Facebook Proxy | Free mobile phone's stuffs | Myspace Images | MPAA | Mortgage Calculator
N.Korean defector says disabled newborns are killed [Archive] - FreeConservatives

PDA

View Full Version : N.Korean defector says disabled newborns are killed


Un Con Troll Able
03-22-2006, 07:25 AM
By Jack Kim 1 hour, 50 minutes ago


SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea has no people with physical disabilities because they are killed almost as soon as they are born, a physician who defected from the communist state said on Wednesday.

Ri Kwang-chol, who fled to the South last year, told a forum of rights activists that the practice of killing newborns was widespread but denied he himself took part in it.

"There are no people with physical defects in North Korea," Ri told members of the New Right Union, which groups local activists and North Korean refugees.

He said babies born with physical disabilities were killed in infancy in hospitals or in homes and were quickly buried.

The practice is encouraged by the state, Ri said, as a way of purifying the masses and eliminating people who might be considered "different."
The group urged the South Korean government to change course away from "silent diplomacy" and immediately begin taking action to pressure the North to improve its human rights record.

The South Korean government has refused to join international condemnation of human rights abuses in the North out of concern that such a move could rattle ties with Pyongyang, which considers any criticism of its human rights as deeply offensive.

"The government should stop trying to avoid upsetting Kim Jong-il," said another defector, Kim Young-sun, 67, referring to the North Korean leader. "It should try to upset Kim Jong-il," she said, adding it would be the best way to change the North.

Kim Young-sun is a survivor of the North's Yodok prison camp, notorious for its forced labor and life-sentences for people charged with conspiring against the Kim Jong-il leadership.

Mun Hyon-ok said women from her hometown in the northern region of North Korea bordering China were taken by a ring of human traffickers and probably ended up in China.

"And there are women who are selling themselves for a handful of rice," she told the forum.

North Korea has called itself a people's paradise and said criticism of its human rights was motivated by a goal of toppling the leadership of Kim Jong-il.


We should have went into North Korea instead of Iraq. If any country needs a regime change, it's Fatty Four-Eyes'.

The rest of the story:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060322/ts_nm/korea_north_rights_dc

DesertFox
03-22-2006, 08:47 AM
I agree. Awful as Saddam was, I think Kim Jong-Il is even worse.

Wolfcounsel
03-22-2006, 09:38 AM
"We should have went into North Korea instead of Iraq. If any country needs a regime change, it's Fatty Four-Eyes'." --Un Con Troll Able

So many baboons in power, so little time.:evilgrin:-Hee hee!

http://freeconservatives.com/smilies/death2.gif
Hey! What's so funny,
you red-faced smirky?


All dictators will fall. Stand in line, run and hide, it matters not. You monsters will all die.

Beowulf
03-22-2006, 04:32 PM
I think this makes Kim Jong Il as evil as Adolph Hitler, who strove to make "the perfect race."

cerberus
03-22-2006, 05:50 PM
I agree. Awful as Saddam was, I think Kim Jong-Il is even worse.

There is no doubt about that. KJI is way worse than Saddam by about a factor of 10 or so.

DeclinetoState
03-22-2006, 05:57 PM
What Beowulf said.

I don't know if KJI is "ten times" as bad as Saddam, but I wouldn't want either one near me. It's bad enough I have to share a planet with them.

DoctorDoom
03-22-2006, 06:32 PM
Given time, this will be SOP here as well. Life has been cheapened to the point where babies are terminated because they are inconvenient, the wrong sex. etc. And there are high-profile "scientists" who advocate extending the period of infant death to a couple of weeks after birth, for precisely the reason that NK is doing it.

PatrioticAmerican
03-22-2006, 07:29 PM
If any of this is true, how did Kimmie get by the baby butchers?

Apollo5600
03-23-2006, 03:01 AM
We should have went into North Korea instead of Iraq. If any country needs a regime change, it's Fatty Four-Eyes'.
NK isn't exactly a strategic position to deal with the rest of the a-holes in the ME. However, they are definently on the "to-do" list.

jayson
03-23-2006, 10:28 AM
NK isn't exactly a strategic position to deal with the rest of the a-holes in the ME. However, they are definently on the "to-do" list.

Let's see here, just after France and just before the Dixie Chicks.

Apollo5600
03-24-2006, 02:26 PM
France we give to the Muslims,

DeclinetoState
03-24-2006, 02:31 PM
North Korea is almost as bad as Holland (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/616jszlg.asp). Or is it the other way around?

Apollo5600
03-24-2006, 02:41 PM
North Korea is almost as bad as Holland (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/616jszlg.asp). Or is it the other way around?Liberals all look the same to me.

DesertFox
03-24-2006, 03:24 PM
It's hard to tell them apart with their asses up in the air and their lips planted on the ground.

Rob_Lister
03-24-2006, 04:27 PM
Invading NK is a pretty difficult task as compared to Iq, isn't it?

They are well dug-in all along the border -- double/triple fortified. We'd have to make a beach landing and as soon as we did, Seoul would be overrun and burned to the ground.

I'm not saying we couldn't/wouldn't prevail, but the cost in terms of lives/property would be huge. Would the cost be worth it?

Un Con Troll Able
03-24-2006, 04:30 PM
...and that is why we haven't invaded -- because the NK army would likely kill 100,000 American troops before we overran the country (assuming China didn't try to intervene as they did in the 1950s).

And America doesn't have the stomach for it.

As to whether or not it would be worth it...probably not. Just use a single nuke to take out Pyongyang.

Damn, I wish we had gone ahead with the production of the neutron bomb.

Wolfcounsel
03-24-2006, 04:37 PM
"...and that is why we haven't invaded -- because the NK army would likely kill 100,000 American troops before we overran the country" --Un Con Troll Able

No need to allow those North Korean goosesteppers to do that. They can quintuple-fortify themselves if they want. You ever hear the saying, "An army moves on its stomach?" Just blast away at the support lines.

DeclinetoState
03-24-2006, 04:47 PM
Although the able leadership of General Matthew B. Ridgway stabilized the military situation near the prewar boundary at the 38th parallel, MacArthur's months of public and private bickering with the Truman administration soon came to a head. On April 11, 1951, the President relieved General MacArthur, triggering a firestorm of protest over our strategy not only in <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.freeconservatives.com/vb/ /><st1:date style=<font face=" /><st1:country-region><ST1:p<FONT face="Tempus Sans ITC">Korea</ST1:p</st1:country-region><FONT face="Tempus Sans ITC">, but in the Cold War as a whole.
http://www.empereur.com/G._Douglas_MacArthur.html

How much of the present mess in Korea could have been avoided if Truman had trusted MacArthur's judgment?

Rob_Lister
03-24-2006, 04:47 PM
The support lines are mostly underground with huge caches stored at the end points. The entire economy (such as it is) pretty much exists to replinish these stockholds. The only people that eat with any regularity at all are soldiers on the boarder -- albeit even they likely don't get enough.

China is the difficulty -- they like having NK on their southern border. It's sort of like when you feel bad about yourself and you watch the Jerry Springer so you can say, 'at least I'm not them!"

The way to 'get' them is through tough-love deplomacy. Isolate them politically to the greatest degree possible (such as bush would do if given a free hand) and deny them 'charity' in all possible areanas (I'm not sure bush would do this). This will kill them, but "leader" would be one of the last to go.

DesertFox
03-24-2006, 04:48 PM
Wolfie's right. NK's starving. It's been starving for several years. Before it began starving it was real hungry for a long time. Prior to that it was starving. Cut their logistics and let them starve.

Also, remember what some Germans once did in Russia when they knew they were gonna be overrun -- set up big pots of lentil soup boiling on the fire. When the overrunning-but-starving Russians got near it they couldn't NOT go to the soup and forget about the war for a few crucial minutes.

Wolfcounsel
03-24-2006, 04:52 PM
"The support lines are mostly underground with huge caches stored at the end points." --Rob_Lister

Yes, but the provisions have to be replenished from the surface.

DesertFox
03-24-2006, 05:00 PM
They can cause some damage and kill some people, preparatory to dying theirselfs and that satanic regime finally disappearing.

Rob_Lister
03-24-2006, 05:08 PM
"The support lines are mostly underground with huge caches stored at the end points." --Rob_Lister

Yes, but the provisions have to be replenished from the surface.

Then we're back to square one. The difficulty is not wiping them out, but wiping them out before they cause too much damage. Wiping out their supply lines NOW stops them three months from NOW.

Wyatt_Junker
03-24-2006, 05:19 PM
Shifting gears...

Here in the West, isn't the amnio to detect if yer bun-in-the-oven is defective, however that may be defined? And thereby, giving the woman the excuse to off it?

Just a question.

DesertFox
03-24-2006, 05:34 PM
Rob, any war with North Korea will result in damage and death on both sides, no matter how slick we go about it. There's no way to avoid it.