From: harkcom@spinach.pa.yokogawa.co.jp (Alton Harkcom)
Subject: Re: In response to Mr. Harkcom
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 01:32:01 GMT
	<BxILC7.7GK@ncifcrf.gov>
	<HARKCOM.92Nov16095130@spinach.pa.yokogawa.co.jp>
	<BxtGsL.D47@ncifcrf.gov>
Organization: Yokogawa Electric Corporation, Tokyo, Japan

In article <BxtGsL.D47@ncifcrf.gov> masuda@fcs280b.ncifcrf.gov
   (Michiaki Masuda) writes:

 =}   As I posted before, I stopped discussing the exchange student incident
 =}on the net. However, as this message of Mr. Harkcom seems to be more of a 
 =}challenge in public against my personality than a comment on the incident
 =}itself, I'd like to take a liberty to respond by spending some bandwidth.

   My challenge was to your personal attack on me and a reply as to the
misunderstanding of your post...

 =}>  Might I also suggest that you be more explicit in your
 =}>comments to avoid such misunderstandings (I tried to read your mind, but by
 =}>the time your article arrived here you were thinking about something else:)
 =}
 =}   I doubt that the reason for your misunderstanding is on my side. 

   But your comment was a response to Mr. Ngai's comment as to the police
knowing more about tactics and the the incident than the two of you.
Your and Mr. Ngai's comments again:

	 =} >Based on the response of the local police who know a lot more
	 =} >about tactics and the incident than you do, my explanation seems
	 =} >much more plausible.
	 =}
	 =}Probably, the local police knows only little more than you and I do.
	 =}The person who knows best cannot talk any longer.

   So the reason for my misunderstanding was due to your comments being
very easy to misunderstand...

 =}> =}   I wonder why you suspected my feeling that way. Is that because I am
 =}> =}Japanese?
 =}
 =}>   No, it is because your comments appear to say that Hattori was the one
 =}>who new best what happened.  Even if you were a caucasian I would question
 =}>such an obviously twisted opinion.
 =}
 =}   Then, your mentioning Yoshi Hattori's nationality was totally unncessary
 =}for you to make your point.

   No it was not.  It is the only thing we know about Mr. Hattori that
could easily be used in what was apparently a logically twisted argument
(who would claim that exchange students are more trustworthy :)
Mentioning YOUR nationality would have been totally unnecessary and an
obvious act of racism on my part...

 =}> =}Or are you somehow trying to label me as a racist by making 
 =}> =}whatever biased distortion and deletion that you can make as you did
 =}> =}in another posting?
 =}
 =}>   If you can find such a post then please remind me of it as I don't
 =}>recall ever having made "biased distortion and deletion" of any post.
 =}>If you can't find such a post then I expect an apology for your sick
 =}>(and incorrect) accusation...
 =}
 =}    If you posted in an attempt to assert that I had been making my comment 
 =}in favor of only one side of the incident, that's a biased distortion of the
 =}fact.

   Since your original comment was apparently a racist comment I asked
for a clarification.  I did not make any claims as to you being a racist.
And once you made your intentions clear I apologized for the
misunderstanding, did I not?

 =}    In article <HARKCOM.92NOV10133131@spinach.pa.yokogawa.co.jp> you cited
 =}a part of my article <Bx81r9.H19@ncifcrf.gov> as:
 =}
 =}> [other racist bull deleted]
 =}
 =}    This is what I meant by "biased deletion." If you want to persuade the 
 =}netters that I am racist, let them judge.

   Yes, my comment as to the content of the deletion was biased,  but the
deletion itself was in no way biased as I was not addressing the deleted
comments.  In that particular post I was addressing the preceding racist
comments.  It is good netiquette to delete comments that are not pertinent
to the reply (those who wish to reread everything said can go back to the
original article)...  It was bad netiquette for me to label the deleted
comments as racist though.  I apologize for the bad manners.

  However, your claim was that I 'made "biased distortion and deletion"
of another poster's article to try and show that they were racist'...
Either produce such an article or apologize for your slander...

 =}  I don't believe that my accucation was sick or incorrect. It was a serious
 =}and sincere one. I don't believe that I owe you any apology.

   If you feel so then defend your claim.  Your accusation may have been
serious and sincere, but unless you are prepared to defend your claim then
I'm afraid you are not being either serious or sincere but propogating
"biased distortion"...

 =}P.S. I suppose that this thread could be another factor to worsen the S/N 
 =}ratio of s.c.j. 

   It obviously is.  But you made a public slander against me and I want
either a demonstration that your slander is true or an apology for the
false claims.  You are free to take this to email as I don't care if
your apology is public or not (though if you can provide evidence for
your claim then I prefer it to be public)...

 =}Unless you believe that your attempt to convince other 
 =}nertters that I am racist is beneficial to s.c.j., you might want to either
 =}stop this thread or reply me by mail.

   I have made no attempt to demonstrate that you are a racist.  It is you
who attempted to slander me by making false claims of such and to attack
my character in general (calling me a biased distortionist).  I merely
pointed out areas of your posts which contained what appeared to be racist
comments and asked for clarification.

 =}If you post your reply, I'll either ignore it or reply by mail.

   You can ignore it if you wish.  You can reply by email if your wish.
You can post to this group if you like as I have now publically accused
you of slandering me.  You have that freedom.  Which choice you make
will depend on how mature you are in handling responsibilities.  (I don't
claim to have handled this maturely either.)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan