Washington Post publishes Yukihisa Fujita's Letter to the Editor

What do you know.

The Washington Post actually published it.

And thankfully, he does not disavow 9/11 truth in this letter, just the ad hominem nature of the hit piece against him.

An inflammatory and partial view of a Japanese statesman

I would like to correct the erroneous stance taken by your The Post's March 8 editorial "Poisonous thinking in Japan."

First of all, I am not the head of the foreign affairs committee in the House of Councillors, as the editorial suggests, but one of the six directors (not the head) of the ad hoc Research Committee on International Affairs and Global Warming Issues. Nor am I responsible for policymaking in my capacity as director-general of the International Department of the Democratic Party of Japan, as The Post implied.

Furthermore, I agreed to talk to The Post's writer in my personal capacity, regarding the agreed-upon topic of Japan's response to immigration, and he agreed that the opinions I expressed were my own and not party or government policy. I find it disturbing that the writer chose to use our informal chat after the interview in such an inflammatory way.

Above all, I strongly protest The Post's statement that my views exhibit a "profound distrust" of the United States and "reflect a strain of anti-American thought" in my party and the Japanese government. I have many American friends and have spent many decades endeavoring to serve as a bridge between the two countries..

I believe I am owed an apology for this attempt to damage my credibility by painting me with "poisonous thinking," "conspiratorial views," "intellectually bogus," "lunatic fringe" and "reckless and fact-averse," despite the fact that I had never stated "conspiracy" as such.

Yukihisa Fujita, Tokyo

The writer is a member of Japan's House of Councillors.

Thanks to Elizabeth Woodworth

Thanks to Elizabeth Woodworth for bringing this to my attention.

A shill made his ugly appearance...

... in the comments section. I had to respond.


They must be feeling the heat about this gaff...it is interesting that Mr. Fugita refers to the author of this yellow journalism hit piece as someone he had apparently spent some time talking to and had confided in him in a confidential manner, but we still do not get to find out who it is...so it's not just some lackey...this is someone who personally interviewed and spoke to him.

It was Washington Post

It was Washington Post editorial writer Lee Hockstader.


WHOIS Lee Hockstader III?

Yes, Fujita identified him as the person asking for that interview on immigration in his first response (March 8 2010) to WaPo's editorial hit piece.

WHOIS Lee Hockstader III?
Who is Lee Hockstader 3rd, Editorial Writer for the Washington Post and Fujita's interviewer?

Evidently this guy was stationed by WashPost's H.Q. on several strategic hot spots during his "career" at quite interesting times, hmm. In terms of family background he is a son of L. F. Rothschild's investment bank partner and via marriage connected to major French nuclear utility industrialist from Framatome/AREVA (global giant corp. also supplying nuclear fuel in the U.S.). He has been recently vacationing at Stanford on fellowship..

In terms of media-credibility of this guy, similar combination of personal/professional background usually pops up red alerts on any rudimentary intelligence data mining (background check) service there is, including that of Botswana hah. I don't care if this guy appears as role model for full-time/part-time spook or just a naive friend of spooks around him, he is just utterly not convincing..


This is our/your personal tiny victory too!

This is our/your personal tiny victory too!
The assassination attempt on Mr. Fujita backfired!

Don't forget we have pushed WaPo hard on all fronts available to us, we flooded the comments section, and more importantly wrote emails and made phone calls directly to the editors and the execs. I can't measure the overall influence of our action, perhaps it was small in the grand picture, but surely it counted. Thanks to all!

This is clearly supporting 9/11 Truth!

Thank you Yuki for being a man of honour and courage!

Kind regards John

Intelligent rebuttal

of the Washington Post smear:


I wonder why they pick these three points. Maybe the biggest holes in the real story?