* Text fwd from Steve Zeltzer on Feb. 28, 2011
Hankyoreh
Breaking the gridlock at Ssangyong
Feb. 28, 2011
There have been a string of recent suicides among workers laid off by Ssangyong Motor, which enacted a mass-layoff in 2009 followed by a 77-day strike and brutal crackdown. One after another has departed this world, unable to handle the agonizing realities of life that followed their dismissal from the company. The latest is an individual named Im who was found dead Saturday. Adding to the tragedy of the case is the fact that Im’s wife took own life last year in the shock resulting from her husband’s firing. There are said to be around ten workers and worker family members who have died since the Ssangyong strike. It is time for not only Ssangyong Motor labor and management but also politicians and the government to take active steps in devising a solution.
Ssangyong Motor faced severe conflict between labor and management with its early 2009 push for mass layoffs in order to overcome financial difficulties. After a protracted 77-day strike, labor and management managed a dramatic compromise on Aug. 6 of that year, but no follow-up measures ensued. In particular, some 400 or so workers are on unpaid leave, making them effectively laid off while still affiliated with Ssangyong Motor, as was the case with the late Mr. Im. At the time the compromise was reached, the company promised to arrange for rotations for these workers according to production quantity after a year’s time. More than a year and seven months later, it is feigning ignorance. The company must present a timeline for when and how it will be returning these individuals to their operations.
The management may take the view that the financial situation has not yet improved enough to bring in new workers. However, the situation has been gradually stabilizing since the confirmation of Ssangyong Motor’s acquisition by India’s Mahindra Group last year. New shares were issued normally in 2011, and automobile sales are looking up, going from around 35 thousand vehicles in 2009 to over 80 thousand last year. It is also time now to establish measures for laid-off workers, as the company will be able to resume normal operations when it escapes from court receivership around late March.
Politicians and the government should also focus their attention on the plight of these workers. During the strike in 2009, a number of politicians visited the scene to resolve the situation, but no one showed any interest after the strike ended. Politicians must refrain from this kind of self-serving show of benevolence for appearance’s sake. The government, for its part, agreed to respect the current labor-management agreement when the Mahindra Group acquired Ssangyong Motor, and it needs to follow through on this to the letter. When a foreign business acquires a domestic company, it is the government’s natural responsibility to provide administration and oversight to ensure that a labor-management agreement to guarantee the employment of domestic workers is properly upheld.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Video Fwd: Brigadier General John Hyten on the Military Uses of Space
Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space
Brigadier General John Hyten on the Military Uses of Space
by RUSI Online
Brigadier General John Hyten on the Military Uses of Space
by RUSI Online
Brigadier General John Hyten on the Military Uses of Space from RUSI Online on Vimeo.
Brigadier General John Hyten appraises a RUSI audience of the military uses of space. General Hyten is Director, Space Acquisition, Office of the Under Secretary of the Air Force.Video Fwd: SPACE FENCE
Organizing Notes
Monday, February 28, 2011
SPACE FENCE
This is a Lockheed Martin Corporation promotional video for their "Space Fence" project that is being sold as a system to protect against space junk accidents.
But what they don't talk about is how this system can be used to identify and target other countries space satellites in times of conflict.
Monday, February 28, 2011
SPACE FENCE
This is a Lockheed Martin Corporation promotional video for their "Space Fence" project that is being sold as a system to protect against space junk accidents.
But what they don't talk about is how this system can be used to identify and target other countries space satellites in times of conflict.
Text Fwd: Sara Flounders: Libya and Imperialism
Global Research
Libya and Imperialism
By Sara Flounders
February 24, 2011
workers.org
Of all the struggles going on in North Africa and the Middle East right now, the most difficult to unravel is the one in Libya.
What is the character of the opposition to the Gadhafi regime, which reportedly now controls the eastern city of Benghazi?
Is it just coincidence that the rebellion started in Benghazi, which is north of Libya’s richest oil fields as well as close to most of its oil and gas pipelines, refineries and its LNG port? Is there a plan to partition the country?
What is the risk of imperialist military intervention, which poses the gravest danger for the people of the entire region?
Libya is not like Egypt. Its leader, Moammar al-Gadhafi, has not been an imperialist puppet like Hosni Mubarak. For many years, Gadhafi was allied to countries and movements fighting imperialism. On taking power in 1969 through a military coup, he nationalized Libya’s oil and used much of that money to develop the Libyan economy. Conditions of life improved dramatically for the people.
For that, the imperialists were determined to grind Libya down. The U.S. actually launched air strikes on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986 that killed 60 people, including Gadhafi’s infant daughter – which is rarely mentioned by the corporate media. Devastating sanctions were imposed by both the U.S. and the U.N. to wreck the Libyan economy.
After the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 and leveled much of Baghdad with a bombing campaign that the Pentagon exultantly called “shock and awe,” Gadhafi tried to ward off further threatened aggression on Libya by making big political and economic concessions to the imperialists. He opened the economy to foreign banks and corporations; he agreed to IMF demands for “structural adjustment,” privatizing many state-owned enterprises and cutting state subsidies on necessities like food and fuel.
The Libyan people are suffering from the same high prices and unemployment that underlie the rebellions elsewhere and that flow from the worldwide capitalist economic crisis.
There can be no doubt that the struggle sweeping the Arab world for political freedom and economic justice has also struck a chord in Libya. There can be no doubt that discontent with the Gadhafi regime is motivating a significant section of the population.
However, it is important for progressives to know that many of the people being promoted in the West as leaders of the opposition are long-time agents of imperialism. The BBC on Feb. 22 showed footage of crowds in Benghazi pulling down the green flag of the republic and replacing it with the flag of the overthrown monarch King Idris – who had been a puppet of U.S. and British imperialism.
The Western media are basing a great deal of their reporting on supposed facts provided by the exile group National Front for the Salvation of Libya, which was trained and financed by the U.S. CIA. Google the front’s name plus CIA and you will find hundreds of references.
The Wall Street Journal in a Feb. 23 editorial wrote that “The U.S. and Europe should help Libyans overthrow the Gadhafi regime.” There is no talk in the board rooms or the corridors of Washington about intervening to help the people of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or Bahrain overthrow their dictatorial rulers. Even with all the lip service being paid to the mass struggles rocking the region right now, that would be unthinkable. As for Egypt and Tunisia, the imperialists are pulling every string they can to get the masses off the streets.
There was no talk of U.S. intervention to help the Palestinian people of Gaza when thousands died from being blockaded, bombed and invaded by Israel. Just the opposite. The U.S. intervened to prevent condemnation of the Zionist settler state.
Imperialism’s interest in Libya is not hard to find. Bloomberg.com wrote on Feb. 22 that while Libya is Africa’s third-largest producer of oil, it has the continent’s largest proven reserves – 44.3 billion barrels. It is a country with a relatively small population but the potential to produce huge profits for the giant oil companies. That’s how the super-rich look at it, and that’s what underlies their professed concern for the people’s democratic rights in Libya.
Getting concessions out of Gadhafi is not enough for the imperialist oil barons. They want a government that they can own outright, lock, stock and barrel. They have never forgiven Gadhafi for overthrowing the monarchy and nationalizing the oil. Fidel Castro of Cuba in his column “Reflections” takes note of imperialism’s hunger for oil and warns that the U.S. is laying the basis for military intervention in Libya.
In the U.S., some forces are trying to mobilize a street-level campaign promoting such U.S. intervention. We should oppose this outright and remind any well-intentioned people of the millions killed and displaced by U.S. intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Progressive people are in sympathy with what they see as a popular movement in Libya. We can help such a movement most by supporting its just demands while rejecting imperialist intervention, in whatever form it may take. It is the people of Libya who must decide their future.
Libya and Imperialism
By Sara Flounders
February 24, 2011
workers.org
Of all the struggles going on in North Africa and the Middle East right now, the most difficult to unravel is the one in Libya.
What is the character of the opposition to the Gadhafi regime, which reportedly now controls the eastern city of Benghazi?
Is it just coincidence that the rebellion started in Benghazi, which is north of Libya’s richest oil fields as well as close to most of its oil and gas pipelines, refineries and its LNG port? Is there a plan to partition the country?
What is the risk of imperialist military intervention, which poses the gravest danger for the people of the entire region?
Libya is not like Egypt. Its leader, Moammar al-Gadhafi, has not been an imperialist puppet like Hosni Mubarak. For many years, Gadhafi was allied to countries and movements fighting imperialism. On taking power in 1969 through a military coup, he nationalized Libya’s oil and used much of that money to develop the Libyan economy. Conditions of life improved dramatically for the people.
For that, the imperialists were determined to grind Libya down. The U.S. actually launched air strikes on Tripoli and Benghazi in 1986 that killed 60 people, including Gadhafi’s infant daughter – which is rarely mentioned by the corporate media. Devastating sanctions were imposed by both the U.S. and the U.N. to wreck the Libyan economy.
After the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 and leveled much of Baghdad with a bombing campaign that the Pentagon exultantly called “shock and awe,” Gadhafi tried to ward off further threatened aggression on Libya by making big political and economic concessions to the imperialists. He opened the economy to foreign banks and corporations; he agreed to IMF demands for “structural adjustment,” privatizing many state-owned enterprises and cutting state subsidies on necessities like food and fuel.
The Libyan people are suffering from the same high prices and unemployment that underlie the rebellions elsewhere and that flow from the worldwide capitalist economic crisis.
There can be no doubt that the struggle sweeping the Arab world for political freedom and economic justice has also struck a chord in Libya. There can be no doubt that discontent with the Gadhafi regime is motivating a significant section of the population.
However, it is important for progressives to know that many of the people being promoted in the West as leaders of the opposition are long-time agents of imperialism. The BBC on Feb. 22 showed footage of crowds in Benghazi pulling down the green flag of the republic and replacing it with the flag of the overthrown monarch King Idris – who had been a puppet of U.S. and British imperialism.
The Western media are basing a great deal of their reporting on supposed facts provided by the exile group National Front for the Salvation of Libya, which was trained and financed by the U.S. CIA. Google the front’s name plus CIA and you will find hundreds of references.
The Wall Street Journal in a Feb. 23 editorial wrote that “The U.S. and Europe should help Libyans overthrow the Gadhafi regime.” There is no talk in the board rooms or the corridors of Washington about intervening to help the people of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or Bahrain overthrow their dictatorial rulers. Even with all the lip service being paid to the mass struggles rocking the region right now, that would be unthinkable. As for Egypt and Tunisia, the imperialists are pulling every string they can to get the masses off the streets.
There was no talk of U.S. intervention to help the Palestinian people of Gaza when thousands died from being blockaded, bombed and invaded by Israel. Just the opposite. The U.S. intervened to prevent condemnation of the Zionist settler state.
Imperialism’s interest in Libya is not hard to find. Bloomberg.com wrote on Feb. 22 that while Libya is Africa’s third-largest producer of oil, it has the continent’s largest proven reserves – 44.3 billion barrels. It is a country with a relatively small population but the potential to produce huge profits for the giant oil companies. That’s how the super-rich look at it, and that’s what underlies their professed concern for the people’s democratic rights in Libya.
Getting concessions out of Gadhafi is not enough for the imperialist oil barons. They want a government that they can own outright, lock, stock and barrel. They have never forgiven Gadhafi for overthrowing the monarchy and nationalizing the oil. Fidel Castro of Cuba in his column “Reflections” takes note of imperialism’s hunger for oil and warns that the U.S. is laying the basis for military intervention in Libya.
In the U.S., some forces are trying to mobilize a street-level campaign promoting such U.S. intervention. We should oppose this outright and remind any well-intentioned people of the millions killed and displaced by U.S. intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Progressive people are in sympathy with what they see as a popular movement in Libya. We can help such a movement most by supporting its just demands while rejecting imperialist intervention, in whatever form it may take. It is the people of Libya who must decide their future.
Text Fwd: 2011 Special Committee on Decolonization - UN Secretary General::"Colonial Situations Are Completely Outdated"
* Text fwd from Martha Duenas on Feb. 27, 2011
Overseas Territories Review
27 February 2011
"Colonial Situations Are Completely Outdated" - U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon
Secretary-General
SG/SM/13412
GA/COL/3216
"Completing decolonization will require concerted efforts on the part of of all concerned."
Following are UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s remarks at the opening of the 2011 session of the Special Committee on Decolonization, in New York, 24 February:
I am pleased to join the Special Committee as it begins its work for 2011.
This year marks the beginning of the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism. Let us focus our attention on accomplishing concrete results with the involvement of all concerned: the Special Committee, the administering Powers and the Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Last December, we commemorated the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, adopted by the General Assembly. On that occasion, I appealed to the international community to realize the full spirit of the Declaration, which called for “the immediate and complete elimination of the colonial system in all its forms and manifestations”, in keeping with the principles of the United Nations Charter. The Special Committee has a crucial role to play as the intergovernmental body exclusively devoted to advancing the United Nations decolonization agenda.
Today, 16 Non-Self-Governing Territories remain on the list, awaiting constructive, results-oriented initiatives. On a case-by-case basis, those Territories have to be given the opportunity to exercise their right to self-determination in order to take the interests of their peoples fully into account. Colonial situations are completely outdated and must be addressed with renewed vigour and creativity.
Last year, in my report to the General Assembly on the “Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism”, I recalled that the Assembly had requested the Special Committee to continue to seek suitable means for the immediate and full implementation of the Decolonization Declaration. In practice, this would mean that the Committee could assess its past work and achievements in order to chart a way forward, together with the administering Powers, for the ultimate benefit of the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Your current work on devising a plan of action for the Third International Decade, and the forthcoming 2011 Caribbean Seminar on Decolonization, might prove instrumental in that regard. It is my hope that difficulties encountered in the recent past will gradually be overcome, thereby strengthening the Committee’s determination to develop effective formal and informal modalities that would help it accomplish its mandate.
The completion of the process of decolonization will require the concerted efforts of all concerned: first and foremost, the Special Committee, the administering Powers, and the peoples in the Non-Self-Governing Territories. Dialogue aimed at improving cooperation between the Special Committee and the administering Powers continues to be of utmost importance.
The Secretariat will spare no effort to assist the Committee in its work. But this can be no substitute for the choices, decisions and actions expected of the Special Committee.
I wish you every success in your important endeavour.
____________________________________________________________________________
Electing New Chair in Unprecedented Secret Ballot, U.N. Decolonisation Committee Members also Approve Timetable, Organization of Work
Addressing the first meeting of the 2011 substantive session of the Special Committee on Decolonization, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called today for “concrete results” in the quest for self-determination by the world’s 16 remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Those results could only be achieved through the concerted efforts of all stakeholders, including the Special Committee, the administering Powers and the peoples of the Territories, he said. “On a case-by-case basis, those Territories have to be given the opportunity to exercise their right to self-determination,” Mr. Ban added, emphasizing that dialogue aimed at improving cooperation between the Special Committee and the administering Powers continued to be “of utmost importance”.
In an unprecedented action this morning, the Special Committee (on Decolonisation) held a secret ballot to elect a new Chair. Out of 25 recorded votes, Francisco Carrion-Mena ( Ecuador) received 15 to become the new Chair, replacing Donatus Keith St. Aimee ( Saint Lucia), who won 10 votes.
The Special Committee also elected, by acclamation, the following Bureau members: Pedro Núñez Mosquera (Cuba) and Rupert Davies (Sierra Leone), Vice-Chairs; and Bashar Ja’afari (Syria), Rapporteur.
Speaking after the elections, Mr. Carrion-Mena called for “reinvigorated multilateralism” in global decolonization efforts. “Decolonization is a tough challenge, but not one that should be impossible,” he said, noting that the United Nations membership had swelled by 93 Member States in the last 50 years. Pledging to push for the decolonization of the remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories, he described his election as a positive testament to the “liveliness” of the Special Committee and its search for a higher profile.
Delegations then took the floor in support of the Special Committee’s work, with Cuba’s representative emphasizing that Puerto Rico, which was not on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories, also needed the Special Committee’s support.
Papua New Guinea’s representative said it was through the Special Committee that many nations had been born, something of which all its members could be proud. However, the administering Powers could and should be more proactive in helping the Territories under their jurisdiction realize their rights, he added.
Syria’s representative, speaking in his national capacity, congratulated the new Chair, saying his election “breathed new life” into the Special Committee’s efforts. Despite its good work in recent years, however, it was shameful that there was still a need to liberate non-self-governing peoples, he said, appealing for an end to that chapter of history.
The Special Committee also heard brief statements by representatives of India, Indonesia, Congo and Saint Lucia.
In other business, the Special Committee approved, by consensus as orally amended, resolutions and decisions relevant to its work, as contained in a note by the Secretary-General (document A/AC.109/2011/L.1); and the organization of its work, programme of work and timetable (document A/AC.109/2011/L.2).
It also invited the delegations of Argentina, Spain and Tajikistan to participate in its deliberations as observers.
The Special Committee, also known informally as the Committee of 24, is the focal point for the implementation of the Decolonization Declaration. Its current 29 members are: Antigua and Barbuda; Bolivia; Chile; China; Congo; Côte d’Ivoire; Cuba; Dominica; Ecuador; Ethiopia; Fiji; Grenada; India; Indonesia; Iran; Iraq; Mali; Nicaragua; Papua New Guinea; Russian Federation; Saint Kitts and Nevis; Saint Lucia; Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; Sierra Leone; Syria; Timor-Leste; Tunisia; United Republic of Tanzania; and Venezuela.
Remaining on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories are Western Sahara, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), Montserrat, St. Helena, Turks and Caicos, United States Virgin Islands, Gibraltar, American Samoa, Guam, New Caledonia, Pitcairn and Tokelau.
The Special Committee will reconvene at a date and time to be announced.
Overseas Territories Review
27 February 2011
"Colonial Situations Are Completely Outdated" - U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon
Secretary-General
SG/SM/13412
GA/COL/3216
"Completing decolonization will require concerted efforts on the part of of all concerned."
Following are UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s remarks at the opening of the 2011 session of the Special Committee on Decolonization, in New York, 24 February:
I am pleased to join the Special Committee as it begins its work for 2011.
This year marks the beginning of the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism. Let us focus our attention on accomplishing concrete results with the involvement of all concerned: the Special Committee, the administering Powers and the Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Last December, we commemorated the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, adopted by the General Assembly. On that occasion, I appealed to the international community to realize the full spirit of the Declaration, which called for “the immediate and complete elimination of the colonial system in all its forms and manifestations”, in keeping with the principles of the United Nations Charter. The Special Committee has a crucial role to play as the intergovernmental body exclusively devoted to advancing the United Nations decolonization agenda.
Today, 16 Non-Self-Governing Territories remain on the list, awaiting constructive, results-oriented initiatives. On a case-by-case basis, those Territories have to be given the opportunity to exercise their right to self-determination in order to take the interests of their peoples fully into account. Colonial situations are completely outdated and must be addressed with renewed vigour and creativity.
Last year, in my report to the General Assembly on the “Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism”, I recalled that the Assembly had requested the Special Committee to continue to seek suitable means for the immediate and full implementation of the Decolonization Declaration. In practice, this would mean that the Committee could assess its past work and achievements in order to chart a way forward, together with the administering Powers, for the ultimate benefit of the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Your current work on devising a plan of action for the Third International Decade, and the forthcoming 2011 Caribbean Seminar on Decolonization, might prove instrumental in that regard. It is my hope that difficulties encountered in the recent past will gradually be overcome, thereby strengthening the Committee’s determination to develop effective formal and informal modalities that would help it accomplish its mandate.
The completion of the process of decolonization will require the concerted efforts of all concerned: first and foremost, the Special Committee, the administering Powers, and the peoples in the Non-Self-Governing Territories. Dialogue aimed at improving cooperation between the Special Committee and the administering Powers continues to be of utmost importance.
The Secretariat will spare no effort to assist the Committee in its work. But this can be no substitute for the choices, decisions and actions expected of the Special Committee.
I wish you every success in your important endeavour.
____________________________________________________________________________
Electing New Chair in Unprecedented Secret Ballot, U.N. Decolonisation Committee Members also Approve Timetable, Organization of Work
Addressing the first meeting of the 2011 substantive session of the Special Committee on Decolonization, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called today for “concrete results” in the quest for self-determination by the world’s 16 remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories.
Those results could only be achieved through the concerted efforts of all stakeholders, including the Special Committee, the administering Powers and the peoples of the Territories, he said. “On a case-by-case basis, those Territories have to be given the opportunity to exercise their right to self-determination,” Mr. Ban added, emphasizing that dialogue aimed at improving cooperation between the Special Committee and the administering Powers continued to be “of utmost importance”.
In an unprecedented action this morning, the Special Committee (on Decolonisation) held a secret ballot to elect a new Chair. Out of 25 recorded votes, Francisco Carrion-Mena ( Ecuador) received 15 to become the new Chair, replacing Donatus Keith St. Aimee ( Saint Lucia), who won 10 votes.
The Special Committee also elected, by acclamation, the following Bureau members: Pedro Núñez Mosquera (Cuba) and Rupert Davies (Sierra Leone), Vice-Chairs; and Bashar Ja’afari (Syria), Rapporteur.
Speaking after the elections, Mr. Carrion-Mena called for “reinvigorated multilateralism” in global decolonization efforts. “Decolonization is a tough challenge, but not one that should be impossible,” he said, noting that the United Nations membership had swelled by 93 Member States in the last 50 years. Pledging to push for the decolonization of the remaining Non-Self-Governing Territories, he described his election as a positive testament to the “liveliness” of the Special Committee and its search for a higher profile.
Delegations then took the floor in support of the Special Committee’s work, with Cuba’s representative emphasizing that Puerto Rico, which was not on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories, also needed the Special Committee’s support.
Papua New Guinea’s representative said it was through the Special Committee that many nations had been born, something of which all its members could be proud. However, the administering Powers could and should be more proactive in helping the Territories under their jurisdiction realize their rights, he added.
Syria’s representative, speaking in his national capacity, congratulated the new Chair, saying his election “breathed new life” into the Special Committee’s efforts. Despite its good work in recent years, however, it was shameful that there was still a need to liberate non-self-governing peoples, he said, appealing for an end to that chapter of history.
The Special Committee also heard brief statements by representatives of India, Indonesia, Congo and Saint Lucia.
In other business, the Special Committee approved, by consensus as orally amended, resolutions and decisions relevant to its work, as contained in a note by the Secretary-General (document A/AC.109/2011/L.1); and the organization of its work, programme of work and timetable (document A/AC.109/2011/L.2).
It also invited the delegations of Argentina, Spain and Tajikistan to participate in its deliberations as observers.
The Special Committee, also known informally as the Committee of 24, is the focal point for the implementation of the Decolonization Declaration. Its current 29 members are: Antigua and Barbuda; Bolivia; Chile; China; Congo; Côte d’Ivoire; Cuba; Dominica; Ecuador; Ethiopia; Fiji; Grenada; India; Indonesia; Iran; Iraq; Mali; Nicaragua; Papua New Guinea; Russian Federation; Saint Kitts and Nevis; Saint Lucia; Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; Sierra Leone; Syria; Timor-Leste; Tunisia; United Republic of Tanzania; and Venezuela.
Remaining on the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories are Western Sahara, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands (Malvinas), Montserrat, St. Helena, Turks and Caicos, United States Virgin Islands, Gibraltar, American Samoa, Guam, New Caledonia, Pitcairn and Tokelau.
The Special Committee will reconvene at a date and time to be announced.
Text Fwd: U.S. trims its nuclear arsenal while upgrading production
* Text fwd from Frank Cordaro on Feb. 26, 2011
The Kansas City Star
Posted on Sat, Feb. 26, 2011 10:15 PM
U.S. trims its nuclear arsenal while upgrading production
By DONALD BRADLEY
The construction site of the new billion-dollar Honeywell plant in
south Kansas City is quite the head-turner.
Workers everywhere, trucks scurrying about like mice, monster earth
movers, cranes reaching to the sky and enough trailers to start a
retirement community. All on 185 acres inside a perimeter fence and
under a wind-whipped Old Glory.
But drive past the former bean field on Missouri 150 enough times and
the thought occurs: Kansas City produces parts for every nuclear
weapon now in our arsenal. The country is making more nuclear bombs,
has been building them virtually non-stop for 65 years, hasn’t used
one against an enemy since 1945, and a significant new arms reduction
treaty went into effect just this month.
Nine thousand warheads, about a quarter capable of being triggered
tomorrow, is a lot of product sitting around.
Any is too many, critics said. “Modernization” is a joke, just more of
the world-threatening, same-old, same-old madness.
Others counter that the world cannot “disinvent” the bomb. What the
country needs, they said, is to scrap the big nukes in the stockpile —
hardly a deterrent — for smaller, tactical ones that potential enemies
think we would actually use.
The $85 billion upgrade of our bomb-making infrastructure in Kansas
City with Honeywell and at other locations is occurring 50 years after
President Dwight Eisenhower warned in his farewell address of the
military-industrial complex and its “potential for the disastrous rise
of misplaced power.”
It’s also taking place two years after President Barack Obama told the
world in a speech in Prague, Czech Republic, that the United States
was committed to ridding itself of nuclear weapons.
“Today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to
seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons,” he
said to the cheers of 20,000 people.
He had the backing of the so-called “Gang of Four” — former
secretaries of state George Shultz, William Perry and Henry Kissinger
and former U.S. Sen. Sam Nunn, all foreign policy heavyweights — who
called in a Wall Street Journal op-ed in 2007 for worldwide nuclear
disarmament.
Then late last year, Obama won Senate approval of the New START
(Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty). Under it, strategic nuclear missile
launchers will be cut in half in seven years. More than 100 missile
silos, bomber wings and submarine launch tubes will be taken off-line.
America’s immediately usable warheads will be halved to 1,550, with
the option of possibly jamming a few hundred more onto bombers.
So what happened? How did the administration get from Prague to that
soybean field in south Kansas City, where ever more non-nuclear
warhead components — the electronics, arming, fusing, firing packages
— will be churned out?
The answer, said experts, even those opposed to nuclear weapons, is
that no matter how many START treaties are ratified, complete
disarmament is unlikely to ever happen because the knowledge and
technology are in the open.
The realistic and responsible course now is to maintain a safe,
reliable deterrent to nuclear attack, they said.
Posted on Sat, Feb. 26, 2011 10:15 PM
U.S. trims its nuclear arsenal while upgrading production
By DONALD BRADLEY
The construction site of the new billion-dollar Honeywell plant in
south Kansas City is quite the head-turner.
Workers everywhere, trucks scurrying about like mice, monster earth
movers, cranes reaching to the sky and enough trailers to start a
retirement community. All on 185 acres inside a perimeter fence and
under a wind-whipped Old Glory.
But drive past the former bean field on Missouri 150 enough times and
the thought occurs: Kansas City produces parts for every nuclear
weapon now in our arsenal. The country is making more nuclear bombs,
has been building them virtually non-stop for 65 years, hasn’t used
one against an enemy since 1945, and a significant new arms reduction
treaty went into effect just this month.
Nine thousand warheads, about a quarter capable of being triggered
tomorrow, is a lot of product sitting around.
Any is too many, critics said. “Modernization” is a joke, just more of
the world-threatening, same-old, same-old madness.
Others counter that the world cannot “disinvent” the bomb. What the
country needs, they said, is to scrap the big nukes in the stockpile —
hardly a deterrent — for smaller, tactical ones that potential enemies
think we would actually use.
The $85 billion upgrade of our bomb-making infrastructure in Kansas
City with Honeywell and at other locations is occurring 50 years after
President Dwight Eisenhower warned in his farewell address of the
military-industrial complex and its “potential for the disastrous rise
of misplaced power.”
It’s also taking place two years after President Barack Obama told the
world in a speech in Prague, Czech Republic, that the United States
was committed to ridding itself of nuclear weapons.
“Today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to
seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons,” he
said to the cheers of 20,000 people.
He had the backing of the so-called “Gang of Four” — former
secretaries of state George Shultz, William Perry and Henry Kissinger
and former U.S. Sen. Sam Nunn, all foreign policy heavyweights — who
called in a Wall Street Journal op-ed in 2007 for worldwide nuclear
disarmament.
Then late last year, Obama won Senate approval of the New START
(Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty). Under it, strategic nuclear missile
launchers will be cut in half in seven years. More than 100 missile
silos, bomber wings and submarine launch tubes will be taken off-line.
America’s immediately usable warheads will be halved to 1,550, with
the option of possibly jamming a few hundred more onto bombers.
So what happened? How did the administration get from Prague to that
soybean field in south Kansas City, where ever more non-nuclear
warhead components — the electronics, arming, fusing, firing packages
— will be churned out?
The answer, said experts, even those opposed to nuclear weapons, is
that no matter how many START treaties are ratified, complete
disarmament is unlikely to ever happen because the knowledge and
technology are in the open.
The realistic and responsible course now is to maintain a safe,
reliable deterrent to nuclear attack, they said.
More specifically, the experts go on, Obama needed Republican votes to
get New START approved, so he agreed to continue the expensive
modernization plan.
U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Tennessee Republican, in explaining his
vote on the Senate floor in December made no effort to make the deal
sound anything but quid pro quo:
“I will vote to ratify the New START treaty with Russia because it
leaves our country with enough nuclear warheads to blow any attacker
to kingdom come and because the president has committed to an $85
billion, 10-year plan to make sure that those weapons work.”
A major protest by Midwest Catholic Worker groups is scheduled for May
2 at the new Honeywell site. Frank Cordaro, a Des Moines anti-nuke
protester who has been arrested at the construction site, agrees a
deal was made.
“Obama needed the war mongrels to go along,” Cordaro said. “It was
easy to flim flam Americans because the public is so militarized, so
caught up in being an empire.”
But James Carafano, a defense expert for the Heritage Foundation, said
talk of a nuclear-free world was fantasy.
“Disarmament is like cops giving up their guns,” he said.
Noting that a nuclear blast over a major American city would kill
thousands and cost trillions, he said, “The consequences of getting it
wrong are too great.
“If you ask people if they want nuclear weapons to be safe and
reliable, they’re going to say yes. Old ones that may or may not work
are not a credible deterrent.”
Experts agree that Obama’s Prague speech was more global posturing
than realistic policy goal and that our nation is unlikely ever to
fold its top hand in the high stakes game of nuclear deterrent.
Uncertain shelf life
Since August 1945, when “Little Boy” and “Fat Man” ushered in the
nuclear age, the United States and the Soviet Union have spent
billions of dollars building and stockpiling nuclear weapons.
The U.S. arsenal peaked with about 30,000 warheads in the 1960s; the
Soviets topped out at about 40,000 in the 1980s.
get New START approved, so he agreed to continue the expensive
modernization plan.
U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Tennessee Republican, in explaining his
vote on the Senate floor in December made no effort to make the deal
sound anything but quid pro quo:
“I will vote to ratify the New START treaty with Russia because it
leaves our country with enough nuclear warheads to blow any attacker
to kingdom come and because the president has committed to an $85
billion, 10-year plan to make sure that those weapons work.”
A major protest by Midwest Catholic Worker groups is scheduled for May
2 at the new Honeywell site. Frank Cordaro, a Des Moines anti-nuke
protester who has been arrested at the construction site, agrees a
deal was made.
“Obama needed the war mongrels to go along,” Cordaro said. “It was
easy to flim flam Americans because the public is so militarized, so
caught up in being an empire.”
But James Carafano, a defense expert for the Heritage Foundation, said
talk of a nuclear-free world was fantasy.
“Disarmament is like cops giving up their guns,” he said.
Noting that a nuclear blast over a major American city would kill
thousands and cost trillions, he said, “The consequences of getting it
wrong are too great.
“If you ask people if they want nuclear weapons to be safe and
reliable, they’re going to say yes. Old ones that may or may not work
are not a credible deterrent.”
Experts agree that Obama’s Prague speech was more global posturing
than realistic policy goal and that our nation is unlikely ever to
fold its top hand in the high stakes game of nuclear deterrent.
Uncertain shelf life
Since August 1945, when “Little Boy” and “Fat Man” ushered in the
nuclear age, the United States and the Soviet Union have spent
billions of dollars building and stockpiling nuclear weapons.
The U.S. arsenal peaked with about 30,000 warheads in the 1960s; the
Soviets topped out at about 40,000 in the 1980s.
Conventional wisdom is that a nuclear bomb has a shelf life. They go
bad ... maybe … we think. Since nuclear testing has been banned since
1991, it’s hard to know for sure.
The uncertainty has kept plants like Kansas City’s busy. The military
didn’t want to risk “duds,” so bombs routinely were refit with new
parts.
“We used to think parts wore out after 20 years or so,” said Steven
Pifer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute. “So we were
constantly dismantling and putting on new parts.”
Having even less confidence in their bombs, the Soviets assumed a
10-year shelf life.
Now, most experts think the U.S. components actually could be good for
a hundred years.
The fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 didn’t change much, although
Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine decided against being nuclear powers
and turned their warheads over to Moscow.
Still, the nuclear club has grown, from the United States, Russia,
France, Britain and China originally, then India, Pakistan, Israel
and, most worrisome, North Korea.
Iran reportedly is enriching uranium but is believed to be some years
from its first warhead.
Owen Cote at Massachusetts Institute of Technology said it may be good
politics to talk disarmament but the worry was that some weapons
states could agree to dismantle but then keep those parts close to
alert status.
“We can’t create conditions to get to zero,” Cote said.
bad ... maybe … we think. Since nuclear testing has been banned since
1991, it’s hard to know for sure.
The uncertainty has kept plants like Kansas City’s busy. The military
didn’t want to risk “duds,” so bombs routinely were refit with new
parts.
“We used to think parts wore out after 20 years or so,” said Steven
Pifer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute. “So we were
constantly dismantling and putting on new parts.”
Having even less confidence in their bombs, the Soviets assumed a
10-year shelf life.
Now, most experts think the U.S. components actually could be good for
a hundred years.
The fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 didn’t change much, although
Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine decided against being nuclear powers
and turned their warheads over to Moscow.
Still, the nuclear club has grown, from the United States, Russia,
France, Britain and China originally, then India, Pakistan, Israel
and, most worrisome, North Korea.
Iran reportedly is enriching uranium but is believed to be some years
from its first warhead.
Owen Cote at Massachusetts Institute of Technology said it may be good
politics to talk disarmament but the worry was that some weapons
states could agree to dismantle but then keep those parts close to
alert status.
“We can’t create conditions to get to zero,” Cote said.
Cordaro disagrees. Other countries are simply following the U.S. lead,
he argued.
“Those other countries are no threats to us,” he said. “They are only
aping us. They would stop if we would.”
Although anti-missile systems are being debated and deployed against
some nations, many believe the first nuclear attack on U.S. soil is
more likely from an enemy undeterred by what sits in our silos or
undersea-launch tubes.
The biggest worry is that a terrorist group, such as al-Qaida, could
lay hands on a black market nuke or create a radiation-spewing “dirty
bomb.” Even in that case, it would be hard to find a target at which
to fire nuclear weapons in response.
Terrorism is a poor man’s war, Cordaro noted. War is a rich man’s terrorism.
The modernizing effort
On Feb. 18, 1943, with the outcome of World War II unsettled, ground
was broken in Bear Creek Valley in rural Tennessee for a factory to
enrich plutonium. A month later, J. Robert Oppenheimer arrived in New
Mexico to discover that Los Alamos housing for his bomb designers
wasn’t ready, but the Army had arranged stays at dude ranches.
Sixty-five years later, those two facilities today remain vital to
America’s nuclear weapons infrastructure.
The Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge will get $6 billion in
improvements and expansion as part of the modernization. The plant,
which employs about 6,000 workers, makes the “secondary” for bombs —
the part that makes them thermonuclear.
The Los Alamos National Laboratory, with 11,700 employees, is home to
the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement facility, which is
key to creating new plutonium pits, the “primary” components of
warheads. New facilities there will cost about $5 billion.
The rest of the modernization funding will go over time for smaller
facilities, clean-ups and for the new or refurbished weapons
themselves.
From 2000 to 2010, the Kansas City plant shipped nearly 1,000 MSAD
(mechanical safe arming detonator) kits, a safety component that
prevents accidental or unintended detonation of a nuclear warhead.
According to the National Nuclear Security Administration, in recent
years the plant, built during World War II to make engines for Navy
fighter planes, has evolved into “science-based manufacturing.”
Now the facility is under fire by current and former employees,
environmentalists and residents about issues of massive pollution and
illnesses that remain unresolved. A cleanup could cost hundreds of
millions of dollars.
Here’s a quirk about the new plant:
“Kansas City will be the only city in world that owns a weapons plant
— let alone a nuclear weapons plant,” said Chris Paine of the Natural
Resources Defense Council, a national environmental group.
“There is absolutely no reason to build this plant. This place will
have ponds and bike paths, a suburban monument to nuclear weapons.”
Jay Coghlan of Nukewatch said the Clinton administration considered
closing the Kansas City plant.
“This terrified Kansas City politicians, even though it made no sense
to build the new plant. They wanted to keep those jobs.”
he argued.
“Those other countries are no threats to us,” he said. “They are only
aping us. They would stop if we would.”
Although anti-missile systems are being debated and deployed against
some nations, many believe the first nuclear attack on U.S. soil is
more likely from an enemy undeterred by what sits in our silos or
undersea-launch tubes.
The biggest worry is that a terrorist group, such as al-Qaida, could
lay hands on a black market nuke or create a radiation-spewing “dirty
bomb.” Even in that case, it would be hard to find a target at which
to fire nuclear weapons in response.
Terrorism is a poor man’s war, Cordaro noted. War is a rich man’s terrorism.
The modernizing effort
On Feb. 18, 1943, with the outcome of World War II unsettled, ground
was broken in Bear Creek Valley in rural Tennessee for a factory to
enrich plutonium. A month later, J. Robert Oppenheimer arrived in New
Mexico to discover that Los Alamos housing for his bomb designers
wasn’t ready, but the Army had arranged stays at dude ranches.
Sixty-five years later, those two facilities today remain vital to
America’s nuclear weapons infrastructure.
The Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge will get $6 billion in
improvements and expansion as part of the modernization. The plant,
which employs about 6,000 workers, makes the “secondary” for bombs —
the part that makes them thermonuclear.
The Los Alamos National Laboratory, with 11,700 employees, is home to
the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement facility, which is
key to creating new plutonium pits, the “primary” components of
warheads. New facilities there will cost about $5 billion.
The rest of the modernization funding will go over time for smaller
facilities, clean-ups and for the new or refurbished weapons
themselves.
From 2000 to 2010, the Kansas City plant shipped nearly 1,000 MSAD
(mechanical safe arming detonator) kits, a safety component that
prevents accidental or unintended detonation of a nuclear warhead.
According to the National Nuclear Security Administration, in recent
years the plant, built during World War II to make engines for Navy
fighter planes, has evolved into “science-based manufacturing.”
Now the facility is under fire by current and former employees,
environmentalists and residents about issues of massive pollution and
illnesses that remain unresolved. A cleanup could cost hundreds of
millions of dollars.
Here’s a quirk about the new plant:
“Kansas City will be the only city in world that owns a weapons plant
— let alone a nuclear weapons plant,” said Chris Paine of the Natural
Resources Defense Council, a national environmental group.
“There is absolutely no reason to build this plant. This place will
have ponds and bike paths, a suburban monument to nuclear weapons.”
Jay Coghlan of Nukewatch said the Clinton administration considered
closing the Kansas City plant.
“This terrified Kansas City politicians, even though it made no sense
to build the new plant. They wanted to keep those jobs.”
Bombs at Whiteman
According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, formed by
Manhattan Project veterans who started the Doomsday Clock, more than
9,000 warheads are stored at 18 locations in 12 states and six
European countries.
According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, formed by
Manhattan Project veterans who started the Doomsday Clock, more than
9,000 warheads are stored at 18 locations in 12 states and six
European countries.
Today, about 2,700 are considered operational, 2,500 in reserve and
the rest awaiting dismantlement.
The biggest concentration of the operational nukes is at the Strategic
Weapons Facility Pacific at Bangor, Wash., which sends out Ohio-class
submarines operating in the Pacific and Indian oceans.
the rest awaiting dismantlement.
The biggest concentration of the operational nukes is at the Strategic
Weapons Facility Pacific at Bangor, Wash., which sends out Ohio-class
submarines operating in the Pacific and Indian oceans.
The Air Force has about 500 warheads on long-range bombers, such as
the B-2A Spirits clustered at Whiteman Air Force Base east of Kansas
City.
the B-2A Spirits clustered at Whiteman Air Force Base east of Kansas
City.
An additional 450 or so warheads are on ballistic missiles in the
American West; the remainder at eight military bases spread through
Europe. The United States is the only country that deploys nuclear
weapons in other countries.
That means the push for more sophisticated weapons and delivery
systems will continue because, as if in response to the famous Rodney
King question, no, countries of the world cannot all get along.
But then doesn’t that mean that this country will forever be building
nuclear bombs?
Not forever, Carafano said.
“Some day the sun’s going to burn out.”
How many nukes?
The exact number of nuclear weapons is not known, as each country
guards the number closely. The Federation of American Scientists
estimates that the global nuclear inventory is approximately 22,400.
Most are in possession by the United States or Russia.
12,000 Nukes in Russia’s arsenal
9,400 Nukes in the United States’ arsenal
To reach Donald Bradley, call 816-234-4182 or send e-mail to
dbradley@kcstar.com. Source: Federation of American Scientists
American West; the remainder at eight military bases spread through
Europe. The United States is the only country that deploys nuclear
weapons in other countries.
That means the push for more sophisticated weapons and delivery
systems will continue because, as if in response to the famous Rodney
King question, no, countries of the world cannot all get along.
But then doesn’t that mean that this country will forever be building
nuclear bombs?
Not forever, Carafano said.
“Some day the sun’s going to burn out.”
How many nukes?
The exact number of nuclear weapons is not known, as each country
guards the number closely. The Federation of American Scientists
estimates that the global nuclear inventory is approximately 22,400.
Most are in possession by the United States or Russia.
12,000 Nukes in Russia’s arsenal
9,400 Nukes in the United States’ arsenal
To reach Donald Bradley, call 816-234-4182 or send e-mail to
dbradley@kcstar.com. Source: Federation of American Scientists
Sunday, February 27, 2011
[Jeju Update] Language, Island, colonial culture and the Jeju naval base 언어, 섬, 식민지 문화 그리고 제주 해군 기지
* Image source: Headline Jeju, Feb. 25, 2011헤드라인 제주, 2011년 2월 25일(클릭)The sign reads: 'Allow and actively promote the use of the Jeju dialect in schools!
'Critically endangered Jeju dialect' of the UNESCO-registered-and-promoted
It is the responsibility of the Jeju Provincial Office of Education that has not allowed the use of the Jeju dialect for 40 years, who has alledged that it is a ‘rustic and impertinent’ dialect. '
____________________________________________________________
Thanks to the activists who are making efforts to decolonize the cultures of their Islands, for example, Michael Lujan Bevacqua who runs the blog called ‘No Rest for the Awake: Minagahet Chamorro,’ it has become clearer to more people that no base movement cannot be separate with the decolonization movement.
Here in the Jeju Island, the faced situation could be similar to a lesser degree if not the same with the examples in the other regions, especially in those Islands who have been suffering under the imperial eyes and tongues.
The Headline Jeju on Feb. 25 reported an interesting article ( by Yoon Chul-Soo) which was about one man protest by Kim Young-Bo, a high school teacher teaching commerce, who demanded the free use of the Jeju dialect in schools in front of the Jeju Special Self-Governing Provincial Office of Education (The Jeju Provincial Office of Education, afterwards) in the afternoon of Feb. 25, 2011.
According to the very article, the teacher protested against the Jeju Provincial Office of Education which he criticized because it had not allowed the free use of the Jeju dialect in schools by alleging that the Jeju language was a ‘rustic and impertinent dialect,’ and to which he demanded that it should allow students to freely speak the Jeju dialect in schools.
Below is the translation of his words cited in the article:
“The Jeju Provincial Office of Education who has not allowed the free use of the Jeju dialect is very responsible for the Jeju language being critically endangered. Even though the situation is very serious as to the degree that it is registered as a critically endangered language by the UNESCO, the Provincial Office of the Education is not trying to fix such wrong education policy.”
It was poignant to hear that the Jeju dialect is critically endangered itself while the UNESCO designated soft corals in the Gangjeong Sea is being threatened with the naval base construction in the Gangjeong village, as well. (* About the UNESCO registered Jeju language, see HERE and HERE)
Here are further translations of his cited words, as well:
"I am more infuriated by the fact that no one really seriously concerns about that, except for short time whenever there were media reports on the Jeju dialect being registered as a critically endangered language. Who would succeed the Jeju language if the current halmang(s)(old women) and harbang(s)(old men) die. The language might disappear.”
"Our generation was not allowed to use the Jeju dialect for talks between teachers and students not to mention for class hours. We had to hear reproach that we were rustic and impertinent if we use the Jeju dialect and we even got a whip. Didn't the students who had been getting punished get one more whip if they unconsciously used the Jeju dialect, did they? It is for the alleged reason that they look as rustic and impertinent from the point of view of teachers.”
According to the article, he pointed out that the Jeju Provincial Office of Education was showing the duality by never allowing the Jeju dialect even among the students within schools while it is also making an effort to revitalize the Jeju language such as through hosting or sponsoring competition events such as those on speaking with the Jeju dialect; those on children song with the Jeju dialect, exhibitions on illustrated poems with the Jeju Dialect; and festivals with the Jeju Dialect. It is told that the authority of the Jeju Provincial Office of Education has issued that it has guided that there should be an education course on the Jeju dialect beside sponsoring such events. However, it is contradictorily prohibiting the very use of the Jeju dialect [within schools].
According to the article, the duality is the very point that motivated him toward his own one man protest.
What is interesting about the event and article is that those things very remind the current situation of the Jeju Island whose native cultures are being disappeared with corporate and militarism culture in South Korea, especially with the law on the Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, which was brought in 2006 with the concept of Jeju free international city and emphasis on the so-called’ ‘globalization.’
Mr. Go Gwon-Il, a Gangjeong villager thinks the Central and Island governments’ current mobilizations for the Jeju to be one of the new seven wonders even being mobilized with many celebrities along with excessive international propaganda is part of such extended move.
According to him, the Jeju Island should NOT be one of the new seven wonders because it would make worse the situation of the Jeju Island, the UNESCO triple-crowned site(Mount Halla’s Biosphere Reserve recognition in 2002; Natural Heritage Sites designation of Mount Halla, Seongsan Sunrise Peak and Manjanggul cave in 2007; and the geopark designation in 2010) with increasing capitalism and reckless tourism.
Otherwise, according to the Wiki on the Jeju dialect:
One large difference between the Jeju dialect and those of mainland Korea is the lack of formality and deference to elders. For example, while a speaker of the Seoul dialect might say 안녕하세요 annyeonghaseyo ("Hello") to an older person, a speaker of the Jeju dialect would say 반갑수다 ban-gapsuda (lit., "Nice chatting" or "Nice talking"; roughly equivalent to "Howdy"). To many mainlanders, a child saying this to an adult would be appalling, but on the islands, a more "egalitarian" form of speech is used, perhaps a cultural idiosyncrasy that has hung on after the incorporation of Jeju itself (under the Tamna kingdom, which, though having subjugated itself to Korean states since the 7th century, was not brought under the full centralized control of a Korean state until 1404) into Korea.
* Image source: Jeju Weekly, Feb. 6, 2011 (Original source: 'Art by Choi Myung Sun. Photo courtesy Jejudo Hangeul Calligraphy Society') The calligraphy written with the Jeju dialect reads:
‘ Moosangomassim(Why is it?)
Umung-ee haejoon bab muk-eo-bob-seo (Why don’t you have some rice mother has cooked?) Chommallo Masi Jotsooda(It is really delicious.) Moosangomassim (Why is it?) Geu-gun Umunim-eui Saranghaneun mosim-ee bab sogobe godeukgodeuk deul-eo-i-si-nan anikkwa (Isn’t it because mother’s loving heart wholly fills the rice bowl, is it?) –Jeju sokkdam gotnae (cited from one of the Jeju proverbs Gotnae)
There was also an interesting article in the Jeju Weekly. See HERE. According to it:
Looking at the wider linguistic picture, the Korean language is also losing ground on account of the dominance of English.
But looking at the problem more closely, one sees that much of the Jeju dialect is disappearing fast, partly because the capitalistic logic of “efficiency” has been an excuse for our indifferent attitude. During the rapid economic development in Korea which started in the 1960’s, preservation of cultural diversity was considered “inefficient” since it could deter fast decision making. This has since put the Jeju dialect on the list of critically endangered languages.
For reference, the 60’s developmentalism was promoted by the Park Jung-Hee military dictatorship who has eyed on the Jeju Island, a historically strategic point by the imperial countries and dominating class, with the turned-out-to-be a failed military base plan then.
The concern about the possibility of disappearing vernacular terms in the Gangjeong village is being faced with the rapidly accelerated naval base construction: Who would remember the names of Goorumbee(cloud-shaped rocks stuck under the earth), Gaegurumbee (cloud-shaped rocks on the earth), Jinsokkak, (hem-look in the place of deep and and inwardly long water), Neobeunnyo (spacious rock protruded over water), Metboori( * Of which the meaning is not exactly known but according to Mr. Go Gwon-Il in the Gangjeong village, it could be ‘a ritual place offered with rice’) in the Joongduk coast and Natgakk(hem-look in the place of stream) in the downstream of the Gangjeong stream, once all the rocky Joongduk coast in the Gangjeong badang(sea) is reclaimed with concrete by the construction?
The naval base construction would not only bury the heaven-blessed nature of the Gangjeong village but would also erase all the archaic history of it, violently making scars into the memories of the Gangjeong villagers who might not be able to say any more that their hometown Gangjeong used to be the most water-abundant and the most water-fresh village in the Jeju Island.
Text Fwd: How Gaddafi's Words Get Lost In Translation
Information Clearing House
How Gaddafi's Words Get Lost In Translation
By Oliver Miles Former British ambassador to Libya
February 25, 2011 "BBC" -- -Col Muammar Gaddafi's speeches this week will have struck many viewers as crazy and perhaps pathetic, with their overblown rhetoric, theatrical delivery and furious calls to arms against the "drug-takers" who oppose him.
But the speech on Tuesday - broadcast live on television from what looked like a ruined garden shed - brought huge crowds out into the streets celebrating into the early hours with music and fireworks.
Oratory is out of fashion with us - no longer do our statesmen hold the House of Commons in thrall for eight hours at a go. But Mr Gaddafi is also a bad joke throughout the Arab world outside Libya. How can that be?
The Arabic language is rich and powerful. Even to a Christian, some parts of the Koran are poetic, almost magical (the magic is totally lost in translation).
It is also the single most important bond uniting the Arabs, who are otherwise so diverse.
But it has a problem. The educated form of the language, based on the Koran, is literally nobody's mother tongue. All Arabs speak a local dialect. If they are educated, especially if their education is traditional, they aspire to speak correctly, but scarcely ever quite make it.
Hence the common remark to a foreigner who has learned his Arabic from a grammar book is: "You speak Arabic better than I do."
In this respect, Mr Gaddafi scarcely even tries. For the most part he speaks Libyan dialect, and Arabic dialects are not fully understood by Arabs from other regions.
There was a dramatic incident at an Arab summit when the King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia cursed Mr Gaddafi in language I have never heard used in polite society. Perhaps, fortunately, the Libyan leader didn't understand, so he asked the then President of Egypt Hosni Mubarak what King Abdullah had said.
The microphones were switched off as Mubarak started to reply.
Mr Gaddafi is also hard to understand, unless you are Libyan born and bred. He spoke at the London School of Oriental and African Studies by direct satellite link a few years ago, on his pet subject Palestine.
His solution is a single state composed of Israel and Palestine and called Isratine, which, of course, infuriates Israelis and Palestinians alike.
Bedouin background
The voice transmission was poor, and a bad interpreter was speaking at the same time as Mr Gaddafi, so the result was 90% unintelligible. At the end, the chairman of the session apologised to the audience for the gobbledygook, turned to me, and invited me to summarise what the Libyan leader had said. Luckily I had read up his theories, so I just made it up. Of such incidents is international understanding born.
Mr Gaddafi's personal style is recognizably that of his Bedouin background. Bedouin have plenty of time and talk a lot when there is anyone to talk to.
He regularly goes on for three or four hours at a stretch.
Add to that, for 40 years or so there has been no-one around to tell Mr Gaddafi to shut up. He speaks without notes and says the first thing that comes into his head.
I remember talking to one of his cousins a few years ago, and saying that the Libyan leader's speeches, always fiery and nearly always anti-Western and anti-capitalist, undermined the efforts he was making to attract investment to Libya. His ministers had to work hard to repair the damage he caused to his own policies.
His cousin smiled and asked me to repeat my comment more slowly so that his secretary could write it down.
One of Mr Gaddafi's most striking characteristics is that he loves to surprise. In a speech in Addis Ababa he attacked the Ethiopians for what he perceived as racism, accusing them of stuffing the bureaucracy of the African Union with anything but Arabs.
"If you don't change your policy," he said, "I will take Libya out of Africa and put it back into Europe".
I thought his speech on Tuesday, if not actually pathetic, was desperate. But what I think is not the point. The speech was addressed to his supporters and potential supporters, and it seems to have scored.
By the way, the ruined garden shed was his family home struck by American missiles in an attempt to kill him in 1986. Since then, it has been a compulsory item on the tourist circuit for VIP visitors.
How Gaddafi's Words Get Lost In Translation
By Oliver Miles Former British ambassador to Libya
February 25, 2011 "BBC" -- -Col Muammar Gaddafi's speeches this week will have struck many viewers as crazy and perhaps pathetic, with their overblown rhetoric, theatrical delivery and furious calls to arms against the "drug-takers" who oppose him.
But the speech on Tuesday - broadcast live on television from what looked like a ruined garden shed - brought huge crowds out into the streets celebrating into the early hours with music and fireworks.
Oratory is out of fashion with us - no longer do our statesmen hold the House of Commons in thrall for eight hours at a go. But Mr Gaddafi is also a bad joke throughout the Arab world outside Libya. How can that be?
The Arabic language is rich and powerful. Even to a Christian, some parts of the Koran are poetic, almost magical (the magic is totally lost in translation).
It is also the single most important bond uniting the Arabs, who are otherwise so diverse.
But it has a problem. The educated form of the language, based on the Koran, is literally nobody's mother tongue. All Arabs speak a local dialect. If they are educated, especially if their education is traditional, they aspire to speak correctly, but scarcely ever quite make it.
Hence the common remark to a foreigner who has learned his Arabic from a grammar book is: "You speak Arabic better than I do."
In this respect, Mr Gaddafi scarcely even tries. For the most part he speaks Libyan dialect, and Arabic dialects are not fully understood by Arabs from other regions.
There was a dramatic incident at an Arab summit when the King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia cursed Mr Gaddafi in language I have never heard used in polite society. Perhaps, fortunately, the Libyan leader didn't understand, so he asked the then President of Egypt Hosni Mubarak what King Abdullah had said.
The microphones were switched off as Mubarak started to reply.
Mr Gaddafi is also hard to understand, unless you are Libyan born and bred. He spoke at the London School of Oriental and African Studies by direct satellite link a few years ago, on his pet subject Palestine.
His solution is a single state composed of Israel and Palestine and called Isratine, which, of course, infuriates Israelis and Palestinians alike.
Bedouin background
The voice transmission was poor, and a bad interpreter was speaking at the same time as Mr Gaddafi, so the result was 90% unintelligible. At the end, the chairman of the session apologised to the audience for the gobbledygook, turned to me, and invited me to summarise what the Libyan leader had said. Luckily I had read up his theories, so I just made it up. Of such incidents is international understanding born.
Mr Gaddafi's personal style is recognizably that of his Bedouin background. Bedouin have plenty of time and talk a lot when there is anyone to talk to.
He regularly goes on for three or four hours at a stretch.
Add to that, for 40 years or so there has been no-one around to tell Mr Gaddafi to shut up. He speaks without notes and says the first thing that comes into his head.
I remember talking to one of his cousins a few years ago, and saying that the Libyan leader's speeches, always fiery and nearly always anti-Western and anti-capitalist, undermined the efforts he was making to attract investment to Libya. His ministers had to work hard to repair the damage he caused to his own policies.
His cousin smiled and asked me to repeat my comment more slowly so that his secretary could write it down.
One of Mr Gaddafi's most striking characteristics is that he loves to surprise. In a speech in Addis Ababa he attacked the Ethiopians for what he perceived as racism, accusing them of stuffing the bureaucracy of the African Union with anything but Arabs.
"If you don't change your policy," he said, "I will take Libya out of Africa and put it back into Europe".
I thought his speech on Tuesday, if not actually pathetic, was desperate. But what I think is not the point. The speech was addressed to his supporters and potential supporters, and it seems to have scored.
By the way, the ruined garden shed was his family home struck by American missiles in an attempt to kill him in 1986. Since then, it has been a compulsory item on the tourist circuit for VIP visitors.
Text Fwd: N. Korea threatens to shoot directly at S. Korean border facilities
* South Korean propaganda aginst North KoreaYonhap News
N. Korea threatens to shoot directly at S. Korean border facilities
Feb. 27, 2011
SEOUL, Feb. 27 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Sunday threatened to fire aimed shots at South Korean facilities involved in "psychological warfare" in a self-defense action, unless the South suspends its propaganda campaign.
"The on-going psychological warfare by the puppet military in the frontline area is a treacherous deed and a wanton challenge to the demand of the times and desire of all the fellow countrymen to bring about a new phase of peaceful reunification and national prosperity through all-round dialogue and negotiations," a North Korean military official told the North's state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).
"We officially notify that our army will stage a direct fire at the (Imjin) Pavilion and other sources of the anti-DPRK psychological warfare to destroy them on the principle of self-defense, if such actions last despite our repeated warning," the official added. "The group of traitors in South Korea must stop the anti-DPRK psychological warfare at once, squarely seeing the seriousness of the prevailing situation."
DPRK is an acronym of the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Also on Sunday, North Korean representatives at Panmunjom, the inter-Korean border village, reiterated their usual threat against the annual Key Resolve military drills between South Korea and the U.S. forces, which will begin Monday.
The North Korean officials said their armed forces would launch "an all-out war of unprecedented scale" and turn Seoul into "a sea of fire" if the South Korean and the U.S. "invaders" provoked Pyongyang with a threat of war.
Imjingak, a tourism pavilion located just south of Panmunjom, has made headlines, as hundreds of South Korean activists frequently sent anti-North Korea flyers and materials from there.
The North's warning of the direct strike came in light of a recent admission by the Ministry of National Defense in Seoul that the South Korean military has been sending propaganda leaflets in balloons to North Korea, mixing them with life supplies. The leaflets warned the North Korean regime about the consequences of dictatorship, according to a report by the ministry.
A South Korean government source said on Sunday that these leaflets contained details about recent anti-government movements in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt, countries where civilian activists have tried to take down long-time rulers.
"I understand thousands of leaflets talked about what has taken place in Egypt and Libya and argued that dictatorship and hereditary regimes (such as the one in Pyongyang) are bound to fail," the official said. "We plan to update the ongoing developments in the Middle East and send more leaflets sometime next month."
North Korea, which has carved a cult of personality for its leader, Kim Jong-il, and his regime, has balked at South Korean activists' sending of balloons carrying leaflets criticizing the communist state and at Seoul's refusal to stop them. South Korea in 2004 agreed to halt such activities amid warming relations.
But after a multinational investigation in May last year found Pyongyang responsible for the deadly sinking of a South Korean warship, Cheonan, in March, Seoul announced a plan to blast anti-North Korea messages through loudspeakers along the border. The North threatened to strike the speakers if they are turned on.
Before Christmas last year, South Korea lit up a giant Christmas tree on top of a border hill -- an action North Korea sees as part of psychological warfare -- for the first time since 2003, a month after North Korea fired artillery at the South Korean western island of Yeonpyeong.
The glowing tree had served as a symbol of prosperity in the South and provided a stark contrast to the destitute North, which had been concerned that the lights would weaken the communist regime's ideological stranglehold of its people.
North Korea, which has carved a cult of personality for its leader, Kim Jong-il, and his regime, has balked at South Korean activists' sending of balloons carrying leaflets criticizing the communist state and at Seoul's refusal to stop them. South Korea in 2004 agreed to halt such activities amid warming relations.
But after a multinational investigation in May last year found Pyongyang responsible for the deadly sinking of a South Korean warship, Cheonan, in March, Seoul announced a plan to blast anti-North Korea messages through loudspeakers along the border. The North threatened to strike the speakers if they are turned on.
Before Christmas last year, South Korea lit up a giant Christmas tree on top of a border hill -- an action North Korea sees as part of psychological warfare -- for the first time since 2003, a month after North Korea fired artillery at the South Korean western island of Yeonpyeong.
The glowing tree had served as a symbol of prosperity in the South and provided a stark contrast to the destitute North, which had been concerned that the lights would weaken the communist regime's ideological stranglehold of its people. (jeeho@yna.co.kr)
N. Korea threatens to shoot directly at S. Korean border facilities
Feb. 27, 2011
SEOUL, Feb. 27 (Yonhap) -- North Korea on Sunday threatened to fire aimed shots at South Korean facilities involved in "psychological warfare" in a self-defense action, unless the South suspends its propaganda campaign.
"The on-going psychological warfare by the puppet military in the frontline area is a treacherous deed and a wanton challenge to the demand of the times and desire of all the fellow countrymen to bring about a new phase of peaceful reunification and national prosperity through all-round dialogue and negotiations," a North Korean military official told the North's state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).
"We officially notify that our army will stage a direct fire at the (Imjin) Pavilion and other sources of the anti-DPRK psychological warfare to destroy them on the principle of self-defense, if such actions last despite our repeated warning," the official added. "The group of traitors in South Korea must stop the anti-DPRK psychological warfare at once, squarely seeing the seriousness of the prevailing situation."
DPRK is an acronym of the North's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Also on Sunday, North Korean representatives at Panmunjom, the inter-Korean border village, reiterated their usual threat against the annual Key Resolve military drills between South Korea and the U.S. forces, which will begin Monday.
The North Korean officials said their armed forces would launch "an all-out war of unprecedented scale" and turn Seoul into "a sea of fire" if the South Korean and the U.S. "invaders" provoked Pyongyang with a threat of war.
Imjingak, a tourism pavilion located just south of Panmunjom, has made headlines, as hundreds of South Korean activists frequently sent anti-North Korea flyers and materials from there.
The North's warning of the direct strike came in light of a recent admission by the Ministry of National Defense in Seoul that the South Korean military has been sending propaganda leaflets in balloons to North Korea, mixing them with life supplies. The leaflets warned the North Korean regime about the consequences of dictatorship, according to a report by the ministry.
A South Korean government source said on Sunday that these leaflets contained details about recent anti-government movements in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt, countries where civilian activists have tried to take down long-time rulers.
"I understand thousands of leaflets talked about what has taken place in Egypt and Libya and argued that dictatorship and hereditary regimes (such as the one in Pyongyang) are bound to fail," the official said. "We plan to update the ongoing developments in the Middle East and send more leaflets sometime next month."
North Korea, which has carved a cult of personality for its leader, Kim Jong-il, and his regime, has balked at South Korean activists' sending of balloons carrying leaflets criticizing the communist state and at Seoul's refusal to stop them. South Korea in 2004 agreed to halt such activities amid warming relations.
But after a multinational investigation in May last year found Pyongyang responsible for the deadly sinking of a South Korean warship, Cheonan, in March, Seoul announced a plan to blast anti-North Korea messages through loudspeakers along the border. The North threatened to strike the speakers if they are turned on.
Before Christmas last year, South Korea lit up a giant Christmas tree on top of a border hill -- an action North Korea sees as part of psychological warfare -- for the first time since 2003, a month after North Korea fired artillery at the South Korean western island of Yeonpyeong.
The glowing tree had served as a symbol of prosperity in the South and provided a stark contrast to the destitute North, which had been concerned that the lights would weaken the communist regime's ideological stranglehold of its people.
North Korea, which has carved a cult of personality for its leader, Kim Jong-il, and his regime, has balked at South Korean activists' sending of balloons carrying leaflets criticizing the communist state and at Seoul's refusal to stop them. South Korea in 2004 agreed to halt such activities amid warming relations.
But after a multinational investigation in May last year found Pyongyang responsible for the deadly sinking of a South Korean warship, Cheonan, in March, Seoul announced a plan to blast anti-North Korea messages through loudspeakers along the border. The North threatened to strike the speakers if they are turned on.
Before Christmas last year, South Korea lit up a giant Christmas tree on top of a border hill -- an action North Korea sees as part of psychological warfare -- for the first time since 2003, a month after North Korea fired artillery at the South Korean western island of Yeonpyeong.
The glowing tree had served as a symbol of prosperity in the South and provided a stark contrast to the destitute North, which had been concerned that the lights would weaken the communist regime's ideological stranglehold of its people. (jeeho@yna.co.kr)
_______________________________
See also Korea Times
Text Fwd: Translation errors in KOREU FTA’s 23 versions prompt outcry for correction
* Text fwd from Steve Zeltzer on Feb. 26, 2011
Hankyoreh
Translation errors in KOREU FTA’s 23 versions prompt outcry for correction
The Lee administration was compelled to accept the correction and refer the ratification bill again to the National Assembly
By Jung Eun-joo
Feb. 26, 2011
The Lee Myung-bak administration announced plans Friday to submit a new South Korea-European Union Free Trade Agreement (KOREU FTA) ratification motion to the National Assembly correcting a translation error present in the text submitted in October 2010. However, concerns were raised about additional errors after it was confirmed that the Office of the Minister for Trade (OMT) in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade did not independently verify translations in the languages of 21 other European Union nations.
Previously, the OMT’s announcement of its intent not to withdraw the ratification even after discovering that certain figures in the KOREU FTA differed from those in the English-language version, calling it a “working-level mistake,” provoked charges that it was violating National Assembly legislation rights.
The translation error was first noted on Monday by Song Gi-ho, an attorney who specializes in trade law.
“In the English text of the FTA, it says that product in the toy and wax areas are recognized for place of origin and subject to duty benefits if they contain less than 50 percent foreign-made materials, while the Korean text gives different figures, showing 40 percent for toys and 20 percent for wax,” Song explained.
In response, the OMT acknowledged that it was “true that there is a numerical error in the Korean version” and said that it was “discussing a revised draft with the National Assembly.”
According to Article 90, Item 3 of the National Assembly Act on “Bill Revision and Withdrawal Rights,” correcting the error in the agreement would require withdrawing the ratification motion, creating a revised motion, and beginning review procedures once again with the Cabinet.
However, the OMT indicated plans to ratify the agreement as is without correction, calling the translation error a “working-level mistake.” Instead, the OMT said that it would discuss matters with the EU and correct the error at a binational trade committee meeting after the FTA takes provisional effect on July 1.
The move prompted criticisms from Democratic Party Lawmaker Park Joo-sun, who called it a “violation of National Assembly legislation rights,” but the OMT held out, maintaining that “because the European Parliament already approved the text with the error [versions in 23 languages, including Korean], it is impossible for South Korea alone to correct the error.” It also belatedly submitted copies of the KOREU FTA text in 21 languages besides Korea and English to the National Assembly.
When the OMT’s approach was met with criticism both from the opposition and from ruling Grand National Party lawmakers, Minister for Trade Kim Jong-hoon paid a visit late Thursday evening to Nam Kyung-pil, chairman of the National Assembly’s Foreign Affairs, Trade and Unification committee, and promised to correct the Korean version and resubmit the motion to the National Assembly. In response, Nam said that if the OMT sent the revised motion to the National Assembly, he would introduce it in the standing committee on March 3.
The controversy did not end there, however. In a government Q&A session Friday, Park Joo-sun asked whether Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Kim Sung-hwan whether the ministry had examined the versions in the 22 other languages, which will have legal force in 27 member nations of the EU.
In response, Kim said, “The EU confirmed that the [translation] verification was finished before sending it to us, so we view the verification as completed through that.”
However, Park raised the possibility that additional errors might be discovered, saying, “Even after it was confirmed that the Korean version was in error, the Foreign Ministry did not verify the versions in other languages itself.”
Hankyoreh
Translation errors in KOREU FTA’s 23 versions prompt outcry for correction
The Lee administration was compelled to accept the correction and refer the ratification bill again to the National Assembly
By Jung Eun-joo
Feb. 26, 2011
The Lee Myung-bak administration announced plans Friday to submit a new South Korea-European Union Free Trade Agreement (KOREU FTA) ratification motion to the National Assembly correcting a translation error present in the text submitted in October 2010. However, concerns were raised about additional errors after it was confirmed that the Office of the Minister for Trade (OMT) in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade did not independently verify translations in the languages of 21 other European Union nations.
Previously, the OMT’s announcement of its intent not to withdraw the ratification even after discovering that certain figures in the KOREU FTA differed from those in the English-language version, calling it a “working-level mistake,” provoked charges that it was violating National Assembly legislation rights.
The translation error was first noted on Monday by Song Gi-ho, an attorney who specializes in trade law.
“In the English text of the FTA, it says that product in the toy and wax areas are recognized for place of origin and subject to duty benefits if they contain less than 50 percent foreign-made materials, while the Korean text gives different figures, showing 40 percent for toys and 20 percent for wax,” Song explained.
In response, the OMT acknowledged that it was “true that there is a numerical error in the Korean version” and said that it was “discussing a revised draft with the National Assembly.”
According to Article 90, Item 3 of the National Assembly Act on “Bill Revision and Withdrawal Rights,” correcting the error in the agreement would require withdrawing the ratification motion, creating a revised motion, and beginning review procedures once again with the Cabinet.
However, the OMT indicated plans to ratify the agreement as is without correction, calling the translation error a “working-level mistake.” Instead, the OMT said that it would discuss matters with the EU and correct the error at a binational trade committee meeting after the FTA takes provisional effect on July 1.
The move prompted criticisms from Democratic Party Lawmaker Park Joo-sun, who called it a “violation of National Assembly legislation rights,” but the OMT held out, maintaining that “because the European Parliament already approved the text with the error [versions in 23 languages, including Korean], it is impossible for South Korea alone to correct the error.” It also belatedly submitted copies of the KOREU FTA text in 21 languages besides Korea and English to the National Assembly.
When the OMT’s approach was met with criticism both from the opposition and from ruling Grand National Party lawmakers, Minister for Trade Kim Jong-hoon paid a visit late Thursday evening to Nam Kyung-pil, chairman of the National Assembly’s Foreign Affairs, Trade and Unification committee, and promised to correct the Korean version and resubmit the motion to the National Assembly. In response, Nam said that if the OMT sent the revised motion to the National Assembly, he would introduce it in the standing committee on March 3.
The controversy did not end there, however. In a government Q&A session Friday, Park Joo-sun asked whether Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Kim Sung-hwan whether the ministry had examined the versions in the 22 other languages, which will have legal force in 27 member nations of the EU.
In response, Kim said, “The EU confirmed that the [translation] verification was finished before sending it to us, so we view the verification as completed through that.”
However, Park raised the possibility that additional errors might be discovered, saying, “Even after it was confirmed that the Korean version was in error, the Foreign Ministry did not verify the versions in other languages itself.”
[Jeju Update] The pain of Gangjeong 강정의 아픔
________________________________
아래는 현재 강정 마을 에서 벌어지고 있는 공사 상황을 요약 (2월 14일 부표 설치, 2월 15~17일 냇깍 테트라파드 설치, 그리고 2월 25일 플랜트 받침 해저 설치 돌입 )함과 동시에 김경훈 시인의 강정의 아픔에 대한 글을 부분 요약 번역한 것입니다. 김경훈 시인의 글 전문은 여기 클릭.
_________________________________
On Feb. 25, the sub-contracting company of Daerim installed the plant supports under the sea. (See more photos and videos) It was a resumption of maritime construction that started with the installation of five buoy markers in the Joongduk Sea on Feb. 14 and 48 tetra pods under the cliff of Meburi near Natgak which is the downstream of the Gangjeong stream for days since Feb. 15.
(Photos from the Gangjeong residents)
Hwasoon port where the crane and factory for naval base construction are being built and sands are accumulated for it (Feb. 26, 2011)
The Seogwipo port is a place where the tetra pods that have been installed in front of the Meboori cliff near Natgakk which is the downstream of the Gangjeong stream and plant supports which have been first installed under the sea on Feb. 25, 2011 are being made and shipped for the naval base construction in the Gangjeong village. Video was taken on Feb. 26, 2011.
아래는 현재 강정 마을 에서 벌어지고 있는 공사 상황을 요약 (2월 14일 부표 설치, 2월 15~17일 냇깍 테트라파드 설치, 그리고 2월 25일 플랜트 받침 해저 설치 돌입 )함과 동시에 김경훈 시인의 강정의 아픔에 대한 글을 부분 요약 번역한 것입니다. 김경훈 시인의 글 전문은 여기 클릭.
_________________________________
On Feb. 25, the sub-contracting company of Daerim installed the plant supports under the sea. (See more photos and videos) It was a resumption of maritime construction that started with the installation of five buoy markers in the Joongduk Sea on Feb. 14 and 48 tetra pods under the cliff of Meburi near Natgak which is the downstream of the Gangjeong stream for days since Feb. 15.
(Photos from the Gangjeong residents)
While the villagers, activists and Island Council have continuously made voice to stop the construction and withdraw the naval field office, the navy, Island government and the central government have pushed construction despite villagers’ three lawsuits including that on the matter of public water reclamation, which are still in process.
On Feb. 25, it brought the feeling of fury and sadness to see the broken fragments of the rocks which had been roped during the resumed maritime construction and touched with concrete structures.
Kim Kyung-Hoon, a poet who has written two poetry books about April 3 uprising and works in the Jeju April 3 Peace Park had an essay in a Jeju media. The below is a partial translation of his essay titled, “Please don’t bury me in your memory- tear of Gangjeong.” In his essay, he describes the pain of Gangjeong village from the point of view of Joongduk Sea, in the village:
Today, my appearance is already full of wounds by the cells of cancer that gradually gnaws my whole body.
[The navy and Samsung] have made a small straight stone roads breaking the big rocks in the mouth of Joongduk Sea, which are my chest. It is told that some villagers who had been abetted by the development business companies had employed a power shovel and broken them. My bones are being broken in such way.
(#It was on Jan. 20 when a villager who had been in favor of naval base drove a power shovel in the Joongduk coast under the supervising of navy and Samsung. It was told later that the very villager has been regretting his own doing, seeing that an old sea-diving woman who was his aunt was discovered to die during her works in the Sea on Jan. 29. The villagers thought it was because the sea was infuriated by the broken rocks and the navy, considering the atmosphere of the embarrassed villagers who have been in favor of naval base and composed of about 30 % of the whole villagers, postponed its opening ceremony to a week later. )
Do you hear the sounds of water that flows in the Gangjeong stream? Because of small amount of water in the winter season, even the flowing water sounds are not pulsatory. [The navy] is sucking up water [of the Gangjeong stream] using a water pump beside the naval field office. It is sucking up my blood breaking holes into the blood vessels of my artery with an injector.
Tens of tetra pods are pressuring me near the coast. Those submerged underwater are drearily glaring at me, straddling and sitting like a ghost in a marsh. They are trying to repeatedly draw my feet.
In the already sold lands, crops are being taken out and earth is dug. My flesh is cut thin little by little. The pulse of the earth is gradually running down. It is becoming a sterile womb that cannot conceive life any more.
The buoy markers are floating within the sea of the Beom Island. Those are the marks to prohibit the entry to the coast. My body is being imprisoned in such way. They are blocking me pushing me back from going further to the coast line. My body is getting shrunken back and my stifled heart raises disease inside.
____________________________________________
A blue direction mark on the Olle trail to the Joongdulk coast. The navy has set up a sign board on Feb. 25, which orders Olle tourists to detour from the Joongduk coast because of bay and coast construction for naval base starting from Feb. 24. The sign has brought much confusion for the Ole tourists and fury from the villagers. The navy has not really blocked the passage since then so far. However with planned construction in earnest, which is told to be hurried with 24 hours works from March, the passage may be blocked sooner or later.
A red-lettered graffiti on the road to the Joongduk coast, which reads, No navy that destroys nature and contaminates environment!
Hwasoon port where the crane and factory for naval base construction are being built and sands are accumulated for it (Feb. 26, 2011)
In the Hwasoon port, which is about 40 minute distance by car from the Gangjeong village, crane and factory are being built for a naval base construction in the Gangjeong village. Scene on Feb. 26, 2011.
Is the ship dredging enormous amount of sands to be used for naval base construction, from the sea bottom? Scene taken on Feb. 26, 2011.
...........................................................................
Seogwipo port where the tetra pods, plant supports are being made and shipped (Feb. 26, 2011)
The Seogwipo port is a place where the tetra pods that have been installed in front of the Meboori cliff near Natgakk which is the downstream of the Gangjeong stream and plant supports which have been first installed under the sea on Feb. 25, 2011 are being made and shipped for the naval base construction in the Gangjeong village. Video was taken on Feb. 26, 2011.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![[URGENT PLEA: In Update] EMERGENCY in GANGJEONG Since AUG. 24, 2011](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQvpaNf6EePZVucu97_JphYsFS5IgumnSiA4YAmen1PZcim6vMmW7XjZ7J6nLh-Cu36mwBN5n1evrA3ey0vYMpwlAGsgnSFggv6a1w4Qx9BvvqOB0hy0BIcBkL2Exfs3zIxBsBuDGa1kzg/s227/jejusit.jpg)
![[Solidarity from Japan for the Jeju] 253 individuals and 16 groups/organizations](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivji7100kBkr0hzvqYfh4IBBilkZ6XgDIg89jOxS6kTssxsVKC6Wm-fZbKOEsiy3zcO-9gW6GHspD5R_2C9WsGx5S1Z5VPj_OVRF7H6dxdaT0S-2H1eqsDsYvIwOV26VscxTHnKmP5iZmh/s227/jeju_12_10j.jpg)
![[Translation] Korean organizations' statement: Immediately cancel the joint ROK-US drill Nov 26](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgfKDMo-qyEjm5asUtHlREyJY_5Ou-2tyB8SH6aUxiViRbbKR-8W_rirFiGp5DYSoD_KaeNOPMWR0af0ZPUIbJKmR89ImDvADHsGAIqsJVBvJNBEIl5wLd3G_zhPDW3Z2SxsHXadOsXe8st/s227/1.jpg)
![HOT! [Hankyoreh Hani TV] Beneath the Surface: the investigation into the sinking of the Cheonan](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh80rL3Qv9GnfHSqbYMfivdqX5gZN-1O_VQj3A_Gk3yjWdybHwJCsprA3l6cEQB0cYCP2oNeaLo2ohLGIy0Uqqkv_fRkBevGJ2f-qkKD5eP1ZGsKeQ-r-jHUUb79WvucIN7hpEtXza4xXCL/s227/HaniTV+Cheonan.gif)
![[Translation]Statement against illegal inspection and unjust lay-off by the Kunsan USAFK!(Nov_2010)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg3JlQ-lreusCIJo5Yv2e3ZrRwrSMUE7UQxlrDVjmBehl0Pa24QZIAbZ5vUpgnnExbkKL9PdCwxVYSHWJkr_XK0FM4EhU3CMFhqfborVNu_p4v3bEFpNm3ia-aEHnvMMuEBI27aB7_BETuJ/s227/gunsan+protest.gif)
![[Translation] Korean organizations' statement against dispatching special force to the UAE on Nov.](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiU7TNhTDLLwZkKP0Z78JsCZKp6je-QSFll3_ThmLES_y_nPLXEzeakrsZXoNxhN5blopEhy6xGV2tneJrniPdTR-JvOQMmSLr_HhlucxFvbusxk4oKvvMO2laBOHSIkB9OOeOxrQlqCA0O/s227/antiwarpeace.jpg)
![[Translation] Stop, Joining MD!: South Korean activists' statement and writing on Oct. 25, 2010](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggGIHVei8j7LCJPJB5HIrspd942q436daNTquP-pFd45Cl70Ml_1JFiFDHgKu6FcoqNgFVKIFqjeuSPau2k_BwGHhx0cqFFL2-4ybZSTlmua0_AsERBtKYQa7jZk7uNj41LX6rj2vksHbo/s227/StopMD.jpg)
![[In Update] People First, NO G-20 (Nov. 6 to 12, Korea)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZl8VTqeL7o2ndliGIE-sZFCikbTgfB9KCc3AtZvDaYijBBEhdfultMEOpyrCaD5gzpH8mqfWjU20KXMbSUl-5KM7yQeHU6z3BWV8tiOy4UKaCudz9VKWoi5x58xdC_gQpJTjkR5u7O9xf/s227/left21_G20.jpg)
![[International Petition] Stop US helipad plan in Okinawa to save great nature](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEihgYmdb0N8ViPvTFC_5i-Psbt4eX_LnAUEOtZkUngv_pGvRyWag1r6W60NicLLyTgWq-sPT1hBxLY5SadEIVv5McfZQ5uIhe-W0VoflQNqojsYZjFW6AH-gB1jsmSDGnGuKIFk2UkvNbFG/s227/yanbaru_w.jpg)
![[Global Network] against the first launch of Quasi-Zenith Satellite, Japan, on Sept. 11, 2010](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2sYpfodDDMIA7qXwuda0DmKapxXFB479fDnn8RKy7QNZqz0VEvWucNd-DleZ37hWNXC-Z8QtaqtM37VuPwac5SgclJ9_khBBSWOedvm19MRXIP1j1kcWrK6EW5IFjQdEEY2h7E6xuyNvC/s227/Qzss-45-0_09.jpg)
![[In update] Some collections on the Koreans’ protests against the sanction & war on Iran](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_gnM5QlRx-4c/TJMvke6t8zI/AAAAAAAAFO4/tamQ8LUnOOA/S227/No+Sanction+on+Iran.jpg)
![[Three International Petitions] to End the Korean war and peace treaty(or peace resolution)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlohLVYtpCg7iMsZhNYY4hBbhTi2dIheHMHWLDph9X2y78cjgZV1LeSfUJeu80elhJm70Q9E059q72lK-spSPvsRG4bPuCDIytltJB9IH3mWt9OG98HqhnTsPakwhvNeoCFUgF1xoxQ2EZ/s227/border.jpg)
![[Collection of Documents] No Base Learning and Solidarity Program_Korea(June 14 to 20, 2010)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEix_HzjToh3nNGHBc-_5gasq-ykcaZ6GInLixILmZVyRJ5xoeHCxWOyYd9fSM7bmnuFsjSrYOGEPnQOwB1Dcyo-sN4Pw0cFPhUtKig_qlVnGL1Wi82ClvPqbEPWYhJiqdNF0DyzLIBETMB9/s227/No-Base-banner.jpg)
![Site Fwd:[John Hines] A U.S. Debate coach’s research trip on the Issues of Korea](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg8yRra0zNhKHN74Auqhd3Nx9tZ7BWCGflRJHGH4CfzBT_yjhZ8Nl9b3OZuLpYWJ2exsjmR0oVl-Qq_cf832p2VdmOZhUi-lCFzCNeDSyVtweX1lWZPC-RlHmDMLtilHwHjNFTenBiM4Fk4/s227/Jeju-Peace-Tour.jpg)
![[News Update] Struggle Against the Jeju Naval Base since Jan. 18, 2010](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKfSTRC5QKBBSFIq_m7QIqXdlbL4-gF5GJYn9Q-pN__k7sV7uxGDcLY5L8xmU7QuWuUhBT_GhG-URBPO80RT3AfWfDrWJr06h1hFuZC6ZBVKe4U6PS1Cd7Kr6olO8TYQtk13Drox7IS6ea/s226/scrum1.jpg)
![[Urgent] Please spread the Letter!: There was no Explosion! There was no Torpedo! (May 26, 2010)](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSd2yWZ3xGwnJQXB73z5FgXCqSosAoB9_33-GLYprOmLqjmvgSAQp1BYI7e4slK1FDxHRi9KK4um-OpDaj8QOkXwAScVAgvvq6-ehbDA-hbkr96wT9oHNNmWnBPv8GU4hoZp9X8F9AZBX4/s227/grounded.jpg)
![Text Fwd: [Stephen Gowans]The sinking of the Cheonan: Another Gulf of Tonkin incident](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_L6hB3RZ1MovTXHe0A8yn_RfgMALGR0kM6poBuGp809xwvHtB_-PGWtS_WpyPWatyd9lB2pPqL2gOLc4dTCEdJ9sMvxJWEdapl-mMLm7WHAsV-jVpgqarVh8XBtdz_0c-Vohdh3HtJahD/s227/lee-myung-bak.jpg)
![[Japan Focus]Politics in Command: The "International" Investigation into the Sinking of the Cheonan](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHmTo8v-uCJnabRhMdnBAkC9J3s5bb2JsDKiT5leJHwbK8IDJHxfJmqQ_C0Is_bPC6UGMf05CA0exF2y4r2x9RhFUHT0kjsKviaME_MZXKnq775UyYAdb7w2SAzE75XvBfHp1al2q6i3cf/s227/wen_jiabao_and_lee_myungbak.png)
![[Japan Focus] Who Sank the SK Warship Cheonan? A New Stage in the US-Korean War and US-China](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiKSS5ULT5QBaMGYpXXqBMX9jtwLwMLuK469b6Ku72GTJYKUObzTANaPjZqvvpPzYMJgPF53sjhvhK3DVa88ipYlggsJageykXlkxY6s8TW05xcU-_vfhf-pACUoaWuFbT-fsU1qEhm_yIi/s227/buoy_map.gif)
![[Updated on 12/13/10] [Translation Project] Overseas Proofs on the Damages by the Military Bases](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikADE6JovUNspQyZUWVMTLAQg7yQNqXpVUbqZPk8f4uc_1723_xm1Cco6WAmstQXVPnaJAcb1mZA8Ny_3xONT_f5uh8MNLPnUhtqdGgy3HCtC1Vbbz4Q0ZY1Cssu-4cJEVNdrvznbS5UzO/s227/missile.jpg)
![[International Petition] Close the Bases in Okinawa](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNpQiHklwFbWVlFK7GDFXnBSOOSFEj3Il-We-N3uTDldKiidL2NGZs7X_LtTnatzTo_r8CexRkFe8NhfxYqmgp1knEEslROTfNjI5_mSb57cdbhPkftvanveYBaevAD9xuKDGoIxiTwoSb/s227/2.jpg)
![[In Update]Blog Collection: No Korean Troops in Afghanistan](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjjEmCRXSNAG7_QBxKWbdksmxoWR4nyAovQTTdR1G2AuXh0jxtqNkI9OmYgYWRoLAJShvtBvE840QXuBWSVh3u3zMYqkNAFX6OWy3m5Nur4HM7uNK-pKT1ycyApJp-VLyhIFRRcoisYAh0E/s226/No-Troops-to--Afghanistan.jpg)
