4 ms·

Based on the source, I went in to this article assuming it would somehow paint North Korea in a more forgiving light, and attack the Trump administration. I wa

Based on the source, I went in to this article assuming it would somehow paint North Korea in a more forgiving light, and attack the Trump administration. I was not wrong. The whole thing left a bad taste in my mouth. Maybe Otto was physically beaten, maybe he wasn't. Maybe his incarceration conditions were "good" or maybe they weren't. Maybe he did try and commit suicide, maybe he didn't. The author certainly didn't have any more hard, objective facts than anyone before them. He just had an axe to grind.

stronglikedan 8y ago
> I was not wrong. When I saw the word "hostage" misused in the title, I had the exact same feeling.
gadders 8y ago
He did get some digs in against Trump, but I think he also praised his actions compared to the Obama administration and how personally he took the issue: >> When Trump learned of Otto's condition, he doubled down on the order for Yun to rush to Pyongyang and bring Otto home. The North Koreans were unilaterally informed that an American plane would soon land in Pyongyang and that United States diplomats and doctors would get off. “The president was very invested in bringing Otto home,” said a State Department official who was involved in the case and who was not authorized to speak on the record. “Listening to him deliberate on this, he sounded to me a lot more like a dad.
badbug 8y ago
The author interviewed several experts who claimed he wasn't beaten including people who examined him in person. Sorry this article is critical of your dear leader.
- throwaway78568 8y ago
  He never explains the misaligned teeth. They seem to agree that the teeth are "healthy" but also that they were previously straight, and are no longer straight. A little odd, don't you think?
  - badbug 8y ago
    The only person claiming that is the family. "Natural and in good repair" from the American doctor. The family also refused an autopsy. Weird right?
    - throwaway78568 8y ago
      Cool man, so you know exactly what happened for that whole time period while he was in NK? He was there for over two years. No way he was beaten at any point, right? No way they tortured him? The amount of cognitive dissonance it takes to defend North Korea is staggering. To each his own I guess.
      - badbug 8y ago
        Never claimed that I knew and no where in any of my posts have I defended north korea. I'm putting more weight on objective observers. People with scientific backgrounds. You are putting weight on grieving parents who refused an autopsy and a notorious liar.
      - tptacek 8y ago
        There's no evidence of physical torture. No fractures, no visible injuries, symmetrical damage in brain scans suggesting no direct trauma to his head, no apparent damage to his teeth, the much-discussed scar on his foot was superficial, and overt evidence of careful medical care (no bedsores, well nourished, things that are hard to do even in US hospitals). Whether you want Warmbier to have been physically tortured or not, the evidence of his torture is not present. Which is important, because it contradicts the media story about Warmbier's experience.
        6CLfK93jQ8 8y ago
        There is no direct evidence of his torture, nor of his lack of torture by other forms. Why did North Korea say that his brain damage was caused by botulism and a bad reaction to a sleeping pill? Otto's doctors said it was most likely cardiopulmonary arrest. His doctor's said we will never know what happened to him exactly but something nefarious seems likely given North Korea's history, and the lies about the cause of brain death. Not to mention, it's easy to envision forms of torture that might cause a cardiopulmonary event(waterboarding, drowning, suffocation, etc). To me it's really surprising that an omission of correcting the perception that Otto was beaten on the part of the Trump administration is evidence Trump used the situation or that North Korea did not violate any of Otto's human rights.
seren 8y ago
As a non-American, I did not feel it was highly critical of the Trump administration > Now, that's not to fault the Trump administration for applying maximum pressure on North Korea for an American citizen ending up brain-damaged in its custody: Such behavior warrants punishment. Nor is it to imply that the senior government official lied to The New York Times about the intelligence reports, as some analysts suggested to me; that person seems to have correctly described them. But if the maverick boldness that the administration displayed in rescuing Otto represents the best of Trumpism, what followed once it was clear the reports were flawed encapsulates its troubling disregard for facts when a dubious narrative supports its interests. You could say that the last sentence is critical but, Trump or no Trump, any government is using sometimes dubious arguments for its own interest. Never let go a crisis go to waste.
- throwaway78568 8y ago
  The author implies that the Otto story was simply a lever for Trump to start a war with NK. And that when moods change, the Otto story is no longer "useful" to Trump and so is forgotten. This is more an indictment of the 24 hours news cycle I think. He also spends a great deal of time defending the NK hospital procedures and "likely" incarceration facilities. I mean, personally I'm repulsed by NK. I'm repulsed that Trump treated their leader with dignity. I'm repulsed that this story implies that the north koreans didn't get a fair shake in the press.
  - ap3 8y ago
    There is also the history of previous American hostages that said they were not tortured. And the statement from the coroner saying no evidence of head trauma. Of course if all of this were lies it would be even worse for an American president to smile and shake hands with those responsible. The article also sort of glosses over the way NK made up the charge against Otto and other foreigners - the regime abuses world citizens for personal gain.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    The story doesn't imply that DPRK didn't "get a fair shake"; it simply says that the story spread in the press was false. We don't believe falsehoods simply because we think they should be true.
msteffen 8y ago
> The author certainly didn't have any more hard, objective facts than anyone before them. Are there other articles that talk about e.g. the coroner's conclusions? I had not heard those before

stronglikedan 8y ago

> I was not wrong. When I saw the word "hostage" misused in the title, I had the exact same feeling.

gadders 8y ago

He did get some digs in against Trump, but I think he also praised his actions compared to the Obama administration and how personally he took the issue: >> When Trump learned of Otto's condition, he doubled down on the order for Yun to rush to Pyongyang and bring Otto home. The North Koreans were unilaterally informed that an American plane would soon land in Pyongyang and that United States diplomats and doctors would get off. “The president was very invested in bringing Otto home,” said a State Department official who was involved in the case and who was not authorized to speak on the record. “Listening to him deliberate on this, he sounded to me a lot more like a dad.

badbug 8y ago

The author interviewed several experts who claimed he wasn't beaten including people who examined him in person. Sorry this article is critical of your dear leader.

throwaway78568 8y ago
He never explains the misaligned teeth. They seem to agree that the teeth are "healthy" but also that they were previously straight, and are no longer straight. A little odd, don't you think?
- badbug 8y ago
  The only person claiming that is the family. "Natural and in good repair" from the American doctor. The family also refused an autopsy. Weird right?
  - throwaway78568 8y ago
    Cool man, so you know exactly what happened for that whole time period while he was in NK? He was there for over two years. No way he was beaten at any point, right? No way they tortured him? The amount of cognitive dissonance it takes to defend North Korea is staggering. To each his own I guess.
    - badbug 8y ago
      Never claimed that I knew and no where in any of my posts have I defended north korea. I'm putting more weight on objective observers. People with scientific backgrounds. You are putting weight on grieving parents who refused an autopsy and a notorious liar.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      There's no evidence of physical torture. No fractures, no visible injuries, symmetrical damage in brain scans suggesting no direct trauma to his head, no apparent damage to his teeth, the much-discussed scar on his foot was superficial, and overt evidence of careful medical care (no bedsores, well nourished, things that are hard to do even in US hospitals). Whether you want Warmbier to have been physically tortured or not, the evidence of his torture is not present. Which is important, because it contradicts the media story about Warmbier's experience.
      - 6CLfK93jQ8 8y ago
        There is no direct evidence of his torture, nor of his lack of torture by other forms. Why did North Korea say that his brain damage was caused by botulism and a bad reaction to a sleeping pill? Otto's doctors said it was most likely cardiopulmonary arrest. His doctor's said we will never know what happened to him exactly but something nefarious seems likely given North Korea's history, and the lies about the cause of brain death. Not to mention, it's easy to envision forms of torture that might cause a cardiopulmonary event(waterboarding, drowning, suffocation, etc). To me it's really surprising that an omission of correcting the perception that Otto was beaten on the part of the Trump administration is evidence Trump used the situation or that North Korea did not violate any of Otto's human rights.

seren 8y ago

As a non-American, I did not feel it was highly critical of the Trump administration > Now, that's not to fault the Trump administration for applying maximum pressure on North Korea for an American citizen ending up brain-damaged in its custody: Such behavior warrants punishment. Nor is it to imply that the senior government official lied to The New York Times about the intelligence reports, as some analysts suggested to me; that person seems to have correctly described them. But if the maverick boldness that the administration displayed in rescuing Otto represents the best of Trumpism, what followed once it was clear the reports were flawed encapsulates its troubling disregard for facts when a dubious narrative supports its interests. You could say that the last sentence is critical but, Trump or no Trump, any government is using sometimes dubious arguments for its own interest. Never let go a crisis go to waste.

throwaway78568 8y ago
The author implies that the Otto story was simply a lever for Trump to start a war with NK. And that when moods change, the Otto story is no longer "useful" to Trump and so is forgotten. This is more an indictment of the 24 hours news cycle I think. He also spends a great deal of time defending the NK hospital procedures and "likely" incarceration facilities. I mean, personally I'm repulsed by NK. I'm repulsed that Trump treated their leader with dignity. I'm repulsed that this story implies that the north koreans didn't get a fair shake in the press.
- ap3 8y ago
  There is also the history of previous American hostages that said they were not tortured. And the statement from the coroner saying no evidence of head trauma. Of course if all of this were lies it would be even worse for an American president to smile and shake hands with those responsible. The article also sort of glosses over the way NK made up the charge against Otto and other foreigners - the regime abuses world citizens for personal gain.
- tptacek 8y ago
  The story doesn't imply that DPRK didn't "get a fair shake"; it simply says that the story spread in the press was false. We don't believe falsehoods simply because we think they should be true.

msteffen 8y ago

> The author certainly didn't have any more hard, objective facts than anyone before them. Are there other articles that talk about e.g. the coroner's conclusions? I had not heard those before