Saturday, September 13, 2008

Who sympathises when the ill is Kim Jong?

First, Even if The Castros or Kim Jongs of the world are generally regarded as dangerous, should we be so giddy with the notion of them being seriously ill? Admittedly there is reason to hope for the safety of the world when a ruthless nuclear crazed leader could be on death's door but still is it not morbid? Should we not report it in a more plain way?
I don't actually care about that but-
Why is it so difficult to get news out about foreign dignitaries from a less than reputable 'corner' of the world? I mean I know that the American spy agency has made some serious gaffs but not knowing if the leader of North Korea is in good health seems pathetic! Do they actually know but keep it a secret to protect the informants? Seems a little unlikely. It just seems strange that there are weeks of rumours and rebuffs that slowly move to the extreme until at some point in the near future Kimmy will undoubtedly come out on TV and say he is in great condition. This will likely be followed by KJ (Kim Junior - if he exists) taking over.

2 comments:

Unknown said...

People who are brainwashed through propaganda and do not know how good the rest of the world are doing will sympathise for their "fearless" leader.

Kim has an eldest son, Kim Jong-nam, who is of course illegitimate. Perhaps Darwinism will finally pull through and his entire bloodline will expire during a nuclear weapons testing experiment. There's always hope!

\ said...

Natural selection eh? I think it favours strong leaders. I read that like 25 million people have links to Genghis Khan's bloodline.