Accusing the south Korean authorities of misleading public opinion while talking about the "sincerity" of the DPRK in a bid to evade their blame for bringing the inter-Korean relations to catastrophe and dialogue to collapse and justify their policy for confrontation, the article notes, and goes on:

They have neither face nor qualification to talk about sincerity.

By origin sincerity means transparent and true mind, genuine feeling not mixed with any lie and hard reality. But this word was mouthed by such liars as the south Korean puppet group of traitors, master hands at committing injustice, telling lies, hatching sinister plots and making gimmicks. This is a mockery of the above-said pure Korean word.

A scrutiny into their touted "sincerity" makes the absurdity of their talk clear.

Through this rhetoric they urged the DPRK to make "apology" for the "Cheonan" warship case, the hideous conspiratorial farce, and the provocative Yonphyong Island shelling which occurred last year, "punish" those responsible for them and give assurances against "reoccurrence of similar cases."

They also claimed that the north should show its will to dismantle nukes in action as one can hardly believe the talk about the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula only and, furthermore, it should "make changes".

As far as the controversial warship case is concerned, the true nature of the conspiratorial case was brought into bolder relief. As a result, this case has become a target of criticism and ridicule of not only south Koreans but the experts of foreign countries and the military personnel concerned who took part in the investigation and scholars who made a verification of evidence. It is long since this case became a laughing stock of the international community and even the United Nations.

As for the Yonphyong Island shelling, the DPRK did not strike the peaceful island.

It was the puppet war-like forces that were the first to frantically fire shells into the territorial waters of the DPRK despite its repeated advance warnings.

The island was the base for the above-said provocation and, therefore, it was struck and turned into a sea of fire.

The south Korean authorities should have thought it was fortunate that the clash did not escalate as the DPRK exercised its self-restraint. They were the first to perpetrate provocations but painted the DPRK's deserved counter-action against them as a "provocation". This is just like a thief crying "Stop the thief!"

The nuclear issue is not a matter which allows the south Korean authorities to meddle in.

The nuclear issue surfaced on the peninsula as the U.S. introduced nuclear weapons into south Korea. It still remains unsettled as the U.S. is threatening the DPRK with nukes.

As it stressed more than once, the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is not the denuclearization of one party but the process of denuclearizing the whole peninsula.

Accordingly, if the nuclear issue of the peninsula is to be settled, it is necessary for the U.S. to dismantle its nuclear bases and withdraw nuclear equipment from south Korea and stop its nuclear threat.

Clarified in the September 19 joint statement adopted at the six-party talks are the guarantee that south Korea shall not introduce nukes and the U.S. shall not pose a nuclear threat to the DPRK and the "principle of action for action" that each party shall fulfil its duty.

In token of the practical will for the denuclearization, the DPRK held the six-party talks and adopted the joint statement and the February 13 agreement, suspended the operation of the atomic energy power plant in Nyongbyon and blew up even the cooling tower in the eyes of the world.

However, south Korea is talking about "will for practical action" and linking it with "sincerity" in a bid to find fault with the DPRK. This is preposterous, indeed.

The south Korean authorities are calling for "changes" in the DPRK. But, in fact, this is what the DPRK should say to them.

The DPRK has steadily changed everything to meet the desire of the people and to swim with the trend of the times and has kept its door fully open to dialogue as far as its relations with the south are concerned.

It is the stand of the DPRK to hold candid talks with anyone without any precondition while the south side asserts that it cannot hold dialogue unless the absurd preconditions put up by it are met. It admits of no argument who has a sincere stand.

One's sincerity can be judged only when both sides sit as the negotiating table. Talking about sincerity without sitting at the negotiating table is not a sincere approach toward dialogue.

Explaining the reason why the south Korean authorities have kept talking about "sincerity", the article goes on:

This is aimed to divert elsewhere the public opinion's criticism of the south Korean authorities for having pushed the north-south relations to catastrophe and rendered the situation extremely tense, shift the blame on to the DPRK, block dialogue and negotiations and escalate confrontation and war moves.

The south Korean authorities approached the north-south relations and the dialogue with no sincerity. Its clear proof is that they wantonly violated the June 15 joint declaration and the October 4 declaration while talking about "lost decade" right after taking office and pushed the north-south relations to catastrophe while talking about "wait-and-see strategy" and "adherence to principle". It is also eloquently proved by their open remarks that the extremely strained north-south relations at present are "normal" and "the present regime may not hold dialogue with the north during its tenure of office".

They responded to the DPRK's proposal for dialogue with anti-DPRK psychological warfare and war moves while talking about "change of system" and "contingency". This is an intolerable mockery and insult to the dialogue partner to talk about "sincerity."

They are repeatedly trumpeting about "sincerity" now that they are driven to a tight corner in face of the DPRK's consistent stand for dialogue and peace and the public opinion supporting it.

Their rhetoric about "sincerity" is also aimed to tide over the serious domestic ruling crisis.

The south Korean conservative authorities are in the grip of a serious crisis due to the total failure of their domestic and foreign policies, economic bankruptcy and the deterioration of the people's livelihood and socio-political chaos.

Another aim sought by the authorities through the above-said rhetoric is to divert elsewhere the people's resentment at them and block the dialogue and cooperation.

This is also a product of their collusion with the U.S. for aggression.

The DPRK, a fortress of the cause of global independence, a banner of socialism and a country standing at the outpost of the anti-U.S. struggle, ranked itself among the nuclear weapons states and is now making a triumphant advance towards a thriving nation. Much upset by this, the U.S. is working hard to stifle it at any cost.

As regards the nuclear issue, the U.S. is trying to lay a hurdle in the way of its solution while talking about "south-north dialogue first and six-party talks next." It is prodding the south Korean puppet forces into blocking the north-south dialogue under the pretext of "sincerity". This is, in the final analysis, aimed to spoil everything.

The south Korean authorities' much-touted "sincerity" is a lame excuse and poor sophism to cover up their black-hearted intention, push the north-south relations to catastrophe and justify their confrontation and war moves.

The DPRK has already shown every goodwill and sincerity to the south side.

The south Korean conservative authorities should not seek an ulterior aim but show their sincerity in practice before covering their sinister nature with the veil of "sincerity" which can convince no one.

They had better stop using a poor trick, a mockery of the north-south relations and the issue of dialogue. They should stop letting loose rhetoric about "sincerity" and take a sincere attitude.

The DPRK will keep closely following the south Korean authorities' future attitude.