Friday, September 30, 2005

Bronze Man

U.S. Interference Concerning Withdrawal of Statue of MacArthur in S. Korea under Fire why does everything the K.C.N.A is against have to burn?
Pyongyang, September 29, 2005 (KCNA) -- The Solidarity of Youth and Students for the Implementation of the June 15 South-North Joint Declaration in south Korea reportedly declared that the reappraisal of MacArthur is a work for the south Korean people to do, not a work for the U.S. to meddle in he IS an American hero. The organization in a statement issued on Sept. 25 in denunciation of the U.S. interference in the internal affairs concerning the removal of his statue said: Members of the U.S. House of Representatives in a letter to the U.S. embassy in Seoul on Sept. 15 openly expressed their complaints, describing the U.S. troops present in south Korea as "liberators" and saying that they can not consent to appraise the hero who commanded the liberation army as a war criminal. Hell NO! The statement termed it a plain interference in the internal affairs of the Korean nation. The statement went on: It is natural that the people are now reappraising MacArthur who massacred numerous innocent civilians and the struggle for withdrawal of his statue is gaining momentum where's the momentum for tearing down Kim Il Sung's statues then. No countries have built a statue of the man who killed their nation. Except Russia, Iraq, Libya, China, and of course... North Korea.
The U.S. patronage of MacArthur symbolic of aggression and war and victory is a revelation of its plunderous nature. Anyone who wants to defend the nation should not yield to the U.S. interference but turn out in the struggle for the removal of the statue of MacArthur and the pullback of the U.S. troops. G'luck with THAT objective...

Thursday, September 29, 2005

Disclosed Rhetoric

U.S. Nuclear Attack Exercise against DPRK Disclosed

Pyongyang, September 28, 2005 (KCNA) -- It was disclosed by a confidential document of the U.S. air force that the U.S. staged a nuclear attack exercise against the DPRK in 1998, am I reading the archives or something? according to south Korean CBS and SBS. The document says that the fourth combat air division under the ninth U.S. air force mobilized 24 fighters including F-15, AWACS and air tanker for staging a long-distance nuclear bomb-dropping drill in Florida early in June 1998, according to the operation plan worked out under the simulated conditions of another Korean war. The document includes the words saying that the nuclear attack exercise is aimed at reducing north Korea to ashes by the order of the president. So, they're pissed that the U.S was conducting military exercises on American soil 7 years ago. I must be missing something...
Choe Song, legislator from the Uri Party who obtained and disclosed the document, noted that this fact indicates how long an anti-communist group of the U.S. has been engaged in an in-depth examination of a preemptive nuclear attack on the north. Ahhhh, so "an anti communist group(?)" was "engaged" in an "examination" of, some kind... Was information of some kind supposed to disseminated somewhere in this "report"?

Wednesday, September 28, 2005

The Hunt Is On

By Stephanie Ho
Washington September 28, 2005
"If the North Koreans have truly made a strategic decision to get rid of their weapons, what we envision is a cooperative approach, where we will be assisted, we, the international community, will be assisted by the North Koreans in the verification," said Mr. Hill. "And we do not look forward to, as I've said before, to having some sort of Easter egg hunt or some sort of game of hide and seek."

9.5 sarcastic months ago... Canada.

"War on Terrorism"--U.S. Aggressive Doctrine Pyongyang

December 15, 2004 (KCNA) -- U.S. President Bush, during his Canada visit some time ago, twaddled? that " the three goals of U.S. diplomacy were building effective multilateral institutions for such security issues as weapons nonproliferation, fighting terrorism and promoting freedom and democracy in the broader Middle East to enhance the security."
Is that an exact quote? Could be...
He also said he hoped to foster a wide international consensus among the three great goals. In this regard, Rodong Sinmun in a signed article Wednesday says: The "war on terrorism" carried on by the U.S. is an offspring of its unilateralism and military strong-arm policy. It is a wanton infringement on democracy and a vicious aggressive doctrine for spreading U.S.-style "democracy" in the international community with strength. Fucken Eh! The infamous "war on terrorism" is what the U.S. invented as a new aggressive doctrine for realizing its wild ambition for world domination by spreading "democracy" of its style with strength through a crafty use of the trend of the international situation that has changed in the new century.

After the "September 11 incident" ????... ! in 2001, the U.S. has exploited the "fight with terrorism" as a lever and a means for spreading its "democracy" in the world in the new century by force. It raised the curtain of the "war on terrorism" by launching the Afghan war under the cloak of "wiping out" the stronghold of Al Qaeda. What it sought was to mislead world opinion with the plausible veil of "anti-terrorism", expand its military and political domination of major areas of resources and strategic vantages and spread "democracy" of its style in the world with strength. Through the Afghan war and war of aggression in Iraq the U.S. could secure these strategic areas on which it had cast greedy eyes for a long time and carry out its military infiltration and expansion of its sphere of influence in Central Asian countries and the Middle East. The U.S .imperialists are the hideous force of aggression and destroyer of human civilization and the worst violator of the human rights in the world wantonly violating the international law and universal ethics and morality of humankind under the cover of "war on terrorism " and seeking to make the world a unipolar world ruled by strong-arm practice and hegemony of the U.S. They are intensifying the "human rights" offensive aimed at the "overthrow of the system" and spread of "democracy" of American style, impudently branding the DPRK as part of the "axis of evil" and a "rogue state". All the countries aspiring after independence should check and shatter their aggressive "war on terrorism", clearly seeing through the criminal and dangerous nature of their maneuvers to spread U.S.-style "democracy" in the world by force.

Now you all know where I get my angry sarcasm from...

No Change

DPRK's Stand on Solution to Nuclear Issue Reiterated

Pyongyang, September 27, 2005 (KCNA) -- The DPRK will closely follow how the U.S. will move at the phase of "action for action" in the future. A DPRK delegate declared this at a plenary session of the Geneva Conference on Disarmament on September 22, referring to the close of the second phase of the fourth six-party talks on the nuclear issue between the DPRK and the U.S. The DPRK approached the talks with magnanimity, patience and sincerity, proceeding from the principled, fair and aboveboard stand to achieve the general goal of the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula at any cost to the U.S, and at no cost to Kim Jong Il, and at last succeeded in meeting all the challenges, making it possible to agree on the joint statement, "verbal commitments,"adjectives don't do justice, I guess he noted, and went on:
The joint statement reflects the DPRK's consistent stand on the settlement of the DPRK-U.S. nuclear issue and, at the same time, the commitments of the U.S. and south Korea responsible for denuclearizing the whole of the Korean Peninsula. The DPRK will feel no need this week to keep even a single nuclear weapon if its relations with the U.S. are normalized, bilateral confidence is built and it is not exposed to the U.S. nuclear threat any longer.
What is most essential is, therefore, for the U.S. to provide light water reactors to the DPRK as early as possible as evidence proving the former's substantial recognition of the latter's nuclear activity for a peaceful purpose.
And the U.S gets what in return? A happy and fun North Korea?

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Kim Jong Il's Palace(39d06'36.67"N 125d59'47.09E)?

Incredible. This is almost 10 miles up. It's fucking HUGE.

Scott: Anyone have any idea what is at 39d06'36.67"N 125d59'47.09E ?? It looks like some sort of palace with a golf course around it. Just wondering...

H/T to Simon of NKZone. Credit to Digital Globe and Google Earth

Simon:"Don't know what it is but it isn't Mount Kumgang (on the East Coaast) and it isnt the Taesong Golf Course (out towards Nampo), Look's like someone's fancy house, Wonder who?" Ok, Simon. You are strange and crazy... But fucking cool too.

Why a hard line is needed...

World Tribune
Iranian Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani. IRINN TV aired this speech on Sept. 20.

Larijani: " [America] has said: 'Because we suspect someone's intentions, we should take preemptive measures against him.' The interesting thing is that the Americans have and invented nuclear weapons. They used them in ending the war against Japan, and yet they still think it's necessary to read the intentions of a country that has "peaceful" nuclear technology. And nuclear weapons, by their account.
"This aggressiveness is unacceptable in today's world. You have pressured North Korea for two years and consequently, it withdrew from the NPT and IAEA. What did you do after these two years? You accepted North Korea's nuclear program. In other words, you agreed that North Korea would have nuclear technology and uranium enrichment, but that it would not be diverted to the production of weapons. You could have achieved this from the start. No, they could have ENDED it from the start with a strike on Yongbyon. You simply applied not too much pressure on it. Western countries should learn a lesson from the experience of the North Korean nuclear dossier, like north Korea did with A.Q Khan. Applying such pressure is like going against an entire nation. Go after the "leader" then...

"I recommend once again that you pay attention to the conduct of North Korea. After two years of dealings with North Korea, what have you got? You have accepted North Korea's nuclear technology in the field of uranium enrichment. So accept ours now. We have no problem. We don't want anything else.
Sounds like a bunch a ganga extorting muthafuckaas ta ME...

Here's a twin paradox for everyone...
Iran, a country with vast oil AND uranium deposits(thus uranium enrichment)... But little need for a nuclear reactor, that MUST have one.
North Korea, a country with few energy and uranium deposits... Thus a NEED for a nuclear reactor, that MUST have uranium enrichment.

Is there not a middle ground?
Here is my idea. An Iranian uranium enrichment program to sell uranium exclusively to the Yongbyon 50 MW station.

And war if either one makes weapons with the technology...

Monday, September 26, 2005

The View From Israel

A unique and vital perspective...

By Young Sam Ma Minister-Counselor in the Israeli embassy of the Republic of Korea September 26, 2005
While Asians were enjoying the full-moon Thanksgiving holidays a week ago Monday, they received two contrasting pieces of news regarding the nuclear deal. One from Beijing, where the six countries finally ironed out a joint statement from the talks on North Korea's nuclear program. The other from Vienna, where delegations from the U.S. and EU-3 (Britain, France and Germany) rushed to tackle the Iranian nuclear issue at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

This dude is forced to decide which challenge is more daunting.
I think the Chinese, South Koreans, Japanese, Russia, and Americans... Have a long road ahead.

The Issue Of Reality

New powers of persuasion needed in North Korea talks

By Jon Herskovitz

SEOUL(Reuters) Mon Sep 26, 2005 - The five countries which persuaded North Korea to sign on to a new regimen to end its nuclear programs have their work cut out to stay united and focused on nuclear weapons rather than diplomatic recognition or energy.
Work long overdue.

North Korea agreed in six-party talks last Monday to give up its nuclear programs in exchange for aid, security guarantees and increased diplomatic recognition, but cast doubt on the deal a day later by asking for civilian nuclear reactors first.
The way I see this situation: If Kim Jong Il has no intention of honoring the deal in the long run... what does it hurt trying to USE the deal as extortion?

Political analysts said North Korea may have been trying to test the limits of the deal reached in Beijing, where the parties agreed to discuss a civilian nuclear reactor for the North "at an appropriate time".
The day AFTER a new North Korean government is installed, would be the most "appropriate" time.

They expect North Korea to continue to bring up such issues, aiming to drive wedges between the other five parties as a way of strengthening its bargaining position in follow-up talks.
"A real breakthrough still remains possible if the other five parties can avoid being distracted by the light-water reactor issue and insist with one voice that Pyongyang start charting a clear path towards accomplishing agreed objectives," Ralph Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum CSIS think tank, told Reuters.

Like letting people enjoy freedoms everyone else takes for granted...

North Korea's five dialogue partners -- China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the United States -- will be talking constantly to maintain a united front in their dealings with the North before the next round scheduled for November, analysts said.
It should get interesting...

The best way to move beyond talk of the light-water reactor issue is to move the process into working-level meetings of experts so that they can address the devil in the details of the agreement, Cossa said.

I'm not even going to point out the obvious punchline in this statement...

"The light-water reactor demand also serves to distract attention away from the real issue, which is Pyongyang's plutonium- and uranium-based nuclear weapons programs and how to both account for and then verifiably dismantle them," he said.

Neither, is the REAL issue...

Sunday, September 25, 2005

Black Pot

U.S. Nuclear Hysteria Assailed

Pyongyang, September 25, 2005 (KCNA) -- The U.S. is contemplating working out new guidelines for the use of nuclear weapons, rejecting the existing ones They won't slack on the job. So, it intends to go unchallenged in the field of strategic nuclear armed forces no, they intend to STAY unchallenged in a bid to beat its rivals and mercilessly destroy those countries challenging its bid to establish its order of world domination. What is this, a game of Risk or something? Minju Joson Sunday observes this in a signed commentary. The U.S. new doctrine on the use of nuclear weapons is of increasingly belligerent and offensive nature, the commentary says, and goes on insanely: The U.S. nuclear K.C.N.A hysteria based on the nuke-all powerful conception has reached its height and gone far beyond the tolerance limit. Its modification of the above-said doctrine would be inevitably followed by other powers' reexamination of the regime for the use of nuclear weapons to keep the strategic balance The D.P.R.K are the only ones REALLY TRYING to change nuclear stability. Not America. Then it would be as clear as noonday that this would spark off a nuclear arms raceYea, caused by Kim Jong Il. This proves that the U.S. is chiefly to blame for posing the threat of nukes to the world yes and proliferating them NO! Don't forget "inventing them". It is beyond doubt that such U.S. high-handed and arbitrary practices as wielding its nuclear stick will become more undisguised than ever before. Such reality eloquently shows what just and wise Songun politics the Workers' Party of Korea has pursued to increase its deterrent for self-defense in every way in order to cope with the daily growing U.S. nuclear threat. The U.S has had the ability to annihilate North Korea for at least 40 years. How does that threat "grow daily"? The army and people of the DPRK are proud of having built such self-defensive deterrent strong enough to protect the national dignity and security from the U.S. nuclear threat. The U.S. nuclear stick will not work on the DPRK that has extraordinarily strong spirit of independence and has sufficient self-defensive means in place Just not a sufficient economy in place. If the U.S. recklessly forces a nuclear war on the DPRK, its army and people will exercise their legitimate right to self-defense as a powerful means of retaliation. Nuclear weapons are no longer the monopoly of the U.S. and gone are the days when it considered nukes all-powerful. Why? Did North Korea build a thermonuclear shield? The U.S. would be well advised to cool its head overheated with nuclear hysteria and face up to the reality. That's a hell of a black pot.

Don't Worry. Be Rich.

The Guardian and Mail September 1 2005
SEOUL South Korea has expressed concern about a service offered by United States internet search company Google that shows satellite photos of sensitive facilities in the country, the president's office said on Thursday.The office said Seoul was in talks with Washington over Google Earth, a map search engine service from the site, which makes available images of South Korea's presidential office and military facilities including air force bases and naval ports."As [Google's] satellite photos are beyond our control, we are in discussion with US authorities," said presidential spokesperson Kim Man-Soo. So, is information. So is freedom.

Israel is very low rez. I guess it's a valid point. Still, it IS North Korea. *snicker*. The United States of America has the highest resolution of any country. Good.

May the Google guys pass Bill Gates. Few deserve it more...

Right Brain... meet The Eye

I get what NKzone is all about now... everytime Simon Cockerell has something odd and communist to say, Barry Briggs says something like this.


Bangkok Times September 25, 2005
North Korea got a good agreement from the drawn-out nuclear weapons talks in China, and the five negotiating partners also emerged as winners. Uhhh, how did the other five countries "win", by giving North Korea MORE aid it does not deserve, in exchange for another false promise to be broken? I guess I "won" on my NFL picks today then... Unfortunately, there is already serious doubt whether Pyongyang realizes this. No sooner had North Korea signed off on a deal with China, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the United States than it seemed to start public renegotiations and threats not to my surprise. Pyongyang gained a huge and friendly opening to the world community with its agreement on nuclear weapons last week. *(snide)snicker* Reneging on that agreement now would turn a win-?win? deal for the world into an escalating series of negative events. Considering North Korea IS ONE HUGE "series of negative events"... It would seen logical to conclude they WILL brake the deal. I have never doubted this... Essentially, through tedious and cliffhanging weeks of negotiations in Beijing, the six-nation talks on North Korean nuclear ambitions were successful In your opinion. On the last day, North Korea agreed to end its nuclear arms program again. In exchange, the other five countries involved agreed to protect Pyongyang's security, and to provide a long list of aid that could help North Koreans to begin recovering from the terrible economic mismanagement of their country A.K.A Kim Jong Il. It should be noted this agreement was obtained successfully and peacefully despite the predictions of almost all of the so-called public experts on North Korea That's one way of spinning it. I knew there would be a deal, and I also PREDICTED how the D.P.R.K would react after. Outside the negotiations, pundits forecast the talks were doomed, because Pyongyang never would make a multilateral deal the deal will be broken by North Korea, mark my fucking word. The view that North Korea would negotiate only in a face-to-face match against the United States proved unfounded Yea, "unfounded" by the United States. Indeed, the evidence is strongest no one truly knows what goes on in the hermit nation, that North Korea agreed to serious negotiations simply because of the singleness of purpose of the five nations it faced. And the consequences.