Poison tipped weapon attack foiled

Poison tipped weapon attack foiled

www.heraldsun.com.au

POISON-tipped covert weapons allegedly carried by a North Korean agent charged with attempting to kill an anti-Pyongyang activist have been unveiled by South Korean authorities.

Prosecutors say the agent, identified only as An, carried two weapons shaped like pens and one resembling a torch - but capable of firing a poisoned bullet - when he was arrested at a Seoul subway station on September 3.

They say An invited activist Park Sang-Hak to the station with the intention of killing him. But Park, forewarned by the intelligence service, stayed away from the meeting.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Launching leaflets up and over the border into Nth Korea brought this on. Seems an Over The Top reaction from the regime. But, total control requires totally absurd actions.

Just another thing for activists to watch out for.

Will it be coming to a protest near you in the future.

These 'pens' fire upto 5m away. Watch ya backs. Not just swimming pools and walks in the woods that will get you

www.heraldsun.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by CitizenNum287119327


So... Fight leaflets with assassination?
Thank you for sharing this, this is something that the world seems to have forgotten is still commonplace in many parts of our planet.

Originally posted by ShadowMonk
reply to post by CitizenNum287119327

 

So... Fight leaflets with assassination?
Thank you for sharing this, this is something that the world seems to have forgotten is still commonplace in many parts of our planet.

Something the US is guilty of as well. Remember they just claimed they killed a certain "cleric" in Yemen with a hellfire missile? They even admit he was not actually guilty of any terrorist event, just for what amounts to free speech, and voicing opinions the US didn't like.
So, assassinations by states are not only the work of the nasty "rogue" nations our governments in the west demonize, but are standard policy of the enlightened and moral western nations as well.

Any government having people killed without due process and a fair trial, where the accused is offered a chance to speak in their defence, or to ask for evidence of their guilt to be presented, is a rogue state and guilty of simple murder. It's also rather scary that the government get to declare who is an enemy, without having to present any evidence of wrongdoing. How far do they then take it? After all, if they are willing to kill people far away in other countries, it also therefore stands to reason they'd have no problem dong this on a domestic basis too. In short, it makes a mockery of the whole idea of justice, which they seem to invoke at every opportunity, to somehow give the impression of being moral / ethical human beings.

reply to post by Britguy


Really? Not what i heard. What i heard was he was Osama bin Laden's 3rd in command and was trying to organize another attack. He wasn't a foreigner either, he was a traitor american, born and raised in my country.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Britguy

 

Really? Not what i heard. What i heard was he was Osama bin Laden's 3rd in command and was trying to organize another attack. He wasn't a foreigner either, he was a traitor american, born and raised in my country.

Did your country hold a trial for him before they killed him? Not even in absentia?

No evidence, no trial, no crime, but there's a targeted killing. It isn't even close to being the first either.

Tell me, did you even know of the guy before he was killed?

Pointing out Americas or any other nations actions have nothing to do with the OP at all.

This seems like its right out of a James Bond film with the clever gadget, until your on the receiving end of it that is. Some pretty cloak and dagger stuff going on. Im wondering if the gadgets inventor is in a North Korean prison camp or just another one of their starving populace.

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Britguy

 

Really? Not what i heard. What i heard was he was Osama bin Laden's 3rd in command and was trying to organize another attack. He wasn't a foreigner either, he was a traitor american, born and raised in my country.

Did your country hold a trial for him before they killed him? Not even in absentia?

No evidence, no trial, no crime, but there's a targeted killing. It isn't even close to being the first either.

Tell me, did you even know of the guy before he was killed?

He was a military combatant. No trial is needed for military combatants. He was organizing another attack on U.S. soil, so we eliminated the threat. Would you be so quick to have a stuck up nose if it was your country he was planning on bombing? No you wouldn't. It was decided from the highest seats in government once the WTC was attacked on 9/11/01 that never again would we ever let this happen again or fail to act on reliable intelligence. His face was put in a deck of cards that was given to U.S. Soldiers after 9/11 happened, and yeah we knew of him because of that.

What would you have us do? Let him carry out his plan and kill thousands more when we could take him out and stop mad scheme? Would you want to stop him if it was your wife or children his attack was going to kill or would you just let him destroy your family and kill the woman and children you loved? Could you sit back and watch your family die knowing what was going to happen or would you snuff him out to protect your family? If you say you wouldn't kill him to stop him then you are either a liar or a hypocrit and maybe both.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

He was a military combatant. No trial is needed for military combatants.

What military was he from?

He was organizing another attack on U.S. soil, so we eliminated the threat.

Proof? Proof isn't necessary now since he is already dead. There was no trial, no evidence, no crime.

Would you be so quick to have a stuck up nose if it was your country he was planning on bombing? No you wouldn't.

Yeah, actually I would considering unlike the US, Canada is signatory to the Internation Criminal Court and we should be held responsible for unlawful assassinations.

It was decided from the highest seats in government once the WTC was attacked on 9/11/01 that never again would we ever let this happen again or fail to act on reliable intelligence. His face was put in a deck of cards that was given to U.S. Soldiers after 9/11 happened, and yeah we knew of him because of that.

The only thing decided after 9/11 in the US was to quickly legislate vastly intrusive anti-terror provisions that completely underminded the last 800 years of human rights progression. On top of this, the US use these new provisions to attack people outside of the US, with or without permission from the UN.

And what deck of cards are you referring too? The only one that I saw came out in 2003 and it featured Saddam's top brass. In fact, I own one of the decks.

What would you have us do? Let him carry out his plan and kill thousands more when we could take him out and stop mad scheme? Would you want to stop him if it was your wife or children his attack was going to kill or would you just let him destroy your family and kill the woman and children you loved? Could you sit back and watch your family die knowing what was going to happen or would you snuff him out to protect your family? If you say you wouldn't kill him to stop him then you are either a liar or a hypocrit and maybe both.

Absolutely frightening. You approve of bombing thousands of people (mostly civilians) with drones, including entire families, just for the sake of the perceived threat that this guy is going to kill your family first?

To answer your question, I surely wouldn't bomb people without just cause in order to defend myself. In fact, that would only intensify the situation. I find it mind boggling how you claim to live in fear of this guy bombing your family, yet I can only imagine how people in Pakistan/Afghanistan/Iraq/Yemen/Somali cope with the fact that US drones bomb entire buildings full of families just to get a specific target that has not been convicted of ANYTHING by any tribunal.

I realize that this isn't exactly on topic, but I just read through a law book that covers the history of progressing human rights and legislation all over the world, only to have the last few chapters outline how post-9/11 policies have gone backwards. The rule of law is there as a medium to protect ALL humans from injustice, to provide fair trial to anyone accused. When the rule of law is abandoned, it sets everything back.

Seriously, do you think that killing this guy will result in saving lives?

EDIT: I may as well state that sometimes assassinations are necessary and do happen. Sometimes a target does need to be taken out for the common good. However, there is a vast difference between poisoning someone in person, and massacreing a building full of people just to kill one guy.