Talk:Superdollar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of the WikiProject Numismatics, which is an attempt to facilitate the categorization and creation of accurate and formal Numismatism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join and see a list of open tasks to help with. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea (North Korea), a project to build and improve articles related to Korea. We invite you to join the project and contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. | |
Contents |
[edit] the US would take action if it were true
This story looks like bogus. Just think about it. If the USA knows the commies have the press factory in Pyeongseong, they would send in AC-130s and choppers with Delta Force or SEAL to capture the equipment. Big scandal. Uncle Sam could then convene the UN Security Council and press through a resolution against North Korea and start an internationally backed war to unite the peninsula. Chinese communists would be powerless to protect Kim-Yong Il in the face of such a scandal. Most certainly Dubya and neocons are very keen to get rid of those stalinist bastards. Why would he miss this opportunity?
[edit] the offense is not worth the cost of taking action
- Same reason there has been a DMZ for about fifty years. The human costs of intervention would be too high. If this is going on (and I see no reason to doubt its plausibility) it seems unlikely to me that the US would take it that seriously because the scale is so small--according to the story North Korean officials abroad (how many of those would there be?) are distributing the notes at a rate of 50/50. This is extremely unlikely to have a serious effect on the US economy. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:57, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] inconsistent
There are confliting passages in this article: Have people been arested, or haven't they?
[edit] where?
- What passages do you think conflict?--ThreeAnswers 23:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV
I edited the first line in this article because it reported NK's involvement as fact, and as far as I'm aware this isn't the case (it is an allegation as of now).
The Garland section is /very/ NPOV. Garland's position as Chief of Staff of the Official IRA, for example, is an allegation reported directly by one newspaper, which is hardly proof. More importantly, the way the article is written suggests that the goings-on are factual, rather than allegations in a US DoJ indictment.
dahamsta 15:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] External links
nytimes.com is a paysite. They get your information, and for "free" they give you the first paragraph. This should be removed or at least warned of. 66.114.93.6 08:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] CIA involvement
Maybe the idea of CIA involvement should be considered in more detail (and not only as a North Korean lie) since many western specialists do not assume that a country like north corea would be able to afford or maintain such a machine - and even if this would be the case would not gain an economical advantage (since operations including the experts, sumggeling the material eg.) would be too expensive
compare the book "Moneymakers. The Secret World of Banknote Printing" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.168.90.160 (talk • contribs)
- I feel there is a lot of mis-guided information on this Supernote page. The most mis-lead is the CIA Involvement section. If you review the translated news article, you will be left with a huge sense of doubt as to the importance of such unsubstantiated claims, in such a short news article. It makes me question how much weight we should put on this section of the Supernote article on our dearest 'just-the-facts mam' ,Wikipedia. I question the intentions of the closing statement in this section "Presently, there has not been an official response by the U.S. government to these accusations". -- ViaBest 17:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- The article consists almost completely of rumours, the one accusing CIA is by no means different to that. The article seems to know better what the North Koreans are doing than they probably know themselves, and that without providing any explanations for the sources of the information. Indeed the style of the article is to say at most "North Korea is accused of...", but never to tell by whom are they actually accused, by everyone ranging from the United Nations to the Pope? Or rather just by the current US cabinet? -84.169.79.157 10:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
North Korea called the accusations "sheer lies" and accused the U.S. of using the issue as a pretext to war.[2][3] On January 6, 2007 reports surfaced suggesting the counterfeiting was the work of the CIA - a statement corroborated by anonymous U.S. government sources.[4]
I clicked through and read the article at globalresearch... it does not say anything about US government sources confirming anything, anonymous or otherwise. The investigation was a german newspaper, the 'Frankfurter Allgemeinen Sonntagszeitung' of Frankfurt, which interviewed "counterfeit money experts and leading representatives of the high-security publishing industry".
The statement re corroboration by US government sources has been removed.
The argument that you're making about "everything" being an uncorroborated rumor is what lets wikipedia become the conspiracy theory repository. The premise of the article accusing the CIA is that a) the CIA is so wholly lacking in oversight and that it is somehow funding secret activities in foreign countries by undermining its own economy, and b) that North Korea, a country that just built an atomic bomb in secret, "doesn't have the technology". Further, its an especially uncorroborated claim if it comes from a conspiracy theory website, and the original article is about half a page and in German. Can we come to a consensus over removing this unless some more persuasive evidence comes to light? Sus4 01:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
One source in a foreign (to the US) paper of dubious credibility does not inspire confidence. It may be worth mentioning the theory, but the prominence of the theorizing makes one believe the solid allegations against North Korea vs. the loose allegations against the CIA are of equal merit. It's exactly like putting the theory of intelligent design on the evolution page. Can we please move the German paper's CIA allegation to the footnotes, until it can be corroborated?
I was interested in this thread about the veracity of allegations that the CIA are involved in the manufacture of the notes, so I checked the source of the information. It turns out that the link at the bottom of the page is incorrect. The correct original article is here. A translation of the article into English is provided here. I think people should read this article again, because some of the comments in this discussion are incorrect.
Reading the article myself, I think it contains interesting information which casts some doubt on US claims that North Korea is behind the manufacture of the supernotes, however, the allegation against the CIA appears to be based upon a "rumour" circulating around "representatives of the security printing industry and counterfeiting investigators". I really don't think that this standard of proof is high enough to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia and so I agree that references to allegations of CIA involvement should probably be removed. It is possible that there is other, more substantiated, information in this article which might be of interest and worth including. Dox96 10:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The CIA reference
Please note the disclaimer at the bottom of the page: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
If this is the only source, and it could have been written by some guy with no sources himself, it should be removed. The hosting site does not assume responsibility for the content and with no actual sources for the content, it seems as reliable as any unresearched and biased personal website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.188.153.194 (talk • contribs) 04:42, 17 May 2007
[edit] Foreign bank account NPOV problem
I'm concerned that the statement: "Later in August 2006, the Sankei Shimbun reported that North Korea had opened 23 bank accounts in 10 countries, with the likely intent of laundering more superbills.[24]" has an NPOV problem. The linked article contains no allegation about using these accounts for laundering, and is speculation anyway. The relevance of this whole statement to the topic at hand is questionable anyway. I suggest deletion. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? Dox96 07:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
