Posts target South Korean judge with doctored Chinese flag picture
"Moon Hyung-bae, you've been caught red-handed swearing an oath in front of the communist Chinese flag," says a Korean-language Facebook post shared February 6, 2025.
The image appears to show Moon holding a microphone in front of the Chinese flag.
Moon is one of eight sitting justices who will rule on Yoon's impeachment after the president was suspended from power following a botched martial law attempt in December 2024 (archived link).
He has been the target of attacks by the ruling People Power Party and its supporters over his alleged relationship with opposition figures such as Democratic Party leader Lee Jae-myung (archived link).
The court rebutted the claims, saying Moon's personal relationships would not affect the court's adjudication of Yoon's impeachment trial (archived link).
Similar allegations about Moon's supposed ties to China have spread in other pro-Yoon Facebook groups. Comments indicate several users believed the image was genuine.
"How can such a person be a Constitutional Court judge, he's a traitor," one person wrote.
"This shows Moon Hyung-bae is a communist, no wonder he was appointed by Moon Jae-in," another said, referring to South Korea's previous left-leaning president (archived link).
But the image is doctored.
Keyword search on Google led to the original photo published by South Korean outlet Yonhap news agency on January 2 (archived link).
"Interim Constitutional Court chief justice Moon Hyung-bae delivers a New Year's address at a swearing-in ceremony for Justices Cho Han-chang and Jeong Kye-seon held at the Constitutional Court in Jongno District, Seoul on the morning of the 2nd," the caption says.
The unaltered image shows Moon in front of a South Korean flag.
Other angles captured by Yonhap and News1, another South Korean news organisation, also show the South Korean flag behind Moon (archived links here and here).
Local broadcaster SBS livestreamed his speech on January 2. The South Korean flag appears around two and a half hours into the video (archived link).
AFP previously debunked photos claimed to show a Chinese flag at a protest calling for Yoon's arrest and Chinese spies caught on South Korean soil.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
34 minutes ago
- New York Post
Long Island child therapist admits sharing baby rape porn
A depraved female Long Island therapist has confessed to sharing horrific videos and photos of baby rape online — where she also got a sick kick out of pretending to be a dad who raped his own kids. Renee Hoberman, a 36-year-old licensed social worker from Plainview, pleaded guilty in federal court in Islip on Wednesday to distributing child porn videos on the social media app Kik, including the rape of a baby less than one years old, federal prosecutors said. She told investigators that she got off on the stomach-churning content, which she shared in 2024 while she was working in Melville as a therapist with children 17 and under. Advertisement Child therapist Renee Hoberman admitted sharing child porn. Facebook / Rina Hoberman 'The defendant … admitted to distributing extremely vile and unthinkable videos depicting the horrific sexual abuse of babies. The videos the defendant distributed and sought for her own perverse pleasure showed the most innocent members of our society being restrained and violently raped,' stated US Attorney Joseph Nocella, Jr. 'The defendant's crimes should outrage and offend every decent member of our society,' he added. Advertisement One nauseating video shared by Hoberman depicted a baby between six months and one-year old being held down and raped by an adult man, prosecutors said. She also participated in perverted online chat rooms in which she posed as the father of several children and claimed to have sex with them. Renee Hoberman worked as a child therapist on Long Island. Facebook / Rina Hoberman Hoberman chatted under several usernames, including 'badgurl854,' 'AlwayzSpnkednkd,' 'prettyprncss2388,' 'Daddywhospanks Naked,' and multiple others during the disgusting incidents, which allegedly occurred between June and October 2024. Advertisement 'The user further claimed that 'he' would have anal sex with the children and would punish the children by getting naked, stripping the children naked, and spanking them while the other children watched,' the criminal complaint stated. Hoberman also uploaded two videos showing child sex abuse, which she claimed were the man's children, prosecutors said. She even invited one sicko to visit 'his' family in New York to spank and sexually abuse the fictional kids. Authorities zeroed in on Hoberman after they received several tips about the abuse from Kik. They found child sexual abuse content in a hidden folder on her phone, and she admitted to sharing child pornography on other messaging apps. Advertisement She admitted to federal agents that she 'has a preference for children from infancy to age three, and that she prefers violent depictions of the children in child pornography,' according to the complaint. Hoberman faces up to 20 years in prison.
an hour ago
English university students must face 'shocking' ideas in a drive to protect free speech on campus
LONDON -- Students at English universities must prepare to confront ideas they find uncomfortable and shocking, the national regulator for higher education said as it released new guidelines governing free speech on campuses across the country. The Office for Students said Thursday that freedom of speech and academic freedom are crucial to higher education, so the guidelines are designed to ensure that universities don't stifle any form of legal speech on their campuses or in their classrooms. Students must be allowed to freely share their opinions and be prepared to hear a range of views during their studies, Arif Ahmed, free speech director for the regulator, said in a statement. 'This includes things that they may find uncomfortable or shocking,' he said. 'By being exposed to a diversity of academic thought, students will develop their analytical and critical thinking skills.' The guidance comes as concern grows that British universities had gone too far in silencing professors and students who expressed ideas some people found offensive. In particular, gender-critical academics and pro-Israeli groups say they have been targeted by university officials and students who disagree with their ideas. In 2021, professor Kathleen Stock resigned from her position at the University of Sussex after a group of students who identified as queer, trans and nonbinary demanded that she be fired for expressing the belief that there are two immutable sexes, male and female. Earlier this year, the Office for Students fined the university 585,000 pounds ($785,000) for failing to uphold freedom of speech. The guidance released on Thursday is designed to implement legislation protecting freedom of speech on university campuses that was passed by the previous government in 2023. The regulator stressed that unlawful speech, including speech that violates anti-terror, equality or public order laws, is not protected by the legislation. Universities also have the right to regulate time, place and manner of lawful speech so that that it doesn't interfere with research, teaching and learning. While the guidance is a good first step, universities will still have a difficult time balancing all the interests on their campuses, Julian Sladdin, a partner at the law firm Pinsent Masons, told the Guardian newspaper. 'The difficulty which remains in practical terms is the fact that institutions are still subject to dealing day-to-day with extremely complex and often polarizing issues on campus and where the bounds of what may be lawful free speech are constantly being tested,' he was quoted as saying.
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
The Trojan Horse Will Come for Us Too
I stopped using my cellphone for regular calls and text messages last fall and switched to Signal. I wasn't being paranoid—or at least I don't think I was. I worked in the National Security Council, and we were told that China had compromised all major U.S. telecommunications companies and burrowed deep inside their networks. Beijing had gathered information on more than a million Americans, mainly in the Washington, D.C., area. The Chinese government could listen in to phone calls and read text messages. Experts call the Chinese state-backed group responsible Salt Typhoon, and the vulnerabilities it exploited have not been fixed. China is still there. Telecommunications systems aren't the only ones compromised. China has accessed enormous quantities of data on Americans for more than a decade. It has hacked into health-insurance companies and hotel chains, as well as security-clearance information held by the Office of Personnel Management. The jaded response here is All countries spy. So what? But the spectacular surprise attacks that Ukraine and Israel have pulled off against their enemies suggest just how serious such penetration can become. In Operation Spiderweb, Ukraine smuggled attack drones on trucks with unwitting drivers deep inside of Russia, and then used artificial intelligence to simultaneously attack four military bases and destroy a significant number of strategic bombers, which are part of Russia's nuclear triad. Israel created a real pager-production company in Hungary to infiltrate Hezbollah's global supply chains and booby-trap its communication devices, killing or maiming much of the group's leadership in one go. Last week, in Operation Rising Lion, Israel assassinated many top Iranian military leaders simultaneously and attacked the country's nuclear facilities, thanks in part to a drone base it built inside Iran. In each case, a resourceful, determined, and imaginative state used new technologies and data to do what was hitherto deemed impossible. America's adversaries are also resourceful, determined, and imaginative. Just think about what might happen if a U.S.-China war broke out over Taiwan. A Chinese state-backed group called Volt Typhoon has been preparing plans to attack crucial infrastructure in the United States should the two countries ever be at war. As Jen Easterly put it in 2024 when she was head of the Cyber and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), China is planning to 'launch destructive cyber-attacks in the event of a major crisis or conflict with the United States,' including 'the disruption of our gas pipelines; the pollution of our water facilities; the severing of our telecommunications; the crippling of our transportation systems.' The Biden administration took measures to fight off these cyberattacks and harden the infrastructure. Joe Biden also imposed some sanctions on China and took some specific measures to limit America's exposure; he cut off imports of Chinese electric vehicles because of national-security concerns. Biden additionally signed a bill to ban TikTok, but President Donald Trump has issued rolling extensions to keep the platform functioning in the U.S. America and its allies will need to think hard about where to draw the line in the era of the Internet of Things, which connects nearly everything and could allow much of it—including robots, drones, and cloud computing—to be weaponized. China isn't the only problem. According to the U.S. Intelligence Community's Annual Threat Assessment for this year, Russia is developing a new device to detonate a nuclear weapon in space with potentially 'devastating' consequences. A Pentagon official last year said the weapon could pose 'a threat to satellites operated by countries and companies around the globe, as well as to the vital communications, scientific, meteorological, agricultural, commercial, and national security services we all depend upon. Make no mistake, even if detonating a nuclear weapon in space does not directly kill people, the indirect impact could be catastrophic to the entire world.' The device could also render Trump's proposed 'Golden Dome' missile shield largely ineffective. Americans can expect a major adversary to use drones and AI to go after targets deep inside the United States or allied countries. There is no reason to believe that an enemy wouldn't take a page out of the Israeli playbook and go after leadership. New technologies reward acting preemptively, catching the adversary by surprise—so the United States may not get much notice. A determined adversary could even cut the undersea cables that allow the internet to function. Last year, vessels linked to Russia and China appeared to have severed those cables in Europe on a number of occasions, supposedly by accident. In a concerted hostile action, Moscow could cut or destroy these cables at scale. Terrorist groups are less capable than state actors—they are unlikely to destroy most of the civilian satellites in space, for example, or collapse essential infrastructure—but new technologies could expand their reach too. In their book The Coming Wave, Mustafa Suleyman and Michael Bhaskar described some potential attacks that terrorists could undertake: unleashing hundreds or thousands of drones equipped with automatic weapons and facial recognition on multiple cities simultaneously, say, or even one drone to spray a lethal pathogen on a crowd. A good deal of American infrastructure is owned by private companies with little incentive to undertake the difficult and costly fixes that might defend against Chinese infiltration. Certainly this is true of telecommunications companies, as well as those providing utilities such as water and electricity. Making American systems resilient could require a major public outlay. But it could cost less than the $150 billion (one estimate has that figure at an eye-popping $185 billion) that the House of Representatives is proposing to appropriate this year to strictly enforce immigration law. Instead, the Trump administration proposed slashing funding for CISA, the agency responsible for protecting much of our infrastructure against foreign attacks, by $495 million, or approximately 20 percent of its budget. That cut will make the United States more vulnerable to attack. The response to the drone threat has been no better. Some in Congress have tried to pass legislation expanding government authority to detect and destroy drones over certain kinds of locations, but the most recent effort failed. Senator Rand Paul, who was then the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and is now the chair, said there was no imminent threat and warned against giving the government sweeping surveillance powers, although the legislation entailed nothing of the sort. Senators from both parties have resisted other legislative measures to counter drones. The United States could learn a lot from Ukraine on how to counter drones, as well as how to use them, but the administration has displayed little interest in doing this. The massively expensive Golden Dome project is solely focused on defending against the most advanced missiles but should be tasked with dealing with the drone threat as well. Meanwhile, key questions go unasked and unanswered. What infrastructure most needs to be protected? Should aircraft be kept in the open? Where should the United States locate a counter-drone capability? After 9/11, the United States built a far-reaching homeland-security apparatus focused on counterterrorism. The Trump administration is refocusing it on border security and immigration. But the biggest threat we face is not terrorism, let alone immigration. Those responsible for homeland security should not be chasing laborers on farms and busboys in restaurants in order to meet quotas imposed by the White House.
