Home » Archives » KoreanStudies » Jong-il Personality Cult
| Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6834] |
Tue, 09 September 2003 03:45  |
victor fic
Messages: 7
Registered: September 2003
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Hello list members:
With the North Koreans celebrating their 55th anniversary, I am researching issues connected with the regime. For now, I would like to focus on the Jong-il personality cult.
1. Can anyone provide me with anecdotes that they have read about or heard about over the years attesting to Jong-il's intellectual, moral and physical prowess -- as his flunkies have it? Is there a web site or article that lists them?
2. Fredonia Press in the U.S. offers a book called "The Great Teacher of Journalists," by or about Jong-il. Apparently, it documents the brilliant assistance he gives to journalists. My order has yet to arrive. Has anyone read the book? Does anyone know Fredonia's background?
Thank you to anyone who can assist me.
Regards,
Victor Fic
SeoulHelp STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
|
|
|
|
| RE: Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6836 is a reply to message #6834] |
Tue, 09 September 2003 23:07  |
Richard Miller
Messages: 16
Registered: September 2003
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Victor Fic asks:
>With the North Koreans celebrating their 55th anniversary, I am researching
issues
>connected with the regime. For now, I would like to focus on the Jong-il
personality cult.
>
>
>1. Can anyone provide me with anecdotes that they have read about or heard
about
>over the years attesting to Jong-il's intellectual, moral and physical
prowess -- as his
>flunkies have it? Is there a web site or article that lists them?
Have you looked at the book Kim Jong Il: The People's Leader, by Choe In Su?
I have an incomplete copy of volume 2, and the book seems to be little more
than one long anecdote about Jong-il's amazing abilities. The summation of a
section entitled "A Genius of Thought and Theory" seems to encapsulate the
book:
"From olden times it was said in the East that even a noted builder who
creates a royal palace cannot make a small stationery shelf, and they say in
the West that even Newton would not have become a Shakespeare....But Kim
Jong Il is a brilliant master of thought and theories who made that belief
appear pale" (p.153).
Over the course of the book, Jong-Il singlehandedly beats the experts at
whatever subject comes up, be it renovating opera, designing a dam, or
climbing Paekdusan. And that's just volume 2.
Richard
Richard Miller
UW-Madison School of Music
http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~rcmiller/
-----Original Message-----
From: Koreanstudies-bounces@koreaweb.ws
[mailto:Koreanstudies-bounces@koreaweb.ws]On Behalf Of victor fic
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 2:46 AM
To: Koreanstudies@koreaweb.ws
Subject: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
Hello list members:
2. Fredonia Press in the U.S. offers a book called "The Great Teacher of
Journalists," by or about Jong-il. Apparently, it documents the brilliant
assistance he gives to journalists. My order has yet to arrive. Has anyone
read the book? Does anyone know Fredonia's background?
Thank you to anyone who can assist me.
Regards,
Victor Fic
Seoul
Richard Miller
UW-Madison School of Music
http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~rcmiller/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6856 is a reply to message #6834] |
Thu, 25 September 2003 20:17 |
William Brown
Messages: 24
Registered: March 2002
|
Junior Member |
|
|
I must be missing something here. How can something that did not happen (US recapture of the Pueblo) now be scary? Seems like the fact that it was allowed to move should make you less afraid. Unless your point is that perhaps the US doesn't really watch them so closely after all, and that fact is scary. In truth, despite all the war talk over the last 50 years, and lots of North Korean provocations, its hard to say we have done anything to provoke there current antagonism.
>From: Frank Hoffmann
>Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
>Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:39:29 -0700
>
>
>Professor Choe wrote:
>
>> I cannot imagine that the US would have allowed NK to remove it
>>via high sea. The only alternative must have been by land. Is it
>>possible to move the ship Pueblo via ground transportation?
>
>You can always disassemble a 900 to 1000 ton boat like that in a
>week or two (which would be necessary anyway to get it through all
>the highway tunnels)..... but what I find much more interesting is
>your note that you can't imagine the US would have allowed NK to
>transport a spy ship that had been captured over 30 years ago (by
>Oct. 1999, when it was transported). That's more than alarming if
>so. There is a Senate Resolution (see below) from January of this
>year (not the first one) asking for the return of that ship, which,
>I think, speaks for itself. But the suggestion that the U.S.
>military would go for an armed conflict to conquer a 1944 build spy
>ship that was captured three decades ago is rather ... well, scary.
>
>Frank
>
>--->>
>
>Congressional Record: January 29, 2003 (Senate)
>Page S1752-S1756
>
>
> STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
>
>
> SENATE RESOLUTION 29--DEMANDING THE RETURN OF THE USS
>PUEBLO TO THE
> UNITED STATES NAVY
>
> Mr. CAMPBELL submitted the following resolution; which was
>referred
>to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
> Whereas the USS Pueblo, which was attacked and captured by
> the North Korean Navy on January 23, 1968, was the first
> United States Navy ship to be hijacked on the high seas by a
> foreign military force in over 150 years;
> Whereas 1 member of the USS Pueblo crew, Duane Hodges, was
> killed in the assault while the other 82 crew members were
> held in captivity, often under inhumane conditions, for 11
> months;
> Whereas the USS Pueblo, an intelligence collection
> auxiliary vessel, was operating in international waters at
> the time of the capture, and therefore did not violate North
> Korean territorial waters;
> Whereas the capture of the USS Pueblo resulted in no
> reprisals against the Government or people of North Korea and
> no military action at any time; and
> Whereas the USS Pueblo, though still the property of the
> United States Navy, has been retained by North Korea for more
> than 30 years, was subjected to exhibition in the North
> Korean cities of Wonsan and Hungham, and is now on display in
> Pyongyang, the capital city of North Korea: Now, therefore,
> be it
> Resolved,That the Senate--
> (1) demands the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
> States Navy; and
> (2) directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit copies
> of this resolution to the President, the Secretary of
> Defense, and the Secretary of State.
>
> Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit a Senate
>Resolution calling on North Korea to return the USS Pueblo to the
>United States Navy. The legislation I am reintroducing today is
>based
>on a resolution I introduced last year during the 107th Congress,
>Senate Resolution 246.
> On January 23, 1968, the USS Pueblo was unjustly attacked and
>captured by
>
>[[Page S1754]]
>
>the North Korean Navy, becoming the first United States Navy ship to
>be
>hijacked on the high seas by a foreign military force in over 150
>years. At the time of its capture, the USS Pueblo was operating as
>an
>intelligence collection auxiliary vessel, and did not pose a threat.
> This act of aggression resulted in the USS Pueblo's 82 crew
>members
>being held in captivity for eleven months, often in inhumane
>conditions. Another brave crew member, Duane Hodges, was killed
>during
>the initial attack and several more crew members were wounded. On
>December 23, 1968, after nearly a year of being unjustly detained
>the
>surviving USS Pueblo crew members were finally released and allowed
>to
>return home.
> It is interesting to note that the USS Pueblo I am calling on the
>North Koreans to return today is in fact the third ship of the fleet
>to
>be named in honor of the city and county of Pueblo, located in my
>home
>State of Colorado. The first ship of the fleet to be named in honor
>of
>Pueblo was an armored cruiser which had previously been named the
>Colorado. In 1916, the USS Colorado was renamed as the USS Pueblo
>when
>a new battleship named USS Colorado was authorized. The first USS
>Pueblo served until 1927. The second USS Pueblo was a city class
>frigate which served from 1944 to 1946. She was later sold to the
>Dominican Republic where she serves today.
> The third USS Pueblo is the ship now wrongly held by the North
>Koreans. Built by the Kewaunee Shipbuilding and Engineering
>Corporation, Kewaunee, WI, the ship originally served as a general
>purpose supply vessel FP-344 for service in the U.S. Army
>Transportation Corps when she was launched on April 16, 1944. During
>1966 and 1967 the ship was converted, redesignated as the USS Pueblo
>and commissioned as an environmental research vessel, AGER-2.
> It is important to note that even to this day the capture of the
>USS
>Pueblo has resulted in no reprisal against North Korea,
>demonstrating
>remarkable restraint by the United States. Even though the USS
>Pueblo
>still clearly remains the legal property of the United States Navy,
>the
>North Korean Government has kept it on display as a sort of
>traveling
>propaganda museum.
> Recent events have made it clear that many unresolved issues
>remain
>regarding our Nation's relationship with North Korea. For example,
>North Korea's recent high-profile resumption of nuclear
>saber-rattling
>presents a serious resurgent challenge that we, our allies in
>Northeast
>Asia and the rest of the world community must take seriously.
> While I certainly agree that successfully resolving this
>situation is
>first and foremost, I also believe that there are other positive
>restorative steps that the North Koreans should take in order to
>help
>improve our bilateral relationship. One such action would be to
>return
>the USS Pueblo to its rightful owners, the United States Navy and
>the
>American people they serve and protect.
> While returning the USS Pueblo may not necessarily remove the 35
>year-old scars inflicted by the attack of January 23, 1968, and
>especially those suffered by the crew of the USS Pueblo and by their
>families and loved ones, it would serve as a good will gesture, a
>salve
>if you will, signaling hope for a brighter future between our two
>nation's peoples.
> I stand with my colleagues back home in the Colorado State
>General
>Assembly in demanding the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
>States
>Navy.
> I urge my colleagues here in the U.S. Senate to join me in
>supporting
>passage of this important resolution.
>
>--
>______________________________________________________
>Frank Hoffmann
>http://KoreaWeb.ws * Fax: (415) 727-4792
Get McAfee virus scanning and cleaning of incoming attachments. Get Hotmail Extra Storage!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6860 is a reply to message #6856] |
Thu, 25 September 2003 21:48 |
Serk-Bae Suh
Messages: 4
Registered: September 2003
|
Junior Member |
|
|
To Mr. William Brown
I am afraid I also must be missing something here.
Who are "we" in your previous posting?
Does this "we" refer to you and Mr. Frank Hoffmann? or Do you mean the U.S.
government by the "we"? or the American People as a whole?
Or, does it just include a group of people who share your view?
Or does it mean the holy trinity of Christian Almighty God whose divine
power is to judge who is evil and who is good and break the backbone of evil?
Maybe it is because that English is not my native language.
I would be more than grateful if you would kindly elucidate the "we" you
are talking about.
Thank you very much.
sincerely,
serk-bae suh
At 08:17 PM 9/25/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>I must be missing something here. How can something that did not happen
>(US recapture of the Pueblo) now be scary? Seems like the fact that it was
>allowed to move should make you less afraid. Unless your point is that
>perhaps the US doesn't really watch them so closely after all, and that
>fact is scary. In truth, despite all the war talk over the last 50 years,
>and lots of North Korean provocations, its hard to say we have done
>anything to provoke there current antagonism.
>
> >From: Frank Hoffmann
> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:39:29 -0700
> >
> >
> >Professor Choe wrote:
> >
> >> I cannot imagine that the US would have allowed NK to remove it
> >>via high sea. The only alternative must have been by land. Is it
> >>possible to move the ship Pueblo via ground transportation?
> >
> >You can always disassemble a 900 to 1000 ton boat like that in a
> >week or two (which would be necessary anyway to get it through all
> >the highway tunnels)..... but what I find much more interesting is
> >your note that you can't imagine the US would have allowed NK to
> >transport a spy ship that had been captured over 30 years ago (by
> >Oct. 1999, when it was transported). That's more than alarming if
> >so. There is a Senate Resolution (see below) from January of this
> >year (not the first one) asking for the return of that ship, which,
> >I think, speaks for itself. But the suggestion that the U.S.
> >military would go for an armed conflict to conquer a 1944 build spy
> >ship that was captured three decades ago is rather ... well, scary.
> >
> >Frank
> >
> >--->>
> >
> >Congressional Record: January 29, 2003 (Senate)
> >Page S1752-S1756
> >
> >
> > STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
> >
> >
> > SENATE RESOLUTION 29--DEMANDING THE RETURN OF THE USS
> >PUEBLO TO THE
> > UNITED STATES NAVY
> >
> > Mr. CAMPBELL submitted the following resolution; which was
> >referred
> >to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, which was attacked and captured by
> > the North Korean Navy on January 23, 1968, was the first
> > United States Navy ship to be hijacked on the high seas by a
> > foreign military force in over 150 years;
> > Whereas 1 member of the USS Pueblo crew, Duane Hodges, was
> > killed in the assault while the other 82 crew members were
> > held in captivity, often under inhumane conditions, for 11
> > months;
> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, an intelligence collection
> > auxiliary vessel, was operating in international waters at
> > the time of the capture, and therefore did not violate North
> > Korean territorial waters;
> > Whereas the capture of the USS Pueblo resulted in no
> > reprisals against the Government or people of North Korea and
> > no military action at any time; and
> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, though still the property of the
> > United States Navy, has been retained by North Korea for more
> > than 30 years, was subjected to exhibition in the North
> > Korean cities of Wonsan and Hungham, and is now on display in
> > Pyongyang, the capital city of North Korea: Now, therefore,
> > be it
> > Resolved,That the Senate--
> > (1) demands the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
> > States Navy; and
> > (2) directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit copies
> > of this resolution to the President, the Secretary of
> > Defense, and the Secretary of State.
> >
> > Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit a Senate
> >Resolution calling on North Korea to return the USS Pueblo to the
> >United States Navy. The legislation I am reintroducing today is
> >based
> >on a resolution I introduced last year during the 107th Congress,
> >Senate Resolution 246.
> > On January 23, 1968, the USS Pueblo was unjustly attacked and
> >captured by
> >
> >[[Page S1754]]
> >
> >the North Korean Navy, becoming the first United States Navy ship to
> >be
> >hijacked on the high seas by a foreign military force in over 150
> >years. At the time of its capture, the USS Pueblo was operating as
> >an
> >intelligence collection auxiliary vessel, and did not pose a threat.
> > This act of aggression resulted in the USS Pueblo's 82 crew
> >members
> >being held in captivity for eleven months, often in inhumane
> >conditions. Another brave crew member, Duane Hodges, was killed
> >during
> >the initial attack and several more crew members were wounded. On
> >December 23, 1968, after nearly a year of being unjustly detained
> >the
> >surviving USS Pueblo crew members were finally released and allowed
> >to
> >return home.
> > It is interesting to note that the USS Pueblo I am calling on the
> >North Koreans to return today is in fact the third ship of the fleet
> >to
> >be named in honor of the city and county of Pueblo, located in my
> >home
> >State of Colorado. The first ship of the fleet to be named in honor
> >of
> >Pueblo was an armored cruiser which had previously been named the
> >Colorado. In 1916, the USS Colorado was renamed as the USS Pueblo
> >when
> >a new battleship named USS Colorado was authorized. The first USS
> >Pueblo served until 1927. The second USS Pueblo was a city class
> >frigate which served from 1944 to 1946. She was later sold to the
> >Dominican Republic where she serves today.
> > The third USS Pueblo is the ship now wrongly held by the North
> >Koreans. Built by the Kewaunee Shipbuilding and Engineering
> >Corporation, Kewaunee, WI, the ship originally served as a general
> >purpose supply vessel FP-344 for service in the U.S. Army
> >Transportation Corps when she was launched on April 16, 1944. During
> >1966 and 1967 the ship was converted, redesignated as the USS Pueblo
> >and commissioned as an environmental research vessel, AGER-2.
> > It is important to note that even to this day the capture of the
> >USS
> >Pueblo has resulted in no reprisal against North Korea,
> >demonstrating
> >remarkable restraint by the United States. Even though the USS
> >Pueblo
> >still clearly remains the legal property of the United States Navy,
> >the
> >North Korean Government has kept it on display as a sort of
> >traveling
> >propaganda museum.
> > Recent events have made it clear that many unresolved issues
> >remain
> >regarding our Nation's relationship with North Korea. For example,
> >North Korea's recent high-profile resumption of nuclear
> >saber-rattling
> >presents a serious resurgent challenge that we, our allies in
> >Northeast
> >Asia and the rest of the world community must take seriously.
> > While I certainly agree that successfully resolving this
> >situation is
> >first and foremost, I also believe that there are other positive
> >restorative steps that the North Koreans should take in order to
> >help
> >improve our bilateral relationship. One such action would be to
> >return
> >the USS Pueblo to its rightful owners, the United States Navy and
> >the
> >American people they serve and protect.
> > While returning the USS Pueblo may not necessarily remove the 35
> >year-old scars inflicted by the attack of January 23, 1968, and
> >especially those suffered by the crew of the USS Pueblo and by their
> >families and loved ones, it would serve as a good will gesture, a
> >salve
> >if you will, signaling hope for a brighter future between our two
> >nation's peoples.
> > I stand with my colleagues back home in the Colorado State
> >General
> >Assembly in demanding the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
> >States
> >Navy.
> > I urge my colleagues here in the U.S. Senate to join me in
> >supporting
> >passage of this important resolution.
> >
> >--
> >______________________________________________________
> >Frank Hoffmann
> >http://KoreaWeb.ws * Fax: (415) 727-4792
>
>
>----------
>Get McAfee virus scanning and
>cleaning of incoming attachments. Get Hotmail Extra Storage!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6863 is a reply to message #6834] |
Fri, 26 September 2003 09:46 |
William Brown
Messages: 24
Registered: March 2002
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Mr. Suh, that's a very good question. "We" users of English should always be careful in our use of pronouns. And I see I also misued the word "there" instead of "their". There is some advantage in Korean where pronouns are not used as much. [Come to think of it, Korean's do often use the term -ooudi- in all kinds of similar situations].
I meant "we" in a broad sense as "we Americans" as represented by our elected government. I don't think the US government has really done anything to North Korea, at least since 1953, that has been deserving of all the North Korean official acrimony. Of course, the USG tells them (NK leadership) if they attack the South it (the USG) will destroy them (NK leadership) but we (US) have never had to actually do that. And I can't think of any time when we (USG) hasve actually fired a gun or taken something of theirs (North Korea's).
I don't think it makes much difference though. The "we" in my view could be South Korea or really just about anyone outside Pyongyang's ruling clique. NK's leadership uses any kind of excuse for maintaining its ruthless, and yes I think evil, power over its poor citizens. The rest of the world, for good or bad, has chosen to tolerate their (NK leadership's) behavior.
>From: Serk-Bae Suh
>Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
>Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:48:43 -0700
>
>To Mr. William Brown
>
>I am afraid I also must be missing something here.
>
>Who are "we" in your previous posting?
>
>Does this "we" refer to you and Mr. Frank Hoffmann? or Do you mean
>the U.S. government by the "we"? or the American People as a whole?
>Or, does it just include a group of people who share your view?
>
>Or does it mean the holy trinity of Christian Almighty God whose
>divine power is to judge who is evil and who is good and break the
>backbone of evil?
>
>Maybe it is because that English is not my native language.
>
>I would be more than grateful if you would kindly elucidate the "we"
>you are talking about.
>
>Thank you very much.
>
>sincerely,
>
>serk-bae suh
>
>
>
>
>
>At 08:17 PM 9/25/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>I must be missing something here. How can something that did not
>>happen (US recapture of the Pueblo) now be scary? Seems like the
>>fact that it was allowed to move should make you less afraid.
>>Unless your point is that perhaps the US doesn't really watch them
>>so closely after all, and that fact is scary. In truth, despite
>>all the war talk over the last 50 years, and lots of North Korean
>>provocations, its hard to say we have done anything to provoke
>>there current antagonism.
>>
>> >From: Frank Hoffmann
>> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
>> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:39:29 -0700
>> >
>> >
>> >Professor Choe wrote:
>> >
>> >> I cannot imagine that the US would have allowed NK to remove it
>> >>via high sea. The only alternative must have been by land. Is it
>> >>possible to move the ship Pueblo via ground transportation?
>> >
>> >You can always disassemble a 900 to 1000 ton boat like that in a
>> >week or two (which would be necessary anyway to get it through
>>all
>> >the highway tunnels)..... but what I find much more interesting
>>is
>> >your note that you can't imagine the US would have allowed NK to
>> >transport a spy ship that had been captured over 30 years ago (by
>> >Oct. 1999, when it was transported). That's more than alarming if
>> >so. There is a Senate Resolution (see below) from January of this
>> >year (not the first one) asking for the return of that ship,
>>which,
>> >I think, speaks for itself. But the suggestion that the U.S.
>> >military would go for an armed conflict to conquer a 1944 build
>>spy
>> >ship that was captured three decades ago is rather ... well,
>>scary.
>> >
>> >Frank
>> >
>> >--->>
>> >
>> >Congressional Record: January 29, 2003 (Senate)
>> >Page S1752-S1756
>> >
>> >
>> > STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
>> >
>> >
>> > SENATE RESOLUTION 29--DEMANDING THE RETURN OF THE USS
>> >PUEBLO TO THE
>> > UNITED STATES NAVY
>> >
>> > Mr. CAMPBELL submitted the following resolution; which was
>> >referred
>> >to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
>> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, which was attacked and captured by
>> > the North Korean Navy on January 23, 1968, was the first
>> > United States Navy ship to be hijacked on the high seas by a
>> > foreign military force in over 150 years;
>> > Whereas 1 member of the USS Pueblo crew, Duane Hodges, was
>> > killed in the assault while the other 82 crew members were
>> > held in captivity, often under inhumane conditions, for 11
>> > months;
>> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, an intelligence collection
>> > auxiliary vessel, was operating in international waters at
>> > the time of the capture, and therefore did not violate North
>> > Korean territorial waters;
>> > Whereas the capture of the USS Pueblo resulted in no
>> > reprisals against the Government or people of North Korea and
>> > no military action at any time; and
>> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, though still the property of the
>> > United States Navy, has been retained by North Korea for more
>> > than 30 years, was subjected to exhibition in the North
>> > Korean cities of Wonsan and Hungham, and is now on display in
>> > Pyongyang, the capital city of North Korea: Now, therefore,
>> > be it
>> > Resolved,That the Senate--
>> > (1) demands the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
>> > States Navy; and
>> > (2) directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit copies
>> > of this resolution to the President, the Secretary of
>> > Defense, and the Secretary of State.
>> >
>> > Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit a Senate
>> >Resolution calling on North Korea to return the USS Pueblo to the
>> >United States Navy. The legislation I am reintroducing today is
>> >based
>> >on a resolution I introduced last year during the 107th Congress,
>> >Senate Resolution 246.
>> > On January 23, 1968, the USS Pueblo was unjustly attacked and
>> >captured by
>> >
>> >[[Page S1754]]
>> >
>> >the North Korean Navy, becoming the first United States Navy ship
>>to
>> >be
>> >hijacked on the high seas by a foreign military force in over 150
>> >years. At the time of its capture, the USS Pueblo was operating
>>as
>> >an
>> >intelligence collection auxiliary vessel, and did not pose a
>>threat.
>> > This act of aggression resulted in the USS Pueblo's 82 crew
>> >members
>> >being held in captivity for eleven months, often in inhumane
>> >conditions. Another brave crew member, Duane Hodges, was killed
>> >during
>> >the initial attack and several more crew members were wounded. On
>> >December 23, 1968, after nearly a year of being unjustly detained
>> >the
>> >surviving USS Pueblo crew members were finally released and
>>allowed
>> >to
>> >return home.
>> > It is interesting to note that the USS Pueblo I am calling on
>>the
>> >North Koreans to return today is in fact the third ship of the
>>fleet
>> >to
>> >be named in honor of the city and county of Pueblo, located in my
>> >home
>> >State of Colorado. The first ship of the fleet to be named in
>>honor
>> >of
>> >Pueblo was an armored cruiser which had previously been named the
>> >Colorado. In 1916, the USS Colorado was renamed as the USS Pueblo
>> >when
>> >a new battleship named USS Colorado was authorized. The first USS
>> >Pueblo served until 1927. The second USS Pueblo was a city class
>> >frigate which served from 1944 to 1946. She was later sold to the
>> >Dominican Republic where she serves today.
>> > The third USS Pueblo is the ship now wrongly held by the North
>> >Koreans. Built by the Kewaunee Shipbuilding and Engineering
>> >Corporation, Kewaunee, WI, the ship originally served as a
>>general
>> >purpose supply vessel FP-344 for service in the U.S. Army
>> >Transportation Corps when she was launched on April 16, 1944.
>>During
>> >1966 and 1967 the ship was converted, redesignated as the USS
>>Pueblo
>> >and commissioned as an environmental research vessel, AGER-2.
>> > It is important to note that even to this day the capture of the
>> >USS
>> >Pueblo has resulted in no reprisal against North Korea,
>> >demonstrating
>> >remarkable restraint by the United States. Even though the USS
>> >Pueblo
>> >still clearly remains the legal property of the United States
>>Navy,
>> >the
>> >North Korean Government has kept it on display as a sort of
>> >traveling
>> >propaganda museum.
>> > Recent events have made it clear that many unresolved issues
>> >remain
>> >regarding our Nation's relationship with North Korea. For
>>example,
>> >North Korea's recent high-profile resumption of nuclear
>> >saber-rattling
>> >presents a serious resurgent challenge that we, our allies in
>> >Northeast
>> >Asia and the rest of the world community must take seriously.
>> > While I certainly agree that successfully resolving this
>> >situation is
>> >first and foremost, I also believe that there are other positive
>> >restorative steps that the North Koreans should take in order to
>> >help
>> >improve our bilateral relationship. One such action would be to
>> >return
>> >the USS Pueblo to its rightful owners, the United States Navy and
>> >the
>> >American people they serve and protect.
>> > While returning the USS Pueblo may not necessarily remove the 35
>> >year-old scars inflicted by the attack of January 23, 1968, and
>> >especially those suffered by the crew of the USS Pueblo and by
>>their
>> >families and loved ones, it would serve as a good will gesture, a
>> >salve
>> >if you will, signaling hope for a brighter future between our two
>> >nation's peoples.
>> > I stand with my colleagues back home in the Colorado State
>> >General
>> >Assembly in demanding the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
>> >States
>> >Navy.
>> > I urge my colleagues here in the U.S. Senate to join me in
>> >supporting
>> >passage of this important resolution.
>> >
>> >--
>> >______________________________________________________
>> >Frank Hoffmann
>> >http://KoreaWeb.ws * Fax: (415) 727-4792
>>
>>
>>----------
>>Get McAfee virus scanning and
>>cleaning of incoming attachments. Get Hotmail Extra Storage!
Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6865 is a reply to message #6863] |
Sat, 27 September 2003 02:54 |
Serk-Bae Suh
Messages: 4
Registered: September 2003
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Mr. Brwon
Let me thank you for your illuminating explanation.
I appreciate it.
I also would like to agree with you to the degree that the "you" (since you
address the U.S. government as yours) have been less bellicose with North
Korea since 1953 compared to "your" aggression against other countries
challenging "you" such as Cuba, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Panama, and so on.
I am just wondering whether it is because North Korea has been armed with
military capability to retaliate or because it does not have oil or any
other valuable natural resources.
If the former is the case, then it seems that "you" have been rewarding the
country for its military capability by tolerating it despite its hostility
while punishing those without the same degree of military prowess. Then who
can blame Kim Jongil for developing nuclear weapons?
If the latter is the case, I thank God who saves the peninsular from
another war by having created it as non-oil-producing land although you,
sir do not appear to be happy with it.
sincerely,
serk-bae suh
At 09:46 AM 9/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Mr. Suh, that's a very good question. "We" users of English should always
>be careful in our use of pronouns. And I see I also misued the word
>"there" instead of "their". There is some advantage in Korean where
>pronouns are not used as much. [Come to think of it, Korean's do often use
>the term -ooudi- in all kinds of similar situations].
>
>I meant "we" in a broad sense as "we Americans" as represented by our
>elected government. I don't think the US government has really done
>anything to North Korea, at least since 1953, that has been deserving of
>all the North Korean official acrimony. Of course, the USG tells them (NK
>leadership) if they attack the South it (the USG) will destroy them (NK
>leadership) but we (US) have never had to actually do that. And I can't
>think of any time when we (USG) hasve actually fired a gun or taken
>something of theirs (North Korea's).
>
>I don't think it makes much difference though. The "we" in my view could
>be South Korea or really just about anyone outside Pyongyang's ruling
>clique. NK's leadership uses any kind of excuse for maintaining its
>ruthless, and yes I think evil, power over its poor citizens. The rest of
>the world, for good or bad, has chosen to tolerate their (NK leadership's)
>behavior.
>
>
> >From: Serk-Bae Suh
> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:48:43 -0700
> >
> >To Mr. William Brown
> >
> >I am afraid I also must be missing something here.
> >
> >Who are "we" in your previous posting?
> >
> >Does this "we" refer to you and Mr. Frank Hoffmann? or Do you mean
> >the U.S. government by the "we"? or the American People as a whole?
> >Or, does it just include a group of people who share your view?
> >
> >Or does it mean the holy trinity of Christian Almighty God whose
> >divine power is to judge who is evil and who is good and break the
> >backbone of evil?
> >
> >Maybe it is because that English is not my native language.
> >
> >I would be more than grateful if you would kindly elucidate the "we"
> >you are talking about.
> >
> >Thank you very much.
> >
> >sincerely,
> >
> >serk-bae suh
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >At 08:17 PM 9/25/2003 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >>I must be missing something here. How can something that did not
> >>happen (US recapture of the Pueblo) now be scary? Seems like the
> >>fact that it was allowed to move should make you less afraid.
> >>Unless your point is that perhaps the US doesn't really watch them
> >>so closely after all, and that fact is scary. In truth, despite
> >>all the war talk over the last 50 years, and lots of North Korean
> >>provocations, its hard to say we have done anything to provoke
> >>there current antagonism.
> >>
> >> >From: Frank Hoffmann
> >> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
> >> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:39:29 -0700
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Professor Choe wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I cannot imagine that the US would have allowed NK to remove it
> >> >>via high sea. The only alternative must have been by land. Is it
> >> >>possible to move the ship Pueblo via ground transportation?
> >> >
> >> >You can always disassemble a 900 to 1000 ton boat like that in a
> >> >week or two (which would be necessary anyway to get it through
> >>all
> >> >the highway tunnels)..... but what I find much more interesting
> >>is
> >> >your note that you can't imagine the US would have allowed NK to
> >> >transport a spy ship that had been captured over 30 years ago (by
> >> >Oct. 1999, when it was transported). That's more than alarming if
> >> >so. There is a Senate Resolution (see below) from January of this
> >> >year (not the first one) asking for the return of that ship,
> >>which,
> >> >I think, speaks for itself. But the suggestion that the U.S.
> >> >military would go for an armed conflict to conquer a 1944 build
> >>spy
> >> >ship that was captured three decades ago is rather ... well,
> >>scary.
> >> >
> >> >Frank
> >> >
> >> >--->>
> >> >
> >> >Congressional Record: January 29, 2003 (Senate)
> >> >Page S1752-S1756
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > SENATE RESOLUTION 29--DEMANDING THE RETURN OF THE USS
> >> >PUEBLO TO THE
> >> > UNITED STATES NAVY
> >> >
> >> > Mr. CAMPBELL submitted the following resolution; which was
> >> >referred
> >> >to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, which was attacked and captured by
> >> > the North Korean Navy on January 23, 1968, was the first
> >> > United States Navy ship to be hijacked on the high seas by a
> >> > foreign military force in over 150 years;
> >> > Whereas 1 member of the USS Pueblo crew, Duane Hodges, was
> >> > killed in the assault while the other 82 crew members were
> >> > held in captivity, often under inhumane conditions, for 11
> >> > months;
> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, an intelligence collection
> >> > auxiliary vessel, was operating in international waters at
> >> > the time of the capture, and therefore did not violate North
> >> > Korean territorial waters;
> >> > Whereas the capture of the USS Pueblo resulted in no
> >> > reprisals against the Government or people of North Korea and
> >> > no military action at any time; and
> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, though still the property of the
> >> > United States Navy, has been retained by North Korea for more
> >> > than 30 years, was subjected to exhibition in the North
> >> > Korean cities of Wonsan and Hungham, and is now on display in
> >> > Pyongyang, the capital city of North Korea: Now, therefore,
> >> > be it
> >> > Resolved,That the Senate--
> >> > (1) demands the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
> >> > States Navy; and
> >> > (2) directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit copies
> >> > of this resolution to the President, the Secretary of
> >> > Defense, and the Secretary of State.
> >> >
> >> > Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit a Senate
> >> >Resolution calling on North Korea to return the USS Pueblo to the
> >> >United States Navy. The legislation I am reintroducing today is
> >> >based
> >> >on a resolution I introduced last year during the 107th Congress,
> >> >Senate Resolution 246.
> >> > On January 23, 1968, the USS Pueblo was unjustly attacked and
> >> >captured by
> >> >
> >> >[[Page S1754]]
> >> >
> >> >the North Korean Navy, becoming the first United States Navy ship
> >>to
> >> >be
> >> >hijacked on the high seas by a foreign military force in over 150
> >> >years. At the time of its capture, the USS Pueblo was operating
> >>as
> >> >an
> >> >intelligence collection auxiliary vessel, and did not pose a
> >>threat.
> >> > This act of aggression resulted in the USS Pueblo's 82 crew
> >> >members
> >> >being held in captivity for eleven months, often in inhumane
> >> >conditions. Another brave crew member, Duane Hodges, was killed
> >> >during
> >> >the initial attack and several more crew members were wounded. On
> >> >December 23, 1968, after nearly a year of being unjustly detained
> >> >the
> >> >surviving USS Pueblo crew members were finally released and
> >>allowed
> >> >to
> >> >return home.
> >> > It is interesting to note that the USS Pueblo I am calling on
> >>the
> >> >North Koreans to return today is in fact the third ship of the
> >>fleet
> >> >to
> >> >be named in honor of the city and county of Pueblo, located in my
> >> >home
> >> >State of Colorado. The first ship of the fleet to be named in
> >>honor
> >> >of
> >> >Pueblo was an armored cruiser which had previously been named the
> >> >Colorado. In 1916, the USS Colorado was renamed as the USS Pueblo
> >> >when
> >> >a new battleship named USS Colorado was authorized. The first USS
> >> >Pueblo served until 1927. The second USS Pueblo was a city class
> >> >frigate which served from 1944 to 1946. She was later sold to the
> >> >Dominican Republic where she serves today.
> >> > The third USS Pueblo is the ship now wrongly held by the North
> >> >Koreans. Built by the Kewaunee Shipbuilding and Engineering
> >> >Corporation, Kewaunee, WI, the ship originally served as a
> >>general
> >> >purpose supply vessel FP-344 for service in the U.S. Army
> >> >Transportation Corps when she was launched on April 16, 1944.
> >>During
> >> >1966 and 1967 the ship was converted, redesignated as the USS
> >>Pueblo
> >> >and commissioned as an environmental research vessel, AGER-2.
> >> > It is important to note that even to this day the capture of the
> >> >USS
> >> >Pueblo has resulted in no reprisal against North Korea,
> >> >demonstrating
> >> >remarkable restraint by the United States. Even though the USS
> >> >Pueblo
> >> >still clearly remains the legal property of the United States
> >>Navy,
> >> >the
> >> >North Korean Government has kept it on display as a sort of
> >> >traveling
> >> >propaganda museum.
> >> > Recent events have made it clear that many unresolved issues
> >> >remain
> >> >regarding our Nation's relationship with North Korea. For
> >>example,
> >> >North Korea's recent high-profile resumption of nuclear
> >> >saber-rattling
> >> >presents a serious resurgent challenge that we, our allies in
> >> >Northeast
> >> >Asia and the rest of the world community must take seriously.
> >> > While I certainly agree that successfully resolving this
> >> >situation is
> >> >first and foremost, I also believe that there are other positive
> >> >restorative steps that the North Koreans should take in order to
> >> >help
> >> >improve our bilateral relationship. One such action would be to
> >> >return
> >> >the USS Pueblo to its rightful owners, the United States Navy and
> >> >the
> >> >American people they serve and protect.
> >> > While returning the USS Pueblo may not necessarily remove the 35
> >> >year-old scars inflicted by the attack of January 23, 1968, and
> >> >especially those suffered by the crew of the USS Pueblo and by
> >>their
> >> >families and loved ones, it would serve as a good will gesture, a
> >> >salve
> >> >if you will, signaling hope for a brighter future between our two
> >> >nation's peoples.
> >> > I stand with my colleagues back home in the Colorado State
> >> >General
> >> >Assembly in demanding the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
> >> >States
> >> >Navy.
> >> > I urge my colleagues here in the U.S. Senate to join me in
> >> >supporting
> >> >passage of this important resolution.
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >______________________________________________________
> >> >Frank Hoffmann
> >> >http://KoreaWeb.ws * Fax: (415) 727-4792
> >>
> >>
> >>----------
> >>Get McAfee virus scanning and
> >>cleaning of incoming attachments. Get Hotmail Extra Storage!
>
>
>----------
>Share your photos without swamping
>your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6869 is a reply to message #6834] |
Sat, 27 September 2003 16:27 |
William Brown
Messages: 24
Registered: March 2002
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Since the US is a representative democracy, I think it is proper for all American citizens to say "we" when we refer to our government. That is not to say we necessarily agree with a current policy but it does mean we each, to a small extent, are responsible for the actions of our govenrment. Clearly that is not the case for many countries. Always I find it necessary to dissasociate the people of North Korea from their Pyongyang rulers, for instance. Read any of the stories of thousands of recent refugees if you disagree.
I would appreciate some suggestions on how South Koreans treat their own government. In my experience, South Koreans tend to love their nationality and their race but often truely hate their government. Of course some Americans are the same way but in Korea it seems rather extreme. Perhaps you are a Korean citizen and could help me understand. But then I see you are from UCLA so perhaps you are American and don't like to use the word "we". In truth, I don't know of which country you are a citizen.
And you are correct, I am not happy with a situation in which a despotic government rules over 23 million people, ruining their lives and starving their children. Apparently you are. As in Iraq, in my view it is our (USG) inability to finish things up properly that causes us to get stuck in places like the DMZ or in Saudi Arabia for so many years. I would love it if we could remove all of our forces from both the W. Pacific and the Middle East as soon its clear we won't get drawn back in. The way things are going, I think that might be possible in a few years--so I'm hopeful. Afganistan and Iraq are important in that regard but a lot also depends on South Korea.
In my mind, we (the world) have a hostage situation on our hands in Korea, as we have since 1950. Pyongyang's rulers are pitifully weak but they have their hands around the throats of too many Koreans. The Japanese, Soviets and Chinese are largely to blame for this in the past--now all of us share this burden.
That's not to say I have the answer. Hostage situations are difficult, no doubt. I understand why Kim Chong-il threatens nuclear warfare. Its probably a logical reaction given the sucess he has had with blackmail over the years. But ultimately I think that it will be his own downfall. Like Saddaam, threatning something one can't use, even threating something one might not have, is pretty dangerous. Seems like we (the US, not necessarily our so-called allies) are doing the right thing, letting him rant and rave all he wants but making sure he understands there are tough consaquences to developing nuclear threats.
In that sense, far from scary, we (the USG) did the right thing not even mentioning the Pueblo transit. (I am pretty sure it went by sea.) A knee jerk reaction--probably desired by Pyongyang--would have been to take it back. And similarly we did the right thing by not shooting down the MIGs that threaten our (USG) recon aircraft. I think by now KCI has been able to frustrate even his former Japanese and Chinese sympathizers--the only ones left seem to be a few in America and in South Korea.
>Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
>Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:54:48 -0700
>
>Mr. Brwon
>
>Let me thank you for your illuminating explanation.
>I appreciate it.
>
>I also would like to agree with you to the degree that the "you"
>(since you address the U.S. government as yours) have been less
>bellicose with North Korea since 1953 compared to "your" aggression
>against other countries challenging "you" such as Cuba, Vietnam,
>Iran, Iraq, Panama, and so on.
>
>I am just wondering whether it is because North Korea has been armed
>with military capability to retaliate or because it does not have
>oil or any other valuable natural resources.
>
>If the former is the case, then it seems that "you" have been
>rewarding the country for its military capability by tolerating it
>despite its hostility while punishing those without the same degree
>of military prowess. Then who can blame Kim Jongil for developing
>nuclear weapons?
>
>If the latter is the case, I thank God who saves the peninsular from
>another war by having created it as non-oil-producing land although
>you, sir do not appear to be happy with it.
>
>sincerely,
>
>serk-bae suh
>
>
>
>At 09:46 AM 9/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>Mr. Suh, that's a very good question. "We" users of English should
>>always be careful in our use of pronouns. And I see I also misued
>>the word "there" instead of "their". There is some advantage in
>>Korean where pronouns are not used as much. [Come to think of it,
>>Korean's do often use the term -ooudi- in all kinds of similar
>>situations].
>>
>>I meant "we" in a broad sense as "we Americans" as represented by
>>our elected government. I don't think the US government has really
>>done anything to North Korea, at least since 1953, that has been
>>deserving of all the North Korean official acrimony. Of course, the
>>USG tells them (NK leadership) if they attack the South it (the
>>USG) will destroy them (NK leadership) but we (US) have never had
>>to actually do that. And I can't think of any time when we (USG)
>>hasve actually fired a gun or taken something of theirs (North
>>Korea's).
>>
>>I don't think it makes much difference though. The "we" in my view
>>could be South Korea or really just about anyone outside
>>Pyongyang's ruling clique. NK's leadership uses any kind of excuse
>>for maintaining its ruthless, and yes I think evil, power over its
>>poor citizens. The rest of the world, for good or bad, has chosen
>>to tolerate their (NK leadership's) behavior.
>>
>>
>> >From: Serk-Bae Suh
>> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
>> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:48:43 -0700
>> >
>> >To Mr. William Brown
>> >
>> >I am afraid I also must be missing something here.
>> >
>> >Who are "we" in your previous posting?
>> >
>> >Does this "we" refer to you and Mr. Frank Hoffmann? or Do you
>>mean
>> >the U.S. government by the "we"? or the American People as a
>>whole?
>> >Or, does it just include a group of people who share your view?
>> >
>> >Or does it mean the holy trinity of Christian Almighty God whose
>> >divine power is to judge who is evil and who is good and break
>>the
>> >backbone of evil?
>> >
>> >Maybe it is because that English is not my native language.
>> >
>> >I would be more than grateful if you would kindly elucidate the
>>"we"
>> >you are talking about.
>> >
>> >Thank you very much.
>> >
>> >sincerely,
>> >
>> >serk-bae suh
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >At 08:17 PM 9/25/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>> >
>> >>I must be missing something here. How can something that did not
>> >>happen (US recapture of the Pueblo) now be scary? Seems like the
>> >>fact that it was allowed to move should make you less afraid.
>> >>Unless your point is that perhaps the US doesn't really watch
>>them
>> >>so closely after all, and that fact is scary. In truth, despite
>> >>all the war talk over the last 50 years, and lots of North
>>Korean
>> >>provocations, its hard to say we have done anything to provoke
>> >>there current antagonism.
>> >>
>> >> >From: Frank Hoffmann
>> >> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>> >> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
>> >> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
>> >> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:39:29 -0700
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Professor Choe wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I cannot imagine that the US would have allowed NK to remove
>>it
>> >> >>via high sea. The only alternative must have been by land. Is
>>it
>> >> >>possible to move the ship Pueblo via ground transportation?
>> >> >
>> >> >You can always disassemble a 900 to 1000 ton boat like that in
>>a
>> >> >week or two (which would be necessary anyway to get it through
>> >>all
>> >> >the highway tunnels)..... but what I find much more
>>interesting
>> >>is
>> >> >your note that you can't imagine the US would have allowed NK
>>to
>> >> >transport a spy ship that had been captured over 30 years ago
>>(by
>> >> >Oct. 1999, when it was transported). That's more than alarming
>>if
>> >> >so. There is a Senate Resolution (see below) from January of
>>this
>> >> >year (not the first one) asking for the return of that ship,
>> >>which,
>> >> >I think, speaks for itself. But the suggestion that the U.S.
>> >> >military would go for an armed conflict to conquer a 1944
>>build
>> >>spy
>> >> >ship that was captured three decades ago is rather ... well,
>> >>scary.
>> >> >
>> >> >Frank
>> >> >
>> >> >--->>
>> >> >
>> >> >Congressional Record: January 29, 2003 (Senate)
>> >> >Page S1752-S1756
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > SENATE RESOLUTION 29--DEMANDING THE RETURN OF THE USS
>> >> >PUEBLO TO THE
>> >> > UNITED STATES NAVY
>> >> >
>> >> > Mr. CAMPBELL submitted the following resolution; which was
>> >> >referred
>> >> >to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
>> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, which was attacked and captured by
>> >> > the North Korean Navy on January 23, 1968, was the first
>> >> > United States Navy ship to be hijacked on the high seas by a
>> >> > foreign military force in over 150 years;
>> >> > Whereas 1 member of the USS Pueblo crew, Duane Hodges, was
>> >> > killed in the assault while the other 82 crew members were
>> >> > held in captivity, often under inhumane conditions, for 11
>> >> > months;
>> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, an intelligence collection
>> >> > auxiliary vessel, was operating in international waters at
>> >> > the time of the capture, and therefore did not violate North
>> >> > Korean territorial waters;
>> >> > Whereas the capture of the USS Pueblo resulted in no
>> >> > reprisals against the Government or people of North Korea and
>> >> > no military action at any time; and
>> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, though still the property of the
>> >> > United States Navy, has been retained by North Korea for more
>> >> > than 30 years, was subjected to exhibition in the North
>> >> > Korean cities of Wonsan and Hungham, and is now on display in
>> >> > Pyongyang, the capital city of North Korea: Now, therefore,
>> >> > be it
>> >> > Resolved,That the Senate--
>> >> > (1) demands the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
>> >> > States Navy; and
>> >> > (2) directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit copies
>> >> > of this resolution to the President, the Secretary of
>> >> > Defense, and the Secretary of State.
>> >> >
>> >> > Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit a Senate
>> >> >Resolution calling on North Korea to return the USS Pueblo to
>>the
>> >> >United States Navy. The legislation I am reintroducing today
>>is
>> >> >based
>> >> >on a resolution I introduced last year during the 107th
>>Congress,
>> >> >Senate Resolution 246.
>> >> > On January 23, 1968, the USS Pueblo was unjustly attacked and
>> >> >captured by
>> >> >
>> >> >[[Page S1754]]
>> >> >
>> >> >the North Korean Navy, becoming the first United States Navy
>>ship
>> >>to
>> >> >be
>> >> >hijacked on the high seas by a foreign military force in over
>>150
>> >> >years. At the time of its capture, the USS Pueblo was
>>operating
>> >>as
>> >> >an
>> >> >intelligence collection auxiliary vessel, and did not pose a
>> >>threat.
>> >> > This act of aggression resulted in the USS Pueblo's 82 crew
>> >> >members
>> >> >being held in captivity for eleven months, often in inhumane
>> >> >conditions. Another brave crew member, Duane Hodges, was
>>killed
>> >> >during
>> >> >the initial attack and several more crew members were wounded.
>>On
>> >> >December 23, 1968, after nearly a year of being unjustly
>>detained
>> >> >the
>> >> >surviving USS Pueblo crew members were finally released and
>> >>allowed
>> >> >to
>> >> >return home.
>> >> > It is interesting to note that the USS Pueblo I am calling on
>> >>the
>> >> >North Koreans to return today is in fact the third ship of the
>> >>fleet
>> >> >to
>> >> >be named in honor of the city and county of Pueblo, located in
>>my
>> >> >home
>> >> >State of Colorado. The first ship of the fleet to be named in
>> >>honor
>> >> >of
>> >> >Pueblo was an armored cruiser which had previously been named
>>the
>> >> >Colorado. In 1916, the USS Colorado was renamed as the USS
>>Pueblo
>> >> >when
>> >> >a new battleship named USS Colorado was authorized. The first
>>USS
>> >> >Pueblo served until 1927. The second USS Pueblo was a city
>>class
>> >> >frigate which served from 1944 to 1946. She was later sold to
>>the
>> >> >Dominican Republic where she serves today.
>> >> > The third USS Pueblo is the ship now wrongly held by the
>>North
>> >> >Koreans. Built by the Kewaunee Shipbuilding and Engineering
>> >> >Corporation, Kewaunee, WI, the ship originally served as a
>> >>general
>> >> >purpose supply vessel FP-344 for service in the U.S. Army
>> >> >Transportation Corps when she was launched on April 16, 1944.
>> >>During
>> >> >1966 and 1967 the ship was converted, redesignated as the USS
>> >>Pueblo
>> >> >and commissioned as an environmental research vessel, AGER-2.
>> >> > It is important to note that even to this day the capture of
>>the
>> >> >USS
>> >> >Pueblo has resulted in no reprisal against North Korea,
>> >> >demonstrating
>> >> >remarkable restraint by the United States. Even though the USS
>> >> >Pueblo
>> >> >still clearly remains the legal property of the United States
>> >>Navy,
>> >> >the
>> >> >North Korean Government has kept it on display as a sort of
>> >> >traveling
>> >> >propaganda museum.
>> >> > Recent events have made it clear that many unresolved issues
>> >> >remain
>> >> >regarding our Nation's relationship with North Korea. For
>> >>example,
>> >> >North Korea's recent high-profile resumption of nuclear
>> >> >saber-rattling
>> >> >presents a serious resurgent challenge that we, our allies in
>> >> >Northeast
>> >> >Asia and the rest of the world community must take seriously.
>> >> > While I certainly agree that successfully resolving this
>> >> >situation is
>> >> >first and foremost, I also believe that there are other
>>positive
>> >> >restorative steps that the North Koreans should take in order
>>to
>> >> >help
>> >> >improve our bilateral relationship. One such action would be
>>to
>> >> >return
>> >> >the USS Pueblo to its rightful owners, the United States Navy
>>and
>> >> >the
>> >> >American people they serve and protect.
>> >> > While returning the USS Pueblo may not necessarily remove the
>>35
>> >> >year-old scars inflicted by the attack of January 23, 1968,
>>and
>> >> >especially those suffered by the crew of the USS Pueblo and by
>> >>their
>> >> >families and loved ones, it would serve as a good will
>>gesture, a
>> >> >salve
>> >> >if you will, signaling hope for a brighter future between our
>>two
>> >> >nation's peoples.
>> >> > I stand with my colleagues back home in the Colorado State
>> >> >General
>> >> >Assembly in demanding the return of the USS Pueblo to the
>>United
>> >> >States
>> >> >Navy.
>> >> > I urge my colleagues here in the U.S. Senate to join me in
>> >> >supporting
>> >> >passage of this important resolution.
>> >> >
>> >> >--
>> >> >______________________________________________________
>> >> >Frank Hoffmann
>> >> >http://KoreaWeb.ws * Fax: (415) 727-4792
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>----------
>> >>Get McAfee virus scanning and
>> >>cleaning of incoming attachments. Get Hotmail Extra Storage!
>>
>>
>>----------
>>Share your photos without
>>swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today!
Help protect your PC. Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6870 is a reply to message #6869] |
Sat, 27 September 2003 22:42 |
Frank Hoffmann
Messages: 203
Registered: July 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
>I would appreciate some suggestions on how South Koreans treat their
>own government. In my experience, South Koreans tend to love their
>nationality and their race but often truely hate their government.
First of all, as you will recall, the South Korean government was a
pretty brutal U.S. sponsored dictatorship for quite a while, and
before that it had been a colony ruled by its neighbor. So, some
critical distance and continuous fight for more democracy etc. should
not surprise anyone. Then, if you look around in the world, Europe or
Asia or Africa, you see very few countries that had such an amazingly
long time of democratic and mostly peaceful development as the U.S.,
ruled and still ruled by one race that constitutes the majority of
the people, with one major religion (Christianity), and with no
invasions and no wars taking place on its territory. In countries
with a different history you see a different political culture. To
me, for example (as someone who grew up in Europe), South Korean
political life seems to be more familiar than what I see in the U.S.
Koreans have a different way of conflict resolution than Americans
have, involving different strategies and different rules of
communication. But the same is true for about every other country and
culture, and even cultures within one country. Just live in Oakland
for some time and you might change your idealistic way of presenting
U.S. culture and politics -);
I don't think South Koreans hate their government. Not today. I would
suggest to be more careful with such oversimplifications.
>And you are correct, I am not happy with a situation in which a
>despotic government rules over 23 million people, ruining their
>lives and starving their children. Apparently you are.
Apparently Serk-Bae Suh is happy that the North Korean government is
starving its own people??? Is that what you just wrote?
Frank
--
______________________________________________________
Frank Hoffmann
http://KoreaWeb.ws * Fax: (415) 727-4792
|
|
|
|
| Re: Jong-il Personality Cult [message #6872 is a reply to message #6869] |
Sun, 28 September 2003 03:49 |
Serk-Bae Suh
Messages: 4
Registered: September 2003
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Mr. Brown
I would like to protest your implied accusation of me as a KCI sympathizer.
I am truly sorry to see the ghost of McCarthism come alive on the Korean
Studies list.
Well, should I confess that I was a KCI sympathizer and publicly
renounce Pro-KCI-ism? or Should I try everything to prove my innocence
shivering with fear?
I am frightened very much not by your accusation but by your simplistic
equation of criticism against the U.S. foreign policy with support for the
dictatorship.
Is it another manifestation of the Zeitgeist of the Bush era, that is, "are
you with us or with them?"
serk-bae suh
At 04:27 PM 9/27/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Since the US is a representative democracy, I think it is proper for all
>American citizens to say "we" when we refer to our government. That is not
>to say we necessarily agree with a current policy but it does mean we
>each, to a small extent, are responsible for the actions of our
>govenrment. Clearly that is not the case for many countries. Always I
>find it necessary to dissasociate the people of North Korea from their
>Pyongyang rulers, for instance. Read any of the stories of thousands of
>recent refugees if you disagree.
>
>I would appreciate some suggestions on how South Koreans treat their own
>government. In my experience, South Koreans tend to love their nationality
>and their race but often truely hate their government. Of course some
>Americans are the same way but in Korea it seems rather extreme. Perhaps
>you are a Korean citizen and could help me understand. But then I see you
>are from UCLA so perhaps you are American and don't like to use the word
>"we". In truth, I don't know of which country you are a citizen.
>
>And you are correct, I am not happy with a situation in which a despotic
>government rules over 23 million people, ruining their lives and starving
>their children. Apparently you are. As in Iraq, in my view it is our
>(USG) inability to finish things up properly that causes us to get stuck
>in places like the DMZ or in Saudi Arabia for so many years. I would love
>it if we could remove all of our forces from both the W. Pacific and the
>Middle East as soon its clear we won't get drawn back in. The way things
>are going, I think that might be possible in a few years--so I'm
>hopeful. Afganistan and Iraq are important in that regard but a lot also
>depends on South Korea.
>
>In my mind, we (the world) have a hostage situation on our hands in Korea,
>as we have since 1950. Pyongyang's rulers are pitifully weak but they
>have their hands around the throats of too many Koreans. The
>Japanese, Soviets and Chinese are largely to blame for this in the
>past--now all of us share this burden.
>
>That's not to say I have the answer. Hostage situations are difficult, no
>doubt. I understand why Kim Chong-il threatens nuclear warfare. Its
>probably a logical reaction given the sucess he has had with blackmail
>over the years. But ultimately I think that it will be his own downfall.
>Like Saddaam, threatning something one can't use, even threating something
>one might not have, is pretty dangerous. Seems like we (the US, not
>necessarily our so-called allies) are doing the right thing, letting him
>rant and rave all he wants but making sure he understands there are tough
>consaquences to developing nuclear threats.
>
>In that sense, far from scary, we (the USG) did the right thing not even
>mentioning the Pueblo transit. (I am pretty sure it went by sea.) A knee
>jerk reaction--probably desired by Pyongyang--would have been to take it
>back. And similarly we did the right thing by not shooting down the MIGs
>that threaten our (USG) recon aircraft. I think by now KCI has been able
>to frustrate even his former Japanese and Chinese sympathizers--the only
>ones left seem to be a few in America and in South Korea.
>
>
>
> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
> >Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:54:48 -0700
> >
> >Mr. Brwon
> >
> >Let me thank you for your illuminating explanation.
> >I appreciate it.
> >
> >I also would like to agree with you to the degree that the "you"
> >(since you address the U.S. government as yours) have been less
> >bellicose with North Korea since 1953 compared to "your" aggression
> >against other countries challenging "you" such as Cuba, Vietnam,
> >Iran, Iraq, Panama, and so on.
> >
> >I am just wondering whether it is because North Korea has been armed
> >with military capability to retaliate or because it does not have
> >oil or any other valuable natural resources.
> >
> >If the former is the case, then it seems that "you" have been
> >rewarding the country for its military capability by tolerating it
> >despite its hostility while punishing those without the same degree
> >of military prowess. Then who can blame Kim Jongil for developing
> >nuclear weapons?
> >
> >If the latter is the case, I thank God who saves the peninsular from
> >another war by having created it as non-oil-producing land although
> >you, sir do not appear to be happy with it.
> >
> >sincerely,
> >
> >serk-bae suh
> >
> >
> >
> >At 09:46 AM 9/26/2003 -0400, you wrote:
> >
> >>Mr. Suh, that's a very good question. "We" users of English should
> >>always be careful in our use of pronouns. And I see I also misued
> >>the word "there" instead of "their". There is some advantage in
> >>Korean where pronouns are not used as much. [Come to think of it,
> >>Korean's do often use the term -ooudi- in all kinds of similar
> >>situations].
> >>
> >>I meant "we" in a broad sense as "we Americans" as represented by
> >>our elected government. I don't think the US government has really
> >>done anything to North Korea, at least since 1953, that has been
> >>deserving of all the North Korean official acrimony. Of course, the
> >>USG tells them (NK leadership) if they attack the South it (the
> >>USG) will destroy them (NK leadership) but we (US) have never had
> >>to actually do that. And I can't think of any time when we (USG)
> >>hasve actually fired a gun or taken something of theirs (North
> >>Korea's).
> >>
> >>I don't think it makes much difference though. The "we" in my view
> >>could be South Korea or really just about anyone outside
> >>Pyongyang's ruling clique. NK's leadership uses any kind of excuse
> >>for maintaining its ruthless, and yes I think evil, power over its
> >>poor citizens. The rest of the world, for good or bad, has chosen
> >>to tolerate their (NK leadership's) behavior.
> >>
> >>
> >> >From: Serk-Bae Suh
> >> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
> >> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 18:48:43 -0700
> >> >
> >> >To Mr. William Brown
> >> >
> >> >I am afraid I also must be missing something here.
> >> >
> >> >Who are "we" in your previous posting?
> >> >
> >> >Does this "we" refer to you and Mr. Frank Hoffmann? or Do you
> >>mean
> >> >the U.S. government by the "we"? or the American People as a
> >>whole?
> >> >Or, does it just include a group of people who share your view?
> >> >
> >> >Or does it mean the holy trinity of Christian Almighty God whose
> >> >divine power is to judge who is evil and who is good and break
> >>the
> >> >backbone of evil?
> >> >
> >> >Maybe it is because that English is not my native language.
> >> >
> >> >I would be more than grateful if you would kindly elucidate the
> >>"we"
> >> >you are talking about.
> >> >
> >> >Thank you very much.
> >> >
> >> >sincerely,
> >> >
> >> >serk-bae suh
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >At 08:17 PM 9/25/2003 -0400, you wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>I must be missing something here. How can something that did not
> >> >>happen (US recapture of the Pueblo) now be scary? Seems like the
> >> >>fact that it was allowed to move should make you less afraid.
> >> >>Unless your point is that perhaps the US doesn't really watch
> >>them
> >> >>so closely after all, and that fact is scary. In truth, despite
> >> >>all the war talk over the last 50 years, and lots of North
> >>Korean
> >> >>provocations, its hard to say we have done anything to provoke
> >> >>there current antagonism.
> >> >>
> >> >> >From: Frank Hoffmann
> >> >> >Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >> >> >To: Korean Studies Discussion List
> >> >> >Subject: Re: [KS] Jong-il Personality Cult
> >> >> >Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 16:39:29 -0700
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Professor Choe wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> I cannot imagine that the US would have allowed NK to remove
> >>it
> >> >> >>via high sea. The only alternative must have been by land. Is
> >>it
> >> >> >>possible to move the ship Pueblo via ground transportation?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >You can always disassemble a 900 to 1000 ton boat like that in
> >>a
> >> >> >week or two (which would be necessary anyway to get it through
> >> >>all
> >> >> >the highway tunnels)..... but what I find much more
> >>interesting
> >> >>is
> >> >> >your note that you can't imagine the US would have allowed NK
> >>to
> >> >> >transport a spy ship that had been captured over 30 years ago
> >>(by
> >> >> >Oct. 1999, when it was transported). That's more than alarming
> >>if
> >> >> >so. There is a Senate Resolution (see below) from January of
> >>this
> >> >> >year (not the first one) asking for the return of that ship,
> >> >>which,
> >> >> >I think, speaks for itself. But the suggestion that the U.S.
> >> >> >military would go for an armed conflict to conquer a 1944
> >>build
> >> >>spy
> >> >> >ship that was captured three decades ago is rather ... well,
> >> >>scary.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Frank
> >> >> >
> >> >> >--->>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Congressional Record: January 29, 2003 (Senate)
> >> >> >Page S1752-S1756
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > STATEMENTS ON SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > SENATE RESOLUTION 29--DEMANDING THE RETURN OF THE USS
> >> >> >PUEBLO TO THE
> >> >> > UNITED STATES NAVY
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Mr. CAMPBELL submitted the following resolution; which was
> >> >> >referred
> >> >> >to the Committee on Foreign Relations:
> >> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, which was attacked and captured by
> >> >> > the North Korean Navy on January 23, 1968, was the first
> >> >> > United States Navy ship to be hijacked on the high seas by a
> >> >> > foreign military force in over 150 years;
> >> >> > Whereas 1 member of the USS Pueblo crew, Duane Hodges, was
> >> >> > killed in the assault while the other 82 crew members were
> >> >> > held in captivity, often under inhumane conditions, for 11
> >> >> > months;
> >> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, an intelligence collection
> >> >> > auxiliary vessel, was operating in international waters at
> >> >> > the time of the capture, and therefore did not violate North
> >> >> > Korean territorial waters;
> >> >> > Whereas the capture of the USS Pueblo resulted in no
> >> >> > reprisals against the Government or people of North Korea and
> >> >> > no military action at any time; and
> >> >> > Whereas the USS Pueblo, though still the property of the
> >> >> > United States Navy, has been retained by North Korea for more
> >> >> > than 30 years, was subjected to exhibition in the North
> >> >> > Korean cities of Wonsan and Hungham, and is now on display in
> >> >> > Pyongyang, the capital city of North Korea: Now, therefore,
> >> >> > be it
> >> >> > Resolved,That the Senate--
> >> >> > (1) demands the return of the USS Pueblo to the United
> >> >> > States Navy; and
> >> >> > (2) directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit copies
> >> >> > of this resolution to the President, the Secretary of
> >> >> > Defense, and the Secretary of State.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit a Senate
> >> >> >Resolution calling on North Korea to return the USS Pueblo to
> >>the
> >> >> >United States Navy. The legislation I am reintroducing today
> >>is
> >> >> >based
> >> >> >on a resolution I introduced last year during the 107th
> >>Congress,
> >> >> >Senate Resolution 246.
> >> >> > On January 23, 1968, the USS Pueblo was unjustly attacked and
> >> >> >captured by
> >> >> >
> >> >> >[[Page S1754]]
> >> >> >
> >> >> >the North Korean Navy, becoming the first United States Navy
> >>ship
> >> >>to
> >> >> >be
> >> >> >hijacked on the high seas by a foreign military force in over
> >>150
> >> >> >years. At the time of its capture, the USS Pueblo was
> >>operating
> >> >>as
> >> >> >an
> >> >> >intelligence collection auxiliary vessel, and did not pose a
> >> >>threat.
> >> >> > This act of aggression resulted in the USS Pueblo's 82 crew
> >> >> >members
> >> >> >being held in captivity for eleven months, often in inhumane
> >> >> >conditions. Another brave crew member, Duane Hodges, was
> >>killed
> >> >> >during
> >> >> >the initial attack and several more crew members were wounded.
> >>On
> >> >> >December 23, 1968, after nearly a year of being unjustly
> >>detained
> >> >> >the
> >> >> >surviving USS Pueblo crew members were finally released and
> >> >>allowed
> >> >> >to
> >> >> >return home.
> >> >> > It is interesting to note that the USS Pueblo I am calling on
> >> >>the
> >> >> >North Koreans to return today is in fact the third ship of the
> >> >>fleet
> >> >> >to
> >> >> >be named in honor of the city and county of Pueblo, located in
> >>my
> >> >> >home
> >> >> >State of Colorado. The first ship of the fleet to be named in
> >> >>honor
> >> >> >of
> >> >> >Pueblo was an armored cruiser which had previously been named
> >>the
> >> >> >Colorado. In 1916, the USS Colorado was renamed as the USS
> >>Pueblo
> >> >> >when
> >> >> >a new battleship named USS Colorado was authorized. The first
> >>USS
> >> >> >Pueblo served until 1927. The second USS Pueblo was a city
> >>class
> >> >> >frigate which served from 1944 to 1946. She was later sold to
> >>the
> >> >> >Dominican Republic where she serves today.
> >> >> > The third USS Pueblo is the ship now wrongly held by the
> >>North
> >> >> >Koreans. Built by the Kewaunee Shipbuilding and Engineering
> >> >> >Corporation, Kewaunee, WI, the ship originally served as a
> >> >>general
> >> >> >purpose supply vessel FP-344 for service in the U.S. Army
> >> >> >Transportation Corps when she was launched on April 16, 1944.
> >> >>During
> >> >> >1966 and 1967 the ship was converted, redesignated as the USS
> >> >>Pueblo
> >> >> >and commissioned as an environmental research vessel, AGER-2.
> >> >> > It is important to note that even to this day the capture of
> >>the
> >> >> >USS
> >> >> >Pueblo has resulted in no reprisal against North Korea,
> >> >> >demonstrating
> >> >> >remarkable restraint by the United States. Even though the USS
> >> >> >Pueblo
> >> >> >still clearly remains the legal property of the United States
> >> >>Navy,
> >> >> >the
> >> >> >North Korean Government has kept it on display as a sort of
> >> >> >traveling
> >> >> >propaganda museum.
> >> >> > Recent events have made it clear that many unresolved issues
> >> >> >remain
> >> >> >regarding our Nation's relationship with North Korea. For
> >> >>example,
> >> >> >North Korea's recent high-profile resumption of nuclear
> >> >> >saber-rattling
> >> >> >presents a serious resurgent challenge that we, our allies in
> >> >> >Northeast
> >> >> >Asia and the rest of the world community must take seriously.
> >> >> > While I certainly agree that successfully resolving this
> >> >> >situation is
> >> >> >first and foremost, I also believe that there are other
> >>positive
> >> >> >restorative steps that the North Koreans should take in order
> >>to
> >> >> >help
> >> >> >improve our bilateral relationship. One such action would be
> >>to
> >> >> >return
> >> >> >the USS Pueblo to its rightful owners, the United States Navy
> >>and
> >> >> >the
> >> >> >American people they serve and protect.
> >> >> > While returning the USS Pueblo may not necessarily remove the
> >>35
> >> >> >year-old scars inflicted by the attack of January 23, 1968,
> >>and
> >> >> >especially those suffered by the crew of the USS Pueblo and by
> >> >>their
> >> >> >families and loved ones, it would serve as a good will
> >>gesture, a
> >> >> >salve
> >> >> >if you will, signaling hope for a brighter future between our
> >>two
> >> >> >nation's peoples.
> >> >> > I stand with my colleagues back home in the Colorado State
> >> >> >General
> >> >> >Assembly in demanding the return of the USS Pueblo to the
> >>United
> >> >> >States
> >> >> >Navy.
> >> >> > I urge my colleagues here in the U.S. Senate to join me in
> >> >> >supporting
> >> >> >passage of this important resolution.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >--
> >> >> >______________________________________________________
> >> >> >Frank Hoffmann
> >> >> >http://KoreaWeb.ws * Fax: (415) 727-4792
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>----------
> >> >>Get McAfee virus scanning and
> >> >>cleaning of incoming attachments. Get Hotmail Extra Storage!
> >>
> >>
> >>----------
> >>Share your photos without
> >>swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage today!
>
>
>----------
>Help protect your PC. Get a FREE
>computer virus scan online from McAfee.
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat May 25 05:49:37 EDT 2013
|
Korean Studies Discussion List
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
