take the blame for “atrocities” they didnt do?

baby
Here is the pic of a Chinese man carrying the poor baby to the train tracks

As I have demonstrated before, most of these photographs are simply wartime propanganda against the Japanese. They were useful in motivating the population against Japan in war time, but have no place in this time of peace with Japan.


88 Responses to “Fake Atrocity Photos III”

  1. comment number 1 by: Mika

    My question to you is do Japanese text books acurately explain the atrocities commited by their military? Somehow i dont think so….

    Tell me this. Which country’s textbooks accurately explain the atrocities committed by their military? Do Korea’s textbooks explain “Vietnamese Civilians Massacre” during the Vietnam War? http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2000/366

  2. comment number 2 by: Chewbacca

    What are you talking about? All textbooks teach Japan’s invasion of China and mention that many Chinese were killed in Nanjing. The point on debate is the details. Do China and Korea’s text books explain every detail of crimes committed by their past military?

    This is your qoute and then in your next post you basically retract..??

    Tell me this. Which country’s textbooks accurately explain the atrocities committed by their military? Do Korea’s textbooks explain “Vietnamese Civilians Massacre” during the Vietnam War? http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2000/366

    So no you are saying that they dont and furthermore which countires do?? hmmm

  3. comment number 3 by: Mika

    So no you are saying that they dont and furthermore which countires do?? hmmm

    What i’m saying is not every little detail is going to be in one textbook. I’m sure US or any other country’s textbooks don’t include everything what their military did in the war.

    I hope you don’t dodge my question anymore. Do China and Korea’s textbooks explain the atrocities committed by their past military?

  4. comment number 4 by: Matt

    Do China and Korea’s textbooks explain the atrocities committed by their past military?

    Mika, have you ever read the bible? I dont mean to sound religious, but Jesus talked about this very thing.

    Matthew 7:3-5
    “And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ’Let me remove the speck out of your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother’s eye.”

    2000 years later we see exactly the same thing.

  5. comment number 5 by: Chewbacca

    What i’m saying is not every little detail is going to be in one textbook. I’m sure US or any other country’s textbooks don’t include everything what their military did in the war.

    I hope you don’t dodge my question anymore. Do China and Korea’s textbooks explain the atrocities committed by their past military?

    you know this goes back to the previous posts… are you justifying this because other countries do it to??

    When has Korea been an agressor in the pacific?
    I hardly thinnk anything the koreans did could even come near to the all out atrocities commited by the japanese against my country and my relatives and the relatives of probably 90% people in the pacific region….enough said

  6. comment number 6 by: Mika

    you know this goes back to the previous posts… are you justifying this because other countries do it to??

    I’m justifying what?? Don’t twist my words. If you insist that Japan’s textbooks are inaccurate, then bring us evidence, perhaps specific passages that are in error.

    When has Korea been an agressor in the pacific?

    An aggressor or not, the Korean military committed the atrocity in Vietnam. It looks like everytime someone mention Korea’s wrong doings, you guys just say Japan has done that or worse. So, it’s OK for Korea to whitewash history. It’s a very distinct double standard.

    I hardly thinnk anything the koreans did could even come near to the all out atrocities commited by the japanese against my country and my relatives and the relatives of probably 90% people in the pacific region….enough said

    Read books written by a Korean professor Che keiho(崔基鎬), which explain how ordinary Koreans were pro-Japanese and supported Japan during the war. Anyway, Japan already apologized and offered reparations for their colonial rule. You won’t improve relations between two countries by focusing on nothing but bad things Japan did in the past.

  7. comment number 7 by: ponta

    Chewbacca
    Nobody can justify his wrong acts by pointing out that others have done the same acts.
    But when one blames someone for something, she needs to be morally consistent.
    She is morally inconsitent when she blames someone for the wrong act X while she is doing the X.

    I don’t think Japanese history textbooks are unfair in the description of historical events.
    They don’t try to justify the war that Japan caused.
    Honestly,I want to know,specifially, what should be corrected in Japanese textbooks.

    Maybe victims want something more about victims to be written.Yes, we should know about it.
    We can, and should do that by using sub-text,but you can not write everything in one textbook by which students learn the whole history of the world.

    Sometimes Chinese and Korean wants Japan to write what did not happened, but that is unreasonable demands
    Take “comfort woman” for instance, it seems some Korean want Japan to write that Japanese soldiers kidnapped Korean women and raped and raped.
    But that’s not what happened.
    Besides, the textbook at issue is for junior highschool students.
    Do we have to teach 13-years old boys and girls what the prostitute is?
    Do we have to teach them Korean agents decieved Korean parents, Korean parents sold their dauters, Japanese army didn’t supervise them well, Japanese soldier exploited the poor faimilies?
    Yes and No.It depends.I think the teachers and the parents with different backgrouds should choose what should be taught on this matter.

    If you feel Japan didn’t learn from the past,and if that’s why you think something must be wrong with Japanese history textbook, then I want to know what it means to learn from the past.
    In my opinion, one thing that we should learn from the past is not repeating the wrong acts that she did in the past?

    Look at what happened after the war.
    Japan has not engaged in the war.
    How about China, and Korea?

    Japan violated natural rights during the war.
    So Japan has tried to protect the fundamental human rights since then.
    How about China, and Korea?
    Which country learned from the past?

    My question to you is do Japanese text books acurately explain the atrocities commited by their military? Somehow i dont think so

    I might be mistaken about your question.
    I want to know why you thought Japanese textbooks did not explain the atrocities accurately.

  8. comment number 8 by: takeshima

    Ponta.. very fair questions… coreans wont answer them. Even if jappo was shit poor and the corean master race could lord over them, coreans dont have it in their character to forgive and forget. Coreans will never accept the blood on their hands… to coreans each and every corean comfort whore was a 12 year old virgin raped 50,000 times, who was kidnapped in front of her family. Coreans ignore the actual words of the comfort whores when they admit that they were sold to other coreans by their mothers and fathers. Its very sad.

    And even today, coreans women stand in line to sell their vaginas. 5% of the corean economy is corean whores selling their vaginas. How is it that coreans claim that they were anything other then willing participants. They were paid and paid welll and now they want more money and they want to pretend that they were not whores…. its a tall order.

    Well if you have done business in corea you would know. Coreans always go back on a deal. Sorry, just so everone knows… its not all coreans that act that way. Its just that they have a reputation for that.

  9. comment number 9 by: Kushibo

    Shakuhachi,
    This photo of the baby in Nanjing is a rather famous photo. I first saw it when I was a kid myself, probably in a Life or Los Angeles Times coffee table book or something (like “Time looks at the 20th century” or something like that).

    In the third message, it seems you’re saying you saw it only recently. If that’s true, I’m a little surprised (not a criticism).

    Anyway, I would like to know if you have a link to the some sites debunking this photo. I have no doubts that the photo has long been used to depict the damage and carnage of the assault on Nanjing, so I don’t need such links.

    By the way, the one thing I would take issue with so far is your description that the photo “was of the Japanese leaving a Chinese baby to die on the train tracks in China.”

    I take issue with that because I never saw it described that way any time I saw one of the photos. It was usually something along the lines of “a [crying] baby sits amidst the rubble of Nanjing.”

    It would have stuck out in my mind if I had seen any photo description saying the baby was left there to die on the tracks, as if to suggest that a train might run over him/her, because a look at that photo shows that no train could get through there at that time.

    On the other hand, the child may have been “left to die” for real, regardless of whether the photographer arranged the scene or not. Were the child’s parent(s) killed and the baby then left there alone? Was the child found among the rubble there? These are questions that should be answered, and there is the problematic issue, as you describe, of setting up photos to emphasize an atmosphere in the picture. But if the abandoned baby is truly an abandoned baby (because of death of the parents or some other war-related circumstances) and the damage to the train station is real, then the photo, even if staged (as you are alleging) cannot so easily be dismissed.

    But I would like to see a link where this photo is being depicted as the Japanese leaving a child to die on the train tracks.

  10. comment number 10 by: Matt

    But I would like to see a link where this photo is being depicted as the Japanese leaving a child to die on the train tracks.

    I dont know if it was described that way in life, but I have seen such representations on Korean websites. I am leaving my office right now, but will provide the links shortly.

  11. comment number 11 by: Matt

    Kushibo, I found this site some time ago, not recently, when it was posted on Daves ESL by a Kyopo hopping mad at the Japanese. The caption connects the Nanking Massacre with the picuture. It would seem reasonable that people would consider that the baby had been placed there, because it seems obvious that the baby is not of an age that can walk there itself. In any event, the propaganda value of the photo is the baby, not the surrounding destruction, and what it implies about the Japanese.

    1937 中日전쟁 당시 부모잃은 어린아이에 모습

    1937년 8월28일 일본군의 폭격으로 폐허가 된 중국 상하이 남부철도역 부근에서 피범벅이 된 아기가 혼자 울고있다. 1935년 중·일전쟁을 시작한 일본은 상하이사변, 난징학살을 거쳐 40년 독일 이탈리아와 3국동맹을 체결하고 41년 태평양전쟁을 일으켰다.

    Actually, that site is literally full of brushed up, faked and even misattributed photos. One could really have a field day with this kind of stuff if one had the time. It takes a lot of ill will to dig this kind of stuff up.

  12. comment number 12 by: Kushibo

    Kushibo, I found this site some time ago, not recently, when it was posted on Daves ESL by a Kyopo hopping mad at the Japanese. The caption connects the Nanking Massacre with the picuture.

    But it didn’t have the description you described, of the Japanese leaving a Chinese baby to die on the train tracks in China. Like I said, I have never seen a description like that with this photo, which I have seen quite a number of times.

    It would seem reasonable that people would consider that the baby had been placed there, because it seems obvious that the baby is not of an age that can walk there itself.

    Yes, it is obvious the baby was brought there, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he or she was brought there by a photographer. It is just as reasonable to assume it’s possible the now dead parent(s) had brought the child there. If the photographer found the baby and brought him or her there, how did the photographer come across this baby that could just be taken up and posed?

    Again, I would like a link to the description of the photographer having set up the picture as you say. I think it’s just as much a leap of faith to assume what you allege as it is to assume that the child was legitimately found by the photographer (whethere he posed the child or not) at the scene of destruction.

    In any event, the propaganda value of the photo is the baby, not the surrounding destruction, and what it implies about the Japanese.

    It’s both. But again I point out, even if the baby was posed there in that spot, were either the destruction (stated as caused by the invading Japanese) or the baby’s circumstances (presumably orphaned or abandoned) different from what the photo suggests? Were the parents of the child standing behind the crying baby, who was made up for the picture, waiting to take their child back to the comfortable home they had waiting?

    I agree with you that it is irresponsible for journalists and photojournalists to stage something, but you seem to jump to the convenient conclusion that exaggerating a photo suggests there is zero truth to it at all. Your protests seem to be excusing the imperial Japanese forces for their acts, and that’s what so many take offense at.

  13. comment number 13 by: ponta

    Kushibo
    This is the site which explain the photo at issue.
    http://www2u.biglobe.ne.jp/~sus/child.htm

    Japan bombed the Shanghai South Station.
    The baby was brought there by several men.
    One testimony said that one of them looked like his/her father.

    It is not about Nankin.
    http://www.princeton.edu/~nanking/

    In any event, the propaganda value of the photo is the baby, not the surrounding destruction, and what it implies about the Japanese.

    It’s both

    If the photo is without the baby, I don’t think you’ve seen this photo several times, nor do I think you remeber this photo so clearly.

    you seem to jump to the convenient conclusion that exaggerating a photo suggests there is zero truth to it at all.Your protests seem to be excusing the imperial Japanese forces for their acts, and that’s what so many take offense at

    I didn’t take Matt as saying that.
    You can’t excuse what Japanese army did by pointing out the fact that the photo was fake.
    But the inadequate photo deteriorates the value of the photo as a report.
    And the inadequate use of the photo make the site lose its credibility.

    I want to point out that there might be some people who would think your protests seem to be excusing the photographer and some sites which use this photo inadequately for their acts; though I for one do not think that’s what you are doing.

  14. comment number 14 by: Matt

    But it didn’t have the description you described, of the Japanese leaving a Chinese baby to die on the train tracks in China.

    Kushibo, my description says that the baby was left on the tracks, not that the Japanese did it. The Japanese could look just as bad for allowing the baby to remain there like that.

  15. comment number 15 by: Kushibo

    kushibo:
    But it didn’t have the description you described, of the Japanese leaving a Chinese baby to die on the train tracks in China.

    Shakuhachi:
    Kushibo, my description says that the baby was left on the tracks, not that the Japanese did it. The Japanese could look just as bad for allowing the baby to remain there like that. [emphasis from Kushibo]
    Shakuhachi, I copied and pasted that from paragraph one of your post: “One of the photos was of the Japanese leaving a Chinese baby to die on the train tracks in China. The photo really does look terrible.”

  16. comment number 16 by: Matt

    Shakuhachi, I copied and pasted that from paragraph one of your post: “One of the photos was of the Japanese leaving a Chinese baby to die on the train tracks in China. The photo really does look terrible.”

    Yes, the baby looks like it ‘left to die’. It does not mean that the Japanese did it, just that they would leave a baby to die. Left to die is a figure of speech. If I saw you dying on the street, and did not make efforts to assist you, that would be leaving you to die. The picture strongly suggests that. I dont mention anything about captions.

    1937 中日전쟁 당시 부모잃은 어린아이에 모습

    This caption implies this baby is a victim of the Sino-Japanese war, and it was not. How about this picture – Japanese soldiers come across a Chinese baby on the train tracks and rescue it. That would make the photo completely different, regardless of the destruction around. Its pretty obvious the only reason you remember it is because it had a baby in it, which is proof of its anti Japanese propaganda value.

    How about this photo? Why do people have such an investment in demonising the Japanese to the extent that they will defend a fake photo designed to create hatred towards the Japanese?

  17. comment number 17 by: Matt

    By the way, feel free to call me Matt here. Not everyone knows who ‘shakuhachi’ is (although it should be obvious by now). Still, calling me by that nickname will confuse newcomers.

  18. comment number 18 by: Victor

    some people are still willing to post links to these and other fake atrocity photos on this blog.

    Excuuuuuuuuuuse me for posting a link to the officical website of Alliance for Preserving the Truth of Sino-Japanese War. Yes, their website featuers the photo in question, and I was unaware of it..

    By the way, Wikipedia also features the same photo on their website

    And we all know how many times “some people” on this blog have quoted Wikipedia…Know thyself!

  19. comment number 19 by: Matt

    By the way, Wikipedia also features the same photo on their website

    And we all know how many times “some people” on this blog have quoted Wikipedia…Know thyself!

    Yes thats why lies have to be confronted right away. Guess where it came from?

    http://www.princeton.edu/~nanking/html/nanking_gallery.html

    http://www.princeton.edu/~nanking/html/image_1.html

    http://www.princeton.edu/~nanking/assets/images/image1.JPG

    Yes, the same place you got it from.

    As for wikipedia, its accuracy depends on the on the people that are writing it, because on wikipedia, anyone can make a change – in fact, the content of wikipedia changes daily. I made a note of the picture on the wikipedia discussion page. When using wikipedia, the important thing is having other sources as well, sources that did not reference wikipedia.

  20. comment number 20 by: Victor

    Matt,
    You forgot to mention this. Wiki states:

    ..this photo appeared in LIFE magazine.

    “LIFE” is a very prestigious magazines in the States. Now what? Are you going to say that they are anti-japanese too? After all, didn’t you accuse me of being anti-japanese just because the site I linked had a fake photo (photos?)

    You wrote:

    you have shown your anti Japanese colours by linking sites that show fake atrocity photos

    My point? No right-minded human being would use a fake photo unless he has some evil motives. I didn’t know about the fake photos and neither did the Life magazine, I’m sure.

  21. comment number 21 by: Matt

    I think I am going to stop beating this dead horse.

  22. comment number 22 by: Victor

    By the way,

    I wouldn’t go so far as to call it a fake atrocity photo.

    It certainly is a staged photo, but the photographer didn’t fake the destruction.

  23. comment number 23 by: Mika

    Victor,

    Britain, France, Russia, and the U.S. had also invaded and colonized China. It was the kind of era called imperialism. I don’t know what you are trying to achieve, but it’s not helpful to the peace and security of both Japan and China to be stirring up old hatreds. Rather, it is reckless, short-sighted, and counter-productive.

  24. comment number 24 by: Victor

    Mika.
    I agree with you.

    But this whole thread was created in response to my post. I think I’m entitled to express my thoughts on this even though it might have become a “dead” topic for some.

  25. comment number 25 by: takeshima

    Slick Vic, dont stop there.. the whole world revolves around you.

    Usually after a Corean such yourself gets souldly handed his ass, he just goes back to his origional comments. I expect you will soon forget everything that you have learned and revert to your Corean brainwashing.

  26. comment number 26 by: zeta

    It’s very funny that Koreans always blame everything on japanese right-wingers, while most of those right-wingers are, actually, Koreans!

    “Most of those who appear to be right-wingers, she says, are just frustrated people feeling the same sense of isolation that minorities such as herself feel. Many, in fact, are Koreans, she said.”

    http://web.archive.org/web/20040213232014/http://www.asahi.com/english/weekend/K2001120900069.html

  27. comment number 27 by: Azncowboys813

    To Japanese: Shame on you! You sneaky people.
    you guys have no idea how much you guys are lying about history. You did that about Korea and China. Also pay dirty money to make fake maps. Ex. Turning taiwan to japan? HAHAHAHAHA Make me laugh. You freaks are not really innocent. Just like your ancestors.

  28. comment number 28 by: Azncowboys813

    I don’t even need to pay attention to what’s on this site. It just talks about Koreans-Inferior, evil, cry babies, and shitty.

  29. comment number 29 by: Victor

    Takeshima,
    Do me a favour. Please don’t comment on my post, OK?
    I’d appreciate it.

  30. comment number 30 by: ponta

    Azncowboys813

    To Japanese: Shame on you! You sneaky people.
    you guys have no idea how much you guys are lying about history. You did that about Korea and China. Also pay dirty money to make fake maps. Ex. Turning taiwan to japan? HAHAHAHAHA Make me laugh. You freaks are not really innocent. Just like your ancestors.

    Hi Azncowboys813
    I am Japanese.
    Are you Korean?
    I want to know it because I want to know this is a typical way of how Koreans react.
    Thanks

  31. comment number 31 by: takeshima

    Slick Vic , do as you preach.

    Ponta, Azncow813 is corean, you can tell because he makes bizare anti-japanese comments. Probally he is living in the USA and calls himself american like JH, but as you can see he is full of illogical hatred. he probally hates america too.

  32. comment number 32 by: Gerry Bevers

    I think I like Shin Sugok.

  33. comment number 33 by: Azncow813

    Ponta, Azncow813 is corean

    chinese/korean/philipino sneaky bastard

  34. comment number 34 by: Azncow813

    I know you guys hate us too. you think of us as inferior.

  35. comment number 35 by: Rhesus

    Matt (and others), this article may be of interest concerning Japan’s presence in Korea.

  36. comment number 36 by: ponta

    Rhesus
    Thank you for the useful link
    It was interesting.

  37. comment number 37 by: Leo

    I dont know if anyione mentioned this or not but why is the baby in the same position in the first and second photos?


  38. […] wrote about these kinds of fake photos, here, here and here. The last one is specifically mentioned in the article as being […]