|calendar>> April 14. 2014 Juche 103|
Inspection Group of NDC of DPRK Opens to Public Truth about Drone Case Touted by S. Korean Authorities
|Pyongyang, April 14 (KCNA) -- The inspection group of the National Defence Commission (NDC) of the DPRK on Monday opened to public the truth about the drone case touted by the south Korean authorities, terming the fiction about the "drones sent by the north" a replica of the Cheonan warship sinking case from A to Z.
According to the open statement, it was reported that crashed drones were found in various parts of south Korea recently.
The south Korean military authorities on April 2 hastily announced the "results of the first investigation" in which they concluded that the drones were sent by the north. On April 11 they announced the "results of intermediary investigation" insisting that the drones "belong to the north".
They claimed those photos available from the drones are the most convincing evidence proving that the "drones belong to the north".
If one follows the south side's assertion, flying bodies coming from the north to the south and from the south to the north should belong to the north and if photos of south side areas are available from the flying bodies, all of them should belong to the north.
If then, flying bodies coming from the south to the north and from the north to the south in the areas north of the Military Demarcation Line should belong to south Korea and if photos of areas of the north side are available from the flying bodies, they should belong to south Korea.
The "central joint inspection team" produced the writing style in the north marked on the engine battery as one of the most convincing evidence proving that the drones belong to the "north".
It is said that the front side of the engine battery of a drone at present bears the trade mark "date of kiyong (use) June 25, 2013" and "date of stop using June 25, 2014."
They insist that this is the method of writing trade mark commonly used in the north and to write "naltsa (date)" used by south Korea as "nalja" is the writing of the north Korean style.
People in the north never use the word "kiyong" on any product. There is no explanation about the word "kiyong" in the large Korean dictionary in the north.
The recent "results of investigation" claimed that Chinese and Japanese letters are seen on the back of the battery and the device supporting the flying posture of the drones was made by Futaba of Japan.
If they assert the drones belong to the "north" as they bear Korean letters, how they will explain the Chinese and Japanese letters and Japan-made device.
Fingerprints were cited as one of the evidence proving the claim that the drones belong to the north.
If one with normal way of thinking insists that the fingerprints they claim found on the drones belong to north Koreans simply because they are not south Koreans', no one can trust the assertion.
A spokesman for the south Korean Ministry of Defense announced at the outset that "it would not be easy to find the place where the north's drone took off even if over 30 trillion won was spent out of the defense budget."
Some days later, he claimed that the take-off point of the drone was confirmed, adding that it was Onchon airfield in South Hwanghae Province.
Onchon airfield of the DPRK is situated in South Phyongan Province, not in South Hwanghae Province.
A few days later, he corrected the take-off point of the drone announced earlier, noting that an airfield near Ongjin in South Hwanghae Province was the place where it took off.
People in the north have never heard there is an airfield near Ongjin.
The south Korean authorities cited the blue color of the drone as evidence to proving that the drones belong to the north.
They claim blue and white colors are "colors used in north Korea". Is there anyone who can agree with this?
"One cannot but construe that drones were sent by the north as it is a short distance for neighboring countries to launch such drones and they were not launched in the south either". This is one clause of the "intermediary investigation results" which judged on the basis of the flying range that the drones were sent by the "north".
If then, do all flying bodies in the world with either short or long flying range belong to the "north"?
The south Korean Ministry of Defense on Mar. 31 claimed it confirmed those drones were launched from the area of the north side as a radar of E-8 detected a drone flying to Paekryong Island from the north.
It made a poor excuse that the south side fired at least 300 shells from Vulcan artillery pieces three times the moment the drone was detected but could not shoot down the drone flying at the altitude of 5-6 km because the maximum firing range of those guns is just 2 km.
The "central joint inspection team," as if it had forgotten all what it had said, made public that the drone discovered on Paekryong Island crashed due to the lack of fuel, flying zigzag at the speed of 100-120 km per hour at the altitude of 1.4 km.
When public became increasingly skeptical about its announcement, the team asserted that another drone which the authorities did not know might be sent to Paekryong Island.
Besides, the south Korean authorities made the claim as evidence proving the "north's involvement" that the drones were "cast in iron mould", electronic circuit board attached to wood is not the south Korean style and there is neither witness nor informer who said that they found a launching pad and additional equipment needed for the drone take-off in south Korea. This is the "results of the intermediary investigation" full of lies.
Seeing these ambiguous behaviors, people whisper that it was not an easy job to cook up and prove the story about the "north's involvement."
The more water flows under the bridge and the more facts are known to public, the more saliently they will bring to light truth that the story about the "north's involvement" is a sheer lie.
The open statement laid bare the sinister criminal aims sought by the south Korean authorities through the drone case:
The first aim sought by the south Korean authorities is to blame the DPRK for orchestrating the drone case and shift the responsibility for the acute north-south relations and the situation on the Korean peninsula inching close to a war on to the DPRK.
The second aim is to take the second "May 24 anti-north measure" by fabricating the second Cheonan warship sinking case in a bid to keep the north-south relations in the state of confrontation.
The third aim is to plug their American master into their arms buildup under the pretext of "strengthening the security posture" and thus make up for the "vacuum of force" and stifle the DPRK by force of arms at any cost.
It is an inveterate bad habit of the south Korean authorities to cook up shocking cases and kick up anti-DPRK confrontation hysteria by linking those cases with the DPRK whenever they are driven into a crisis.
The inspection group of the NDC has the willingness to make everything clear now that the south Korean authorities have not yet ceased floating the story about "the north's involvement" in Cheonan warship sinking case and are fabricating the second and third Cheonan cases.
The DPRK remains unchanged in its stand to jointly investigate all cases including the Cheonan case as they claim the north was involved in them.
Security room chief of Chongwadae Kim Jang Su, who allegedly looks after "state security" of south Korea, may take part in the investigation on behalf of the south side as it will draw great attention of the nation.
If the south Korean authorities have no compunction, there will be no reason whatsoever for them to shun the just and reasonable claim made by the DPRK from the very day of the occurrence of the Cheonan case.
We will wait for the south Korean authorities' response.
Copyright (C) KOREA NEWS SERVICE(KNS) All Rights Reserved.