1."Federal agencies have the authority to intervene in protests, picket signs, or blockades. The law is impartial: it must be enforced without exception."
2."Federal forces are not required to have judicial oversight for their actions."
3."Forces are not obligated to consider alternative entrances or pathways. If the main path is blocked, their duty is to clear it."
4."This action continues until the flow of traffic is fully restored."
5."To carry out these acts, forces will use the minimum necessary force, which is sufficient and proportional to the situation they are addressing."
6."Instigators and organizers of the protest will be identified."
7."Vehicles used in the protest will be identified and subjected to citations or penalties."
8."Data of the instigators, accomplices, participants, and organizers will be transmitted to the authorities through appropriate channels."
9."Notices will be sent to the judge in cases of damage, such as burning flags."
10."In cases involving minors, relevant authorities will be notified, and the guardians of these youths who bring them to these demonstrations will face sanctions and punishment."
11."The costs incurred by security operations will be borne by the responsible organizations or individuals. In cases involving foreigners with provisional residency, information will be forwarded to the National Directorate of Immigration."
12."A registry will be created for organizations that participate in these types of actions."
Libertarian uses fascist argument
History of fascist apologism I see
That was in a comment comparing Japan to Turkey, so either you really failed to read anything else or you are expecting others to just believe you. In any case you are a clown.
What you said is meaningless. Japan isn't just unapologetic, they're actively denying that they committed war crimes. They're also governed by fascists who actively want to build the military back up, so "peaceful and harmless" for now maybe.
That I actually agree with, their future seems not so cute.
Consider also their 99% conviction rate and legal segregation
i don't wanna um actually and in no way do i think the current and prior administrations at any level which could be said to hold office has completely vindicated themselves (as i understand is the case as it is said from countries which were majorly affected, e.g. china and south korea)
i do think it's important to know the sequence of events and that there was something that some people might point to as "aha! we did apologize, what else do you want!!?"
I'm not the one to determine if a proper apology has been made, though I like to be informed what such folks might think and what the perpetrators likewise think, oh, and the history or sequence of events.
I pasted a condensed timeline here, source is wikipedia:
NOTE: This one is so lame, i don't know what the original is (i'm assuming it's translated) and this seems so watered down, especially because HE WAS ALIVE THEN ARRGHHH AND IT WAS DONE IN HIS NAME ARSDFLJKGSDKLJF
The trend is towards lameness I think. Even repeating the words someone else said before (to honor them or something) would be nice as what was said before seems to accept way more responsibility and, crucially, acknowledges the specifics of what happened.
None seem to mention the 'presumed supremacy' and 'pan-asian empire' that I think drove some of the ideology. I don't know what else to call that kind of obfuscation besides cowardice.