Comments on: Richardson on David Albright: Put Me Down for “C” http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/ Tue, 22 May 2012 21:47:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Congress Reacts to Syria-North Korea Nuclear Connection http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-57721 Congress Reacts to Syria-North Korea Nuclear Connection Thu, 24 Apr 2008 22:01:34 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-57721 [...] I’m sure more details and reactions will be released over the next few days but as Robert Koehler reports, we can all rest easy because David Albright is now on the case.  [...] [...] I’m sure more details and reactions will be released over the next few days but as Robert Koehler reports, we can all rest easy because David Albright is now on the case.  [...]

]]> By: OneFreeKorea » Dude, Where’s My Spine? Agreed Framework 2.0 at Four Months http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-47382 OneFreeKorea » Dude, Where’s My Spine? Agreed Framework 2.0 at Four Months Sun, 17 Jun 2007 14:03:05 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-47382 [...] My guess is that putting a piece of yellow tape over the reactor door and letting in some U.N. inspectors are two concessions that Kim Jong Il will eventually give for the right price.  After all, each is easily reversible for any convenient pretext.  Call them “pink” lines.  The “red” lines that Kim will never cross are his agreement to fully disclose all of his nuclear programs or let us verify the completeness of that disclosure.  If I’m right about that, the February agreement really looks like a thinly veiled excuse for both Kim and Bush to “discuss” those matters for the next 18 months, as the press obligingly looks the other way, and as the Bush Administration prepares to exit from office claiming that peace is at hand.  In reality, it will have solved nothing, but will have helped to perpetuate a tyranny that uses famine as a weapon of mass terror, manslaughter, or murder; that gasses children with their parents; that treats the handicapped like untermenschen; that kidnaps the innocent citizens of its neighbors and distant nations; that runs gargantuan concentration camps of unspeakable cruelty; and that murders infants it suspects of being racially impure.  Even as these topics are politely swept out of our diplomatic conversation, Kim Jong Il will keep building a new plutonium reactor much larger than the one at Yongbyon, he’ll continue his parallel uranium enrichment program, and of course, he’ll keep the bombs he already has. [...] [...] My guess is that putting a piece of yellow tape over the reactor door and letting in some U.N. inspectors are two concessions that Kim Jong Il will eventually give for the right price.  After all, each is easily reversible for any convenient pretext.  Call them “pink” lines.  The “red” lines that Kim will never cross are his agreement to fully disclose all of his nuclear programs or let us verify the completeness of that disclosure.  If I’m right about that, the February agreement really looks like a thinly veiled excuse for both Kim and Bush to “discuss” those matters for the next 18 months, as the press obligingly looks the other way, and as the Bush Administration prepares to exit from office claiming that peace is at hand.  In reality, it will have solved nothing, but will have helped to perpetuate a tyranny that uses famine as a weapon of mass terror, manslaughter, or murder; that gasses children with their parents; that treats the handicapped like untermenschen; that kidnaps the innocent citizens of its neighbors and distant nations; that runs gargantuan concentration camps of unspeakable cruelty; and that murders infants it suspects of being racially impure.  Even as these topics are politely swept out of our diplomatic conversation, Kim Jong Il will keep building a new plutonium reactor much larger than the one at Yongbyon, he’ll continue his parallel uranium enrichment program, and of course, he’ll keep the bombs he already has. [...]

]]> By: OneFreeKorea » A Denuclearization Agreement, But Without the ‘Denuclearization’ Part http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-43050 OneFreeKorea » A Denuclearization Agreement, But Without the ‘Denuclearization’ Part Sun, 06 May 2007 01:51:40 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-43050 [...] It’s Day 21 since Peace in Our Time Day, and here’s the latest “peace in our time” update: Yonbyong is running; no IAEA inspectors have gone to North Korea and none have been invited; there have been no substantive six-party sessions since March; North Korea denies having the uranium program it previously admitted; North Korea may or may not be running away with the ransom in dirty money that held this deal up, even though it wasn’t part of the deal; and North Korea refuses to discuss its abductions of Japanese citizens. But Japan is standing firm, and America may actually be yielding to Japan’s insistence: The United States will not remove North Korea from its list of state sponsors of terrorism until progress is made regarding the North’s kidnapping of Japanese citizens decades ago, a White House official said Thursday. [...] [...] It’s Day 21 since Peace in Our Time Day, and here’s the latest “peace in our time” update: Yonbyong is running; no IAEA inspectors have gone to North Korea and none have been invited; there have been no substantive six-party sessions since March; North Korea denies having the uranium program it previously admitted; North Korea may or may not be running away with the ransom in dirty money that held this deal up, even though it wasn’t part of the deal; and North Korea refuses to discuss its abductions of Japanese citizens. But Japan is standing firm, and America may actually be yielding to Japan’s insistence: The United States will not remove North Korea from its list of state sponsors of terrorism until progress is made regarding the North’s kidnapping of Japanese citizens decades ago, a White House official said Thursday. [...]

]]> By: OneFreeKorea » Agreed Framework 2.0: A Day 60 Scorecard http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-35728 OneFreeKorea » Agreed Framework 2.0: A Day 60 Scorecard Sun, 15 Apr 2007 02:28:59 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-35728 [...] Failure.  North Korea never even engaged in substantive discussions about coming clean on its nuclear programs, including a uranium enrichment program that North Korea once admitted to having, the evidence for which is too compelling for even the regime’s most ardent and doctrinaire apologists to deny. 3. The DPRK and the US will start bilateral talks aimed at resolving pending bilateral issues and moving toward full diplomatic relations. The US will begin the process of removing the designation of the DPRK as a state-sponsor of terrorism and advance the process of terminating the application of the Trading with the Enemy Act with respect to the DPRK.  [...] [...] Failure.  North Korea never even engaged in substantive discussions about coming clean on its nuclear programs, including a uranium enrichment program that North Korea once admitted to having, the evidence for which is too compelling for even the regime’s most ardent and doctrinaire apologists to deny. 3. The DPRK and the US will start bilateral talks aimed at resolving pending bilateral issues and moving toward full diplomatic relations. The US will begin the process of removing the designation of the DPRK as a state-sponsor of terrorism and advance the process of terminating the application of the Trading with the Enemy Act with respect to the DPRK.  [...]

]]> By: David Albright Responds to K-blog Criticism at ROK Drop http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-35348 David Albright Responds to K-blog Criticism at ROK Drop Sun, 08 Apr 2007 22:59:39 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-35348 [...] Then read here and here for the related OFK postings.  [...] [...] Then read here and here for the related OFK postings.  [...]

]]> By: OneFreeKorea » Some Questions for David Albright http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-35322 OneFreeKorea » Some Questions for David Albright Sun, 08 Apr 2007 17:42:35 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-35322 [...] David Albright, or someone who claims to be him, has commented on this post, criticizing Richardson’s arguments, and indirectly, mine: Richardson appears hopelessly confused on what a centrifuge program is and how it must develop. He also seems intent on misquoting me about what I said and wrote. He really needs to pay more attention to facts and has a responsibility to mislead the reader less. For those truly interested in learning about North Korea’s nuclear program and what I have written about that program, I would refer them to the ISIS web site at www.isis-online.org. [...] [...] David Albright, or someone who claims to be him, has commented on this post, criticizing Richardson’s arguments, and indirectly, mine: Richardson appears hopelessly confused on what a centrifuge program is and how it must develop. He also seems intent on misquoting me about what I said and wrote. He really needs to pay more attention to facts and has a responsibility to mislead the reader less. For those truly interested in learning about North Korea’s nuclear program and what I have written about that program, I would refer them to the ISIS web site at http://www.isis-online.org. [...]

]]> By: usinkorea http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-35321 usinkorea Sun, 08 Apr 2007 17:39:12 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-35321 <blockquote>rather than a blanket denial you should attempt to refute some of the direct points made against you in our respective posts.</blockquote> Which I would hope makes any serious-minded reader start to lean to the conclusion that a person can't refute the specifics. It at least leans some credibility to the claims of the other when a person seems to go out of their way to avoid getting into the specifics. It would have been better to avoid commenting at all...

rather than a blanket denial you should attempt to refute some of the direct points made against you in our respective posts.

Which I would hope makes any serious-minded reader start to lean to the conclusion that a person can’t refute the specifics. It at least leans some credibility to the claims of the other when a person seems to go out of their way to avoid getting into the specifics.

It would have been better to avoid commenting at all…

]]> By: Richardson http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-35316 Richardson Sun, 08 Apr 2007 15:27:35 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-35316 Albright, I see your comment here is a bit more direct about me than <a href="http://www.dprkstudies.org/2007/02/22/david-albright-north-koreas-latest-apologist/#comment-5648" rel="nofollow">the one on my own site</a> (where I have posted <a href="http://www.dprkstudies.org/2007/02/22/david-albright-north-koreas-latest-apologist/#comment-5651 " rel="nofollow">my response</a>). If you’ve something to say to me – and since you left a comment on my site it seems you do – I suggest you do so directly. And since you bring it up, I challenge you to <em>specifically</em>: • Point out which quotes are not correct, and what you <em>claim</em> to actually have said. • Point out where I seem to have gone astray on, “centrifuge program is and how it must develop.” You’re making the claims, it’s only fair to ask you to prove it. I agree with Joshua that rather than a blanket denial you should attempt to refute some of the direct points made against you in our respective posts. Pointing to your website front an unconvincing and weak approach. Looking forward to your responses, on either site. Albright, I see your comment here is a bit more direct about me than the one on my own site (where I have posted my response). If you’ve something to say to me – and since you left a comment on my site it seems you do – I suggest you do so directly.

And since you bring it up, I challenge you to specifically:

• Point out which quotes are not correct, and what you claim to actually have said.
• Point out where I seem to have gone astray on, “centrifuge program is and how it must develop.”

You’re making the claims, it’s only fair to ask you to prove it.

I agree with Joshua that rather than a blanket denial you should attempt to refute some of the direct points made against you in our respective posts. Pointing to your website front an unconvincing and weak approach.

Looking forward to your responses, on either site.

]]> By: Joshua http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-35312 Joshua Sun, 08 Apr 2007 14:14:49 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-35312 Mr. Albright, why don't you give us some specifics about how he (or I) misquoted you or how either of us misconstrues the scientific evidence? We've laid out our criticisms in considerable detail. Please join the debate on those specific points. Please begin with North Korea's admissions, what we found in Libya, and what AQ Khan and Musharraf admitted selling to the North Koreans. I have never seen you address those points anywhere. Mr. Albright, why don’t you give us some specifics about how he (or I) misquoted you or how either of us misconstrues the scientific evidence? We’ve laid out our criticisms in considerable detail. Please join the debate on those specific points. Please begin with North Korea’s admissions, what we found in Libya, and what AQ Khan and Musharraf admitted selling to the North Koreans. I have never seen you address those points anywhere.

]]> By: David Albright http://freekorea.us/2007/02/22/richardson-on-david-albright-put-me-down-for-c/comment-page-1/#comment-35311 David Albright Sun, 08 Apr 2007 14:06:42 +0000 http://freekorea.us/?p=6560#comment-35311 Richardson appears hopelessly confused on what a centrifuge program is and how it must develop. He also seems intent on misquoting me about what I said and wrote. He really needs to pay more attention to facts and has a responsibility to mislead the reader less. For those truly interested in learning about North Korea's nuclear program and what I have written about that program, I would refer them to the ISIS web site at www.isis-online.org. If you are interested in more details, please contact ISIS at intern@isis-online for a free copy of our book Solving the North Korena Nucler Puzzle. In the late 1990s, we produced this book about North Korea's nuclear program and the extensive information uncovered by the IAEA in the early 1990s about that program. Much of this information remains relevant today. Richardson appears hopelessly confused on what a centrifuge program is and how it must develop. He also seems intent on misquoting me about what I said and wrote. He really needs to pay more attention to facts and has a responsibility to mislead the reader less. For those truly interested in learning about North Korea’s nuclear program and what I have written about that program, I would refer them to the ISIS web site at http://www.isis-online.org. If you are interested in more details, please contact ISIS at intern@isis-online for a free copy of our book Solving the North Korena Nucler Puzzle. In the late 1990s, we produced this book about North Korea’s nuclear program and the extensive information uncovered by the IAEA in the early 1990s about that program. Much of this information remains relevant today.

]]>