I find the suggestion that North Korean border guards nabbbed the journalists from China to be a little too incredible. More likely, they crossed into North Korea and got caught. I'm sure they knew what the consequences might be.
Has it ever been determined if they were in fact on NK territory while reporting? I've seen plenty of pictures of tourist taking pictures of NK soldiers on their side of the Yalu river, and my guess is that they didn't get arrested. Not that I agree with the verdict, but they were probably on the NK side whether they realized it or not.
its quite possible that the journalists were in china and abducted to nk. nk has a lot of spies in china who are there to repatriate defectors.
This is no longer the case. They used to smile and welcome the photos but now there is big problems and they scream. I think it is quite likely they got mad they were being filmed and went over to nab them.
This article mentions two others who "escaped". Anyone know what their version is? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_on_re_as/as_nkorea_journalists_held
I heard that on NPR this morning and seems like crucial "testimony" that could really clear things up.
See, this is one place where I think China SHOULD get involved. It's no skin of N. Korean's back to release those two if China "asked", very likely they will comply. At the same time, it'd definitely would help China to come out smelling like roses. On the other hand, if those reporters were captured on the Chinese side and China doesn't asked for them to be back, it'd look really bad on China's part. But, good luck to the journalists and their families. This is just f-ed up.
So if the North Koreans subject these two ladies to "enhanced interrogation techniques" like waterboarding, etc. are we allowed to call it torture?
Obama says it is torture, so I think we can it now. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/30/obama-waterboarding-mistake
Guys, the law is the law. You may not find it fair, but the people in charge of N Korea do. You don't go to Saudi Arabia and become a male gigolo. You don't go to North India and eat a giant beef steak. You don't go to the Whitehouse and smoke a giant blunt on the steps. You don't have to agree with it for it to be law. We may not agree with it all, but it is what it is. I don't like people disrespecting the law of any country. This is why I don't go to North Korea and shoot political films - because I know the reprucussions of it. I don't have to go. I should not go if I know I will be doing something illegal. If I did go I would know full well that I will be captured, mistreated and tried under a court of law which I don't consider to be fair (which is why the interviews were done in the first place). I think Ottomatton said in another thread that when you start a war, you lose the right to b**** and moan about losing fair and square. Similarly in this case, if you decide that the law of another country is worth challenging for your own personal ambitions, then you lose the right to b**** and moan when you get caught. You are doing a good deed, but you know that it is not considered good by the other side and that you will be punished if caught. I didn't say the law is fair. I said that the outcome is fair and expected. If I said otherwise, I retract my statement. It is THEIR country. The law is KNOWN. I'm sure hundreds of people warned them against interviewing people on the border. They took a calculated risk and failed. I feel bad for them but it is not for me or you to decide what is right and wrong on North Korean soil. That is what is meant by "sovereign nation". Until the entire planet is governed under one body whose laws provide equal rights for members and NO ONE can ignore, the only thing we can do is try to help these people within the legal boundaries of North Korea. Sheesh. I understand that we don't view the sentence as fair. I understand that we are responsible for fairness and equality on earth and to take care of our fellow humans. Therefore, I feel bad for the decision that these guys made in going to the border of North Korea. I wish I could advise them otherwise as I'm sure many did. I pray for them to receive a fair path forward. They must be fairly punished for putting the U.S. in this awkward position of having to negotiate even if they are freed. They did break the law. They are criminals. I hope they receive what they deserve and learn from their mistakes. Conflict arises from differences in laws between countries. These conflicts cannot be instantly erased nor will they be resolved through this kind of situation. However, one thing is for certain: when you are in another country, expect to be treated with standard procedure for that country. We all know this from simply vacationing in other countries. MadMax, I believe you're a lawyer so I'm sure you know this. So again: The mistake is from the interviewers. They are getting what they expected to get if caught. The N Korean law may not be fair, but it is not the problem here unless their law was imposed on the interviewers. The two interviewers intentionally committed the crime and were fully aware of what could happen. We are all in the same boat in that we worry for them. I know I will pray for them to be treated fairly. But I will not point the finger at N Korean authorities for making this decision.
I'm going to learn towards the fact that the arrest and accusations are at least a bit fishy. If N. Korea really had concrete proof of the crimes they were sentenced for, they'd love to parade it in front of the international media as a big F You to the US. If the punishment sticks, are these women actually going to live to see the outside world in 12 years? I'm not particularly optimistic about their chances of getting out of there. I agree. Especially since this is a China-N. Korea border issue. And they're much more likely going to get something done. Chances are this really is just N. Korea wanting to get something out of nothing.
I'm guessing that a country that releases this--"Our nuclear deterrent will be a strong defensive means ... as well as a merciless offensive means to deal a just retaliatory strike to those who touch the country's dignity and sovereignty even a bit," wouldn't be above crossing the border into another country and nabbing some journalists to make a "point." That's a pretty casual remark about unleashing nuclear weapons, but I'm sure that until it actually happens, the naysayers can just call it harmless rhetoric and meaningless saber rattling.
Certainly NOT as a merciless offensive means to deal a just retaliatory strike to those who touch the country's dignity and sovereignty even a bit. Thanks for helping me to emphasize that.
My bad......I guess Japan did touch our country's dignity and sovereignty......a bit. And that was less than 65 years ago.......we knew all there was to know about what would happen with those bombs. And really, the yields back then weren't much different than the yields of today's thermonuclear devices. I'm sure North Korea will act in a perfectly responsible manner, and I apologize for my stupidity.
NK is one ****ed up country led by a dictator who has no idea what he's doing. he's getting older and will die, hopefully a painful and a long death. i can't stand him, he's tortured and killed thousands of his own people, there are starving people there and instead of feeding them with the food they get from aid, they feed the soldiers. screw him, and the leaders of that country. i hope S. Korea bombs them to pieces.
