OK, let me get this straight — a foreigner refuses to submit a health check, and you give her a visa extension anyway?
I guess if whitey bitches enough, problem solved.
(HT to readers)
Follow Us!
Korea News via Yahoo- S.Korea name squad for vital clash
- Korea bans Orioles' scouts after teen inks deal
- S. Korea Lawmakers Make First Gaeseong Trip Since Kim Death
- Korea-US trade pact re-emerges as political issue
- Korea-U.S. trade pact re-emerges as political issue
- South Korea Lawmakers Make First Trip to Gaeseong Complex Since Kim Death
- South Korea Holds Rates for Eighth Straight Month
- South Korea Holds Interest Rate for Eighth Month as Economic Growth Slows
- Saudi 'pledges secure energy supply' to S. Korea
- The Korea Times gets taken for an intergalactic ride
Buy My Seoul Guidebook!
Books and DVDs on Korea
{ 60 comments… read them below or add one }
I think it’s hilarious that she used the ‘human rights violation’ argument. It seems to be the soup du jour for anyone who doesn’t get what they want these days in Korea, so I don’t see why whitey can’t jump on the bandwagon as well.
Yes, testing elementary school students is a human rights violation as well, at least according to the KTU.
Anyway, it’s not news that immigration policies vary from office to office, officer to officer. The story here SHOULD be immigration officers not applying immigration’s policies, not a foreigner pulling a fast one.
Where in the article did it say she was white?
I guarantee they’ll be going over the paperwork and making sure she does get tested or kicked out of the country. Another case of the dumber and dumberer expat in Korea.
I wonder where her worries truly lie-human rights or kuta cowboy?
Why is anyone surprised? I’m pretty sure the law says that any bureaucrat official is allowed to do whatever they want, any time, with little or no consequence. And if they’re not sure, I think they’re supposed to pick something out of a hat. That’s been my experience, anyway.
“I wonder where her worries truly lie…”
Giving her the benefit of a doubt, I say her B.S. capacity was reached and she did what American college kids do: whine until they get what they want.
Putting aside everything else, it’s cool that she succeeded so far without hauling in a large organization like the UN Human Rights Commission.
But she’s actually lost the fight. She made Korea look bad, ergo she’s a goner — it’s only a matter of time now.
I give her 3 weeks before Deportation or Testing.
Well, I’m guessing that she knew that, despite the Immigration officer’s claims, the law hasn’t changed. In other words, there is currently no legal basis for the new regulations (although a bill seeking to ‘remedy’ that problem was submitted late last year).
“It is impossible for us to grant a visa in violation of the regulations”
Actually, since the regulations are not law, the decision to grant a visa remains a discretionary one.
Gong-gam is the law firm (and Chang the lawyer) that handled the “Heo” foreigner HIV/AIDS case, and won.
http://www.korealawblog.com/entry/seoul_high_court_hiv_not_justifiable_reason_for_deportation
As Gong-gam points out the E-2 requirements were put in with “no legal grounds”. That is without even enacting a law. Prof. Wagner at KHU mentioned this several times in his articles.
iheartblueballs – Is it hard for you to understand that when you decide single out a group for a search that implicates the right to privacy and the presumption of innocence AND you do without even bothering to pass a law that it is a human rights violation?
Listen to what the nation’s top Public Interest Law Group says about it: “no legal grounds”, “discriminative immigration rules”. This group is looking for further challenges. This isn’t a bunch of overly sensitive foreigners bitching about nothing.
Grandfallon – there is no “law” requiring the HIV/AIDS & drug tests. They just decided to go for it. Laws are pending. What you point out is also at the core of the human rights violation. Wild unchecked discretionary power. Doing whatever they want without laws or rules.
judgejudy – I’ll take that bet. Can you really guarantee she’ll be kicked out of the country? “Heo” had AIDS and a deportation order and Gong-gam won their case. He lives in Korea. What does Vandom have? “Visa extension, one year.”
Gong-gam wanted them to try to deport her. That was the plan.
And there will be more challenges coming. Gong-gam has said they will “support foreign teachers challenging the discriminative immigration rules”.
Gong-gam’s webpage:
http://www.kpil.org/eng/index.php
Nobody’s saying there should be no rules for people teaching kids. There is a way to do it according to Korean law and to make it just.
They can’t kick her out now, at least on that ground, since they’ve publicly stated she submitted all the requisite papers.
The intimidated immigration officers probably thought, “oh shit another difficult angry whitey – I ain’t going to speak English and deal with her… just get her out of our hair.. who cares”.
Can anyone imagine if I was to write something like that and handed it over to a Canadian immigration officer and stand there looking all cross and expecting special treatment?
I think the difference with her renewal/extension is that, in-country, she SHOULD be protected by Korea’s own anti-discrimination laws, but out-of-country she is not under such protection.
I thought this was (part of) the reason why they were enacting a bill to make such “regulations” into law. Without the law, there was no legal basis for them to force these medical checks on only one small demographic.
“But the KIS refuted the allegations. Kim Young-keun, a KIS spokesperson, said the immigration office in Suwon had received all of the necessary documents to allow the organization to grant a renewal.”
What’s the problem, it NEVER happened as Ms. Vandom said. Immigration and Mr. Kim do NOT lie!
I doubt Attorney Gong-gam can make Immigration/Kim, Young-keun prove they received all necessary documents.
So like I say, what’s the big fuss?
How unfair. Causing a fuss never works for locals.
I just renewed my e2 visa. I didn’t submit any medical test. Immigration didn’t even ask.
Guess it depends who you get.
I want to know if the letter that she presented was written in Korean or in English.
Wouldn’t it be pretty arrogant for a Korean to rock up to an Australian/American/Caledonian immigration office with a letter written in Korean, demanding certain treatment? (I say this regardless of the merits of her legal argument.)
Did I skip over a line in the article? Can anyone confirm what language it was in?
It works with police at traffic checkstops, too.
Ummm the tests are required to be submitted before obtaining an ARC. If she already has the ID card, then no rule has been circumvented.
She’s been living in Korea for 3 years. Only recently was asked to submit the HIV & drug tests for a renewal.
Bipolar Mindscrew – about 17,000 had an ARC in 2007. They were all required to do the tests even though they were living here and already had the ID cards.
Hamel – I heard the letter was in Korean and English. The Gong-gam law firm had translated it for her.
Gong-gam was hoping the KIS would issue a deportation order. It’s complicated because the E-2 “requirements” (they aren’t law) can’t be challenged in court because THEY AREN’T LAW. It’s a catch-22.
So Gong-gam wanted STATE ACTION in the form of a deportation. That could be challenged in Admin. Court. Gong-gam could ask what law the deportation was based on and then KIS would lose.
The KIS knows there’s no law to base the E-2 requirements so they made a clever decision (first for everything), just give her the visa and say she submitted the papers. Finally make a statement like: “It is impossible for us to grant a visa in violation of the regulations”.
KIS is smart because they know most English teachers are pussies and it’ll be a long time ’til another one has enough balls to do what Vandom did.
In the meantime, Gong-gam is waiting for another E-2 to challenge it.
It’s not the English teachers bitching, the KOREAN human rights legal experts want to put the kibosh on the gov doing shit without any law to base it on. IT IS BAD FOR KOREANS (not just whitey).
Who’s paying the lawyers?
Linkd – the lawyers are doing it pro bono (for free).
It’s GONG-GAM, the Korea Public Interest Lawyers Group. The largest public interest law group in the country.
http://www.kpil.org/eng/index.php
They wouldn’t take the case if it didn’t have merit and it wasn’t in the interest of Korean citizens.
It’s not so simple as “whitey” bitching. Vandom had nothing to gain in this, and everything to lose. She did it cuz she cares about the country.
Gong-gam wanted this case, they needed an E-2 visa holder to bring it. They are looking for more E-2 holders to bring cases. Doubt they will find someone will Vandom’s courage anytime soon…
Ok so the letter was in Korean and English. Thanks,
As for immigration, putting this issue aside for a moment, I always tell anyone dealing with KIS the same thing: the outcome that you will get at immigration depends on which officer you get on the day you go. And sometimes it depends on when you see that officer too (their mood may vary depending on a number of factors like meal last eaten, had sex lately, etc).
If you do not like the answer one officer gives you, come back another day and choose another officer. You may get a different answer. I have heard so many contrary things happening to different people (especially with regards to the F-5 visa lately) that almost NOTHING would surprise me. Thanks, poppyroks.
Sorry, poppyroks, but I just can’t agree. I am not an Objectivist or even an Ayn Rand fan, but even I can see that most people do things because they want to and/or because it serves their own interest. The argument you make is similar to someone suggesting that Gerry Bevers has nothing to gain by supporting Japan in her historical claims to Those Rocky Islets(TM). He does and so does Vandom, even though the gains may not be that obvious to others.
hamel, I wouldn’t rule out righteous indignation as a strong motivation for human action. Especially with chicks.
poppyroks, next question: what does a Korean lawyer involved with this case say to a ‘typical Korean’ to explain why this case matters to Korean society at large?
hamel – point taken. I meant she didn’t have anything to gave in the sense of having a secret agenda. I think her motivation was: 1. She was upset, as she says in her letter, that after 3 years of living in Korea she was suddenly suspected as a threat and had “prove” herself as clean and worthy. she certainly had a lot to lose. 2. She found Korean legal experts who said we are angry too, this isn’t good for us either. 3. She care about Korea enough to support their cause and they cared enough about her to support her cause. Objectivist enough for you?
Linkd – i think it goes back to the arguments that Prof. Wagner at KHU was making. He wrote a couple articles in the KT about the E-2 issue. His arguments always came back to it’s bad policy for KOREANS.
“…unconstitutional maneuver amounts to nothing less than a sanctioning by the ministry of the exercise of arbitrary governance and unchecked discretion. Such a cavalier disregard of the Constitution and the essential principle of the rule of law should concern Korean citizens and anyone else living here.”
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/special/2009/03/181_39380.html
“But if the goals of the ROK are truly to protect “people’s health” and maintain “public order,” then the current policy of discriminatory HIV and drug testing for foreigners must be abandoned. Korean leaders at the national and international level have repeatedly acknowledged that attempting to control the spread of HIV by testing and deporting foreigners is counterproductive and can actually increase the threat to public health.
Government policies that uphold the stigma for people living with HIV/AIDS create disincentives for voluntary testing, promotes the false idea that only foreigners are at risk for HIV/AIDS, and ignores the needs of the 13,000 Korean citizens estimated to be infected. It is government policies such as these – and not foreigners – that threaten ‘people’s health.’
As for the maintenance of ‘public order,’ it must always be recalled that respect for the Korean constitutional principles of human rights, non-discrimination, and the rule of law is central to securing public order. Government policies that disregard these essential principles truly threaten public order by eroding the constitutional foundation on which this society is based. The implementation of compulsory drug testing, without even bothering to enact a law and without concern for the fact that foreign teachers are tested for drugs for which there had been no prior arrests, constitutes just such a dangerous government policy.”
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/special/2009/03/139_41565.html
I’d say that’s argument that the lawyers believe. As for what you could explain the “typical Korean”? Try explaining to the “typical American” that torturing suspected terrorists is not in America’s interests. Some get it right off, some don’t. I suppose it’s the same with Koreans.
Linkd and poppyroks: presactly. Whenever we take a stand on something, we do it because it makes us feel good and/or right to do so. No shame in that.
This is not a battle I would have picked. I do sympathise with the Marmot in a way when he says that as non-citizens in this country, we don’t have the same rights as Koreans, and if the Korean government (or, for that matter, government of any nation we are living in if non-citizens) chooses that we are undesirable, then we have little reason to argue.
I understand that in this case the argment is apparently about due process. I do sympathise, but I also remember that in Korean immigration law, almost everything is discretionary and regulations, not laws. That is neither new nor surprising, and I really wonder how it is in other countries. I mean, immigration departments/ministries in other countries can set regulations based on government policies at the time, can’t they? Must an act of parliament (or the like) be made each time an immigration stipulation changes?
Just as an anecdote, I was told 5 years ago by the director of an English village that, when they tried to hire a Polish-born women who had studied and lived in the US for years, KIS told them no, she must be a “native speaker” and Poles did not qualify. Somebody found out/admitted that it was not a law but a regulation, and discretion could be used. Hey presto, the Pole was hired.
I don’t know why immigration would have to deport her. All they needed to do was wait until her visa ran out.
“I do sympathise with the Marmot in a way when he says that as non-citizens in this country, we don’t have the same rights as Koreans, and if the Korean government (or, for that matter, government of any nation we are living in if non-citizens) chooses that we are undesirable, then we have little reason to argue.”
And if you live here for 5, 10, 15 years paying taxes and not getting arrested why should you still be considered a foreigner? In Canada, we call those people Permanent Residents. Koreans still consider your blood as dirty. You guys like being pets for the Koreans and now you’ve got Stockholm Syndrome so you justify their RACIST laws. You should see the Koreans fight tooth and nail to ensure that they get everything coming to them in Canada, but then you roll over like lapdogs when the Koreans treat you like dirt. Good for Ms. Vandom.
In Los Angeles, Ms. Grace Lee and thousands of others like her are asking herself the same question.
# 29 theKorean,
That’s a REALLY bad comparison. Ms. Grace is an illegal, Ms. Vandom isn’t. In fact there aren’t any illegal Americans in S. Korea while there are thousand of illegal Koreans in America.
There are thousands of illegal American residents of Korea. Most of them are English-teacher types arriving on a tourist visa and not obtaining an E-2 visa sponsored by a hagwon, instead teaching “privates” as free men.
tbone,
I won’t get into my whole view on immigration, but it would suffice to say that the distinction you draw, in my view, is meaningless.
My view on immigration is fully laid out on the front page of my blog, if anyone is curious.
No, Grace is not an “illegal.” No person is illegal. Her residency and paid employment are illegal. She is not.
Because I’m a US national. Or so my passport says.
Not sure what the deal is in Canada, but in the US, we call non-citzens without permanent residency status “aliens.” If they are in the country illegally, we call them “illegal aliens.” Unless you write for the NYT, in which case you call them “undocumented Americans.”
No, they consider my passport blue and my residency status E-7.
Firstly, Koreans don’t treat me like dirt, although I do wish permanent residency was easier to obtain (as opposed to citizenship, which, I understand, is relatively easy to obtain). Secondly, as I think I’ve made perfectly clear, I think the US (and Canada) have a lot to learn from Korea in terms of how to deal with foreigners “fighting tooth and nail to ensure that they get everything coming to them.”
She is an illegal. “Illegal” here is simply shorthand for “illegal alien,” which she is by accounts on this post.
Let’s not get our panties in a wad over semantics.
If you’re still there, poppyroks, of course I wish y’all luck.
This is where I think you’re wrong, unless my sense of how ingrained Confucianism remains in Korea is incorrect. I think you’re overlaying logic where only emotion is wanted. I think you’re pushing rules where (unspoken) consensus is all they’re after. And I certainly don’t believe that public order in Korea is based on the constitution. All those assumptions of mine, however, have no bearing on your case – but I’m sure they’ll be stressing out your judge, who will be, in my charicaturized imagination, a perfect ajosshi, who will simply plug into the hive mind and produce the verdict he believes to be an accurate reflection of the Korean public will, in complete disregard of whatever logical arguments you have presented. May you prevail.
Terminology matters, especially when we are labelling people.
# 35 Andy Jackson,
Thank you for correcting Sonagi and I wasn’t labelling just stating the fact!
# 31 Carr,
I knew there had to be a few(thought I’d try to get away with it), but why don’t you prove there are “thousands”?
MrMao:
Why not just come out and call me a ‘house N-word’?
Look, I think you’re wrong. Partly because you make things very combative — us vs. them (even comparing it to kidnapper versus kidnapped by invoking the Stockholm Syndrome). I tend to think that people are mostly alike , but that countries are at various stages of development.
Decaded ago, my father came to Australia and became a permanent resident. He never took citizenship, and he lived, worked and died in that land as a PR. Am I grateful that the Australian government didn’t care what citizenship he had when he was dying and in need of medical care but had no private health insurance? You bet I am. Am I grateful for all the things that my father received, despite lack of citizenship? For sure!
How lucky we were that my father chose to immigrate to Australia, a country wealthy enough and developed enough to be able to extend those benefits to non-citizens. Korea at present is not at that stage. Perhaps it will be in 50-100 years.
If, on the other hand, Australia had chosen to only extend the right to free/cheap medical care (for example) to its own citizens, I would have been unhappy. But what right would I have had to ask the government to change its law for my father?
In most cases, people come to a country that is not their own out of personal choice. The same goes with adopting a new citizenship – most people do it out of choice. If they are not happy with the treatment/service they receive, they can move on to another land, or go back to the one they came from.
That is where your Stockholm Syndrome analogy falls down, because Mrs. Vandom is not a hostage, but a person with a right to come here or go elsewhere.
#37
Even if we are going to get worked up about it, Ms Grace is “an illegal,” which is not the same thing as saying that Ms Grace “is illegal.” The first is an illgeal alian while the second is someone who should not exist anywhere.
Those packbackers who stay here past their 90 days are illegals and remain so until they get their paperwork strait or get the boot.
Of course we bend the rules in Korea, why get all worked up about it? I mean are you going to expect that people are going to start stopping at red traffic lights too?
“Diaz-Balart and Berman Reintroduce the “DREAM Act” in the US House of Representatives”
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/96336
Thank you! Now make it work!
thekorean:
“In Los Angeles, Ms. Grace Lee and thousands of others like her are asking herself the same question.”
They snuck in or overstayed on tourist visas. No dice.
RJ:
“I think the US (and Canada) have a lot to learn from Korea in terms of how to deal with foreigners “fighting tooth and nail to ensure that they get everything coming to them.”
By resorting to nativist, exclusionary policies based on stone-age clan attachments, delusionary understandings of history and obsession with bloodlines? Just how were you planning on getting this into mainstream thought at home? Cross-burnings? Nope, tried that.
Sperwer:
“Partly because you make things very combative — us vs. them”
Nope, not guilty. Koreans make things combative and my many years in Korea illustrated very clearly just how I am viewed in Korea, and it ain’t as one of “uri.” What a bore, spending time with Korean droids.
“I tend to think that people are mostly alike , but that countries are at various stages of development.”
Very generous of you, but perhaps you just say that to get yourself through another dreary day in Korea. I really don’t think that stages of development have anything to do with it; Koreans like their backwoods mentality, nobody else does and that’s the way they want it.
“Korea at present is not at that stage.”
Tired of waiting. Honestly don’t think it will happen in my lifetime.
“That is where your Stockholm Syndrome analogy falls down, because Mrs. Vandom is not a hostage, but a person with a right to come here or go elsewhere.”
Actually, Ms. Vandom is probably a person who made sacrifices in her life back home in order to come to Korea and subjecting her to arbitrary, draconian, invasive laws which she can like or lump is a form of abuse. And then you guys translate it into English, pluralize the nouns and put in some articles and call it a career.
How about we start simply by enforcing the border and US federal immigration law. I don’t have to work too hard to get that kind of thinking into the mainstream:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/68_say_those_who_employ_illegal_immigrants_should_be_punished
JW — I like the way they sell that:
I don’t think anyone objects to taking down barriers — if they exist — for immigrant students in the United States. But we’re not talking about immigrants here — we’re talking about foreigners illegally residing in the territory of the United States.
I guess it sounds better to the voters than AMNESTY, though.
I wonder how much autonomy you had regarding where you lived when you were 16 years old or younger, let alone 4, 5, or 6. I’m going to take a wild guess and say that you, or anyone else, had no say in it and had to move with your parents. Unless you want to argue that tantrums should be considered a legally worthy course of action.
typical response 1: “Well, they’re adults now, so they can get the fuck out.”
That’s nice. These guys spent more than majority of their lives in United States, raised in the American education system, culture, societal structure, thoughts, etc., etc., and the answer is to throw them into a country they barely remember? Korean guys can survive teaching English I suppose (as opposed to their originally intended career paths like doctors, engineers, etc.), but hispanic guys I know who are in this category barely speaks Spanish (I’m pretty sure I know more Spanish than them). But no, let’s just throw them back across the border! It’s the only “decent” thing to do.
typical response 2: “they’ll invite their parents and relatives to the states and they’ll start a chain migration [insert nativist/pseudo-legalist rant]”
According to the U.S. immigration law (“3/10 year bar”), someone who has illegally stayed in United States for more than a year cannot legally re-enter the States’ for 10 years regardless of the invitation, etc. So no, that’s a phantom fear.
typical response 3: “Well, I don’t give a shit. They should blame their parents.”
Mmm! You can’t find any truer betrayal of the American values than punishing the children for something their parents did, not to mention punishing someone for a crime that they absolutely had no choice in committing. Meanwhile, let’s go after those damned meth babies! Who told them they could breathe in the fumes of their parents’ meth lab?! Arrest those no good druggies! It’s the LAW!
Welcome to the real world, bum. Things are a little messier out here than they are in University.
Complete hogwash. Of course there are. Plenty of Americans come here on tourist visas to work under the table. Then there are/were the handful of guys I knew (or knew of) who overstayed their visas by a few months to squeeze a few more thousand dollars out of the locals before heading back. And the bum in Itaewon who’s been here for how many years drunk and on the street.
No way! No matter how self-evident this statement, you’re going to have to prove it to tbonetylr, Mister!
Bum – You forgot Typical Response 4: OK, if it’s so cruel to send the children of illegal immigrants back to their passport country, let them stay… but send their parents back.
In which case, we get, “Oh no! You can’t do that! You’re breaking up families!”
Immigration law? Bwahaha. Don’t you know enforcement of immigration law is un-American? Just ask Nancy Pelosi:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/18/pelosi-tells-illegal-immigrants-work-site-raids-american/
Or Sheriff Joe Arpaio:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29630232/
PS: I believe the bum in Itaewon, who was there when I first moved up to Seoul, has gone back to Canada, I believe.
# 49 Carr,
Perhaps you don’t get it like #48 Darth Babaganoosh. You responded to me when I referred to illegal aliens as illegals. Why is it that you can’t get it like Andy Jackson? An American teaching on a tourist visa doesn’t make them an illegal alien nor does an American evading taxes.
Again Carr, where is your link(support your claim = prove it) showing that there are thousands of illegal alien Americans which are mostly comprised of Engish Teachers(according to you)?
You people keep bringing up illegal illegal illegal…well how the hell does that matter when we are sitting here trying to *change* what illegal means? So far as I’m concerned, the only “illegal” and unwanted foreigner residing in the US is someone who doesn’t want to work or has a criminal background. In every other case, we will have a net positive for the US economy and society, now and for the future. God almighty, why do you think they’ve been trying to push this Dream act for so long?
Prior to living in Korea, I would have had sympathy for “Ms. Grace Lee”. But now, having lived in Korea and seen how the Koreans treat others, I’ve gotta say that I have . . . complete and total sympathy for her and anyone else in her position!
It would be cruel and inhumane to send Grace Lee or any other female back to Korea. Having seen how Koreans treat “their” women, I think any Korean woman in the U.S. who wants it should automatically qualify for refugee status and be allowed and encouraged to stay. Forever.
WeikuBoy,
While you are probably right that korean women would be better off here in the US than in Korea, do not forget that at least 1 study has shown asian american women (more specifically, seniors and adolescents) to be the single most depressed group of people in the US.
http://www.apa.org/ppo/issues/pwomenanddepress.html
This is actually quite similar to torture laws. You want to keep the option always available, but never admit it to the public. So in terms of immigration, you want the public to be kept at bay by assuring them that we’re doing everything we can to limit immigration to legally processed immigrants, but always keep the option available to grant “amnesty” to those who are obviously a benefit to America. This has the added benefit of preventing even all the desirable immigrants from coming in *all at once*.
Not the most ideal way , but I think it is the best way given the realities.
Mr Mao #43:
if you cannot even do me the courtesy of referring to me by my correct monniker (Sperwer has not appeared in this thread yet, touch wood) then I can’t possibly debate anything with you.
I tell you what, you are witty though. Almost Tom Robbins level, but missing the beets.
Have a nice day.
Sorry, hamel.
And yes, RJ, there is a crisis in America. I just really cringe when I hear the words “have a lot to learn from Korea.” Kinda makes me feel icky.
When one realizes their ignorance but has difficulty admitting it, much frustration you will face. According to a fortune cooking.
Anyway, bitching like a mad man usually gets you surprisingly far. Airplane seats, extended warranties, free ipod accessories…oh my
Wait, they tried to make her declare HIV/AIDS status?
That’s not bitchy, that’s being discriminated against.
Grow up guys.
Vandom wrote a reply in the KT to someone who had earlier complained (in the KT) about her not taking the HIV and drug test.
Vandom’s article:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2009/05/137_45155.html
A reply to:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2009/05/161_42435.html
You must log in to post a comment.