Blog


 

 

I can be contacted via the Events page of this site.

Terry Boardman


9.6.2016

RECOMMENDED !

For sober and thought-provoking comment on the subject of Britain’s EU Referendum, please see the following two essays by ANDY THOMAS:

EU or Not EU: Deciding With the Inner Voice and

EU or Not EU: Reasoning the Issues 

as well as responses to those essays and further thoughts on the EU vote by Andy at his website: 

http://truthagenda.org/2016/06/07/responses-to-articles-and-further-thoughts-on-the-eu-vote/


6.10.2014

My translation of LUDWIG POLZER-HODITZ – A European:

A Biography by T.H. Meyer

has been published today by Temple Lodge

This detailed study by Thomas H. Meyer of Basel of  one of Rudolf  Steiner’s closest esoteric pupils, Count Ludwig Polzer-Hoditz (1869-1945), a man who was especially involved with the political issues of Central Europe and with the origins of Social Threefolding as well as with karmic research, was originally published by Perseus Verlag (Basel) in German in 1994. This translation was made from the revised and expanded 2nd edition of 2008.

http://www.templelodge.com/pages/viewbook.php?isbn_in=9781906999643

http://covers.booktopia.com.au/150/9781906999643/ludwig-polzer-hoditz-a-european.jpg


21.8.2014

Interview with Sergei Glaziev

Extensive outlay of the thoughts of Putin’s close collaborator and advisor :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cikvqdMRTTA

 
“Listening between the lines”, we can note that Glaziev, in his references to ”Lisbon to Vladivostok” and the context in which he speaks of this, is very aware of that which the geostrategists of the British Empire 100 years ago (e.g. Halford Mackinder) were most afraid of, and also their successors in the USA today (e.g. Zbigniew Brzezinski) : the possibility of real economic and political/diplomatic/military  cooperation between Russia and Europe (especially, but not only, Germany). Furthermore, there is the even greater challenge to USuk power from Europe-Russia-China (trans-Eurasian) links, a challenge which Glaziev is clearly also aware of and striving for. He knows that USuk are currently using Ukraine as a hammer to break the growing Europe-Russia economic links; he can be sure that after separating Russia from Europe, USuk will turn to try to break  – by one means or another – the Russia-China links.
Unfortunately, Glaziev nowhere  – in this interview at least – reveals his thinking to be anything other than thoroughly materialist.

19.3.2014

The Ukraine Crisis and the ‘Eastern Partnership’

In response to Russia’s absorption of Crimea, some voices in countries that were formerly part of the USSR and are now ‘independent’ are reacting irresponsibly by calling for action by NATO. They talk about Czechslovakia and 1938 and forget what happened 6-9 August 1945. This is not 1938; we now have nuclear weapons and Cuba in 1962 should have taught us the folly of playing nuclear poker with the very exisatence of mankind.

The Ukraine crisis began in late November 2013 when President Yanukovych of Ukraine rejected the Eastern Partnership Association Agreement with the EU and opted instead for an agreement with Russia. That prompted the Maidan demonstrations in Kiev that focused especially on issues of corruption. But soon the demonstrations were joined by Far Right elements and the violence increased, reaching appalling levels in February 2014. But what was the EU Eastern Partnership – a project supposedly devised by Poland and Sweden – actually for? In the autumn, before the protests got seriously underway in Kiev, the following two articles appeared from Lithuania:

http://www.tspmi.vu.lt/tinklarastis/2013/10/tomas-janeliunas-the-main-advocate-of-the-eu-eastern-partnership-programme/   Note the reference to Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard here.
 
http://www.lithuaniatribune.com/50145/kirkilas-eastern-partnership-dilemma-the-eu-or-russia-democracy-or-autocracy-201350145/   From Sept 2013:

For Lithuania, given the country’s European integration experience, the Eastern Partnership has naturally become the No 1 priority of its EU Presidency. Lithuania strongly holds on the position that these countries should be helped to make the ‘right’ decision towards Europe and given a credit of trust in advance, especially now, when Armenia might be lost to Russia’s geopolitical project. Demand or “waiting and seeing” strategy is no longer feasible, if Europe does not want to lose the other three.

The major battle is now for Ukraine (democracy ranking 80th). Georgia and Moldova will likely follow the pattern afterwards. Therefore, Lithuania hopes that during the Vilnius Summit of Eastern Partnership the EU Association Agreement will be signed with Ukraine and the Free Trade Agreements will be initialled with Georgia and Moldova.

Zbigniew Brzezinski in his famous book on Eastern Europe ‘The Grand Chessboard’ states, that “with Ukraine Russia is an Empire, without Ukraine – it’s not. The politicians in Russia took it very literally and doing everything in their power to keep Ukraine in their sphere of influence”. With Ukraine Russia is an Empire, without Ukraine – it’s not.

 

And now from the horse’s mouth:

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21590585-success-eastern-partnership-depends-ukraine-playing-east-against-west  23 Nov 2013 (note the date – just before the Maidan demos got going)

 From the “Charlemagne” section: “Playing East against West” “The success of the Eastern Partnership depends on Ukraine”

“Perhaps not since the end of the cold war has Europe hosted such a raw geopolitical contest.”
(Nb Malcolm Rifkind this morning on BBC radio said: “not since 1945….”)

 
IN JUNE 1709 Peter the Great fought a decisive battle against the Swedish king, Charles XII, at Poltava, in what is now Ukraine. Ukrainians fought on both sides. Ivan Mazepa, a Ukrainian Cossack Hetman, had sided with Sweden in a quest for Ukrainian independence. But the battle ended in Sweden’s defeat: Russia swept westward, dominated all of the Baltics and turned Poland into a satellite.

On November 28th the heads of European Union member states will gather in Vilnius, Lithuania’s capital, for a summit of the “Eastern Partnership”. This project was championed by Poland and Sweden in 2008 as a way of engaging with six former Soviet republics (Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia) after Russia blocked Georgia’s and Ukraine’s path to NATO. The success or failure of this venture depends on whether Ukraine, by far the largest and most important of the six, signs an association and free-trade agreement with the EU.

Radek Sikorski and Carl Bildt, the foreign ministers of Poland and Sweden, have put their reputations on the line. Ukraine is of particular importance to Poland, for historical reasons, but also as an emblem of Poland’s dominant role in eastern Europe. For Mr Bildt, signing the agreement with Ukraine is a test of Europe’s pulling power and its ability to enact its own foreign policy…Losing Ukraine to Europe has long been a Russian nightmare. Although Ukraine declared its independence 23 years ago, Russia has never fully internalised it.
 
As Zbigniew Brzezinski, national-security adviser to President Jimmy Carter, explained two decades ago: “Russia can be either an empire or a democracy, but it cannot be both …Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be an empire, but with Ukraine suborned and then subordinated, Russia automatically becomes an empire.” The “loss” of Ukraine would push Russia’s western border back to where it was in the 17th century. It would also make a mockery of Mr Putin’s project for a Eurasian union and his mission as a gatherer of Russian lands….[final sentence:] Even if the Swedes and Poles triumph in Vilnius, they would be foolhardy to celebrate.

 
[As the writer well knows, it was not so much Sweden or Poland that were seeking to triumph in Vilnius, it was Zbigniew Brzezinski and his comrades. - Terry]
 
[I've just heard Poland has called for a meeting under NATO's self-defence clause; BBC is now discussing NATO 'hard power' options. NATO likely to send forces to eastern Poland: "the Russians only respect military demonstrations of red lines" - Terry]

It’s always worth revisiting Brzezinski’s The Grand Chessboard (1997)…. I did so again recently, and the sheer level of subtle and not so subtle vitriol and venom against Russia that breathes throughout the whole book struck me again. It’s worth watching the man in action here:

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/discussions/audio-video/foreign-affairs-live-featuring-zbigniew-brzezinski 

In the article in Foreign Affairs Sept 2009 which this video interview is referring to, Brzezinski in 2009 here talks about the need for a “cooling off period” after the 2008 war between Russia and Georgia before EU/NATO moves are made in the direction of Ukraine.  Was that cooling off period 2008-2013? Did  Brzezinski actually have input in the formation of the Eastern Partnership concept? He writes in the article: “for promoting and consolidating positive change in the East”  the Eastern Partnership …could very well be an effective instrument…”
 
Putin and his advisers are under no illusions that ZB was behind the spirit of the Eastern Partnership if not the actual concept itself:

http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-mania-ukraine%E2%80%99s-euromaidan-9636
Putin adviser Sergei Glazyev writes:

Despite the fact that Ukraine’s participation in the Common Economic Space with Russia is natural and vital for the development of Ukraine’s economy, culture and education, it is being opposed by the anti-Russian policy of Washington and its NATO allies in Kiev. This policy is steered by Zbigniew Brzezinski who convinced the American geopolitical machine that Russia could never return to its Great Power status without Ukraine.

 
The main problem is the nature of the EU itself. It is not ‘European’ and it is not a bridge; it is a sub-western* construct  – a transatlantic superhighway – serving the transatlantic interests very capably presented through Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1997. Those who see through the EU project have to decide whether they feel it should be accepted as such and that the attempt could be made to metamorphose it into something ‘good’, or else, that it should be scrapped and Europeans begin again with an altogether different form of associative community. Personally, I’m not convinced that the former is the way to go. It seems to me like it would be an attempt to pour ‘new wine in old wineskins’. A real alternative has been available to Europe for almost 100 years since Rudolf Steiner first spoke about the threefolding of the social organism.
 
* ‘sub-western’, as in ‘subordinated’

=====================================

7 May 2013

REISSUE of my first book  MAPPING THE MILLENNIUM – Behind the Plans of the New World Order

My first book Mapping the Millennium – Behind the Plans of the New World Order (original cover shown on this page) , first published in 1998 by Temple Lodge Publishing of London, out of print for the last few years and hard to come by, was re-issued by the same publisher this month, May 2013. It is available via the usual outlets price £13.99.

Book Cover for MAPPING THE MILLENNIUM

========================================================

SANDY HOOK

You may have seen this already.
http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=32818
Very good thread. Watch especially The Sandy Hook Shooting Fully Exposed

Note also that this on the page
Via: NBC:

The weapons used in Friday’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., were legally purchased and registered to Nancy Lanza, the mother of the gunman, Adam Lanza, two law enforcement officials told NBC News.The gunman was clad in black and used two 9mm pistols to kill 20 small children and six adults at the school. It was unclear how many shots were fired there”

is DIRECTLY contradicted by the words of the Medical Examiner in the first video on the Cryptogon page  who said that a rifle was used in the killings.

By the way,  14 December was the day of the fatal attack on Kaspar Hauser who was born in 1812, 200 years before. You might think that is stretching things too far, but if you take seriously the possibility, probability, that that guy in the Cryptogon video  – Gene Rosen – was acting and lying through his teeth about such an event then you have to ask yourself what kind of ‘per-sona’ is he? What level of evil are we dealing with here? And in the year, the Kaspar Hauser anniversary year, in which the Jimmy Saville affair was also blown wide open in the English-speaking world, the worst levels of evil are surely those in which horrendous things are done to children.

If Kaspar Hauser is as important a spiritual being as he is considered to be, then he surely represents something like the true child within each of us and as such, it’s not perhaps too far-fetched to imagine that the day chosen by evil forces for such a deed against children might be associated with him, especially in ‘his’ anniversary year. 14 Dec is the 348th day of the year, leaving 17 days left to run before the end of the year. Kaspar Hauser died on the 17th December from the wounds he received on the 14th.

After the absurdity of the O’Bama kills Osama affair, it’s clear that the PTB in the US now feel they can pull off any stunt, do a little “media magic” hocus-pocus over it and Joe Public in the US will just shrug and let them carry on.

By the way, I very much recommend the following on 9/11 if you haven’t seen it; it’s made by architects, engineers, physicists, chemists and other knowledgeable people:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg The fact that the mainstream media ignores this kind of evidence is IMHO evidence of…. dare I say it…. a cover-up. Yet Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen and now Mali go on, alljustifed by 9/11 and the so-called ‘al-Qaeda threat’.

One of the things that operates like a clamp on some people’s minds is the thought that “our government would never do that!” which keeps them from seeing that a government could actually deliberately bring about the deaths of its own citizens by commission or omission. People on both right and left fall for this – the right because of the patriotic “my country right or wrong” attitude, and the left because of their tendency to believe in government and state action (as a symbol of community and protection of the weak) againsy selfish and greedy individuals. Especially when there’s a leftwing government in power, they find it hard to conceive that it could kill its own citizens for ulterior motives. But that’s what our government did in 2003 when we invaded Iraq and what the American government did then too and also in 1991 and also in 1967 when it allowed the Israelis to attack an American warship and kill many of the crew, the USS LIberty.

Here are two documentaries on the issue, one British, one American.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOBeqvgsQas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aVXj7hFZx4  BBC


 

 

Some good news from Japan -  perhaps…
but given the short life cycle of Japanese administrations (most recent Prime  Ministers have lasted for 18 months -2 years max) and the great pressure from Big Business, I don’t hold out much hope for success from the politicians, and there is no firm deadline given. It’ll have to be up to the people to hold the government to its word.
Much worse news from Japan is the following detailed article, based on declassified documents and other research, which makes clear that de facto, Japan already HAS nuclear weapons and the capacity to deliver them:
This is the best piece I’ve read on this in a long time. It makes clear that Japan  – thanks to the USA – already HAS nuclear weapons de facto AND the missiles to deliver them – both of them developed covertly to hide the fact from the Japanese people. Hence the secrecy over Fukushima and Japanese governments’ secrecy over the nuclear programme from the beginning in the 1960s.
===================================================

China – Japan: Just The Tip Of The Iceberg – Analysis

 

Though I do not sympathise with the line taken by this globalist-aligned writer, I think he makes one very cogent point: behind the Senkaku issue potentially is indeed the Ryukyu (Okinawa Islands) issue. The Senkakus never actually belonged to the formerly semi-autonomous kingdom of the Ryukyus, but the Japanese government since the 1890s has always acted as though they did. The Japanese feudal domain of Satsuma (based in Kyushu, southern Japan) conquered the Ryukyus in the early 17th century and brought them under their control. The central government in Edo (later Tokyo) ignored this until the end of the Shogunate in 1867. When the new imperial Meiji government took over in 1868, Japan moved to take over Okinawa for the Japanese State in 1879.
If the Japanese nationalists and/or government can succeed in somehow linking the Senkakus to the Ryukyus in the mind of China and the world, then they can start to accuse China of harbouring desires to seize the Ryukyus. Until the 1870s the Ryukyu Kingdom used to pay tribute to China, and today some Chinese nationalists are already calling for Japan to quit the Ryukyus, saying they rightfully belong to China. Certainly, the Chinese navy would be very happy to have bases in Okinawa, as this would enable it to ‘break out’ into the Pacific, something the USA is determined to prevent (see CFR magazine Foreign Affairs May/June 2010 article by Neo-Con hawk Robert Kaplan).

Japan: U.S. Pawn In Campaign To Encircle China

Time for Tough Measures

By Chu Zhaogen

—————————

WWII Clouds Loom Over China-Japan Dispute on Senkaku Islands

 

The Sino-Japanese dispute has escalated into WWII memories, threats and boycotts as well as unleashing demonstrations.

In its relations with Japan, China frequently brings up the topic of Japanese aggression and atrocities in China from the late 19th century Sino-Japanese war continuing throughout World War II. The dispute with Japan is now part of the legacy of World War II and China claims that under the Potsdam Declaration of 1945, Japan was obligated to return all the territories seized illegally.

The above means that the dispute over the islands is now connected to one of the most highly charged issues in Sino-Japanese history, making it a matter of national honor for the Chinese that is not subject to negotiation.

In the interim, China has allowed anti-Japanese demonstrators a relative freehand (“Their feelings are perfectly understandable” explained the Chinese Foreign Ministry) and the Japanese Embassy in Beijing has issued warnings to Japanese citizens and businessmen to take precautionary measures.

Japanese participation in public and private events in China has been canceled as part of the anti-Japanese mood.

———————-

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/politics/AJ201209130062

New Japanese populist party headed by young charismatic leader from the working class, Toru Hashimoto, Mayor of Osaka, includes disputed islands in its logo.

Osaka [Hashimoto] rejects petition for referendum on nuclear power

 

http://122.248.242.148/article/behind_news/politics/AJ201203280037

===============================================


The China-Japan Dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands

Posted by on Sep 19, 2012 in blog | 0 comments

 

I think a key in all this is the links between Governor of Tokyo Shintaro Ishihara and US rightwing circles. All the rapid escalation that is happening now, is the result of Ishihara’s speech at the Heritage Foundation in April 2012 where he first floated his idea of buying the islands for Tokyo.


http://www.japanfocus.org/-Gavan-McCormack/3821

Troubled Seas: Japan’s Pacific and East China Sea Domains (and Claims)

Gavan McCormack

The memory of the disastrous path onto which Japan was led over eight decades ago by insistence on “positive diplomacy” to defend the “lifeline” of inalienable territorial rights in “Man-Mo” (Manchuria-Mongolia), and ultimately China proper, has faded in Japan, but in China it is not forgotten. The uncompromising repetition of today’s no less strident but vacuous formula of koyu rights to Senkaku/Diaoyu is noted with foreboding. The fact that it is almost precisely echoed in territorial claims on all sides—by China (including Hong Kong and Taiwan), Japan and Korea, and by the South China Sea states in respect of that region’s maritime zones—makes it difficult to be optimistic of any easy or early resolution.

The unfolding of the events of 2012 showed just how easily public opinion can be inflamed. The self-righteous insistence on exclusive ownership, by any of the three state parties or, indeed, by the “World Chinese Alliance,” is unlikely to offer a way to convert the East China Sea into one of “Peace, Cooperation and Friendship.” As one looks in vain on all sides for some trace of the political wisdom and vision to declare such a program, it grows the more likely that, should it surface, it would be denounced as “weak-kneed.” While the Japanese (and international) media denounce China for its “increasingly narrow-minded, self-interested, truculent, hyper-nationalist” stance,79 and refer to China in the context of the ocean territorial disputes of 2012 as having “thrown down the gauntlet,” 80 in many quarters Tokyo’s uncompromising and belligerent tone passes without comment……..

Intent on maintaining strategic and tactical superiority over China and defying its “A2/AD” aspirations in advance, the US in 2010 developed what it refers to as its “Air-Sea Battle” concept, followed early in 2011 by the “Pacific Tilt” doctrine. The commitment under the former to coordinated military actions across air, land, sea, space, and cyber space to maintain global hegemony and crush any challenge to it, and the shift under the latter of the US’s global focus from the Middle East and Africa to East Asia have profound implications for Okinawa. From the Chinese viewpoint the Okinawan islands resemble nothing so much as a giant maritime Great Wall intervening between its coast and the Pacific Ocean, potentially blocking naval access to the Pacific Ocean. For Okinawa it means that those islands become nothing less than a “front line.” Parts of the island chain, including notably the Miyako and Yaeyama (Yonaguni, Iriomote, and Ishigaki) island groups might be seen as fronting, if not straddling, the First Chinese line, while the Miyako strait (between Okinawa Island and Miyako Island), offers a crucial access path for Chinese naval forces to and from the Pacific, through waters which Japan concedes are international (or “open seas”) but within Japan’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Okinawans note grimly that the implications of the two doctrines – dispersal of US forces to locations at or beyond the “second line” (Guam, Tinian, the Philippines, Hawaii, and northern Australia) where vulnerability to Chinese missile or naval attack might be minimized – are that the front-line role assigned to Okinawa is assumed to carry a high degree of vulnerability.

Mounting tension:
Hong Kong newspaper:  recent demos in Tokyo. Note the slogans IN ENGLISH clearly intended for Korean and Chinese TV.
———————————-

China willing to risk ‘conflict’ as it claims waters around Senkakus

Yu Zhirong, a senior official of the State Oceanic Administration who was formerly with the People’s Liberation Army Navy, told The Asahi Shimbun: “We will have to chase off Japan Coast Guard vessels from Chinese territorial waters. We are not fearful of risking a minor conflict.” http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/politics/AJ201209150064

———————————————-

ANALYSIS: From China’s viewpoint, Japan should have kept isles problem shelved

But officials in China’s foreign ministry feared that things would spiral out of control if Japan and China began openly clamoring for ownership of the islands.

“What we are calling for is to maintain the status quo,” said one ministry official shortly before Japan purchased three of the Senkaku Islands from their private owner.

China believes Japan has opened a Pandora’s box by moving to purchase the islands.

“Japan reneged on a tacit understanding,” said a researcher at a government-affiliated think tank in China.

————————————-

 

Sunday, Sep. 16, 2012

Anti-Japan rallies expand to 85 cities

Protesters clash with Chinese riot police as demonstrations enter sixth day

Kyodo
On Saturday, more than 80,000 took to the streets in at least 57 cities to denounce Japan’s nationalization of the islands, marking the largest anti-Japan protests since the two countries normalized diplomatic relations in 1972. (NB 40 years ago)
“These irrational moves can actually escalate the crisis between the two nations, and may be what the Japanese rightwingers are expecting to see,” Liu Jiangyong, vice dean of the Institute of Modern International Relations at Tsinghua University in Beijing, was quoted as saying in the Sunday issue of the China Daily.  EXACTLY!
———————————–
Sunday, Sep. 16, 2012

Nishimiya, top envoy to China, dies in hospital

Nishimiya, 60, collapsed near his home in Tokyo and was hospitalized on Thursday — only two days after becoming the top envoy to China. The cause of his death has not been determined….Nishimiya was found lying unconscious on a street near his home in Shibuya Ward by a passerby. Police have ruled out foul play.
——————————–

Japan Frets over U.S. Support in China Dispute

By Kirk Spitzer September 14, 2012
For an officially pacifist country, Japan has a deceptively large and powerful military. More than 250,000 of its men and women are in uniform, and its annual defense spending is the 6th highest in the world. Its maritime forces bristle with modern submarines and surface warships……

“The PLA Navy is aware of its limitations, and they don’t want to get a beating from the Japanese,” says Patalano, who presented a series of lectures in Beijing and Tokyo this month. “The more likely scenario would be for China to insert special forces under cover of night, by parachute or other means. When the Japanese wake up in the morning and see Chinese soldiers on one of their islands, what do they do then?”

Brad Glosserman, executive director of the Pacific Forum CSIS in Honolulu, says there’s little doubt that the U.S. would respond if shooting were to break out between China and Japan. The key, Glosserman says, is to make sure the Japanese know exactly what they can count on from the U.S. — and what, if anything, they can’t.

“The U.S. will be there, because if we aren’t, our credibility is shot and the Japanese will never trust us again. That would transform the regional security environment, and the Chinese will think they have carte blanche,” says Glosserman. “But the problem is, do Americans and Japanese agree on what ‘being there’ means? Does that mean submarines? Surface warships? Helicopters with Marines rappelling to the ground? The Americans need to understand what the Japanese expect of them, because failure to do those things could cause big problems.”

———————————

Japan’s territorial disputes: will they lead to constitutional change?

Author: Rikki Kersten, ANU Sept 12
———————————–

 

http://shisaku.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/some-very-tense-family-dinners.html

Thank you for your post. Ishihara did have an ulterior motive to go to Washington. He wanted to lobby some in the U.S. Congress directly for a conversion of USFJ Yokota Airbase into a joint military-civilian airport — a hobby horse he has been pursuing for many, many years.

 

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Gavan-McCormack/3821 

(Terry – a very good overview article of the Senkaku/Diaoyu problem and of Ishihara’s sheer gross irresponsibility)

Outspoken and bold when addressing China, the courage of Ishihara and other Japanese politicians and media figures appears to desert them when facing the United States, whether over Senkaku/Diaoyu or indeed even over Ishihara’s own domain in the Metropolis of Tokyo, where the little-used 700 hectare Yokota base sits on a prime site and the US Air Force maintains control over significant sections of the national capital’s air space.

———————————————-

 

http://www.asahi.com/english/

The government’s pledge to pull the plug on nuclear power by the 2030s could prove to be a hollow promise, with few details yet given on how to achieve it and how to reconcile contradictions along the way. (September 16)

——————————

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201209150058

Japanese business circles dismiss government no-nukes goal

———————————-