<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Taft-Katsura Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rokdrop.com/2009/07/03/taft-katsura-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rokdrop.com/2009/07/03/taft-katsura-again/</link>
	<description>Korea From North to South</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 14:35:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: USinKorea</title>
		<link>http://rokdrop.com/2009/07/03/taft-katsura-again/comment-page-1/#comment-344147</link>
		<dc:creator>USinKorea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:53:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rokdrop.com/?p=14606#comment-344147</guid>
		<description>I did finally locate a source for the full text of the document.

It was in the Pacific Historical Review vol. 9.1 (1940) pp.66-70. I can&#039;t link it because I got it through my college library&#039;s members-only database.

If you look at the two images of the document linked in this post, you&#039;ll see that a large section at the bottom of page two is whited out.

That was done because it wasn&#039;t part of Taft&#039;s telegram - it was a note scribbled by people in the State Department that mentioned China was boycotting American trade goods as a protest to some decision the US government had made concerning China - I think concerning immigration...

Another key piece of information -- this often called &quot;secret treaty&quot; was marked only &quot;confidential&quot; by the State Department and was placed in their &quot;miscellaneous correspondence&quot; section of Record Group 59: General Records of the Department of State.

So, either the State Department didn&#039;t put much interest or weight into this &quot;treaty&quot; -- or -- it was a brilliant cover up:  (not labeling it &quot;secret&quot; or &quot;top secret&quot; and &quot;burying it&quot; in an obscure section of the historical record where it could remain &quot;hidden.&quot;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I did finally locate a source for the full text of the document.</p>
<p>It was in the Pacific Historical Review vol. 9.1 (1940) pp.66-70. I can&#8217;t link it because I got it through my college library&#8217;s members-only database.</p>
<p>If you look at the two images of the document linked in this post, you&#8217;ll see that a large section at the bottom of page two is whited out.</p>
<p>That was done because it wasn&#8217;t part of Taft&#8217;s telegram &#8211; it was a note scribbled by people in the State Department that mentioned China was boycotting American trade goods as a protest to some decision the US government had made concerning China &#8211; I think concerning immigration&#8230;</p>
<p>Another key piece of information &#8212; this often called &#8220;secret treaty&#8221; was marked only &#8220;confidential&#8221; by the State Department and was placed in their &#8220;miscellaneous correspondence&#8221; section of Record Group 59: General Records of the Department of State.</p>
<p>So, either the State Department didn&#8217;t put much interest or weight into this &#8220;treaty&#8221; &#8212; or &#8212; it was a brilliant cover up:  (not labeling it &#8220;secret&#8221; or &#8220;top secret&#8221; and &#8220;burying it&#8221; in an obscure section of the historical record where it could remain &#8220;hidden.&#8221;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GI Korea</title>
		<link>http://rokdrop.com/2009/07/03/taft-katsura-again/comment-page-1/#comment-344095</link>
		<dc:creator>GI Korea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 12:35:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rokdrop.com/?p=14606#comment-344095</guid>
		<description>I have to agree that the Wikipedia article&#039;s phrasing is a fair way of describing the issue.  Nice find with that Taft memorandum.  Interesting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to agree that the Wikipedia article&#8217;s phrasing is a fair way of describing the issue.  Nice find with that Taft memorandum.  Interesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: USinKorea</title>
		<link>http://rokdrop.com/2009/07/03/taft-katsura-again/comment-page-1/#comment-344097</link>
		<dc:creator>USinKorea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 06:40:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rokdrop.com/?p=14606#comment-344097</guid>
		<description>Thanks.  I added a little more with a 2nd update - and that will be the last for this entry.  I think it makes the case clear... </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks.  I added a little more with a 2nd update &#8211; and that will be the last for this entry.  I think it makes the case clear&#8230; </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

