Someone held the information about Mark Foley for 1-2 years just to release before a election. -Dennis Hastert
Oh so your saying YOU Knew about Mark Foley for 1-2 years.-S1Genocide
Oh wait nevermind Kirk Fordham just proved me right HAHA~~!-S1Genocide (click)
Newsradio 620 WTMJ
McCain The one Republican I would have voted for in 2008 taking a play from Bush and Karl Roves play book. If we screw up its Clintons fault. Let me remind you of this:
Your party is in control.
You pulled out of the direct talks.
Your president named NK as a member of the Axis of Evil.
AND the final kicker:
Rumsfeld sold the nuke generators to NK!
Rumsfeld link to sale of reactors to North Korea
By Randeep Ramesh
May 10 2003
The US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, sat on the board of a company that three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea - a country he now regards as part of the "axis of evil" and which has been targeted for regime change by Washington because of its efforts of build nuclear weapons.
Mr Rumsfeld was a non-executive director of ABB, a European engineering giant based in Zurich, when it won a $US200 million contract to provide the design and key components for the reactors. He sat on the board from 1990 to 2001, earning $US190,000 a year. He left to join the Bush Administration.
The sale of the nuclear technology was a high-profile contract. ABB's then chief executive, Goran Lindahl, visited North Korea in 1999.
The company opened an office in the capital Pyongyang, and the deal was signed a year later in 2000.
Despite this, Mr Rumsfeld's office said the Defence Secretary did not "recall it being brought before the board at any time". In a statement to the American magazine Newsweek, his spokeswoman, Victoria Clarke, said there "was no vote on this".
A spokesman for ABB told The Guardian on Thursday that "board members were informed about the project which would deliver systems and equipment for light water reactors".
Just months after Mr Rumsfeld took office, President George Bush ended the policy of engagement and pulled the plug on diplomacy. Pyongyang warned that it would respond by building nuclear missiles.
By January 2002, the Bush Administration had placed North Korea in the "axis of evil" alongside Iraq and Iran.
Critics of the Administration's bellicose language on North Korea say the problem was that Mr Rumsfeld did not "speak up against it".
"One could draw the conclusion that economic and personal interests took precedent over non-proliferation," said Steve LaMontagne, an analyst with the Centre for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington.
Heavy water reactors produce weapons-grade plutonium. Light water reactors are known as "proliferation-resistant" but one expert said they were not "proliferation-proof".
Rumsfeld link to sale of reactors to North Korea --The US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, sat on the board of a company that three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea - a country he now regards as part of the "axis of evil" and which has been targeted for regime change by Washington because of its efforts of build nuclear weapons. Mr Rumsfeld was a non-executive director of ABB, a European engineering giant based in Zurich, when it won a $US200 million contract to provide the design and key components for the reactors.
So I think you just lost a lot of votes buddy. I will not be voting for you and will bash you every chance I get. Do you guys ever take responsibility for what your party has done in the last 6 years?
Wrong Path on North Korea
By Donald Gregg and Don Oberdorfer
Wednesday, September 6, 2006; Page A15
The Bush administration is preparing to implement a new set of comprehensive sanctions against North Korea in response to its recent ballistic missile tests. This would be a grave mistake, likely to lift the already dangerous situation on the Korean Peninsula to a new level of tension. Imposing such sanctions at this time could bring about more of the very actions the United States opposes. They should be reconsidered before lasting damage is done.
U.S. allies and friends in Northeast Asia, including South Korea, Japan, China and Russia, have been notified of the impending actions. These governments have participated along with Washington in the stalled regional talks with North Korea aimed at ending its nuclear weapons program. With the possible exception of Japan, these friendly governments believe that a major new drive to further isolate the Pyongyang regime would be a move in the wrong direction.
The only path to success with North Korea is negotiation, which President Bush and others have endorsed on many occasions. What is needed is sustained engagement to persuade Pyongyang to return to the regional talks and cease its confrontational actions -- not new sanctions that will make such a course even more difficult.
Pyongyang's ballistic missile tests of July 4 were a provocative mistake that led to unanimous condemnation by the U.N. Security Council and sharp cutbacks in aid from South Korea. The tests especially angered China because of Kim Jong Il's refusal to accept a high-level envoy who was to express China's unhappiness about them. Beijing took the remarkable step of voting to condemn its fraternal neighbor. It slowed down but did not stop its crucial food and energy assistance for fear of creating instability on its border. China is unsympathetic to further U.S. sanctions at this time and most unlikely to follow suit.
Recent U.S. financial sanctions based on North Korea's money-laundering and counterfeiting of U.S. currency have been painful for Pyongyang's free-spending leadership. But neither these sanctions nor the impending comprehensive sanctions are likely to lead to the demise of the 60-year-old North Korean regime or to a positive shift away from its militaristic actions. Instead, the predictable result of new sanctions now is new steps by Pyongyang to prove it will not be intimidated: additional tests of ballistic missiles or an underground nuclear explosion to validate its declaration early last year that it is "a full-fledged nuclear weapons state."
In June 2005 Kim Jong Il told a South Korean emissary that his country possesses nuclear weapons but that it does not need to test them. Semi-official U.S. estimates are that Pyongyang has sufficient nuclear material for six to 12 nuclear weapons, though the status of bomb assembly is unknown. Should Kim's regime be spurred to test such a device, the repercussions of a successful test for the global drive against the spread of nuclear weapons would be great, with especially powerful political and military impact in Northeast Asia. Such an event might prompt extensive new arms programs, possibly including nuclear weapons programs, by South Korea, Japan and Taiwan.
Why, at such a time, choose sanctions, a policy option whose historical record is overwhelmingly one of failure? One possible reason is that sanctions give vent to the visceral hostility that senior Bush administration officials feel toward North Korea. Another is that sanctions could be a defense, however inadequate, against political charges that the administration has done little or nothing to slow North Korea's nuclear programs. But a sanctions-based policy ignores the damage it would do to those in North Korea seeking transformational change and greater openness. Some longtime foreign observers believe such trends are gathering force.
Some high in the Bush administration have argued that dangerous actions by North Korea are likely whether or not the United States undertakes new sanctions against Pyongyang. Perhaps so, but they are much more likely if, instead of carrot-and-stick negotiations, the administration withdraws all previous carrots and multiplies the sticks. In this case a U.S. administration will have to share the blame with North Korea if a new international crisis erupts.
Donald Gregg is a former U.S. ambassador to South Korea and currently chairman of the Korea Society. Don Oberdorfer is a former diplomatic correspondent for The Post and currently chairman of the U.S.-Korea Institute at Johns Hopkins University's Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies.
