July 15, 2003


Crazy Kim Myong-Chol puts down his spaniel burger for a few minutes to threaten Australia with atomic death:

Kim Myong-Chol from the Centre for Korean-American Peace last night said if North Korean ships were stopped at sea, North Korea could turn its nuclear arsenal on Australia.

"If Australia become part of American manipulation against North Korea, North Korea reserve the right to strike back on Australia," Mr Myong-Chol told ABC TV's Lateline program.

"That is official North Korean position.

"If Australia become part of American operation, North Korean response is to attack Australia."

Mr Myong-Chol said North Korea had the ability to strike Australia at any time.

"North Korea is carefully monitoring all Australian behaviour, so Australia must be careful in its behaviour to North Korea," Mr Myong-Chol said.

"Otherwise, harm to Australia."

Myong-Chol has previously issued similar threats: “Too much risky for America”, etc. He's a rich source of comic bluster. Someone should set up MyongWatch.

Posted by Tim Blair at July 15, 2003 11:06 AM

TO: Tim
RE: Prima Facia Evidence

"Kim Myong-Chol from the Centre for Korean-American Peace last night said if North Korean ships were stopped at sea, North Korea could turn its nuclear arsenal on Australia. " -- Kim via Tim

Looks like proof to me that we need to do for Kiim Il-Jong what we did for Saddam Hussein....

....provided we can prove that Kim Il(l)-Jong put those words in Kim Myong-Chol's mouth.

Once that megalomanic gets nukes, no one withing range of his missiles will be able to sleep at night.


P.S. I'm out-of-range of his current line of missiles. But, given time, I'm sure even that will change.

Posted by: Chuck Pelto at July 15, 2003 at 11:18 AM

Unhappy to say it, but war against the communistos of North Korea is a prospect one will bet on. Better to get it out the way before the killers have brought their nuclear weapons plants back into production.

The country is collapsing but like good Islamic fascists, the fault is the wests'. Islam and sociliasm are religions seeking to preserve tribalism but parasitically adapted to civilisation. Tribalism inculcates what the charltan scientists, psychologists, define as ego and egoitistical, the definition of all things external to oneself and one's tribe according to one's perspective and primitive beliefs.

In Kim Il Jong's case, that infantile stance is heightened by a non-existent economy . Faced with fast approaching economic collapse, and in view of the above considerations, that Kim is threatening to unleash a devestating war is consistent.Mad, he might seem, evil he definitely is and looking at the antics of his evil regime,the danger is both real and imminent.

The argument against war is not as the peaceniks propose, well howled during Gulf War. The argument is, it is a cloak by which governments increase their coercive powers compounded by the increase in the confiscatory act of thft, taxation.The dilemma for libertarians, open taxis as the ground of freedom and civilised life, is having to face up to savages. And through the 20th century to the present they have all, in the main, been hues of sociliasts.

With the above qualification in view, llets blitz the bastard now before he does it to us.

Posted by: d at July 15, 2003 at 12:19 PM

sadly, i don't see this guy going without so much as a whimper, as the soviets did. this will be ugly. but, as has been said above, better sooner than later

Posted by: Mr. Bingley at July 15, 2003 at 12:52 PM

Could somebody please explain to me why we still send food to these crazy fucks, by way of aid? They're obviously mad as cut snakes and the sooner they perish from the face of the earth the better for all.

Seriously though, why would we consider helping them whilst they point missiles at us and threaten to fire them. Really, that isn't aid, that's extortion. Just let the marxist fucktards devolve back to the cave man that they resemble so well.

Posted by: Todd at July 15, 2003 at 01:29 PM

Just had a thought. Considering how well they are at organising food for their comrades, I am not too concerned about their ability to hit us with a nuclear weapon. I would hate to be in Austria when they fire it though.

Posted by: Todd at July 15, 2003 at 01:30 PM

Comical Cholly? Come on guys, help me out here.

Posted by: Fred Boness at July 15, 2003 at 01:51 PM

I am confused why China has not come through - they are playing a dangerous game here. Despite what everyone is saying this is as much China's problem as it is America's. Watch what China does if you want to know how close old Kim is to losing it. Hopefully they will take him out long before he gets his finger near that button.....

Posted by: Rob at July 15, 2003 at 01:56 PM

I might well be wrong, but shouldn't this competitor for Comical Ali's crown be referred to as Mr. Kim rather than Mr. Myong-Chol? Remember, in Oceania, peace is war and war is peace, so am I too far out of line to call his NGO the Centre for Korean-American War?

I'd put, "Thank you, I'll be here all week," into his mouth, but with any luck, he won't be.

Posted by: charles austin at July 15, 2003 at 02:11 PM

d, N. Korea isn't islamic. They go in more for the Cult of Personality surrounding their leaders. Like father like son.

Why do we give food to starving people? To stop them starving when their own government doesn't care. Please remember, It isn't the whole of the North Korean population which is wacko, just their leadership caste.

Fair point Rob, we don't know what China thinks on the issue and they're not a nation known for seeking outside opinions or help. They'll play their cards close and see what leverage they can create in other areas (trade perhaps).

Posted by: Jake D at July 15, 2003 at 02:29 PM

Rob, nearly added comment on China but considered it best to leave China out of it. China is 1coming through' on North Korea. As the prop of the regime, Beijing , and it is breath taking the volte face, now realises it has not so much a client regime as a rabid dog ready to bite it with very large fangs.

As a child, one found the `Old Yellow' dog story, didn't cry, just laughed; the infantile standard of prose only added to the inherent comedy of it.

North Korea is rabid but it ain't no Old Yellow. This, reminds one of two more pieces of communard propaganda much advanced by the mainstream specimen of communard, the ALP.

The first bit of crap, USA-Australia lost the Vietnam war. On facts alone, unadulterated crap. What let the commies in was the combined withdrawal plus the failure to properly equip the South Vietnamese Army.For otherwise, by the early 70's NVA was finished.
One is sick of this bit of first rate lying by pinkos, ` we lost the war'.

The second bit of porpaganda stands on two leprosy ridden legs.

1/ The straw man objection. No one said communist regimes were a monolith but. Russian and China supported the fuckers of North Korea and North Vietnam.

2/ The public rheotric justifying both of those wars was correct- one understood that as a boy, well confirmed that which was then belief only was in fact the correct summation of what was at stake.More so, if one points out Malaya, Burma, Indonesia and Borneao actions.Not something lefty fuckers, including `righties' who are no less communisto than the ALP, some who style themselves as businessmen too bye the bye,are willing to face up to - hence myth writing and story telling instead of history; After all, to write history would entail of quite a number what lying gutless shits they have have been all along.

As an after thought, how did the rot of communism Asia take such a hold. France had a big a hand in that as they did in taking the world to the trenches of WW1. How so! This so!
End of WWII, Britain occupied Vietnam, the Vietnamese wnated Britain to remain, not because they did not wish independence but because they wanted freedom of commerce and rule of law, and an example was India.

One of Churchill's blunders, and one admires the hero of the free world, was to hand Vietnam back to the source of pinko socialisto dreams, France. The French Fuckers Fucked it up. France, it has consistenlty played a black hand in history and continues to do so.
In other words, if Britain hadn't handed Vietnam back to the French government, the commies would have owned less land in Asia.Due to that first rate cock up, things got worse. Instead of commie China and North Korea, commie Vietnam had to be dealt with plus the commie movements they financed in the region; abetted by assistance and proganda from pinkos in Australia including unions, ( one had a documented list of treacherous Oz outfits and individuals but, unfortunately, I misplaced it in the early 90's.But does one really need the list to cite the prime candidates; No, Sir.)

Posted by: d at July 15, 2003 at 02:39 PM

Jake, didn't say N.K. was Islamic. I was just drawing attention to some fundamental structural similarities - which is also why I call Mohammed the Marx of his day( in this case to illuminate what Mohammed was on about and not to commit an anachronism).
It is worth noting, tribalism involves a `cult' of the `leader'. Examplifying that is the religious kingdoms of ancient near eastern
history, such as Pharoah, even the legends of Solomon and David. The `Adam - Eve' narrative has kingship as its sitze im leben.

Tribalism, it can be said accuratley, is the sitze of Islam and soicalism.It is worth extending this. Continental `philosophers' , in their anthropological themes effectively only conjured up tribalism. Rationalism and science are completely different things, one might say. No time to expand 0on this one, but using prose technical language is a way of restating a myth but myth it remians: note that ther liars who parade themselves as hiostorians like those properly exposed by Windhschuttle.

As for starving people,surprising it may seem, but people reduced because of savagery, Sir, is something, believe it or not, something one can weep over ( a man never cries, he may weep but not cry). Unfortunately, Sir,`aid' has a documented habit of only financing the savages who are the root problem.But tell that to communisto dribblers in Oz ?!

Posted by: d at July 15, 2003 at 02:56 PM

Rob and Jake - I think there's some fairly good evidence that China has worked out what is good for it and is moving to test the limits of its influence. See for example:


. . . . although I suspect that's merely the tip of the iceberg.

And now, the good news: I've cracked "d"'s code: all you have to do is remove every third word, plus every word containing the letters "s", "t" or "i", and his posts make sense. Well, certainly no less sense, at least . . .

Posted by: Mork at July 15, 2003 at 03:20 PM

Notice how North Korea is all Uncle Sam's problem, while every garlic-gobbling sharper with diplomatic tags on his auto demanded an okay on anything to do with Iraq.

Useless ululators...

Posted by: The Sanity Inspector at July 15, 2003 at 03:28 PM

I agree with the poster who said NK probably couldn't make a long range missile accurate enough to make it likely to hit Australia, or a nuclear bomb likely to go off right after the ride. Still, for whatever it's worth, if Sydney gets hit by a nuke, America will turn NK into glass. So, Mr. Myong, better be careful in your behavior to Australia, 'cause after your little pinprick, your pathetic, brutal little national horror will cease to exist.

Posted by: Reid at July 15, 2003 at 03:34 PM

And that, ladies & gentlemen is why we stand with the US on international issues. Because when push comes to shove they will stand by us (hopefully *before* we get hit though).

At the end of the day I would much rather have the US fighting with me than France & Russia.

Posted by: Glenn at July 15, 2003 at 04:22 PM

Add Liberia to the current list of Uncle's Only problems.

Posted by: Jake D at July 15, 2003 at 04:33 PM

Crack , Mork, heck not the sort of thing to mention in public - do you want the feds down on you like a ton of bricks? Think , man.

Posted by: d at July 15, 2003 at 04:45 PM

What was it exactly that the Vietnamese were supposed to have liked so much about the British occupation? Was it the prohibition of demonstrations and meetings, the curfew? Or was it the directive that the violation of these measures would result in the violator being shot?

It was only ever short term anyway.

By the way, the reason that communism was able to take such a hold in Vietnam was the behaviour of the various right wing regimes in the South Vietnam.

Posted by: craig at July 15, 2003 at 04:51 PM

Kim Myong-Chol = Puce + Lithium

Posted by: Craig Mc at July 15, 2003 at 05:34 PM

Craig, immediately on the close of WWII Britain was in Vietnam but handed it back to the French.
And the reason of the commies' hold, Craig, had nothing to do with `rightwing regimes', as you say, in the south.

Try, to your first question, rule of law: not something Ho Chi Minh, nor his successors, nor their fellow crims were much interested in learning about.

Secondly, Asiatics understand commerce better than leftoid westerners as in - it spells freedom and liberty. Now try sucking some more eggs craig.

Posted by: d at July 15, 2003 at 05:35 PM

As they don't have any nuclear devices small enough to fit in the warheads of their current stock of ballistic missiles, I believe they are planning on arming the weapons with kimchi; a chemical, biological and nerve agent combined in one (and if ingested, results in a sub-nuclear chain reaction in the trousers).

Posted by: Paul Bickford at July 15, 2003 at 05:41 PM

Re. Glenn's comment that he'd rather have the US fighting alongside us than France or Russia. Reminds me of General Patton's comment that he'd rather have a division of Germans in front of him than a division of Frenchmen behind him.

Posted by: Steve at July 15, 2003 at 06:18 PM

China has probably come to the conclusion that a NK nuclear missile is just as likely to land in China, no matter where it was aimed at.

Posted by: Patrick at July 15, 2003 at 06:44 PM

d, is your bunker up in the mountains well stocked? And keep an eye on that use-by date on the baked beans cans.

Posted by: The at July 15, 2003 at 07:07 PM

I think the term MyongTard needs to be developed.

Posted by: Tom at July 15, 2003 at 10:10 PM

I think d must stand for denial.

Posted by: craig at July 16, 2003 at 01:52 AM

TO: Rob
RE: Where's China?

"I am confused why China has not come through..." -- Rob

Could it be that North Korea is the Chicoms rabid pit-bull on a leash?



Posted by: Chuck Pelto at July 16, 2003 at 07:45 AM