North Korea Making Rapid improvements

[gaiusmarius]

Just so you know, being a moderator changes what members like me will say to you when stupid shit comes out of your word hole.

just as well, as you havn't really addressed what i said other then making some round about insult.

you can't argue with history, the throne of england is blood soaked, the whole British empire was built on exploitation murder and theft in the name of her fucking majesty, so gimme a break, no one should be bowing to her, i always wondered why a US president ever would bow to any unelected monarch. so for all his faults, i think not bowing was a good call, i don't really care what the blue blood lovers think about it. i believe in equality of all men and woman, that means i don't bow to any human.

 

[Brother Nature]

The relationship has been 'special' since about 1775. I simply don't see any point in any sitting president meeting the queen, because she's not politically relevant. It just speaks to the pomposity of the royal family. It'd be like if when foreign dignitaries come to the US, we make them bow down to the Kardashians. To try to discredit Trump for not doing something that is totally ridiculous, and wildly unsupported by the majority of the world, really seems like grasping at straws from his detractors. Now, I don't like Trump, but people getting all outraged about him not following protocol and bowing to the queen is as absurd as when Trump said Obama was born in Kenya. It's attacking for the sake of attacking and it's weak. I lean more so to the left in my political views, but to see the bullshit that is being spewed by the left against Trump is pretty off putting. Just because something validates our own views, doesn't mean it doens't need to be verified. It all just makes me happy I live at the bottom of the world, with great healthcare, non-extremism in our politics, and most importantly, great weed.



Anyways, here's a decent article regarding the original topic and speaks to the point I'm trying to make above.

The Media’s Brazen Dishonesty About North Korean Nuclear Violations

July 13, 2018 • 47 Comments

In its reporting of supposed North Korean “violations”, the corporate media is once again found to be pushing a political agenda, as Gareth Porter explains.
By Gareth Porter
In late June and early July, NBC News, CNN, and The Wall Street Journal published stories that appeared at first glance to shed a lurid light on Donald Trump’s flirtation with Kim Jong-un. They contained satellite imagery showing that North Korea was making rapid upgrades to its nuclear weapons complex at Yongbyon and expanding its missile production program just as Trump and Kim were getting chummy at their Singapore summit.
In fact, those media outlets were selling journalistic snake oil. By misrepresenting the diplomatic context of the images they were hyping, the press launched a false narrative around the Trump-Kim summit and the negotiations therein.
The headline of the June 27 NBC News story revealed the network’s political agenda on the Trump-Kim negotiations. “If North Korea is denuclearizing,” it asked, “why is it expanding a nuclear research center?” The piece warned that North Korea “continues to make improvements to a major nuclear facility, raising questions about President Donald Trump’s claim that Kim Jong Un has agreed to disarm, independent experts tell NBC News.”
CNN’s coverage of the same story was even more sensationalist, declaring that there were “troubling signs” that North Korea was making “improvements” to its nuclear facilities, some of which it said had been carried out after the Trump-Kim summit. It pointed to a facility that had produced plutonium in the past and recently undergone an upgrade, despite Kim’s alleged promise to Trump to draw down his nuclear arsenal. CNN commentator Max Boot cleverly spelled out the supposed implication: “If you were about to demolish your house, would you be remodeling the kitchen?”
But in their determination to push hardline opposition to the negotiations, these stories either ignored or sought to discredit the careful caveat accompanying the original source on which they were based—the analysis of satellite images published on the website 38 North on June 21. The three analysts who had written that the satellite images “indicated that improvements to the infrastructure at North Korea’s Yongbyon Nuclear Research Center are continuing at a rapid pace” also cautioned that this work “should not be seen as having any relationship to North Korea’s pledge to denuclearize.”
If the authors’ point was not clear enough, Joel Wit, the founder of 38 North, who helped negotiate the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea and then worked on its implementation for several years, explained to NBC News: “What you have is a commitment to denuclearize—we don’t have the deal yet, we just have a general commitment.” Wit added that he didn’t “find it surprising at all” that work at Yongbyon was continuing.
A Willful Misreading of Images
In a briefing for journalists by telephone on Monday, Wit was even more vigorous in denouncing the stories that had hyped the article on 38 North. “I really disagree with the media narrative,” Wit said. “The Singapore summit declaration didn’t mean North Korea would stop its activities in the nuclear and missile area right away.” He recalled the fact that, during negotiations between the U.S. and the Soviets over arms control, “both sides continued to build weapons until the agreement was completed.”

Determined to salvage its political line on the Trump-Kim talks, NBC News turned to Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, who has insisted all along that North Korea won’t give up its nuclear weapons. “We have never had a deal,” Lewis said. “The North Koreans never offered to give up their nuclear weapons. Never. Not once.” Lewis had apparently forgotten that the October 2005 Six Party joint statement included language that the DPRK had “committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons….”
Another witness NBC found to support its view was James Acton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who declared, “If [the North Koreans] were serious about unilaterally disarming, of course they would have stopped work at Yongbyon.” That was true but misleading, because North Korea has always been unambiguously clear that its offer of denuclearization is conditional on reciprocal steps by the United States.
On July 1, a few days after those stories appeared, the Wall Street Journal headlined, “New satellite imagery indicates Pyongyang is pushing ahead with weapons programs even as it pursues dialogue with Washington.” The lead paragraph called it a “major expansion of a key missile-manufacturing plant.”
But the shock effect of the story itself was hardly seismic. It turns out that the images of a North Korean solid-fuel missile manufacturing facility at Hamhung showed that new buildings had been added beginning in the early spring, after Kim Jong-un had called for more production of solid-fuel rocket engines and warhead tips last August. The construction of the exterior of some buildings was completed “around the time” of the Trump-Kim summit meeting, according to the analysts at the James Martin Center of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies.
So the most Pyongyang could be accused of was going ahead with a previously planned expansion while it was just beginning to hold talks with the United States.
The satellite images were analyzed by Jeffrey Lewis, the director whom had just been quoted by NBC in support of its viewpoint that North Korea had no intention of giving up its nuclear weapons. So it is no surprise that the Martin Center’s David Schmerler, who also participated in the analysis of the images, told the Journal, “The expansion of production infrastructure for North Korea’s solid missile infrastructure probably suggests that Kim Jong Un does not intend to abandon his nuclear and missile programs.”
But when this writer spoke with Schmerler last week, he admitted that the evidence of Kim’s intentions regarding nuclear and missile programs is much less clear. I asked him if he was sure that North Korea would refuse to give up its ICBM program as part of a broader agreement with the Trump administration. “I’m not sure,” Schmerler responded, adding, “They haven’t really said they’re willing to give up ICBM program.” That is true, but they haven’t rejected that possibility either—presumably because the answer will depend on what commitments Trump is willing to make to the DPRK.




Distortion is the Norm
These stories of supposed North Korean betrayal by NBC, CNN, and the Wall Street Journal are egregious cases of distorting news by pushing a predetermined policy line. But those news outlets, far from being outliers, are merely reflecting the norms of the entire corporate news system.
The stories of how North Korea is now violating an imaginary pledge by Kim to Trump in Singapore are even more outrageous, because big media had previously peddled the opposite line: that Kim at the Singapore Summit made no firm commitment to give up his nuclear weapons and that the “agreement” in Singapore was the weakest of any thus far.
That claim, which blithely ignored the fundamental distinction between a brief summit meeting statement and past formal agreements with North Korea that took months to reach, was a media maneuver of unparalleled brazenness. And big media have since topped that feat of journalistic legerdemain by claiming that North Korea has demonstrated bad faith by failing to halt all nuclear and missile-related activities.
A media complex so determined to discredit negotiations with North Korea and so unfettered by political-diplomatic reality seriously threatens the ability of the United States to deliver on any agreement with Pyongyang. That means alternative media must make more aggressive efforts to challenge the corporate press’s coverage.
This article originally appeared at The American Conservative.
Gareth Porter is an investigative reporter and regular contributor to TAC. He is also the author of Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare. Follow him on Twitter @GarethPorter.

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Having spent a number of years in the USA in the past, and knowing many Americans in the UK during my lifetime I find it VERY odd that any of them would fawn over the royal family and think that it was a good thing......but many of them do.

Many of them have said that they would like to have a monarchy in the USA even......sounds completely crazy to me, since to form the USA they had to have the American war of independence to free themselves from King George 111, who was a British monarch, and the blood of many thousands of patriots had to be spilled for the USA to be born.

Since when did Americans care about the queen?

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Having spent a number of years in the USA in the past, and knowing many Americans in the UK during my lifetime I find it VERY odd that any of them would fawn over the royal family and think that it was a good thing......but many of them do.

Many of them have said that they would like to have a monarchy in the USA even......sounds completely crazy to me, since to form the USA they had to have the American war of independence to free themselves from King George 111, who was a British monarch, and the blood of many thousands of patriots had to be spilled for the USA to be born.

Thinking about it.....I would put this sort of attitude down to the main-stream-media that daily promotes the royals, usually in a good light, but often negates to inform us of the inequality and bloody history involved in supporting these people throughout the centuries.

*I did leave this link before, and it is a bit of an eye opener.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gL55GOmd2H8

** and here's another link that addresses inbreeding amongst the royals...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3QJ1oFXmPc

 

[Brother Nature]

Your preaching to the choir here man. In good old kiwi land, as a commonwealth, we're still very subject to all this. I have to hear it daily at lunch and morning coffee breaks, and weirdly from someone whose ancestral culture was desecrated by the crown. It baffles the mind, but I guess a lot of people only really look at what is directly in front of them, it certainly makes it easier. Probably no better example than this extreme left and right partisanship were seeing allover countries worldwide. America and Britain are the most focused on examples, but it is taking hold all over the world. It's an interesting development I've never had to deal with in my life time, it'll be interesting to see where this all goes. It'd be interesting to hear perspectives of those who had been through the real fascism, oppression, censorship, etc... of our early century.

 

[Gry]

You two seem to have subservience issues, which I will leave you to resolve.

I do find Porter to be an interesting and most worthwhile source.
He is a frequent guest on the Scott Horton Anti War Radio Show:
https://scotthorton.org/

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Subservience issues?...lol

Maybe we are sick of being referred to as 'Subjects of the crown?'

I often hear from religious people that we are all born equal, but that is simply not the case, particularly when you consider it in reference to the royals...

*thanks for the link Gry....I will check it out once I have helped my daughter with her homework.

You two seem to have subservience issues, which I will leave you to resolve.

I do find Porter to be an interesting and most worthwhile source.
He is a frequent guest on the Scott Horton Anti War Radio Show:
https://scotthorton.org/

 

[CaptainDankness]

Having spent a number of years in the USA in the past, and knowing many Americans in the UK during my lifetime I find it VERY odd that any of them would fawn over the royal family and think that it was a good thing......but many of them do.

Many of them have said that they would like to have a monarchy in the USA even......sounds completely crazy to me, since to form the USA they had to have the American war of independence to free themselves from King George 111, who was a British monarch, and the blood of many thousands of patriots had to be spilled for the USA to be born.

Yeah, some Americans damn near worship the Royal Family. I could careless about the Royal wedding or Princess Diana as do most. I guarantee if we had a candidate running for president that wanted to start a royal family they would lose miserably, simply because middle America don't play that shit.

Most of us know our history well enough, their is no such thing as freedom if we must bow to royalty.

I also find it hilarious that Americans care what the British think of our president, they hated George Washington too.

Who knows maybe they can take some American refugees that hate freedom ANTIFA comes to mind.

 

[igrowone]

Yeah, some Americans damn near worship the Royal Family. I could careless about the Royal wedding or Princess Diana as do most. I guarantee if we had a candidate running for president that wanted to start a royal family they would lose miserably, simply because middle America don't play that shit.

Most of us know our history well enough, their is no such thing as freedom if we must bow to royalty.

I also find it hilarious that Americans care what the British think of our president, they hated George Washington too.

Who knows maybe they can take some American refugees that hate freedom ANTIFA comes to mind.

well, we've had a father and son president in the Bushes
seen some members boast how Ivanka is destined to become the presidential heir apparent
what is that if not royalty?

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

Alot of it is because of the constant, relentless and repetitive news coverage that CNN/BBC and most other news-media outlets spew out about them year after year, turning them into a posh reality show that so many people aspire to be like somehow...

Now its gotten even worse with one of the royals marrying that American lady, which will create more anglophile Americans.

The constant propaganda about the royals has been going on for centuries, and it has been mostly hidden that their family the Saxe-Coberg-Gotha's had top leading nazi's within it, and one Prince that was largely responsible for getting WW1 started.

Yeah, some Americans damn near worship the Royal Family. I could careless about the Royal wedding or Princess Diana as do most. I guarantee if we had a candidate running for president that wanted to start a royal family they would lose miserably, simply because middle America don't play that shit.

Most of us know our history well enough, their is no such thing as freedom if we must bow to royalty.

I also find it hilarious that Americans care what the British think of our president, they hated George Washington too.

Who knows maybe they can take some American refugees that hate freedom ANTIFA comes to mind.

 

[mean mr.mustard]

Who knows maybe they can take some American refugees that hate freedom ANTIFA comes to mind.

Because in fascism is freedom.

Brilliant.

I don't think some people understand diplomacy.

I think it's become blatantly obvious.

On one hand there's people saying he shouldn't bow.

Others realize he just makes us look brash crass and arrogant.

Sure you don't have to bow but what about rapport?

Many seem to have lost sight of what international visits consist of.

 

[CaptainDankness]

Because in fascism is freedom.

Brilliant.

I don't think some people understand diplomacy.

I think it's become blatantly obvious.

On one hand there's people saying he shouldn't bow.

Others realize he just makes us look brash crass and arrogant.

Sure you don't have to bow but what about rapport?

Many seem to have lost sight of what international visits consist of.

ANTIFA are Communists...

I also don't care what people think anywhere in the world about our elected leader not bowing for royalty. The queen of England should bow before America as we are most certainly better.

 

[CosmicGiggle]

The queen of England should bow before America as we are most certainly better.

..... better in what way, everyone's laughing at us now.

 

[CaptainDankness]

well, we've had a father and son president in the Bushes
seen some members boast how Ivanka is destined to become the presidential heir apparent
what is that if not royalty?

Bush's are not royalty and certainly not the Trump's nor the Clinton's. I want what you are smoking.

 

[CaptainDankness]

..... better in what way, everyone's laughing at us now.

We have freedom and a republic of bad mother fuckers who can take any and all comers. If that ain't better I don't know what is.

Our land is also nicer we have tropics, deserts and forests even artic land.

Tell me, how is England better??

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

I think you can fit the entire British Isle's into California, and still have plenty of room around the edges..

America was and probably still is to some degree an extension of Britain, since the first white settlers were from England.

As for who lives better or worse, that's usually determined by your bank balance.

I just put up a new thread here in the Tokers Den about the settlement of America, perhaps some of you would like to comment on it?

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=354671

 

[mean mr.mustard]

We have freedom and a republic of bad mother fuckers who can take any and all comers. If that ain't better I don't know what is.

Our land is also nicer we have tropics, deserts and forests even artic land.

Tell me, how is England better??

What is it about this obsession over better?

Is different bad?

Is acting like you won't bow but everyone better bow to you good?

Maybe you wouldn't be on the list of top diplomats.

But I'm sure Trump needs more staff.

 

['Boogieman']

Hell no we don't bow to the queen, if anything she should bow to us.

 

[CaptainDankness]

What is it about this obsession over better?

Is different bad?

Is acting like you won't bow but everyone better bow to you good?

Maybe you wouldn't be on the list of top diplomats.

But I'm sure Trump needs more staff.

Nobody needs to bow to me and England is a bit more than different, most of the the people are fine but their government is pretty fucked. They don't even have freedom of speech they can be jailed for speech. They speak openly about overthrowing the royal family they probably won't be heard from again.

They already have cameras on every street corner, you think the NSA is bad. Lol, now knife control? You're telling me that they can't even try to take over with swords??

Reminds me of Brave Heart.
[YOUTUBEIF]Po3HbErxC-c [/YOUTUBEIF]

 

[shithawk420]

Iaido and kenjitsu is somewhat common there.they still have swords.probably need to register it like a gun though