被災地を想う時 / When I yearn for the stricken area No.8

総てが虚偽だ / All is false

細かな事は別の項で触れたいと思いますが、今回の大騒動の基である電力会社については、勉強していませんので上面だけにします。

東電にしても九電にしても問題視する以前の、組織（ 人間 ） 魂、精神、体質などの問題であって語るに値しません。 未だに国営企業だとでも思っているのではないのかな！？

私たちが子供の頃は、人間のやる事に完璧はないと親から良く云われました。自分の失敗に気付いたら素直に非を認め詫びなさいと教えられた。

多分この教訓は詫びる恥ずかしさが、同じ過ちを繰り返さない戒めになると教えているのだろう。確かに非を詫びない人間は同じ過ちを繰り返す。

彼等は定例会見でも嘘の説明が多いから、記者の質問に何時もおどおどして不自然な回答しか出来ない。こんな回答を真剣に聞くこと自体に、疑問を感じてしまうのは私だけだろうか？ 私だけならば悲しすぎます。

専門家（ 学者 ） に付きましてはひとつの質問をさせて下さい。

私は人間が頭で考え己の手足で作り出すものに、完璧な品物はあり得ないと信じて生きて来た。原発の賛否論は別問題として、先生方は原発は本当に壊れない、有害物質は流失しない、安全な施設だと信じておられたのでしょうか！？

もし信じて原発建設を容認していたとしたら、いま巷でバーゲンセールの様に飛び交っている、「 想定外 」 と云う言葉をどう解釈すべきなのでしょうか！？

単純に解しますと、大震災に対する想像力がおよばない状態で基準を定め、建設を押し進めて運転開始に至り、今回の惨事に遭遇してしまったことになりませんか？

原発建設に携わっていなかった、直接の関係者ではなかったとでも言われるのでしたら、先生方が過去に行った講義、講演、論説などを思い起こして頂きたいのです。

多少なりとも専門家としての自尊心なり責任感をお持ちでしたら、政府の要人も東京電力の関係者も先生方も、「 想定外 」 と云う言葉を使うべきではないと考えます。

まるで鬼の首でも獲ったかの様に、胸でも張るのではないかと危ぶむ勢いで、国会でも、記者会見でも、テレビのインタビューでも想定外を平然と口にする。被害者の痛みを少しでも感じているのであれば、 「 想定外 」 と云う言葉は使うべきでない。 謹んで欲しいと心から願っております。

The close thing wants to conflict in a different clause, but does it only in the top surface because I do not study about the electric power company which there is under this uproar.　

If it is problems such as an organization (human being) soul, mind, the constitution before bringing it into question even if I make Kyushu Electric Power even if I make Tokyo Electric and talks, I do not deserve it.　But will not you yet think that it is a national enterprise?

We were said not to have the perfection from a parent in the human thing that we did well in a childhood. It was told that I apologized in acknowledgment of a fault obediently if I noticed one's failure.

Probably this lesson will be to teach when I admonish you that feeling embarrassed to apologize for do not repeat the same mistake. The human being who does not apologize for a fault surely repeats the same mistake.

They are regular interviews, but I am always afraid of the question of the reporter, and it is possible for only an unnatural answer to have much false explanation. Only as for me, I am too sad whether it will be only me that find a question in to hear such an answer seriously.

Let me ask one question when an expert (scholar) is accompanied.

If the perfect article was impossible, I believed it to a thing a human being thought with a head, and to create by one's hands and feet and lived. When the toxic substance which was not really broken was the safe institution which was not washed away, as for the yes and no theory of the nuclear power generation, in the teachers, would the nuclear power generation be believed as the other problem?

How should I interpret words to say when "unexpected" flying like a sale in the public now if I believe it and accepted nuclear power generation construction?

I set a standard that you understood it simply in a state beyond the imagination for the great earthquake disaster and I promoted construction and have not met with this tragic incident to a startup?

If but I am said not to have been the direct person concerned who was not engaged in nuclear power generation construction, I want teachers are past and to recall a lecture, a lecture, the article that you performed.

The very important person of the government thinks that the person concerned of Tokyo Electric should not use the words to say when teachers "are unexpected" more or less if I have the pride as the expert or a sense of responsibility.

I am calm, and, by force to be anxious about when even a chest may be made, even an interview of TV eats the assumption outside at both the Diet and the press conference as if I totally caught even the neck of the ogre. You should not use the words to say, "I am unexpected" if you feel the pain of the victim to be that there few it. I wish that I want you to be careful heartily.