The Identity of Kim Il Sung (1949) [pdf](cia.gov)
cia.gov
The Identity of Kim Il Sung (1949) [pdf]
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-00809A000600270269-4.pdf
139 comments
Funnily enough what you describe with balloons is still being done with USB sticks today:
https://flashdrivesforfreedom.org/
https://flashdrivesforfreedom.org/
As they say on the website; "Many citizens have devices with USB ports and SD card slots", but more citizens have just eyes and no USB ports/SD card slots, so why not send balloons filled with flyers instead, to reach even more people?
I watched a presentation of these guys at SHA2017 and someone asked the same thing. Here's the full presentation in case you're interested: https://media.ccc.de/v/SHA2017-120-hack_north_korea
As far as I recall their answer was that a USB drive can store much more. Video, entire books, etc. However leaflets are also done.
Personally I don't know if it's worth the risk knowing that their local OS ("Red Star OS") can fingerprint files. But I guess they know what they're doing.
As far as I recall their answer was that a USB drive can store much more. Video, entire books, etc. However leaflets are also done.
Personally I don't know if it's worth the risk knowing that their local OS ("Red Star OS") can fingerprint files. But I guess they know what they're doing.
Fingerprinting files would be the least of my concerns. When you plug a USB stick, you potentially plug a keyboard and handover control of your computer to the stick.
Most people in the western world wouldn't think twice before plugging in a found USB stick into their own computer because they are curious, people simply don't know the risk. I'm sure even fewer people in North Korea know basic computer hygiene.
Idk it’s basic workplace trading now, I think most people plugging in a random usb here are at least doing it in an isolated VM or something.
In a isolated VM? No way. Most people don’t know what a VM is. Hopefully most people wouldn’t plug a random USB into their computer, but I suspect that (# of people who would plug in a random USB) > (# of people who know about VMs)
Even among the people who "know about VMs" how many of them could confidently plug in a physical device to a physical machine and be sure that it was somehow isolated to the VM? I must have a dozen ways to run VMs here, but I couldn't do that.
What is the most common attack vector to fear? I thought maybe auto-run had been disabled by default, in most modern versions of Windows, for the past 10-15 years at least.
If you plug a USB keyboard, windows will automatically set it up. All the stick needs to do is emulate a keyboard, then it can send keystroke to the OS as yourself, no need for auto-run.
Maybe in San Fransisco, US it's basic workplace training, but outside of very technology focused cities, people definitely don't know how easy it is to be compromised by a USB is.
Most computers in various places like hospitals, veterinarians, shops, gyms and more all have exposed USB ports where it'd be trivial to plug something in when the clerk/assistant is looking the other way, just as another example.
Most computers in various places like hospitals, veterinarians, shops, gyms and more all have exposed USB ports where it'd be trivial to plug something in when the clerk/assistant is looking the other way, just as another example.
But then again, why would anyone connect their computer to the completely censored national LAN, only to be spied upon by the state?
Because it will contain entertainment as well and it's the way to communicate with friends. Despite being censored, it's all they have.
In my (lack of) knowledge of North Korea, I don't think most people even have computers, and it's not like the government's built infrastructure to just connect their computer to the LAN. (It's different if you're part of the government elite living in the compounds for sure...).
These reunion shows were reported on in Germany, too. I haven't heard anything about them for a few years, though. I assume not many direct separated family members are still alive, or there's currently no agreement about these meetings. It's fascinating that the population of both countries is now largely born after the split.
Do you know the "Ibuk T'ongsin" listed as the source in the doc? Is that a name of the "monthly periodical" or the name of the author who wrote the article for that monthly periodical?
In hangul, it's written as 이북통신, and it was a periodical promoting propaganda against North Korea: http://www.much.go.kr/L/x3th5X5gDH.do
Also, if you can't read Korean, I recommend using https://papago.naver.com/ instead of Google Translator.
Also, if you can't read Korean, I recommend using https://papago.naver.com/ instead of Google Translator.
Meh, the so-called "fake Kim Il Sung theory" isn't a new info found in 2011, it was a raging conspiracy theory all the way back from 1940s. If you speak Korean, search for "김일성 가짜설", you'll find wiki pages the size of a book chapter.
From what I've heard, the theory is largely discredited now. (Of course that doesn't mean North Korea's breathless account of Kim's heroic adventures is anywhere near believable, but that's a separate issue.)
From what I've heard, the theory is largely discredited now. (Of course that doesn't mean North Korea's breathless account of Kim's heroic adventures is anywhere near believable, but that's a separate issue.)
This document was declassified in 2011; it was published in 1949.
I've seen similar documents about Tito. In the end it doesn't change anything, you deal with the de-facto ruler of a country, not with his ancestors.
https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-features/decla...
https://www.nsa.gov/portals/75/documents/news-features/decla...
> From what I've heard, the theory is largely discredited now.
Are there any reliable modern historians that have written about this? Especially the bit that says he was a serial killer in his early years.
Are there any reliable modern historians that have written about this? Especially the bit that says he was a serial killer in his early years.
The reference biography of Kim Il Sung is "Kim Il Sung: The North Korean Leader" by Dae Sook Suh. A relatively fair treatment of the man given that the author is notable for his anticommunist bias: https://www.amazon.com.au/Kim-Sung-North-Korean-Leader/dp/02...
I can also recommend Kim Il Sung's own autobiography, With The Century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/With_the_Century (wiki page has many links to the full book). Because it was written by Kim himself, it's a lot less hagiographic than what you might expect (he didn't have to worry about censorship). Plenty of embellishments sure, but also shows a very human picture of the man.
To give a bit more historical background on the conspiracy theory: Kim's anti-Japanese actions in the 1930s-40s had received some coverage in the Korean press - despite Japanese censorship. He went into hiding in the USSR in the early 40s and was sent back to Pyongyang by the Soviets a couple months after the August 1945 liberation of the peninsula. Dissatisfied with their first choice for a North Korean leader (a man named Cho Man-Sik), the Soviets intended to replace him with Kim (a convinced Stalinist) after some PR efforts to bolster his public image.
At Kim Il Sung's first public appearance at a rally in Pyongyang in late 1945, people were shocked by his young age (there are several testimonies from people present at the event attesting to this). This was exploited by the anti-communist South to discredit him, claiming that someone that young could never have done the resistance deeds that people had heard about during the colonial period. As Suh's book shows, however, there is a good amount of evidence to support the fact that he was indeed a leader in the resistance against Japanese colonization (albeit not the only one) with several feat of arms (albeit not nearly as many as later claimed).
I can also recommend Kim Il Sung's own autobiography, With The Century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/With_the_Century (wiki page has many links to the full book). Because it was written by Kim himself, it's a lot less hagiographic than what you might expect (he didn't have to worry about censorship). Plenty of embellishments sure, but also shows a very human picture of the man.
To give a bit more historical background on the conspiracy theory: Kim's anti-Japanese actions in the 1930s-40s had received some coverage in the Korean press - despite Japanese censorship. He went into hiding in the USSR in the early 40s and was sent back to Pyongyang by the Soviets a couple months after the August 1945 liberation of the peninsula. Dissatisfied with their first choice for a North Korean leader (a man named Cho Man-Sik), the Soviets intended to replace him with Kim (a convinced Stalinist) after some PR efforts to bolster his public image.
At Kim Il Sung's first public appearance at a rally in Pyongyang in late 1945, people were shocked by his young age (there are several testimonies from people present at the event attesting to this). This was exploited by the anti-communist South to discredit him, claiming that someone that young could never have done the resistance deeds that people had heard about during the colonial period. As Suh's book shows, however, there is a good amount of evidence to support the fact that he was indeed a leader in the resistance against Japanese colonization (albeit not the only one) with several feat of arms (albeit not nearly as many as later claimed).
> wiki page has many links to the full book
The netsec person in me says we probably shouldn’t be downloading PDFs/epubs from the servers of literal North Korean Government sites…
The netsec person in me says we probably shouldn’t be downloading PDFs/epubs from the servers of literal North Korean Government sites…
The post you're commenting on is a PDF file hosted on cia.gov, how is that any better? Or are you assuming that all readers of HN 1) are American citizens, and 2) that American citizens shouldn't care about possible threats from the CIA?
just to be clear are you implying that the CIA is hosting malware on their clearnet servers so every one can get infected ?
hacking provides a significant portion of the North Korean economy. the same cannot be said for the USA.
besides, the CIA has a lot more to lose. if you get a virus downloading a PDF from North Korean servers, that's The Scorpion and the Frog. you're not gonna get much sympathy. if you get a virus downloading a PDF from CIA servers, that's near enough an international incident
besides, the CIA has a lot more to lose. if you get a virus downloading a PDF from North Korean servers, that's The Scorpion and the Frog. you're not gonna get much sympathy. if you get a virus downloading a PDF from CIA servers, that's near enough an international incident
Are you creating a false equivalency between North Korea and American? If so, Noam Chomksy in the house!
I think analogies can be taken too far, but "both North Korea and the US are probably interested in compromising the computers of their adversaries, and may intentionally or unintentionally infect others in the process" doesn't seem too far-fetched to me. It's not the same as saying "North Korea and the US are functionally and ideologically the same."
Respectfully, what do you imagine the attack vector would be?
A zero day bug in the pdf parser or javascript engine of your browser. Such bugs are common enough that the North Korean military is believed to use them to gather intelligence and for theft, but also are rare enough that they're going to use them on just anyone.
I thought North Koreans don't know how to use computers? Remember the Kim Jong Un memes around that?
I'm frankly getting tired of all the hysteria. If that is indeed the attack vector just use a sandbox and a pdf viewer with low featureset. Is all we do nowadays mindless hysteria?
EDIT: comical. the response to the advice to use a PDF viewer with low featureset is to list Acrobat exploits. Seems like in the hysteria about how terrible "our enemies" are, all sarcasm and absurdity is lost
I'm frankly getting tired of all the hysteria. If that is indeed the attack vector just use a sandbox and a pdf viewer with low featureset. Is all we do nowadays mindless hysteria?
EDIT: comical. the response to the advice to use a PDF viewer with low featureset is to list Acrobat exploits. Seems like in the hysteria about how terrible "our enemies" are, all sarcasm and absurdity is lost
Saying the inverse of what you actually believe but with a tone that suggests insincerity isn't comedic. It's just obnoxious.
I can see why calling out the hypocrisies of the hysteria of people like you would seem obnoxious to you.
EDIT: Comical indeed that MichaelCollins feels the need to come to muruculas rescue. The thread didn't start with murucula, it started with people saying they should not open NK PDF's because they're dangerous. The mindless hysteria could only have been trumped by people accusing one of China and Russia stoogedom in the comments below.
I was merely referring to the memes that were so popular in HN circles just a few years ago about how Kim Jong Un was too stupid to use a computer[1].
I have no skin in the game, but if the HN crowd is not able to read a PDF with basic Opsec to protect itself from malicious Acrobat exploits, we don't really deserve to be called hackers.
[1] http://www.slate.fr/sites/default/files/styles/1200x680/publ...
EDIT: Comical indeed that MichaelCollins feels the need to come to muruculas rescue. The thread didn't start with murucula, it started with people saying they should not open NK PDF's because they're dangerous. The mindless hysteria could only have been trumped by people accusing one of China and Russia stoogedom in the comments below.
I was merely referring to the memes that were so popular in HN circles just a few years ago about how Kim Jong Un was too stupid to use a computer[1].
I have no skin in the game, but if the HN crowd is not able to read a PDF with basic Opsec to protect itself from malicious Acrobat exploits, we don't really deserve to be called hackers.
[1] http://www.slate.fr/sites/default/files/styles/1200x680/publ...
Pay attention to usernames, rjzzleep.
Anyway, muricula didn't say North Koreans don't know how to use computers, so there was no hypocrisy in his suggestion that North Koreans might have competent computer hackers. You're raging at numerous strawmen at once.
Anyway, muricula didn't say North Koreans don't know how to use computers, so there was no hypocrisy in his suggestion that North Koreans might have competent computer hackers. You're raging at numerous strawmen at once.
So many strawmans, so little time. Viewing the history of rjzzleep is fascinating. He loves china and russia but can't say a nice thing about a western country. He constantly points to a collapsing west.
[deleted]
Im not convinced. The Chinese communist party celebrates itself for its resistance against the japanese all the time, when one reads the history though, it gets obvious that the brute of the fighting was done by the nationalists and the communists then only performed a cleanup operation, engaging in no major battles.
These rewritten heroic-historys are largely worthless.
These rewritten heroic-historys are largely worthless.
Depending on the "history" you read, you'd think that the US, and not the USSR, was pivotal in defeating hitler in Europe.
USSR was so pivotal in defeating Germany - forgetting that the Second World War broke up because Soviets signed Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, essentially giving Germans free reign.
Korea hardly had any nationalist armed resistance by the 1930s. The nationalists camp had either turned to peaceful resistance a la Ghandi (Cho Man-sik), exile (Syngam Rhee) or collaboration (Lee Kwang-su, Ch'oe Nam-Seon and so many others).
Kim Il Sung participated in two attacks on the Japanese in the Korean Peninsula confirmed by modern historians (at Hyesan and Pochonbo, the latter of which may have been led by someone else) and other attacks in collaboration with the Chinese communists (see book above for details).
For those wondering why Korean nationalists would have become collaborators: they thought colonozation by an Asian race was less likely to erase Korean culture than colonization from a white race (as the nationalists believed a Japanese defeat in the pacific war would lead to Western colonization of East Asia)
Kim Il Sung participated in two attacks on the Japanese in the Korean Peninsula confirmed by modern historians (at Hyesan and Pochonbo, the latter of which may have been led by someone else) and other attacks in collaboration with the Chinese communists (see book above for details).
For those wondering why Korean nationalists would have become collaborators: they thought colonozation by an Asian race was less likely to erase Korean culture than colonization from a white race (as the nationalists believed a Japanese defeat in the pacific war would lead to Western colonization of East Asia)
>the nationalists believed a Japanese defeat in the pacific war would lead to Western colonization of East Asia
culturally, in many ways it did
culturally, in many ways it did
The Communists didn't fight major battles against the Japanese, they didn't have the resources for that after the Nationalist purges and civil war. But neither did the French resistance against Nazi Germany, does that mean they didn't resist at all?
The Communists used guerilla tactics, to much success in some cases. Who did more to stifle the Japanese war effort is an impossible question to answer, but both sides of the Chinese Civil war contributed in the fight, each to their own strengths.
The Communists used guerilla tactics, to much success in some cases. Who did more to stifle the Japanese war effort is an impossible question to answer, but both sides of the Chinese Civil war contributed in the fight, each to their own strengths.
Yup. My understanding is that it was a propaganda spread by the right wing in order to discredit Kim Il Sung at that time. It's largely accepted as a conspiracy by the contemporary history communities IIUC.
I must preface my question by stating I understand it is not logical to request someone to produce evidence to refute an article which in of itself makes claims with no evidence. You could simply state the original article has no evidence, so why believe them? But, I'm just curious.
Do you happen to have any historical evidence or perspective which supports the theory that right wing people pushed this the false history - or that the right wing conspiracy is widely accepted by the contemporary historical communities? I'd like to read.
Do you happen to have any historical evidence or perspective which supports the theory that right wing people pushed this the false history - or that the right wing conspiracy is widely accepted by the contemporary historical communities? I'd like to read.
I don't have any first hand documents but wikipedia seems to explain a bit[1].
Also note that the original article explicitly says "THIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION".
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Il-sung
Also note that the original article explicitly says "THIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION".
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Il-sung
Namuwiki seems to discredit the claim that it was a right wing conspiracy theory (based on my limited korean abilities). It's a trope to constantly blame right wing groups in Korea for everything that the left doesn't like. I've seen it during my stay here and just realized man, this left-right rivalry seems like a major trend all over the world
Also as historical records show, and as some in the western braintrust noted at the time, the idea that Stalin was foisting revolution onto Korean communists, it was somewhat backwards - local Korean communists fighting the Japanese and then Americans, like the Chinese, were much more enthused about revolution in their countries than Stalin was.
It was Mao foisting it onto Korea. Stalin was a careful opportunist and thought Korea would be too risky and reckless, so he was hesitant but was eventually persuaded by Mao that it was a good idea.
> local Korean communists ... were much more enthused about revolution in their countries than Stalin was.
Even if we substitute "Stalin" for "Mao", this statement has low epistemic legibility and low relevance. It could have been 100, 10k, or 1 million Korean communists who were genuinely more "enthused" than Mao was, given that there's likely to be N > 0 people who are more enthused about any kind of political project inside of a large population when their enthusiasm is contrasted to that of a single person. That's a given. It doesn't detract from the fact that an ideology and system was forced onto a sizeable unwilling population with Mao's direct backing.
> local Korean communists ... were much more enthused about revolution in their countries than Stalin was.
Even if we substitute "Stalin" for "Mao", this statement has low epistemic legibility and low relevance. It could have been 100, 10k, or 1 million Korean communists who were genuinely more "enthused" than Mao was, given that there's likely to be N > 0 people who are more enthused about any kind of political project inside of a large population when their enthusiasm is contrasted to that of a single person. That's a given. It doesn't detract from the fact that an ideology and system was forced onto a sizeable unwilling population with Mao's direct backing.
this is untrue, the Korean peninsula had a strong socialist (including non-Marxist forms of socialism) and later communist (as in affiliated with the COMINTERN) movement from the early 20th century and its main influence was the Japanese Communist Party - not Mao. (Incidentally, a large part of the membership of the Japanese Communist Party was Korean - up until the cadres.)
North Korean troops (and earlier the so-called "Yanan Koreans") were also instrumental in securing the Chinese communist victory during the Civil War through their actions in Northeast China. So in a sense they forced communism on China just as much as the Chinese forced communism onto Korea.
> It was Mao foisting it onto Korea. Stalin was a careful opportunist and thought Korea would be too risky and reckless, so he was hesitant but was eventually persuaded by Mao that it was a good idea.
Your statement refers to the Korean War. As archive records now show, both Stalin and Mao were reluctant and Kim Il Sung only managed to convince Stalin by pretending that Mao was on board for an invasion of the South (and likewise lying to Mao about Stalin being on board).
In any case, North Korea was already socialist before the Korean War. And the South also had a very strong communist movement - the first governments that sprouted in Korea after 1945 were "people's committees".
But the US backed dictator Syngman Rhee (selected for his staunch anti-communism, the man was so reactionary his conservatism shocked even US intelligence) managed to politicide the Southern communists in large numbers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodo_League_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeju_uprising
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeosu%E2%80%93Suncheon_rebelli...
North Korean troops (and earlier the so-called "Yanan Koreans") were also instrumental in securing the Chinese communist victory during the Civil War through their actions in Northeast China. So in a sense they forced communism on China just as much as the Chinese forced communism onto Korea.
> It was Mao foisting it onto Korea. Stalin was a careful opportunist and thought Korea would be too risky and reckless, so he was hesitant but was eventually persuaded by Mao that it was a good idea.
Your statement refers to the Korean War. As archive records now show, both Stalin and Mao were reluctant and Kim Il Sung only managed to convince Stalin by pretending that Mao was on board for an invasion of the South (and likewise lying to Mao about Stalin being on board).
In any case, North Korea was already socialist before the Korean War. And the South also had a very strong communist movement - the first governments that sprouted in Korea after 1945 were "people's committees".
But the US backed dictator Syngman Rhee (selected for his staunch anti-communism, the man was so reactionary his conservatism shocked even US intelligence) managed to politicide the Southern communists in large numbers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodo_League_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeju_uprising
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeosu%E2%80%93Suncheon_rebelli...
Most of the leaders selected for the South Korean govt where collaborators with the Japanese occupation.
Because the "socialist" revolutions, were first and foremost national independence movements. The red decoration was nothing more then the "fashion" at the time. Had socialism existed when america declared independence and russia supported the us, the american indepence day would be significantly more hammer & sickled. This is why the vietnam war was so wrong, it was fought by a ex-colony for a colonial power, halucinating a enemy were there actually was just its own history repeating.
It's not "fashion", it's the practicalities of getting military and diplomatic assistance as an underdog. Enemy of your enemy and all that.
The Soviet Red Army "liberated" northern Korea in August 1945, just as it "liberated" half of Germany at the end of WW2. Calling the influence of the Soviet Union in vulnerable parts of the world "fashion" is mindbogglingly dumb.
It wasn't so bad for Germany, we still let ex-Nazis run the US half.
In 1946, the infant mortality rate in Berlin was greater than 90%.
[deleted]
> it was a raging conspiracy theory
Sure, but is it false?
> From what I've heard, the theory is largely discredited now.
If you say so.
Sure, but is it false?
> From what I've heard, the theory is largely discredited now.
If you say so.
Using what evidence can you distinguish the content of the classified document from something someone just made up?
Probably not an internet stranger telling using himself and hearsay as a source.
The linked document has a number of red flags.
The source was a South Korean periodical.
The document has a "THIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION" stamp on it.
The document was published during a political crisis in South Korea.
For anyone experienced with the art of deception, this puts it squarely in the "probably bullshit" bin. Misinformation like this gets published every single day in reputable outlets, and most people don't question it, because it is written to confirm their prior beliefs ("North Korea bad").
The source was a South Korean periodical.
The document has a "THIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION" stamp on it.
The document was published during a political crisis in South Korea.
For anyone experienced with the art of deception, this puts it squarely in the "probably bullshit" bin. Misinformation like this gets published every single day in reputable outlets, and most people don't question it, because it is written to confirm their prior beliefs ("North Korea bad").
> The source was a South Korean periodical.
This means basically nothing. If it were fake, would a South Korean periodical publish it? Yes, almost certainly. But if it were real, would a South Korean periodical publish it? Yes, almost certainly.
That sort of 'evidence' washes out. All we're left with is unverifiable claims.
This means basically nothing. If it were fake, would a South Korean periodical publish it? Yes, almost certainly. But if it were real, would a South Korean periodical publish it? Yes, almost certainly.
That sort of 'evidence' washes out. All we're left with is unverifiable claims.
I think you're supposed to take two of them in concert with each other - it originated in South Korea and was published during a particularly politically convenient time in South Korea. I don't know personally how important or suspicious that is, but the fact that it's clearly been marked and acknowledged as "unevaluated" is maybe a stronger reason to take it with a pinch of salt.
[deleted]
While I agree the document would be questionable, I don't think "North Korea bad" is so much a belief as it's a fact. It doesn't get much badder than that. Probably the worst dictatorship for their people we have on this planet right now.
I'm very lucky to have been born here and not there.
I'm very lucky to have been born here and not there.
I think the point is that "North Korea bad" is both regrettably true and an overly simplistic way to look at the current situation without really thinking about the history of the Korean peninsula, the causes of the split, the war and what roles our own governments had in causing the entire situation. This doesn't change the indisputable fact that the Kim regimes have been brutal and that the DPRK is truly a nightmarishly awful place to live, but it lets a lot of other people off the hook.
Please explain how “our own governments” are in any way responsible for the actions and choices of one of the most brutal communist regimes in history. I’m presuming you’re Western. “Our own governments” have much to answer for, but North Korea isn’t one of those things.
The only alternative historical path would have completely erased South Korea, now a prosperous country that acts as a positive influence on the region and world. If any outside influence is responsible for North Korea, it is China, any other take beggar’s belief.
The only alternative historical path would have completely erased South Korea, now a prosperous country that acts as a positive influence on the region and world. If any outside influence is responsible for North Korea, it is China, any other take beggar’s belief.
What's communist about North Korea, apart from "something often said"? It's more of a feudal monarchy.
We can split hairs about what is true communism, but between the cult of personality, the economic system, its art and media, and the more ephemeral peculiarities of its public culture, it looks an awful lot like stepping into a time machine that takes you back to Stalinist-era USSR. There's really no place on Earth quite like it.
So it’s a “cultural communism”?
Calling an ideological opinion a "fact" drains that word of all meaning.
What is a “fact” other than a piece of information demonstrated through repeated direct observation? Acting as if “North Korea is bad” is “just like your opinion man” is one of the most bad faith statements I’ve ever seen on the Internet. It’s utterly ridiculous and you know that too.
This is called "browbeating", and does not make your ideological opinion any more based in fact.
This is a report (summary) of a radio broadcast by a south korean Radio station in 1949.
This is not a CIA analysis of Kim Il Sung, just a report on a report.
This is not a CIA analysis of Kim Il Sung, just a report on a report.
Extremely interesting to see how the CIA works, in 1949 they didn't have to be as believable as now - it's obviously a smear job in how it tries to paint him as a murderer and lowly thief only out to get money. It's no wonder it has been discredited.
For the easily offended - no, I don't think he was a good guy.
For the easily offended - no, I don't think he was a good guy.
"it's obviously a smear job in how it tries to paint him as a murderer and lowly thief only out to get money"
I am trying to follow the logic here. The CIA wanted to smear Kim by using a restricted classified report that wasn't released for 60 years? If I was doing a smear campaign in 1949 I would put it on the radio.
I am trying to follow the logic here. The CIA wanted to smear Kim by using a restricted classified report that wasn't released for 60 years? If I was doing a smear campaign in 1949 I would put it on the radio.
> it's obviously a smear job in how it tries to paint him as a murderer and lowly thief only out to get money.
Even without this document there can be this and worse said about him. So why bother?
Even without this document there can be this and worse said about him. So why bother?
What worse stuff could have been said at the time, though? His "followers" thought of him as a noble leader free of any moral ambiguity. The direct opposite is a cold-blooded murderer who murders out of greed.
If the CIA tried to discredit the image his followers had of him, I think this write-up would be a good way to do it.
I wonder if the CIA fabrications of today only seem believable now and will seem unbelievable in 70 years.
I would think so, and it gets harder for them due to globalisation and countries working together economically (well apart from Russia maybe) - because back in 1949, China, Korea and Japan were basically impenetrable black boxes for most people, where you'd take the CIA's word for it because who knew what was possible or likely in those cultures?
I wonder why people believe them now, to be honest.
I'd say it depends. Which "CIA fabrications of today" are you referring to?
Many people likely have something that springs to mind, based on their own existing biases, but that differs between people. When naming a particular "fabrication" you'll probably encounter much more resistance. (Russiagate? HIV/AIDS? The moon landing?)
Many people likely have something that springs to mind, based on their own existing biases, but that differs between people. When naming a particular "fabrication" you'll probably encounter much more resistance. (Russiagate? HIV/AIDS? The moon landing?)
Remember all the accusations of Julian Assange being a rapist?
What do the "(Ueda: ###, ###, ###)" blocks mean? Some kind of internal CIA/gov't unique-person-identifier?
It looks like a way of referring to Korean (or Han?) characters. The document seems to have been typed, so adding characters from another language would be difficult. It looks like:
Kim = 12380
Il = 4446
Sung = 3610
Ju = 4871
Kim: 12380
Il: 1
Sung: 4499
[deleted]
Or Unicode style references to the Chinese characters that compose those names?
Since that Unicode didn't exist back then, maybe a table of Hanja? (Also since it mentioned Ueda I guess it originally meant Japanese Kanji repurposed by the US for standardisation.)
It's a Japanese dictionary where characters can be referenced by an index number:
https://www.amazon.com/Uedas-Daijiten-Dictionary-Characters-...
https://www.amazon.com/Uedas-Daijiten-Dictionary-Characters-...
This is the CIA's published version of this document: https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp80-00809a000...
The webfont used by that page looks so horrible on my system that I thought the page was an image. I've never used a site before that benefited so much from going to Inspect Element and disabling the font: property.
For those interested in the Korean War, Blowback's season 3 [0] covers the span from Japan's imperial occupation of the Korean peninsula to the Korea War.
[0]: https://blowback.show/
[0]: https://blowback.show/
I love Blowback. Season one was great, season two a bit less great, since absolutely any bad thing was blamed on the US, as if Castro and the USSR didn't do anything repressive or bad against the Cuban people.
Note that this is unevaluated information according to the document, and coming from a single person.
> Note that this is unevaluated information according to the document, and coming from a single person.
It lists the source as "Ibuk T'ongsin," which appears to have been some kind of periodical. Looks like it's just an English translation of open-source intelligence.
It lists the source as "Ibuk T'ongsin," which appears to have been some kind of periodical. Looks like it's just an English translation of open-source intelligence.
Maybe the HN title should be changed. People in other comments are very excited: "I had no idea!", "wow, CIA dossier!".
Possible title: "Unevaluated information about Kim Il Sung's identity from an old publication in some Korean monthly periodical."
Possible title: "Unevaluated information about Kim Il Sung's identity from an old publication in some Korean monthly periodical."
That was an incredibly interesting story. Where can I find more government declassified documents?
Not even joking the CIA has the best library for this:
https://www.cia.gov/legacy/headquarters/cia-library/
Luckily, you don't need to be an agency or IC employee to read a lot of it:
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/home
https://www.cia.gov/legacy/headquarters/cia-library/
Luckily, you don't need to be an agency or IC employee to read a lot of it:
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/home
A profile on Xi while he was Vice President of the PRC https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09BEIJING3128_a.html
Very interesting, thanks.
Anyone know who the professor is that sourced this? His father was China's "first Minister of Labor" and the professor became an American.
> Despite Communist Party rhetoric regarding the creation of a "classless" society, the professor described, the pre-Cultural Revolution society and leadership compounds in which he and Xi Jinping grew up were, ironically, the "most precisely class-based mini-society ever constructed."
Always an interesting observation. I've read is a constant source of conflict in many modern socialist groups is that ideological purity tests often damages their ability to maintain cohesion, recruit among the actual 'working class' since the party is usually middle class university kids, and infighting over petty details of organization has been satirized to death. While the historical success stories of (obviously authoritarian) socialist parties always had rigid hierarchies, clear leaders, and ruthless pragmatism.
Politics always dilutes ideology, you just can't say that part out loud.
Anyone know who the professor is that sourced this? His father was China's "first Minister of Labor" and the professor became an American.
> Despite Communist Party rhetoric regarding the creation of a "classless" society, the professor described, the pre-Cultural Revolution society and leadership compounds in which he and Xi Jinping grew up were, ironically, the "most precisely class-based mini-society ever constructed."
Always an interesting observation. I've read is a constant source of conflict in many modern socialist groups is that ideological purity tests often damages their ability to maintain cohesion, recruit among the actual 'working class' since the party is usually middle class university kids, and infighting over petty details of organization has been satirized to death. While the historical success stories of (obviously authoritarian) socialist parties always had rigid hierarchies, clear leaders, and ruthless pragmatism.
Politics always dilutes ideology, you just can't say that part out loud.
What I find interesting about Xi is his father who was instrumental in introducing free market to China through the province he was in charge of Guandong or Guangzhou (?) who wanted to create self-reliant city governance by inviting limited test run of foreign capital in return for labor produce.
Deng Xiaoping quickly recognized its potential and essentially took credit for this model that allowed China to catapult itself onto the world stage.
I can only imagine his ambitions growing up, he's family suffered under the cultural revolution, he's father was sidelined and others took credit for what essentially transformed China.
He was originally chosen as a candidate to replace Hu, after the March 2012 coup d'etat that led to the imprisonment of Bo Xilai and Zhou Yongkang. He was picked because he was predicted to be a lame duck but what transpired as you see was the political war launched to remove/reduce Ziang Zemin's grip on power.
The internal struggles of the CCP and Xi's family history is very interesting but what I find even more interesting is how much the American media attacks Xi because Jiang Zemin has lot of friends in this area.
Here's the info on 2012 Coup: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSq_TVjw9rQ
Deng Xiaoping quickly recognized its potential and essentially took credit for this model that allowed China to catapult itself onto the world stage.
I can only imagine his ambitions growing up, he's family suffered under the cultural revolution, he's father was sidelined and others took credit for what essentially transformed China.
He was originally chosen as a candidate to replace Hu, after the March 2012 coup d'etat that led to the imprisonment of Bo Xilai and Zhou Yongkang. He was picked because he was predicted to be a lame duck but what transpired as you see was the political war launched to remove/reduce Ziang Zemin's grip on power.
The internal struggles of the CCP and Xi's family history is very interesting but what I find even more interesting is how much the American media attacks Xi because Jiang Zemin has lot of friends in this area.
Here's the info on 2012 Coup: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSq_TVjw9rQ
> he's father was sidelined and others took credit for what essentially transformed China.
Yeah it was probably easy to see Xi as just another party leader but this back story shows how he sees himself as both coming from and representing the very best that China has to offer and a bunch of his friends are very comfortable with such a singular strong man elitist taking over.
He’s got the credentials for such a thing.
It’s just too bad he went ‘redder than red’ in the critical years his father was in jail. But I guess his success was partly because he wasn’t a Deng Xiaoping acolyte that grew up being pro-West.
Yeah it was probably easy to see Xi as just another party leader but this back story shows how he sees himself as both coming from and representing the very best that China has to offer and a bunch of his friends are very comfortable with such a singular strong man elitist taking over.
He’s got the credentials for such a thing.
It’s just too bad he went ‘redder than red’ in the critical years his father was in jail. But I guess his success was partly because he wasn’t a Deng Xiaoping acolyte that grew up being pro-West.
Yes precisely to your point of pro-West and isolationist factions that are splitting up the leadership. It does seem that from Xi's travels that he clearly feels secure enough to meet foreign leaders and leave beijing unattended.
Jiang Zemin's people are throwing everything they got to hold on to essentially unlimited power and wealth. We can see that they also have their fans in the West who have benefited from this system setup by Deng.
It's unlikely that Xi will compromise, I can see that he was able to hide his ambition very well, enough to fool other CCP princelings that tried to wrestle away control. ie) bo xilai
Jiang Zemin's people are throwing everything they got to hold on to essentially unlimited power and wealth. We can see that they also have their fans in the West who have benefited from this system setup by Deng.
It's unlikely that Xi will compromise, I can see that he was able to hide his ambition very well, enough to fool other CCP princelings that tried to wrestle away control. ie) bo xilai
That video you shared was really interesting btw, this is far from common knowledge.
Maybe I don't follow China closely enough but it's interesting both Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao are still alive and kicking.
Looking at the list of paramount leaders, having one extend beyond 8yrs isn't necessarily unprecedented... but Xi doing it clearly was to some people.
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Paramount_leader#/List_of_paramo...
Maybe I don't follow China closely enough but it's interesting both Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao are still alive and kicking.
Looking at the list of paramount leaders, having one extend beyond 8yrs isn't necessarily unprecedented... but Xi doing it clearly was to some people.
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Paramount_leader#/List_of_paramo...
>displaying a fascination with (and knowledge of)
Buddhist martial arts and mystical powers
Beyond parody.
Beyond parody.
https://guides.loc.gov/finding-government-documents/declassi... is an excellent source.
https://www.documentcloud.org/app?q=classified is also pretty interesting and has good search tools.
https://www.documentcloud.org/app?q=classified is also pretty interesting and has good search tools.
Lol I guess NSRB and FBI didn't need to know that
That was an exceptionally fascinating account to hear. Where can I get more documents that have been declassified by the government?
https://cryptome.org/
before wikileaks was wikileaks.
before wikileaks was wikileaks.
>> he's neither brilliant or educated but he's reliable i.e gets things done.
something to note.
something to note.
Where did you get this quote from? The closest line in the document is quite different:
> Kim is neither brilliant nor adequately educated, but he has proven himself highly acceptable to Stalin.
> Kim is neither brilliant nor adequately educated, but he has proven himself highly acceptable to Stalin.
[deleted]
Note that this story is not accepted by historians. It's not clear that this is still the official position of the CIA or US government.
What's (Ueda: X, Y, Z) notation? Is it some kind of numberic representation of Hanja (Korean using Chinese characters)?
See replies to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32220169.
He was a good man in lieu of western propaganda. Read his speeches on nuclear war.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/kim-il-sung/index.htm
https://www.marxists.org/archive/kim-il-sung/index.htm
Wow. I had no idea.
That was superb
What a singularly horrible human being.
Oh, I thought he had derived a math identity.
[deleted]
You work with math?
---
A company I worked for had its own in-house tool for leave management of employees.
The leaves are supposed to get reset on January 1st but that year it didn't happen automatically for whatever reason.
Somebody asked on an internal chat group when the "leaves would be reset".
It had been a long day. I casually replied "mid March".
Everybody panicked, and I panicked because I didn't know why they where panicking.
Later we discovered I thought he was asking about when leaves on trees would reappear after the winter (after they fell down during fall/autumn) :D
This was weird because I was in a torrid region where it's rather hot and humid all year round, there's no such thing as winter, it never snows, and the trees are evergreen — there's never an all-leaves-are-down situation.
(The year prior to that I was in another part of the Earth where the leaves are gone winter. I told you it had been a long day.)
---
A company I worked for had its own in-house tool for leave management of employees.
The leaves are supposed to get reset on January 1st but that year it didn't happen automatically for whatever reason.
Somebody asked on an internal chat group when the "leaves would be reset".
It had been a long day. I casually replied "mid March".
Everybody panicked, and I panicked because I didn't know why they where panicking.
Later we discovered I thought he was asking about when leaves on trees would reappear after the winter (after they fell down during fall/autumn) :D
This was weird because I was in a torrid region where it's rather hot and humid all year round, there's no such thing as winter, it never snows, and the trees are evergreen — there's never an all-leaves-are-down situation.
(The year prior to that I was in another part of the Earth where the leaves are gone winter. I told you it had been a long day.)
What does resetting the leaves mean?
"Leave" is a word for holiday/vacation in UK English. So you'd have a yearly allocation of (say) 25 days of leave/holiday/vacation that is consumed through the year (by going on holiday), then on or shortly after New Year it would be "reset" back to 25.
TLDR Kim il sung is Don Draper
I remember when I was in primary school, you will find these propaganda papers on the streets telling South Koreans of how corrupt their government was and urging them to defect to North. Apparently, North Korea would send balloons filled with these propaganda messages. South would do the same to North.
Then there was a TV show once a year where separated families in North & South re-unite for a holiday. They were separated during the Korean War and the two governments allowed these families to be found and meet for a few days, before they were separated again. They hadn't seen each other for ~30 years so were young and only remembered just a few bits of information. These TV shows made EVERYONE cry.