Clark's article in the Japan Times and my rebuttal



Mr. Gergory Clark wrote an article "Racist banner looks frayed" in the Japan Times on Feb. 17, 2005.
He touched many subjects in this article, among them the Otaru Onsen lawsuit. He reported some faulty facts and I requested the Japan Times to correct those errors.
After several emails and direct phonecall from me to the Japan Times, they finally agreed to print a letter to the editor from me in their March 9th issue.

But I am not completely happy with the outcome of the letter, since it was edited by the Japan Times. I admit, the editing was minor and I am thankful that some of my grammatical mistakes were edited, but unfortunately the point about Clark being very aggressive in his language did not make it into the purinted version.

The parts that the Japan Times deleted are in red.

Furthermore, I used the word "sabotaged" which was changed to "vandalized" by the Japan Times.

There is a distinct difference. "Sabotage" means to tamper with a device or machine with the intent so that it malfunctions and causes greater harm.
"Vandalism" is property destruction without merrit for the destrutor.

To give examples:
Cutting into a car tyre with a knife is vandalism, Putting a nail into a tyre, so that it deflates slowly is sabotage.

"Sabotage" can cost lives, "vandalism" rarely does.

Olaf


written by Olaf Karthaus
as it was published in the Japan Times on March 9th 2005
Corrections of Mr. Clark's article from Feb. 17, 2005

I was a plaintiff in the Otaru Onsen lawsuit, and read with great interest the article by Gregory Clark.
Clark writes: "A bathhouse that had suffered severe property destruction at the hands of drunken Russian seamen had felt it had no alternative but to put up a "No Foreigner" sign. It too was hit with a suit claiming it had violated the U.N. convention."End of quote.

This is not true. The bathhouse in Otaru that was sued by the three plaintiffs did not suffer any property destruction by foreigners. The court documents do not mention property destruction. There is no police report either. The bathhouse put up the "Japanese Only" sign more or
less from day one of their business.

With the false information that the sued bathhouse had suffered "severe property destruction" Clark portraits the bathhouse as the victim of violence. And me as profiting from this victim in a most despising way - suing them and demanding monetary compensation! He uses very graphic and violent vocabulary (...ultrasensitive foreigners ...only to be dragged through the courts...[the bathhouse] was hit with a [law]suit....) to make his point.

Is it too far fetched to think that some sick elements in this society might read Clark's articles and take it one step further: "look, here we have this famous foreigner Gregory Clark in Japan. Even HE hates the plaintiffs. Let's beat the ultrasensitivity out of them, so that they
learn how it feels being hit and dragged". My property has already been repeatedly (three times in six months) sabotaged in such a way that my family and I have been put in a potentially life-threatening situation. I do not know if this sick person did it because of the lawsuit, but chances are high.

I did not sue the bathhouse lightly. I knew of the possible
consequences. My family and I were willing to take the risks. Those risks are already high enough. What we do not need is someone as intelligent and influential as Clark pouring oil into the fire of anti-foreign sentiments by using violent language and spreading rumours.

I haven't sued a bathhouse that suffered severe damage.
Neither, by the way, did I write a book about it, as Clark claims:"  The litigious foreigners involved have now published a book[.]"

Olaf Karthaus, Sapporo
Fueling antiforeigner sentiment

I read Gregory Clark's Feb. 17 article with great interest, since I was one of the plaintiffs in the Otaru (Hokkaido) Onsen lawsuit. Clark writes: "A bathhouse that had suffered severe property destruction at the hands of drunken Russian seamen had felt it had no alternative but to put up a 'No Foreigner' sign. It too was hit with a suit claiming it had violated the U.N. convention."

This is not true. The bathhouse in Otaru that was sued by the three plaintiffs did not suffer any property destruction by foreigners. The court documents do not mention property destruction. There is no police report either. The bathhouse put up the "Japanese Only" sign more or less from day one of their business.

By leaving the false impression that the bathhouse had suffered "severe property destruction," Clark portrays me as someone trying to profit off a victim of violence.






 Is it too far-fetched to think that some sick elements in this society might read Clark's articles and, after thinking that even a famous foreigner like Clark hates the plaintiffs, go one step further? My property has been vandalized (three times in six months) in such a way that my family and I have felt as if our lives were threatened. I don't know that these incidents are related to the lawsuit, but I'm guessing the chances are high that they are.



I did not make the decision to sue the bathhouse lightly. I knew of the possible consequences. My family and I were willing to take the risks. Those risks are already high enough. We don't need someone as intelligent and influential as Clark pouring oil on the fire of antiforeign sentiments by spreading rumors.

By the way, I have not written a book about my experiences, as Clark's remark about "litigious foreigners" suggests.

OLAF KARTHAUS
Sapporo



Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1