« October 2006 | Main | December 2006 »
Because the debate is pretty much over, I was just curious how or why China and Russia decided to turn a blind eye to their once oh so amazing communist partner-in-crime North Korea. I mean, really; China was my ace in the hole.
I had to play Kim Jong-Il in a fantasy land. I cannot even imagine what it would be like to make the real decisions. I think he is a lunatic. It's tough to get into the head of a lunatic.
This whole situation with our Nuclear weapons testing has been a complete disaster for me, my family and my community. For the past ten years we have been struggling dearly to find enough food to eat even with the aid from the U.N.. Kim has made this situation worse by banning any private market exchanges of grain. I don't have much money, I can barely support my family as it is. Even the rich families are struggling to barter enough goods to find enough food. With this whole import ban thing in effect stimulated by the Nuke testing, we can't get enough supplies to grow our crops, leaving many of us to flee illegally to China or South Korea. China, please help us and allow us to enter your country as refugees.
Sincerely, Korean Man Toso
Its now or never. China is prepared to par-take in a military push provided all parties and UN back the proposal. The more time that this is allowed to continue the further along the North Korean nuclear program developes. We have to make some sort of threat to North Korea now. In waiting we might as well accept the fact that North Korea is going to be a nuclear nation. This might set off the arms race with countries like Iran. So China is saying now or never America.Lets Roll.
US Ambassador Bell (China)
I must praise Chairman Ill, I didn’t think he had it in him to be so utopian. This compromise I must admit sounds good on paper, and I’m pretty sure everyone wouldn’t oppose living in a non-nuclear world. But to possibly think the world is willing or even capable to do it just because some rogue leader calls for disarmament is beyond ludicrous.
The main problem with this compromise is, it would compromise the national security of the US, its allies, and not to mention the world. The more scrupulous of the nuclear nation; the US France, Britain, and Russia would most likely disarm is there was a UN resolution to do so. However I can’t say the same for China, India, Pakistan, North Korea or Israel, who or what would stop them from partially disarming and then rearm a year later. I can just hear someone saying “the UN could”, but realistically the UN couldn’t even stop one country from pursuing a nuclear program. The second scenario that is troublesome is this: countries such as Iran who don’t have nuclear weapons but have nuclear programs and could develop weapons, and then you’d have an unstable nation being the only nuclear power in the world with no one to challenge them.
Personally, I think the only reason North Korea is issuing this compromise is there running out of options. Their ports and lands are blockaded, their closest allies have turned against them, and they have no where to go. North Korea is in a long slow battle of attrition, that there slowing losing. If Chairman Ill doesn’t want to talk sensibly its his loss, all we have to do is wait and he’ll bleed him self out.
It has come to the attention of the United Nations that North Korea is quite displeased with the response to its proposed compromise between itsel fand the rest of the world. I, the Chief Administrator, received the following via telegraph in the early morning of 30 November 2006.
"It cannot be in the best interests of member nations not to look into this proposal."
I believe I have firmly outlined the reasoning behind each nations' disapproval of the compromise.
"... it is YOUR job, not mine, to make the international community see the value in this project."
My job is to ensure the maintainence of outright peace and stability throughout the international community...that is the UN's job. I am unsure as to why you've delegated the responsibility of enforcement of YOUR plan toward the UN, especially a plan aimed at destabilizing the status quo. I also lack the knowledge as to why debate continues on this compromise...it is dead in the UN, the US, and China.
"Sadly, your stance, and that of member nations, reveals something shocking: The refusal to relinquish absolute power over the world."
I think you are forgetting that the United Nations IS the world. Our 192 member states make up the majority of the populations of the international community. The sort of cooperation constructed against your idea is actually quite remarkable. Where is the absolute power if all are in agreement?
The following message was telegraphed to my office on 25 November 2006 from Chairman Il:
"You ask where the threat is, Mr. Siegel? The United States certainly found a way to make Iraq a threat, did it not? How many nuclear weapons have they found there Mr. Administrator? We have plenty to fear, Mr. Siegel, this I can assure you. If the United States can simply decide when and under what circumstances it conducts a war, then it must be in the best interests of the Democratic Republic of North Korea that we do all in our power to make sure we are not next in the list of "Rouge States" that the United States plans to conquer and then abandon. If we do not develop the weapons to protect our land, then we are most certainly next. President Bush has in fact issued a pseudo declaration of war in his previous speech, outlining the "Axis of Evil" that needs to be dealt with. In fact, Mr. Administrator, we have much to fear."
Memo of 30 November 2006:
"It cannot be in the best interests of member nations not to look into this proposal. You, sir, could not be more wrong in one of your arguments. The money SAVED from this endevour would reach untold billions. The United States, as I'm sure you are well aware, spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year maintaining its missile fields in the Dakotas and the 7 billion dollar ballistic missle submarines it has prowling around our waters."
This continuous dumping of responsibility onto the shoulders of the United Nations is ill-founded. I fear that you have brought your broken bicycle to a piano repair shop. It is not the UN who blockades your waters this evening. It is not the UN who is constructing trade barriers. No UN resolution was passed to direct men or machine against the Democratic Republic of North Korea. Your chief interests are expressed toward the actions of the United States. Why, then, are you pulling the UN to fix your relationshipial troubles with the US? For the time being, I feel that the outward discrepancies can best be handled within your two nation states. You both must work together to come about a solution. No matter what the international community contributes, you continuously rebuttle with negativity dealing with the United States, not the UN. It seems you are not willing to actively participate until the US meets your needs, something only workable through the US. The UN is, of course, genuinely concerned with the situation, however the continuous assault of UN values through citation of US efforts alone is frustrating and unconstructive. We hope for positive developments in the future so that we can once again work as a whole and push forward.
Regards,
UN Chief Administrator Siegel
Dear Readers,
As the Chief Administrator of the European Union I would like to wish everyone well for the upcoming elections tomorrow. The past few weeks have been a great opportunity for the world to converge on such an important issue in our world today. I have learned a lot from the citizens of the United States to Kim Jong-Il himself about the contrasting opinions on this issue. As we head into the elections tomorrow, I would like to address everyone with the European Unions final stance on the issue of the United States involvement in North Korea in this memo.
The European Union believes that it is in the best interest of the United States and the world if they did not enter this conflict under their name alone. An issue involving nuclear weapons involves the global community since the safety of the global population would be at risk. It would be wise for the United States to push its efforts to actually supporting the United Nations in all of its potential. The European Union is growing bored with the lack of negotiations coming from North Korea despite all of our efforts so we have weakened our connections. Action needs to take place, but at the correct time and with support of the global community.
The European Union plans to continue the humanitarian assistance that we offer to the citizens of North Korea currently. For those who are unaware the EU has been providing assistance ever since 1995 when devastating floods struck the country. We provide the citizens with medicines, water, food, and we provide a better option for sanitation, winter clothes and hygiene. It is in the best interest of the world to support the people of North Korea but oppose the regime in power. We must look out for the millions of people who are actually suffering under the regime and will be affected by any actions we decide to take.
I hope the European Union will be supported by others reading this memo. With your support we are already a step closer to global cooperation. I thank you all and I bid you a pleasant evening and a good nights rest for the elections tomorrow morning.
Thank you,
Diane Galatowitsch, The Chief Administrator of the European Union
In response to Kim Jong-Il's "compromise," I do not think that a proposition like this will ever work. In an ideal world, this would be a great solution and promote only peace. However, we don't live in a perfect world and it is necessary for nations to have means of protection. The United States of America will not disarm and other nations will likely follow. Why would the U.S. or any other nation give up its power to defend itself to a nation that has threatened the world? Sure, we all want world peace, but I don't see that ever being a realistic situation. Peace can only be minimized.
The fact still stands that North Korea has nuclear weapons and is not exhibiting the ability to control them or remain in a peaceful state. It is clear how the UN and various other countries feel about North Korea and this blockade will remain until North Korea decides to be realistic. We need to continue working with the UN and other nations to resolve this issue as peacefully as possible. In the coming months, a timetable should be set up for North Korea. If this is still unable to persuade Mr. Il, military force will be used. The United States will stand with this issue and not give up because of Mr. Il's inability to work with everyone else in the world. The U.S. will not be disarming its nuclear weapons and will continue to work to rid North Korea of its nuclear plans.
Senator Austin
The United States does not agree to the compromise brought forth by Chairman Il regarding a complete nuclear disarmament because nothing will be gained of it. The United States relies not on nuclear weaponry and hasn't since 1953 nor do ANY of our ready-planned offensive military scenarios in the Marine Corps and Army contain anything about using nuclear weaponry solely because they will never be used in an offensive situation; also see the unilateral non-proliferation cooperation movement between Russia and the United States with removing all nuclear artillery shells in 1991-2003. Our position as a "sole super power" is merely relative and is in no way proportional to our quantity nor quality of nuclear weaponry but is more a function of our technology and versatile abilties. However the light on our status with relation with the rest of the world is entirely irrelevant as well as this silly "compromise". That is all the United States will share on the issue at this time.
Secretary of State Mark DIlle
China feels this disarming is a ludacris idea. Its in total agreement with UN. After what the nations went through to secure nuclear weapons it would be a huge waste of their money to simply throw it all away. On top of that this would almost surely cause the US's title of the so called "super power" to diminish in some way. China can't seriously believe that the US would let that happen or consider this. It also needs to be brought up that North Korea proposed this. North Korea is an unstable country and isnt in any positions to be making such requests. China will put away its nuclear weapons when everybody else does first, and their positive everyone else feels the same way.
US Ambassador Bell (China)
In the upcoming election an important decision regarding our nation's young people will take place. Vote for myself, Senator Victor Eremita, for the protection of our children. My oppoents, Senator Hauko and the owner of "Beer-a-licious" Parag Shah want to irrationally and irresponcibily create a federal drinking age of 18. (There is no federal drinking age as of yet, but the federal government keeps state government's drinking age at 21 with financial incentives.)
Sen. Hauko asserts that, "I feel that like most things, people only want what they cannot have. If we make alcohol legal, teens will not feel the strong notions to drink excessively." but has no facts or studies to support his "feeling." Further he says: "However, if the drinking age was moved to 18, don't you think more children would not have to lie to their parents about where they are and what they are doing?" Adolecence who drink will still make poor choices whether their parents know or not because their judgement is impaired.
Senator Hauko has come out in support of Parag Shah, who also wants to lower the drinking age. Parag Shah owns a beer production company. He says: "I have seen to many kids drinking beer just to get drunk and not for the taste. I believe my beer will allow young adults to responsibly drink alcohal because they want to enjoy it, but not do it just to get drunk, similar to a glass of wine." I fail to see the logic of this argument, as I'm sure, the people, can too. By making the taste better, wouldn't young people have just another insentive to consume more? Also, he openly acknowledges that he has "seen to[o] many kids drinking beer just to get drunk and not for the taste." Finally, in another statement, he says "I ask all of you who support a more responsible youth to lead our country, you vote for me, Parag Shah for Senate." How can his words be taken seriously when he previously contradicted himself about the responsibility of youth in the previous example? The best way to truely support youth in this election is to allow the drinking age to be raised, thus preventing alochol-related death, developmental impedment, and alcohol-related violence around our children.
This election is not about who trusts youth more or less, it's not about trust at all. Take into consideration the recent adolecence alcohol-related deaths, including the death of the President's daughter. Please weigh the facts and vote responsibly. My oppents have provided no concrete arguments or information to support their claims other then "feelings" that, contrary to years of behavior, significantly reduce their alcohol intake, and yet one of them owns a beer company. I have a daughter, and seek to gain the Congressional seat soley to prevent the lowering of the drinking age, unlike my oppoent, who would see his profits dramatically increase. Please vote for myself, I won't let you and our children down.
Thank you,
Senator Victor Eremita
*P.S. If you're still not convinced, I encourage you to watch my campaign video:
http://www.victor%20eremita.youaremighty.com/
*Campaign Poster:
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l155/deusexmachina45/god-bless-america3-1.jpg
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l155/deusexmachina45/god-bless-america3-1.jpg
I had an entry on tuesday that I think this blog deleted because I can't find it anywhere. What a wonderful gift technology is!
I had announced on Tuesday my legislation to create a federal drinking age of 25. Right now, there is no federal drinking age, financial incentives by the federal government to the state governments keep state's drinking age at 21 nationally. Contrary to popular belief, few states specifically prohibit minors' consumption of alcohol in private settings (an exception includes Connecticut), and in some cases or states, alcohol permits can be purchased at a cost to the parent or legal guardian. The legislation I'm purposing will not only do away with those exceptions, while still allowing exceptions in regards to religious, medical and family exceptions, and raise the drinking age to 25. There are several reasons for this, but primarily it's to keep college kids away from alcohol. In our universities across the country, minors and those of age to consume alcohol are classmates and regularly attend the same parties and frequent the same social circles. In these situations, those over 21 purchase alcohol for who can't purchase it legally. It makes little sense to allow this failure of logical thinking to continue. If we raise the restriction age, we will seriously impede the ability of teenagers to acquire alcohol by classmates over 21. And in light of the President's recent tragedy we can all see how relevant and necessary this kind of restriction is.
My second reason for restricting young adults from access to alcohol has to do with the development of young people. A person's brain continues to develop into their early twenties. Exposure to alcohol can have profound and irreversible effects on the structure and function of the adolescent brain. Heavy drinking has been shown to affect the neuropsychological performance (“neuropsychological performance” refers to various memory skills.) of young people and may impair the growth and integrity of certain brain structures and restrict blood flow in certain brain regions and electrical brain activities, and severly impair the ablility of brain neurons to make new connections. Chemical and electrical processes are also impared. Other brain functions that alcohol consumption negatively effects are memory function, attention, visuospatial skills (which is the perception of the spatial relationships among objects within the field of vision), and executive functioning ( which is planning, abstract reasoning, and goal-directed behavior). Structures of the brain effected include the Cortex, the Corpus callosum, the Amygdala, the Hippocampus, and the Cerebellum. The Hippocampus, for example, plays an important role in learning and memory function, and adolescent drinking can lead to a decrease in volume of the Hippocampus. Furthermore, imaging studies indicate that adolecent drinkers exhibit abnormalities in some brain areas that are particularly sensitive, such as the hippocampus, and in the chemical and electrical processes that occur during brain activity.
Besides harmful neurological effects, underage drinking also has profound social and psychological effects which can have long-term effects on both physical and psychological well-being and may have long term implications. Adolescence is a period marked by the formation of identity and the establishment of more mature interpersonal and intimate relationships and a transition into adult roles. Social control lessens during this period, and people become freer to choose unconstrained behaviors and lifestyles. Constructing a stable identity can be confusing and difficult, and some teenagers use substances to relieve their identity confusion. Further, this stage of life is also marked with acquiring skills in order to function in an adult society and failure to master them can result in frustration and stress, which can lead to a variety of unhealthy behaviors, including increased alcohol use. Paradoxically, alcohol makes the successful mastery of these developmental tasks harder and may makes failures more severe and increase stress . Numerous studies have identified problems related to alcohol use, including fatal and nonfatal injuries and overdoses, academic/vocational failures, violence and other crime, unintended pregnancies, and sexually transmitted diseases. Every year approximately 2000 people under the age of 21 die in car accidents involving underage drinking. Among college students under the age of 21 alone, 50,000 experience alcohol-related date rape, and 430,000 have been asaulted by another student who has been drinking.
One of the strongest influences that lead teens to drinking at college is that many college students may drink more because of their misperceptions about the norms of drinking on their campuses. They may think campus attitudes are much more tolerant toward drinking than they are and believe other students drink much more than they actually do. By not allowing college-age people to purchase alcohol, this influence is significantly reduced and would save lives, grief and development of countless teenagers. College students should have the basic creativity to find alternative outlets for stress and for recreation that doesn't involve endangering oneself. Please vote wisely for the sake of the future of our children.
Special thanks to Dr.Kinduva B. Deale, M.D., and http://niaa.nih.gov
-Senator Victor Eremita
Justice for Senate! It would be foolish to jeopardize the future of our high school students by lowering the drinking age to 18 years of age. Not only would it bring an explosion of alcohol into our schools, but the age at which people begin to drink illegally will also drop. Many more 14-16 year old children know students who are 18 than those who are 21. The accessibility will be greatly increased, and the number of underage drunk drivers will increase. We need to protect our kids and vote NO to lowering the drink age!
Principal Justice
As you all know there are elections coming up for Senator. I want to announce today that I will be running for that position. I have been a strong supporter of Senator Haukos and I agree with many of the same issues he does, especially on the drinking age. I want to teach responsibility to the youth of this country as they receive new freedoms. When kids become young adults when they turn 18 years of age, they are given many new responsibilities that will design the future of our country. Beyond drinking, they need to learn how to handle this responsiblity. I believe alcohal can be a teacher of responsibility and if kids are able to drink at 18, they will learn more responsibility at an earlier age. Along with lowering the drinking age, I plan to implement various programs to teach responsibliity with alcohal and also other freedoms that will be granted to them. I am not saying this will be an immediate change but I promise you after some time you will see dramatic improvements. I ask all of you who support a more responsible youth to lead our country, you vote for me, Parag Shah for Senate.
Citizens of the world,
North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-Il recently proposed a "compromise" to the international community. It called for total disarmament of all world powers in exchange for the word of the Chairman that North Korea would also follow suit. In an attempt to re-open serious communication channels with the Democratic Republic of North Korea, I, as UN Chief Administrator, proposed the compromise to the Security Council. Needless to say, the compromise failed to reach a vote, much less any sort of serious debate.
The powers of the world wish to compromise with North Korea on different levels that do not involve total disarmament. It has been noted that such trust in a terror-ridden world can be catastrophic, and there is no international institution powerful enough to force nations to reach 100% compliance, a height unreachable without constant surveillance by certified weapons inspectors. There is also the matter of accounting for EVERY SINGLE nuclear technology on the planet. Not only is it unfeasable to numerate such a grand amount of personnel an operation, the monetary costs of such an undertaking would be astounding. The case stands for developed nations holding nuclear arms as well, where hundreds of millions of dollars were spent or are being spent to develop these technologies, a commitment no person would turn back on.
These factors, of course, mean nothing so long as the international community fails to cooperate as a whole...an event unseen after thousands of years of civilization.
UN Chief Adminstrator Siegel
Citizens of the United States of America,
It has been brought to our attention that a compromise has come forth between the U.S. and other nations of the world, including North Korea. As a representative of this great nation, I call upon all citizens to voice their opinion on this key decision in American history. I think that it is vital to the success and happiness of the country for the representatives that you elect into office to be presenting the opinions of their districts and states they represent. Please, use the democracy that we are so fortunate to have and speak up for your opinion so congressmen and women can work for the people. How do I know where I stand if my citizens don't know where they stand?
North Korea has agreed to disarm all of their nuclear weapons if the rest of the world community will do the same. I would like us to consider this topic very seriously. Is this the solution that we have been waiting for? Is it possible to rid the world of nuclear weapons? What would we do as a world community if these rules are broken? Or maybe is it ok for us to have a limited number of these weapons to control terrorism and war. Perhaps nuclear weapons only provoke war? Would you feel safe if the United States had no nuclear weapons to protect itself?
Citizens, please let your congressmen know what America wants.
I trust Americans will make the best decision.
Senator Austin
Wednesday November 29, 2006
A local Wayzata, Minnesota man was involved in a multiple death drunk driving incident. Mario Brenner (uncle of Kayla Brenner), age 63, a Driver's Education Instructor at Wayzata High School, is being charged with killing three adolescent boys. Brenner, who was driving home from the Red Rooster Lounge and Restaraunt, entered the neighborhood driving his 1986 Hoda Prelude. According to the police Brenner said that he did not see the kids playing in the street until right before he hit them. The boys were 8, 9, and 11 years old.
When word got out to the hospital, a unit was sent out to the site of the accident. The young boys were rushed to the emergency room. Unfortunately the were dead upon arrival. As a result of the accident, Brenner's blood alcohol level was tested. The results were a B.A.C. level of 1.56, almost twice the amount of the legal limit.
An interview was held with an EMT on site. She stated, "This event is one that will definitely have a major impact not only the young boys' families, but the neighborhood as a whole. Their loss is a great one, and it is sad that it was a result of a drunk driver.....People always believe that it is the young and naive underage drinkers that cause all of these accidents, but out of all of the accidents that I have seen throughout my time as an EMT, most of the time it is the older, mature adults that are behind the wheel....My heart goes out to the families."
Statistics to Remember:
According to DrunkDrivingStatistics.com;
-Of the 8,256 alcohol related traffic deaths recorded in 2004, 91% of the deaths were a result of drunk drivers ages 21+.
-68% of the 91% were in between the ages of 45-65.
To the People:
Ladies and Gentlemen of our great and sovreign nation. Our nation is at a turning point. Our young men and women are at a disadvantage to the rest of the American public. We as a society have decided that it is ok for them to decide whether or not they want to go to war on their own. They DO NOT need parental consent to make this decision. We allow our young men and women to gamble, decide whether or not to stay in school, decide where to go to college. We also allow these adults to take part in the most sacred American right, voting. These mature young adults make a vast majority of these decisions on their own with out their parents. As can be seen by the strength of our nations youth, they are, in the vast majority, making the correct decisions. If these young adults can handle all of these rights and priviledges in a responsible manner, who are we to say that they cannot decide on alcohol as well. Give our young adults the rights and priviledges that all other adults in our great nation have- the ability to decide whether or not to consume alcohol. After all, they could make the decision to not help fight for this country's freedom.
-Senator Dain A. Haukos
There still remains one senate seat open on the Hill. Elections for the third senator (in the drinking age debate) will take place Friday morning. Local citizens and officials will vote for their chosen voice. This election will be very important for it will influence the upcoming vote on lowering the drinking age -- also to take place this coming Friday morn.
The candidates include:
High School Principal Justice
The Parent Brenner
Concerned parent Jessica
The Health Professional
Lindsey the College Student
Sgt. Thatcher
Mike Vicante
Journalist Jack the Ranger from the Global Press
Senators Haukos and Emeratis await with curiosity to see who their community will elect.
Olivia Borges-Nunez
Keeping the masses informed is my MO
Senators,
China has made the decesion to back the UN in its efforts to form blockades. But it also wants to make clear that it is only in favor of these circumstances if the innocent people of North Korea are still kept in good help. It can't be held accountable for starving innocent people. Though it does applaud this peaceful means of action by the UN and the United States.
US Ambassador Bell (China)
An Editorial from Editor-in-Chief Jack Ragner
An Open Letter to Sen. Haukos,
In two letters sent to The Global Press headquarters, you have reaffirmed your support of the "Increased Alcohol Rights for Americans Act." While the letters gave minimal explanation on your position other then that the Act will increase sales of Alcohol which can be taxed and controlled through taxation. The question that these letters raise is who will buy more alcohol other then teenagers? In reality, no one will increase consumption except teenagers. If teen binge drinking is a national problem, and the Act will increase alcohol consumption which will logically only be picked up by teenagers, then how will this Act help Americans? Isn't it simply going remove the stigma attached to irresponsible teen drinking? This stigma is the last defense against all of our children going out to drink themselves to death. We already are going to have future problems with Social Security and Medicare, how will killing the newest source of tax revenue and the only people paying Social Security help our nation? It seems that this new bill seems short sighted, and ignorant.
While we're on the topic of ignorance, your ignorance of today's media is astonishing. It seems to me that anyone seeking to retain office would memorize at least a few key members of today's media. While I have great respect for The Global Press's founder and his son who succeeded him, I am not a member of the Saratom family. At the end of the letters that I have sent you, I signed my name. And even as you substituted my name for our great founder, you didn't even have the courtesy to spell his name right. As the protégé of Mr. Saratom's son, it offends me greatly to see my mentors name misspelled not once, but twice. It seems wise to me that a senator such as yourself review both your history, and the names of current media personnel.
These letters raise an important question, one that no citizen should have to ask about a senator while s/he is in office. Your advocacy of the deaths of our nations future business persons, soldiers, leaders, doctors, scientists, and other important citizens, and inability to remember simple history nor the name of today's editor-in-chief of a paper read by more then 750 million people worldwide worries me greatly. So greatly in fact, that I must ask the questions on the mind of the nation. Do you really know what's best for the nation? Do you really represent your constituents? If you truly do represent your constituents' wishes then God help us all.
The Global Press
Editor-in-Chief Jack Ragner
The views expressed on this page are solely the views of their owner, and do not necessarily represent those of The Global Press.
The Democratic Republic of North Korea has decided to present to the UN a compromise that all member nations will be unable to turn down.
We will abandon our quest for a nuclear program under the conditions that all members in the United Nations, and even those outside of it (with pressure from members), completely disarm and dismantle all atomic armament, including ceasing production of all nuclear arms. The ultimate goal: removal of all atomic arms from the planet by 2015.
The United Nations must create an organization with the sole purpose of maintaning this international state. This organization will have members from all participating nations, and must requre the full compliance of the international intelligence community.
I should hope the United States and her influence will be the first to endorse this program and lead the way to a New World Order.
Kim Jong-Il
I don't know what is being said at the negotiating table. Hopefully it is looking positive and moving away from war. I have a question though about what could happen. Is there anyway that we could monitor North Korea and their nuclear ability through China, South Korea and spies? After North Korea blew up their first bomb the French were able to fly over the area and test the radiation levels. Could we, with Kim Jong-Il agreement of course, test radiation and consider war if they start using the energy for things other then energy? One of the harder ways to avoid war is to get rid of the leader. The country is so deep in poverty that I think the only way we are going to get Kim Jong-Il out is through the people and their decisions and one way to do that is to allow them to continue to have energy.
In regards to the current debate over the drinking age argument, I just want to let everyone know that my sister Krista (while pregnant with her second child) was killed by an underage student named Mike Vancanti. He is also known as a "Superstar" at his high school and has the reputation for hosting parties to minors. Within 2 seconds, a loved one or relative may end up dead due to the number of underage drivers who don't realize the dangers of drinking and driving. Although Mike walked away from the crash with only a fractured femur, he inturn was very hurt by all the pain and suffering endured by our family. My sister left a husband and little 2 year old boy. It is still hard to accept the fact that my sister was healthy, young and full of life until one night someone else jeopardized her life. Why does alcohol have to play a role in high school functions? Why can't students have fun being sober?
READ THIS: Alcohol is the No. 1 drug of choice among the nation’s youth and kills more teens than all other illicit drugs combined. More than one third of all traffic deaths among 15-20 year olds involve alcohol.
The United States of America, the UN, and other supporting countries have no desire to begin any kind of action against North Korea using force. However, you have not complied with any of the efforts that we have tried to resolve the issue using strictly diplomacy. Therefore, the blockade as been put into place. In the future it is absolutely critical that you comply with the UN and supporting countries before the issue escalates and military force is needed. I don't see how a military conflict with many nations of the world will help you become a world power. Isn't that your ultimate goal? How will North Korea with a struggling economy and limited resources be able to support this conflict if you don't comply ???
Senator Austin
The Democratic Republic of North Korea has outwardly challenged the methods of the United Nations and its members. Chairman Il is well aware of the opportunities for peace and alliance that he so fully passed over. By isolating itself from the rest of the international community in this manner, North Korea is thus positioned against the whole of the globe. The threat lies in the unwillingness to communicate and negotiate. This is ill for a nation in a situation such as that of North Korea.
Mr. Il, economic blockades are not meant to please you. They are meant to force a nation into, at the very least, opening a workable channel of communications with surrounding powers, which you have presently done so promptly.
UN Chief Administrator Siegel
This message is for all UN delegates, and, more importantly, the United States of America.
It has been made all to clear to the Democratic Republic of North Korea by the UN backed blockade of our ports, the polarizing of surrounding nations support by the United States and their economic blackmail, and the downright silly stance taken by US represenative Austin that we have been left no choice but to defend the very lives of our citizens by whatever means neccessary.
Let this statement be made clear to all the world, I repeat, all the world: The Democratic Republic of North Korea WILL NOT take any offensive measures to remove the downright uncivilized and irresponsible blockade on our ports. We WILL NOT take the measures neccessary to remove the blockade that is starving our children and needlessly destroying our economy. We WILL NOT act on any so immaturely stated "uncivilized hostility" that the US Secretary of State seems certain is built up within our small country. We have no wish for conflict of any kind. However, it is certain that not only the United States, but China and Russia all wish to partake in the imperialistic merry-go-round; why else would they station hundreds of thousands of troops on our borders?
I repeat, to Secretary of State Dille, Senator Austin, and Administrator Siegel: The Democratic Republic of North Korea does not wish to partake in any offensive maneuvers. If you answer any question of mine, answer this one:
Where are your threats grounded? Where?
If they are in your silly nuclear arms "threat", why haven't you invaded, disarmed and abandoned Pakistan, who is fueling the insurgency in Afghanistan. Or China, who refuses to make so called "reform"? Why does Russia, who quietly released to the world that they are "pretty sure" they have "all" their nuclear arms trusted with such power?
When did Korea ever threaten the United States with nuclear arms or otherwise? When did we plan to invade the United States Senator Austin? When did we look to increase the size of our country by military means anytime in the last half century Mr. Dille?
Yet whose battleships and aircraft carriers are sitting not but miles off our shores?
To the American people I have but one plea: Realize what situation your leaders have put you in. Your military is already stretched too thin in Iraq, even though the bulk of your entire might is there, over 250,000 troops. Ever since President Clinton gutted the CIA, you have been unable to safely assert the size or combat effectiveness of other nation-state's military. You are on the very eve of an absolute and catistrophic mistake, for even with Russian and NATO armies added to the puny 35,000 man American force occupying the DMZ, you do not come within sight of 1/4 the size of our military force.
Finally, to the President of the United States:
You have lost all faith in a diplomatic solution to the "situation" that you have so delicately constructed as a means to further the American Empire. We will await your offer to remove the blockade and allow us to carry ourselves as a proper nation.
We WILL NOT carry our any offesive maneuvers in the meantime. Rest assured this will not stay the case if the United States and its partner in crime, the UN, do not remove the blockade and put affiliated military forces on stand down. The clock is ticking.
Kim Jong-Il
The United Nations would like to induce its support of the recent decisions of the United States State Department to put forth economic sanctions, especially the physical blockade of the majority of North Korean ports, as a step in the correct direction in the de-nuclearization process. These actions have garnered support from most, if not all, of the UN member nations and can depend on further support in a variety of forms in the coming weeks.
On behalf of the United States President, it will be my duty to explain the summation of conclusions the White House Staff has come to terms on regarding the North Korean Crisis. Since North Korea has fallen silent on the United States' demands concerning the blunt indefinite ceasefire declaration as well as the immediate approval of American trade agreements, and to protect national security on this matter, the Department of Defense and Pentagon have decided that a full blockade will be placed on the entirety of the North Korean border with the exception to the Northwestern border adjacent to China. This land/naval blockade will restrict the movement of ALL goods, imports and exports to shut down the nations economy as it comes to a decision on whether it wants to proceed with war or peace; yes, it is that simple of a decision. The Russian Federation has agreed to fully militarily aid the United States in this blockade as it blockades the border adjacent to its own nation on the Northeastern corner. The information the Russian Government disclosed with their public is stating that over 150 000 troops are at the ready as well as 8 000 fully functional tanks. The South Korean military will also aid the US in the blockade by blockading the Southern border and their troops will be accompanied by 30 000 American Armed Forces including Army and Marine Reconnaisance. The British military has agreed to back the US militarily in terms of ground support and armory and is in the process of transporting 15 000 troops of their own armed forces. We are calling out the Chinese government for military support in this situation, hoping, of course, that this blockade yields a diplomatic result but in case it does not the world will be ready for North Korea's potential uncivilized hostility. This action is entirely defensive and the North Korean lands will not be breached unless a first strike is implemented by the North Korean military. More information will be disclosed later this week.
United States Secretary of State Mark Dille
After hearing about the death of the president’s daughter, I could never imagine losing my own daughter. My daughter is a freshman at the University of Minnesota-Duluth. When she was a junior in High school, her and her friends got minor consumption tickets at a Prom after party. The reason they were caught by cops was from a group of kids streaking down the street. When the cops entered, there were several kids passed out everywhere, kids puking in the toilet, tub, and any available sink. I strongly believe that high school students, even if they are 18. The drinking age should not be lowered to 18; there are too many irresponsible teenagers out there who can't handle drinking at such a young age.
Letter to the Editor of The New York Times
Dear Fellow Americans,
As a citizen whose taxes are, unwillingly being used to support a department of defense that plans a possible military invasion in North Korea, I feel it necessary to deplore the current administration's actions. Although all those talking heads up in Washington tout a policy of diplomacy, it is clear that "protecting out own interests" is the guiding policy
Exactly who do we think we are to attack a country that has nuclear weapons when we ourselves have nuclear weapons positioned and ready to fire on a variety of nations. Kin Jon ll, in his recent message to the public, was accurate to describe the US as an oppressive force wanting to colonize the world. How can Il even attempt "diplomatic procedures" when he is not given any options to choose from; His only option is to stop making nuclear weapons.
Call me a zealot, if you will. Perhaps I am misinformed on the issue. If so, where is the news/media coverage that is out there to tell me otherwise? Where are the "scholars" and "experts" with their finely polished analysis of the situation?
In the mean time, I urge my fellow American to examine the wider impact of a military invasion in North Korea.(view photo montage linked below). Look beyond the face of Kim Jon Il, who is presented as the prime "evil doer" to see the faces of North Korea's children, who start out life as innocent souls wanting only a future of opportunity, not one of destitution and poverty, like the children in Iraq now have.
Do we really want to breed another generation of terrorists?
Your fellow citizen,
Luis Wyn Hassim
The faces of our Enemy?:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/53744657@N00/show/
Editorial Page-- St. Paul Pioneer Press
As the country works to find calm after the death of the president's daughter, Laura Starner, others are busy at work. I speak more specifically of certain individuals in congress who are tickled pink by this tragic opportunity to forward their stance on the upcoming alocohol bill. While Senator Emeratis and Senator Haukos have been tight-lipped in keeping their comments limited to condolences for the president's family, other's such as Senator Rothgard have pushed the envelope too far.
This campaigning buzz is in part due to the recent announcement of Senator Laurence VonGratskin's (R-MN) retirement. With a new seat open in the Senate, the delicate balance of those FOR and AGAINST the upcoming alcohol bill will be disrupted. Both sides of the issue wait with bated breath to see who Gov. Pawlenty choses to fill VonGratskin's seat. Pawlenty states that he wants to chose "a voice of the people" not a "polished politician."
The nation waits to see who will offer him or herself as a candidate. Will it be The Parent, who tirelessly works with community leaders to forward her stance on the alcohol issue? Or will it be Shah, CEO of Beer'A'Licious? Or perhaps Sgt. Thatcher, another well respected individual in the community? We'll have to see?
Minneapolis, MN-11:30AM
By Richard Stone
Late Sunday morning Senator Laurence VonGratskin (R-MN) announced among family and friends that he will retire from the Senate Monday morning. Citing difficulties in his fight with Coronary Artery Disease, Sen. VonGratskin announced that he wished to spend the rest of his final days with his wife, children, and grandchildren.
Minnesotan Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) will have two weeks, starting Monday, to fill Sen. VonGratskin's seat. After the death of President Starner's daughter, Laura, the Increased Alcohol Rights for Americans Act has exploded into the nation spotlight. Bitterly dividing the Senate, Capital Hill Analysts say that the bill may very well pass or fail by one vote. With the bill up for debate Tuesday and a final vote coming sometime next week, whoever fills Sen. VonGratskin's seat may decide the bill's outcome.
The Governor’s office stated that it will begin the search process to fill Sen. VonGratskin's seat Monday, and may have a list ready by the end of the week. The list is expected to include the names of several prominent Minnesotans, and the Governor has decided to extend the search to ordinary citizens.
The Global Press
Editor-in-Chief Jack Ragner
"Fair Coverage of an Unfair World"
As the Chief Administrator of the United Nations, I sincerely urge the diplomatic community to consider the implications regarding North Korea's actions, or lack thereof, of the past few days. By situating itself into a willing absence from negotiations, the country has begrudged itself within the international sphere, and isolated itself from those willing to work in a beneficial direction.
Kim Jong Il cites an unjust past for sure reasoning to continue into the field of nuclear technology, but I ask now, what does the world owe you? It has been five decades since foreign military forces last set foot on North Korean soil, a North Korea guided into Communism by its own doings as well as Chinese influence and aid. It is true that the Cold War era thrust most of the Western world away, however once the era ceded, the West offered only help toward North Korea's fledgling economy, only ending after Kim Jong Il quit answering his diplomatic phone and constructed a line of his own.
What is your reasoning? Where is the threat, Kim?
Your friend,
UN Chief Administrator Siegel
To the international community,
It is with great pleasure that I examine the events taken place regarding nuclear proliferation, chiefly the goings on within North Korea. The recent stances taken by nations willing to take the lead show true progress for a peaceful ending. The words of American President Bush and his strong views on the U.S.'s role in the process truly strengthen the united effort. I urge the members of the UN to follow the U.S. as it strides to find ways of stopping what may become a menacing North Korean peninsula.
The same can be said of the Japanese economic pressures. It is a good direction to head for, as Kim Jong Il becomes less and less willing to negotiate.
Hello
Today, I call upon us members of the US Congress to pass a resolution to take action against North Korea. Kim Jong-Il has clearly told us what he wants and is intending to do with nuclear weapons.
In his speech to "the weak Americans," he told us North Korea will "stand up to this great oppressor." [the US] Then, he continues, "The people of North Korea will stand up to the tyranny and imperialistic ambition of the United States with not only nuclear arms at the ready, but over 1.2 million fighting troops
As a representative of the United States government, I feel that we must take action immediately. First, we need to work with the UN and other countries to resolve this threat as quickly as possible. It is important that we do not jump into this issue too soon and use unnecessary force. However, we need to be firm and clear about what is expected of North Korea and what the results will be if our diplomatic efforts are not met.
I call upon you other US representatives to work with me to use the power we have as elected representatives. It is our duty to protect the American people.
Senator Austin
When North Korea blew up the nuclear bomb the world was horrified and very upset with North Korea. But Kim Jong Il had to know that the world would respond negatively, so what was his motivation? I think that he is unable to fix his country by himself and is trying to get other contries to help him bring his to it's feet again. I think he is using the bomb as leverage to get what he needs to help his country which isn't good becasue he can continue to use this bomb to get what he needs and manipulate other powers. This could just be a far-fetched theory though.
Washington D.C.-8:54PM
By Terri O'Connell, D.C. Correspondent
After a day that included both the death of President Starner's daughter, and the movement of the "Increased Alcohol Rights for Americas Act" from committee to a spot on the calendar, Senator Rothgard (D-IL) made the following announcement.
"My heart goes out to President Samuel Starner, and his family. I would like to make a statement about my bill in the Senate. While this incident is horribly tragic, I'm afraid that there will be an irrational backlash against the progress we've made to guarantee the same rights to everyone of the age of majority. This, however, might have been prevented by working to curb the notion that binge drinking is required of today's youth. Hopefully the pending legislation will fulfill this goal; and though nothing will bring this great woman back, hopefully future tragedies can be prevented. I ask for calm from American people as the nation grieves. Thank you."
This statement followed by a statement by senator Roger Glasman (R-AZ). The most outspoken critic of Sen. Rothgard's proposed "Increased Alcohol Rights for Americas Act" that may see a vote within the month.
"My prayers are with the President and his family. This tragedy speaks to the very core of the problem. It’s a simple fact that these young people make worse choices about consuming alcohol then older member's of society. I hope that this tragedy wakes the nation and opens the people's eyes so that we can see that those under 21 are still too young to make good decisions about the use of alcohol."
As the legislation progresses through the Senate, and has already passed the House, the nation waits for the up coming Senate vote on the measure. Though the President gave his support to the bill as recently as yesterday morning, the White House has refused to issue a statement yet as to whether or not he will continue to do so. While little is clear tonight, one question is quickly being answered inside the Beltway: Is anything sacred anymore?
The Global Press
Editor-in-Chief Jack Ragner
"Fair Coverage of an Unfair World"
As we grow increasingly intimate with each other's concerns over North Korea, we should still try to remain peaceful with North Korea. With our ban of imports from North Korea and yours as well, we are stepping into dangerous ground that could result in war. We support harsher punishment toward North Korea, yet we are scared of what possible consequences might arise out of such behavior. While we both want the disarmament of North Korea, we cannot be entirely hipocritical about such claims. Nuclear weapons should not be a pillar of national security such as the United States or North Korea, and should be more vocal in insisting on the inhumanity and immorality of nuclear weapons, and their common threat to all human beings. Do you think disarmament is the best course of action?
