I'm guessing this story hasn't flown above the radar in much of the western media, but I think it's going to have some significant effects.

Most of you are probably aware that Myanmar (Burma) has been run by a military government since the 1960s, and that in 1990 a democratically elected government, led by Aung San Suu Kyi, was blocked from taking power (she's been under house arrest for the past 15 years). The country has for the past 20 years in particular been one step above North Korea with regard to the level of surveillance its civilians live under and much of the citizenry lives in abject poverty. They recently completed a sham of a constitutional reform process (the major ethnic and democratic/opposition groups were excluded, the military government consolidated its power, and the capital was moved), and even the normally politically neutral Red Cross issued a statement this year that the Burmese government was abusing its citizens' rights. Generally, as people do everywhere, the citizenry copes with the situation as best they can and there is little unrest on the surface at this point; the inherent objectivity, some would say passivity, inherent in Therevada Buddhism, the overwhelmingly predominant religion, means that the population projects a deceptive calm.

But the junta may have just made a fatal misstep.

In August, the government made an announcement that fuel prices would be hiked dramatically, and protests erupted; but what makes the protests particularly difficult to deal with is a group of Buddhist monks has coordinated and marched in them, motivated by concerns about the suffering of their lay communities. Yesterday, the government tear gassed a group of them: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7000269.stm

This in itself is a huge PR problem for the military, as Burma, as I mentioned, is overwhelmingly Theravada Buddhist and monks are highly respected; but the *big* problem, the one that could break the elephant's back within the regime itself, wouldn't necessarily seem like a big deal to the outside observer:

A new group that draws on militant youth elements in the clergy, the Alliance of All Burmese Buddhist Monks, appears to be co-ordinating the monks' protests.
It has asked its followers across the country to refuse alms and offerings from anyone connected to the military.

*This* is a big big deal, particularly if the monasteries and monks across the country participate en mass (and today's UK Times indicates they are). Donating alms and food offerings to monks is one of the primary ways that lay practicioners gain merit within the faith (Therevada monks and nuns take a vow of absolute poverty and possess only their robes, bowl, and sleeping mat); it provides both a function within the practice itself (developing generosity of spirit) and is a key to one's fate in *future* lives as well as there is an overwhelming belief in karma and reincarnation.

Refusing alms from people connected with the military, in other words, amounts to a form of excommunication. This not only 'spiritually' imperils members of the regime, who may individually be more or less devout, and will undoubtedly create pressure within the ranks; but it gravely discredits them in the eyes of the population.

It sets up a very interesting situation, and may finally result in real revolution in Burma; mistreatment of monks will only flame unrest, and if the 'price' for helping the military is becoming a spiritual, as well as a social, pariah, few will pay it, meaning the apparatus of the surveillance state could be in very serious danger indeed.

I don't know if this will be of interest to many people here but I think it is a fascinating situation and it will be interesting to see how it unfolds. More on the protests here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2482952.ece

Regards,
Nydia

Hmm, the age old struggle of the Politics and Religion....
It will be very interesting, indeed to see how this particular chapter plays out.
Considering Buddhism's historical stance towards non-violence, hopefully, the government won't take advantage of this.
Perhaps, it will be a repeat of Ghandi vs British Raj....

I'd read several months ago that Burma's military was engaging in heavy persecution of the country's non-Buddhists, in contradiction to that religion's stereotypically non-violent nature. It'd be nice to think that this divide produces real, positive change in the country's leadership, but given previous military/religious complicity in preserving the junta, I suspect we might just end up with a new military dictatorship to replace the old.

I'm aware that there's been some significant toast-buttering, in exchange for looking the other way, that has gone on over there between the junta and the abbots (although there was a significant uprising by the monks some years ago which resulted in their leaders being killed or jailed and heavy persecutions); which is part of what makes this latest protest so interesting as it marks a formal and significant break in that complicity and a willingness by at least some of the monks to step up and stick their necks out again. Whether it has any teeth, and results in a real populist uprising, or in a deal being cut, only time will tell. Buddhism is more or less a 'state' religion in Burma (although it's about 10% Christian, particularly among ethnic minority groups) and the leaders make a show of their practice much like many politicians do in the US for reasons that often have very little to do with faith - and that extends, paradoxically, to persecutions (much as it also does here), the difference being that the junta would (and does) persecute the monks too if and when they can get away with it.

I think it's also safe to say that there are not a few cases where Buddhist monks have perverted the precepts and writings just as whack job fundamentalists in Christianity and Islam have done so with their own texts to justify paradoxical/antithetical behavior and even genocide; a perfect example, which I linked to a friend last week, was prominent Zen Buddhist abbots in Japan justifying warfare and killing for the Emperor prior to and during World War 2 (and some of the logic in those writings would have done the guy who wrote that mind-spinning pretzel logic for the Paul Hill memorial site proud).

In any case, I think it's an interesting development in that it's an unusual statement (we won't accept your alms) to potentially touch off a revolution, although religious-institution driven political uprisings are hardly novel.

I have a close friend who's family is under house arrest in Burma, she currently goes to school and resides in the UK. However, if she goes home to visit her family, she too will be under house arrest. I copy and pasted your post in an email to her, to get her thoughts on it. I will post what she says about it after she responds to me.

:devil

Dear Trikki:

I'd be very interested in hearing what she has to say about it - even the BBC, of course, has a somewhat skewed perspective compared to folks who are actually live in the country and truly understand the culture and the dynamics that move it, and I freely plead a high degree of ignorance despite an interest in and small familarity with that school of Buddhist practice. Granted, these protests were about the price of fuel and a symbolic statement and not, at least directly, about overthrowing the government itself (which would result in swift and harsh reprisals); but I am reminded of that paradox from Orwell's 1984, where Winston observes a great hue and cry in the street and thinks the revolution has come at last, only to realize that the great commotion is in fact a scuffle over a small shipment of badly made tin pots that have somehow made it to the prole marketplace:

"Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."

Granted, most Burmese *are* very conscious of the nature of the oppression that they live under, but see themselves as largely helpless to change it. This puts them, in at least in that sense, one step ahead of us :).

Regards,
Nydia

Not much new in this report, but it appears the protests are intensifying, spurred on by the arrest of four of the monks in Sittwe yesterday, as well as the imprisonment of two men who gave water to monks protesting last month:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7002732.stm

Interestingly, the monks are trying to avoid jeopardizing the public by urging them not to join them, but this may, of course, have the opposite effect.

To give you an idea of just how oppressive the regime is, consider this snippet from todays Reuters report:

Urging thousands of bystanders not to join in, they staged a sit-in outside the local government offices to demand the release of two men sentenced to two years in jail for giving water to monks protesting against soaring fuel prices last month.

Just a couple of hours ago, the government released a statement that the two men would be released (but not the monks) in three days time - and the tightrope dance continues...

Regards,
Nydia

It was far better when we ran things :P

"Better" being a subjective term, of course....

:rolleyes:

Duh.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7004625.stm

And updated again, from the BBC:

In a strongly-worded statement, seen by the BBC, the Alliance of All Burmese Buddhist Monks described the military government as "the enemy of the people".

It said the monks would keep up their protests until they had "wiped the military dictatorship from the land of Burma".

They have also been withholding religious duties from anyone connected to the military.

I can't imagine it will be long now before the government brings force to bear, given the strong statement, although I wonder how much of a unified voice they speak with as this organization was described as a 'youth movement' within the clergy there - it will be interesting to see if there is any effort on the part of the senior abbots to rein them in if some sort of compromise offer is made, or if this represents the beginning of a real revolution.

"The area around University Avenue where Ms Suu Kyi's [imprisoned opposition leader] house is located has been closed to traffic since the wave of protests began.

But in what appears to be an unprecedented move, the guards allowed the monks to walk past the home.
Witnesses said Ms Suu Kyi walked out with two other women and cried as she watched the monks and prayed with them but did not speak."

- I'm not sure for how much longer the junta will stand by. This may be the sign that it's going too far.

My friend called me instead of emailing me back her responses to what is going on in her home Country of Burma. She is very worried about her family, her father was a General in the prior government before the regime change. They have him and the rest of his family on house arrest. She can call and talk to him, but his phone lines are tapped, so they really can't talk too much about anything that is going on. I am still hoping she will email me so I can post it here as a first hand account.

Anyway, I read that 20,000 people marched against the government, 10,000 of them Monks. Here I copy pasted from Yahoo.

YANGON, Myanmar - About 20,000 people led by Buddhist monks demonstrated against Myanmar's military junta Sunday, in what has quickly become the largest anti-government demonstrations since the failed democratic uprising in 1988.


The 10,000 monks marched from Yangon's famous Shwedagon Pagoda to the nearby Sule Pagoda before passing the U.S. Embassy, witnesses said. Monks shouted support for detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, while the crowd of 10,000 protected them by forming a human chain along the route.

It was the sixth straight day monks have marched in Yangon, and came a day after they were allowed to walk past Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Suu Kyi's compound in a symbolic gesture of support. Their activities have given new life to a protest movement that began a month ago after the government raised fuel prices.

A monk gave a speech Sunday calling for Suu Kyi's release and national reconciliation before the monks set off from the Shwedagon Pagoda, the witness said.

The protest was the largest in the latest series to erupt in Yangon.

Earlier Sunday, the government had deployed about 20 pro-junta thugs and 20 riot police on the road leading to Suu Kyi's compound, witnesses said. A fire truck was parked nearby.

While authorities had not intervened in Sunday's march, plainclothes police trailed behind the marchers and some with shotguns were posted at street corners along the route.

By linking their cause to Suu Kyi's pro-democracy struggle, which has seen her detained for about 12 of the last 18 years, the monks increased the pressure on the junta to decide whether to crack down or compromise with the demonstrators.

"This was a very important gesture," said David Steinberg, a Myanmar expert at Georgetown University in Washington, who is monitoring events from Singapore. "It's significant because the military allowed them to pass (Suu Kyi's house). That and other images indicate the military is not prepared, unless things get worse, to directly confront the monks in their uniforms."

Steinberg said this was in contrast to 1990, when the military put down a protest by hundreds of monks in Mandalay, arresting and defrocking some and closing monasteries linked with the demonstration.

So far, the government has been handling the monks' disciplined but defiant protests gingerly, aware that forcibly breaking them up in predominantly Buddhist Myanmar would likely cause public outrage.

But Steinberg said the military's lack of force should not be seen as a sign of weakness, given that it remains the largest and most powerful institution in the country.

"Any change (in the government) will have to be approved by elements of the military if there is to be change," he said. "They are far too powerful to be resisted if the military acts in unison."

A U.N. official agreed, saying that while Myanmar dissident groups he had met in Bangkok this week were optimistic about the outcome, they had failed to take into account the military's history of brutally suppressing uprisings in 1988, 1990 and 1996.

"They were very optimistic and expectant and seemed to believe that there was one outcome possible — which was a popular uprising that brings Suu Kyi to the forefront," said the official, who requested anonymity, citing protocol. "I'm not as confident that is the only outcome possible. I would think massive repression and violence on a significant scale is not to be discounted."

The monks on Saturday stopped briefly in front of Suu Kyi's house and said prayers before leaving at the other end of the street, said witnesses, who asked not to be named for fear of being harassed by the authorities.

"Today is extraordinary. We walked past lay disciple Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's house today. We are pleased and glad to see her looking fit and well," a 45-year old monk told about 200 people at Sule Pagoda.

"Daw" is an honorific used in referring to older women in Myanmar.

Suu Kyi, 62, is the leader of the National League for Democracy party, which won a 1990 general election but was not allowed to take power by the military. She has been under detention continuously since May 2003.

The latest protest movement began Aug. 19 after the government raised fuel prices, but has its basis in long pent-up dissatisfaction with the repressive military regime. Using arrests and intimidation, the government had managed to keep demonstrations limited in size and impact — but they gained new life when the monks joined.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070923/ap_on_re_as/myanmar

:devil

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7009825.stm

- Hell yeah. Bring on the steam-roller!

Silence from the junta is scaring me though. But hell, bring on the revolution.

Edit: Any opinions on foreign intervention? A joulst or a hand from the UN, Britian/American... might that help the process? Or just make it worst?
I think it's important for the Burmese people to know that the outside world is with them.

Hmmmm, If the U.S. gets involved in this, and it all goes south, how fast do you think it will take the blame game to start?

Edit: Any opinions on foreign intervention? A joulst or a hand from the UN, Britian/American... might that help the process? Or just make it worst?
I think it's important for the Burmese people to know that the outside world is with them.We should declare support for the pro-democracy population and promise support should they return to power. And by 'we' I mean Western democratic nations -- the US' standing on the world stage and "democracy support actions" in the ME don't engender much trust. A broad espousal of support would be best.

While UN action of some sort would be nice, given that China is a primary trading partner, the situation would have to break down considerably before the Security Council could pass a veto-proof measure. I expect eventual degeneration as the monks and populace push their luck. The question is -- how far will they push? And how many is the military willing to kill to preserve their power under the threat of popular disapproval and religious interdiction?

With the strength of religious faith being taken into account, I do not think there will be a lot of monks being killed before there is mutiny within the ranks, which would then lead to a full-fledged uprising of the people, I am sure.

Remember, it is the generals who are enjoying the fruits of power, not the soldiers on the front line (at least, not to as great an extent). I do not believe your average soldier wants to be alienated from family and friends and faith, as the monks are proposing via their protests.

The situation is continuing to escalate over there, with over 100,000 monks, nuns, and civilians marching in the streets of Rangoon and elsewhere yesterday, chanting openly that they wanted dialogue with the government over democracy and carrying flags from the 1988 uprising, as well as pictures of Aung San, Aung San Suu Kyi's deceased father. Military convoys have been deployed, but the situation has not broken down... yet:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7011655.stm

Feedback from people on the ground in Burma here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7011884.stm

Regards,
Nydia

My partner (who before now had not taken too much time to read on world events) is glued to the situation atm.


It is very tense, but the religious stand is very comendable and the people on the ground are being brave. Let us hope that it does not end in bloodshed, but if it does, let us hope that it is for a reason.

Bush putting sanctions into place on the military government.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7013560.stm

The military has surrounded the monasteries, and arrested two prominent civilians who has been feeding and otherwise supporting the monks; troops have been deployed in other cities, and there is both a curfew and a ban on gatherings of more than five people. Today should be very telling...

Regards,
Nydia

heres to hoping the shit that happened in 88 doesnt repeat =/

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/09/26/myanmar.crackdown/index.html

5 dead in Myanmar so far...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7014570.stm

- Well, the storm has broken.

The monks are repeatedly not fighting back, but still defying the government.

God this is agonizing.

There was a nice little background piece posted today on the BBC on the role Buddhist monks play in Burmese society, as well as the issue of refusal of dana being such a significant move by the monks:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7014173.stm

The monks being willing to lay down their lives without fighting back is a powerful display of soul force that will galvanize the population in Burma and elsewhere and it's not surprising that the government is trying very hard not to create martyrs. Hopefully this will play to its conclusion without too much loss of life, and the junta will realize its peril and sit down to dialogue; but I expect that things will get worse before they get better. I especially hope hysteria related to the chaos does not ensue and the people end up with a worse bargain than they started with (hard to see how that is possible, but still) - that revolution (or compromise) doesn't trade them one repressive regime for another but results in a real transformation.

May all beings be happy and free from suffering.

-Nydia

Been following this for awhile... Its almost surreal! =(

A Flickr user named racoles has several photos (http://flickr.com/photos/racoles/) of the protests for your perusal.

The military are raiding temples in the city, at least six, with hundreds of monks being imprisoned.

So much for the UN. Like always, China and Russia have vetoed anything worth while.

Its impotency becomes starker by the year.

You think China and Russia are going to allow more democracy near their borders if they can hinder it?

China and Russia could care less what kind of government their satellites have as long it does what they say. Might as well ask if we're going to allow more democracy in Central America, it's not a complete question.

China and Russia could care less what kind of government their satellites have as long it does what they say.

If that doesn't speak volumes, I'm not sure what does.....

I wonder if there will be any backlash because the U.S. didn't get involved?

China needs to get involved... :(

What sort of backlash? Do you mean within this country or from the international community? I expect that there will be some momentary outrage from some factions, but most Americans couldn't come anywhere close to placing Burma on a map, and will likely forget about it once the immediacy of the situation leaves the headlines. We *have* had economic sanctions in place against the regime for some time, and Bush strengthened those this week, but we have relatively little influence on Burma itself (and precious little 'street cred' left with the UN, although certainly this could provide us with an opportunity to redeem ourselves a bit).

As far as *strategic* reasons why there might be backlash for our failure to intervene, although Burma *does* have significant offshore oil resources (which makes it strategically important to China and India), it has much closer ties with China, India, and Russia than it does to the West, a situation exacerbated by the trade embargo, and we have relatively little 'pull' with them - next to Beijing, the country who might *have* strategic reasons for intervening, or a vested interest in Burma's stability, would be India. Regardless, I don't see us getting involved in a military sense, especially considering the current overstretched state of our own armed forces and the current anti-more deployment mood in the country, and Russia and China will almost certainly block any attempt to send UN peacekeeping forces there.

As far as within Burma itself, the monks are not specifically appealing to the US (or UN) for help, as heartbreaking as the images are; in fact, they have been asking civilians and others not to risk their lives because they are making a very specific type of appeal to the government (appealing to its humanity, much as the Civil Rights marchers did in this country, as you mentioned earlier in the thread). The hope is that as the regime cracks down it will lose control as the sand slips through its fingers, so to speak, and that it will be forced to confront its own inhumanity on a very basic level with the goal being that a revolution will occur from within as the leaders confront their own consciences (idealistic, yes, but there are precedents). Given that some of the raids in the crackdown have targeted nuns (and if attacking religious *men* who don't fight back doesn't give you enough bad PR, try breaking into monasteries and beating up the women ;) ), they don't seem to be too terribly rattled about either basic issues of conscience or how the situation appears to the outside world so far, although they are plenty scared of losing control of the populace.

I expect things are going to get a lot uglier before they get better, but hopefully we can get diplomats, if not international forces, on the ground there soon.

Regards,
Nydia

P.S. A little 'viewpoint' posted today on the philosophy in action by a western Buddhist: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7015922.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/09/28/myanmar.dissidents/index.html

Internet is cut in Burma... and latest report that hasnt been confirmed is that 35 bodies lay in the street with people kneeling and praying over them.

Wish there was a way for people to pay a little more to uncle sam next year in exchange for them sending our troops there to help these people =(

One way or another, they need help... And I feel horrible that I cant help them!

Cell phone service has also been cut, and there have been raids on most of the major monasteries in Rangoon and several elsewhere in the country.

There were small demonstrations in the UK today, calling on the British government to act, but multiple Burmese immigrants were quoted as saying that they were afraid of demonstrating in front of the embassy for fear that they would be videotaped and prevented from returning to their home country, such is the (not unfounded) fear of the military surveillance state.

The junta has agreed to allow a UN special envoy into the country, but other than that shows every sign of battening down the hatches...

Regards,
Nydia

Is there anything we can do at all? Shit if its a matter of money at all i would donate if it helps in anyway. I just hate sitting here and not being able to do anything...

This and Darfur piss me off!

Worse before better.

Why do I have this sinking feeling I'm going to get to see a lot more of Burma than I ever wanted to?

Meh one more country to check off on the list.

So, the UN envoy has not only gained access to the top military leaders, but has also been able to MEDIATE between them and the imprisoned opposition leader. Well.. wow.

Will this go anywhere? No idea. But the mere fact that he has access to these places is something, he only arrived friday.

Not only that, but the Chinese PM Wen Jiabao has been on the phone to Gordon Brown, and has criticized the Burmese junta and called for democracy and stability. It's not sanctions, but again it's a step.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7020399.stm

Well, things appear to be settling down into oppression and intractability, and as the number of updates and pictures slows down to a trickle as the military clamps down, there seems to be less and less to report, and with no graphic images of monks in the streets, Burma is already sliding off of the front pages :/. Here is an update from the BBC this morning: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7021402.stm

The UN special envoy has not, yet, been allowed to meet Than Shwe, although he did meet with Aung San Suu Kyi over the weekend. The streets and monasteries in Rangoon are locked down, several thousand monks have been imprisoned (hunger striking is reported), and soldiers outnumber people in the streets (and are searching people for cameras, cell phones, etc).

The one bright bit in this was China urging the government to extend Ibrahim Gambari's visit so that negotiations might continue, but that seems a largely toothless measure unless Mr. Gambari can convince the junta to enter negotiations with the monks, or convince them that there will be consequences to their continued crackdown that they actually might care about. I'd have to say I'm not terribly optimistic at this point.

Regards,
Nydia

I heard on the radio this morning that a high ranking official from the Junta defected and is reporting Thousands dead, with hundreds of them being monks... They reported that he said they are disposing of hundreds of monks bodies to get them off the street.

I dont think this is on the news anywhere else seeing as its not confirmed and is just the words of one man, but i dont doubt it one bit! =(

Update just now from the BBC, several thousand monks are being shipped out of Rangoon to 'prisons' (I have a feeling what we are talking about are in fact concentration camps) in the north:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7022437.stm

Also, some pictures from the crackdown here:, be sure to check out the bit of propaganda from state TV on the last page: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7020640.stm

One more update, and this an interesting one, from a British monastery student who was in Burma when the protests started:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7022475.stm

I think that, when people look at the sequence of events, what one has to understand is encapsulated here:

The whole thing started as a religious movement. It was not an organised democratic movement and there was no intention whatsoever for it to be turned into one. Monks were adamant about it.

They knew that there is no point in asking the generals for freedom. They knew that they don't have guns and can't beat the army. All they wanted to do was show the world what their situation is and that they are prepared to die.

The monks also expressed some surprise, but also frustration, that Ibrahim Gambari met with Aung San Suu Kyi, but not with them - it indicates a lack of understanding of the nature of the protests, although I am sure the UN felt that they wanted to deal with someone who was 'someone', so to speak.

To the Western mind, it's hard to comprehend why someone (or thousands of someones) would be willing to 'throw their lives away' on a symbolic and impotent (empirically, anyway) gesture in order to call attention to their plight, but the action operates on several levels: they are making a principled stand that death is what would 'cause least suffering' under such circumstances; they are appealing to the humanity of the individuals who make up the government, as well as shaming them; and they are trying to provide an example to the people, not to dishearten them as they watch monks die, but to inspire and hearten them, that people can still be fully human beings and act their consciences and in accordance with the precepts even in the face of horrific oppression - that despite the state they are in they are not beaten animals and have inherent dignity.

I just hope that something empirically good for the people of Burma ultimately comes of their sacrifice.

Regards,
Nydia

A tragedy.

But just like Darfur, we can't do anything.

We're liberating the Iraqi's.

Nice little comic in the LA Times today...

Shows two people sitting at a diner counter, and one is reading the newspaper...

He turns to the woman next to him and sais... "The Oppressive Government in Burma seems to "Hate Freedom" Why aren't we Invading them?"

And she turns to him and sais..."They haven't Oppressed any Oil Wells..."

I bet $500.00 we attack Iran before even lifting a hand for Burma... or Darfur for that matter :(

Would be nice if Iran would go help out Burma or Darfur as well.

Would be nice if Iran would go help out Burma or Darfur as well.

Uh... So any thread i post in will have Iran brought up? alright i'll Bite.

Since America decided that we would be the shining beacon of Freedom and defend Freedom around the world...(IE:Iraq, Afghanistan) It is hypocritical to not help the people in dire need of freedom, the ones actually being slaughtered by the thousands without it.

Unlike the U.S. Iran hasnt dedicated its existence to upholding "Freedom" around the world. They just want to be left alone.

This bringing to light the fact that the United States only invades a country when there is something to gain, and in reality does not defend the weak and oppressed as it so sais it does.

I am very sorry that i had to respond to his post and change the subject of this thread, but please understand that i was baited :(

Thousands dead if this is credible...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=484903

Uh... So any thread i post in will have Iran brought up? alright i'll Bite.



It would seem logical that if you're going to post about the opression of the US gov't then yes you should expect rhetoric about Iran. Is that line to hard to draw on your own?

EDIT: BTW, you brought up Iran yourself :)

It would seem logical that if you're going to post about the opression of the US gov't then yes you should expect rhetoric about Iran. Is that line to hard to draw on your own?

I wasnt the first... and i posted about a comic on the Times, which is RELATED to Burma and is critisizing the U.S. And thats fine, keep bringing it up, and i will keep shutting you down with facts.

http://www.freeburma.org/
http://www.uscampaignforburma.org/


found this today...

Nice little comic in the LA Times today...

Shows two people sitting at a diner counter, and one is reading the newspaper...

He turns to the woman next to him and sais... "The Oppressive Government in Burma seems to "Hate Freedom" Why aren't we Invading them?"

And she turns to him and sais..."They haven't Oppressed any Oil Wells..."

I bet $500.00 we attack Iran before even lifting a hand for Burma... or Darfur for that matter :(

I think your infatuation is more than you're able to realize. But probably it could be your ignorance is suppressing that realization.

It doesn't matter who brought what up, you perpetuate your own grief with comments like the above. This is an internet message board and I consider you an anon retard not a fact giver. But if you feel it necessary to dole out your "facts" then by all means please continue your infatuation... at the very least it's amusing.

I think your infatuation is more than you're able to realize. But probably it could be your ignorance is suppressing that realization.

It doesn't matter who brought what up, you perpetuate your own grief with comments like the above. This is an internet message board and I consider you an anon retard not a fact giver. But if you feel it necessary to dole out your "facts" then by all means please continue your infatuation... at the very least it's amusing.

Wow... Just wow.

The point of the U.S. attacking Iran before doing anything about Burma or Darfur is to show how helpless the oppressed people are because our country who has vowed to stop injustice such as this does nothing, BECAUSE they have nothing that is in our interest to aqquire.

Consider me whatever you want, I am not here to win over your heart or mind(or lack thereof) I am simply posting my opinions. If you think Iran should do something about Burma or Darfur... Make a new thread about it, and I will be right there to discuss it with you. But you hijacked this thread.

Your argument that i did, was BS, as it was already posted by another that we are doing nothing to help them. I simply posted my opinion on that matter, and a funny posting from a comic.

If you want to discuss iran, i will be right there for you, to appease your twisted form of entertainment needs. Just dont take us off the Burma track in this thread please.

Your reply really did just illustrate your ignorance. You questioned why people bring up Iran yet you clearly brought the hammer on yourself. I am simply pointing that out for you. Clearly you missed that. It doesn't matter what your point was, YOU brought it up, YOU. If you don't want people to discuss Iran with you don't bring it up. That's pretty simple.

I think what is happening in Burma is disgusting and sad but I think idiots who try to make light of the situation by somehow tying Iran-US relations to it is even more disgusting. It certainly doesn't help the situation does it.

Oh and you started the derail with your "humor" post. If you want people to take you more seriously find a different trumpet other than the Iran bullshit. But if you're a troll then you enjoy the poo that comes at you from constantly interjecting your dumb views on Iran.

Yes, I laugh at you. Since we've lost the other more entertaining comics you and your ignorance will do for now. Thanks for making my day.

Hmmm Jedd, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Burma a sat. country of china?

Ooo yup, guess that doesn't really put Burma and Iraq/Iran on equal footing does it?

Your reply really did just illustrate your ignorance. You questioned why people bring up Iran yet you clearly brought the hammer on yourself. I am simply pointing that out for you. Clearly you missed that. It doesn't matter what your point was, YOU brought it up, YOU. If you don't want people to discuss Iran with you don't bring it up. That's pretty simple.

I think what is happening in Burma is disgusting and sad but I think idiots who try to make light of the situation by somehow tying Iran-US relations to it is even more disgusting. It certainly doesn't help the situation does it.

Oh and you started the derail with your "humor" post. If you want people to take you more seriously find a different trumpet other than the Iran bullshit. But if you're a troll then you enjoy the poo that comes at you from constantly interjecting your dumb views on Iran.

Yes, I laugh at you. Since we've lost the other more entertaining comics you and your ignorance will do for now. Thanks for making my day.

Iran was only in that post to show that WE will attack a country who has done nothing over a country that is oppressing its people and killing thousands, because there is more for us to gain in Iran then there is in those other countries.

The post had nothing to do with Iran politically, Learn some reading comprehension my friend. It will help you not look like an idiot.

Iran could easily have been replaced with Iraq, or Afghanistan. Thus your argument that i brought Iran into the conversation is complete Bullshit. The post was to show that a country in need of our help will not get it because of other bullshit that we are stuck in.

I am done with this topic, but will continue posting regarding Burma. You can call me ignorant all you like. It doesnt detract from the fact that your post was inflamatory, while mine was bringing up a sad truth. Thank you for showing your lack of intelligence and reading comprehension, i will remember this in the threads that are closer to this subject, and know not to bother arguing with you over anything.

Hmm, to take an interest in a country that has the potential to aquire nuclear material that could fall into the wrong hands, over a country that is oppressing it's own people....
Which would you chose?

Hmm, to take an interest in a country that has the potential to aquire nuclear material that could fall into the wrong hands, over a country that is oppressing it's own people....
Which would you chose?

But but but.... Iran.

How dare you to draw such a conclusion Sixee his intentions were not perverse in the least. He was trying to show witt and imply that the US would invade Burma b/c it's like Iran!!!

Sorry apparently I can't read anymore so that interpretation could be wrong. LOL.

Back on topic... does anyone think that sanctions actually work? An interesting point was made on the radio this AM that sanctions aren't meant to really harm a country's economy so much as to send a message. My question, what message is sent if sanctions don't work?

And I think anyone with half a brain knows we wouldn't invade Burma; that was complete bullshit and baiting which I gladly took to prove your ignorance Jedd. And I seriously doubt you're done you don't strike me as someone with self control; I'd love to be proven wrong however.

Back on topic... does anyone think that sanctions actually work? An interesting point was made on the radio this AM that sanctions aren't meant to really harm a country's economy so much as to send a message. My question, what message is sent if sanctions don't work?


Well, you might want to direct your question to the Vice President. As I have beaten into the ground now, Cheney (as Halliburton CEO) simply set up an off shore office to get around the sanctions imposed on Iran by the US and UN. He demonstrated most clearly that when greed is sufficient, not even patritotism can keep a determined "businessman" from getting around sanctions, no matter how traitorous his actions may seem down the road.

Interesting that it is Cheney who is pushing hardest to take military action against Iran now, after his bank balance has been boosted by their money.
(I wonder if they may have defaulted on payments, and that is why he is so pissed at them)

But as far as Burma goes,as long as China remains a willing trade partner, it is doubtful that any sanctions imposed will be of any good, as China can simply become a middle man in the trade route. The junta obviously are not concerned with what the world view is of them, after 19 years of the continuous deterioration of the people's standard of living as a result of the junta's pitiful governing. The only sanction that would serve any real purpose with these dictators would be one with "extreme prejudice" attached.

It seems to me that if we keep up with sanctions then it could cause a vaccum and one that China can fill to their advantage. I just don't understand.

One of the big topics now is boycotting the 2008 Olympics in Beijing. Big talk amongst protesters and such trying to make us show China that they need to do something, or at least let someone else do something.

The killing continues...

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,509232,00.html

They surrounded a monastery on Weiza Yandar Street. All the roughly 200 monks living there were forced to stand in a row and the security forces beat their heads against a brick wall. When they were all covered in blood and lay moaning on the ground, they were thrown into a truck and taken away. "We are crying for our monks," said the man, and then he was gone.

China ?

Have we forgotten?

http://ramblingsofpassion.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/051201_tiananmen-square_ex.jpg

That student and his friends met the same fate these monks are facing now.

A couple of reports have been smuggled out of Burma in the last couple of days indicating that the conflict (if you want to call it that) between the monks and the military continues to intensify, with the military intent on breaking the backs of the monasteries that supported the protests regardless of public opinion.

Nighttime raids on the monasteries and mass arrests/deportations are continuing, although lay people are taking shifts watching them and signalling to the monks when the military is coming. The monks, for their part, are continuing to refuse alms from the military, refusing to disrobe, and in many cases hunger striking, although a certain level of desparation has set in and many of those still in the capital are trying to flee Rangoon (not so easy as many bus drivers are afraid to take them for fear of repercussions).

In the face of the crackdown, the streets are deceptively quiet, but the populace is growing very, very angry at the atrocities being committed against the more or less national faith and against basic human rights. The government seems well aware of what a precipice they are on and are ruthlessly disrupting even small gatherings of people with live fire, and running military trucks through the streets of Rangoon and blaring such cheery messages as: ""We have photographs. We are going to make arrests."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7024825.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7025357.stm

Even with the considerable force the junta is bringing to bear and the state of fear much of the populace is in, one has to wonder at what point a crucial line will have been crossed and a critical mass of the population decide they have nothing to lose and are willing to put their lives on the line in mass revolt.

Regards,
Nydia

Thanks for the link to Der Spiegel, Akipt!

There was a really good interview about the military junta linked off that page as well, and one on the student protests this week which goes into considerable depth about the history of the relationship of the monkhood to government in Burma (second link):

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,508872,00.html

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,508874,00.html

There's also another great article on Der Spiegel which discusses India's (lack of a) position regarding the uprising. Looking back on some of the comments posted in this thread, it would be erroneous to say that 'we won't get involved in Burma because it doesn't have oil'. In fact, Burma has *a lot* of oil and gas, which is why we're getting the coverage we are in the first place - and why the crushing povery of the non regime-connected population is particularly ironic.

If there is an oil-related reason why the US won't get involved in Burma, it's because it's not oil that *we* can reasonably exploit; it's China's and India's. Both regimes have pandered to the junta (India despite the fact that, as the world's largest democracy, it 'should' be concerned about supporting brutal repression) because keeping cozy with the folks who have their hands on the oil and gas tap outweighs all other considerations.

If push comes to shove however, and things degenerate in the country to the point where the flow of the all-important pipelines is threatened, I suspect that both China and India will be willing to cut a deal with whoever can be set up to deliver, whether pro-democratic or more of the same.

Regards,
Nydia

Well, Ibrahim Gambari is back from Burma, but it remains to be seen whether his dialogue with Than Shwe bears fruit. While images of Aung San Suu Kyi were shown on Burmese television (seated with Mr. Gambari), and has agreed 'in principle' to meet with her (provided she drops her support for international sanctions and her 'confrontational' attitude) it's unknown whether this is just an attempt to pay lip service to international appearances and keep the unrest managed while the regime ruthlessly crushes anyone connected with the protests and further tightens surveillance.

US diplomats inside Burma reported today that they visited fifteen monasteries in and around Rangoon in the last couple of days and found them all ransacked and empty; an estimated 10,000 monks, nuns, and other civilians have been arrested and imprisoned/deported. The few that have been released report having undergone extensive interrogation about their families. Given that, it is hard to think that the apparent attempts at compromise is anything other than an attempt to softsoap the international community into thinking that something will be done so that it goes back to sleep while the screws continue to tighten away from marauding cameras.

Regards,
Nydia

A sad update on Burma, via a clandestine interview with the head of the All Burmese Monks Alliance, and a statement from Ibrahim Gambari that his mission to Burma has 'failed'. Mass murders and deportations of monks and citizens continue to be reported, and the junta has sworn to hunt down any remaining journalists in the country. Particularly chilling was this report from a raid on one of the monasteries in the east of Rangoon:

When the troops advanced on the monastery, there were suddenly hundreds of people on the street, but they could do nothing. The soldiers surrounded the complex and butchered the crowd with bayonets. Inside the monastery they went on a murderous rampage. The monks, who are sworn to a life of non-violence, offered no resistance. "The monks had to stand in a row and then the soldiers smashed their heads against a brick wall," says a local resident.

The population is under house arrest at night and intersections in Rangoon are blocked off by soldiers every night at 6 pm; the regime is building cells as fast as it can ad the deportation centers it has set up. It appears that the regime has entrenched and is settling into a long crackdown... The worst part is that is in response to a protest driven by the extreme suffering and hunger of their own people, and one wonders how long it will be before the country simply implodes.

Regards,
Nydia

Article, from today's Der Spiegel, here: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,510074,00.html

I don't think it will 'implode'.

This isn't eighties Argentina. Popular resistance will not bring down the military junta. The system is far more oppressive, and as we have seen time and again, from the Revolution to the events of the past month - the junta is not going anywhere without a fight. It has a firm grip upon the people, has the ability to curfew entire populations and implement a nation-wide media censorship - however ineffective it has proved to be.

Even pressure from its overmighty neighbour has failed to create much hub-ub, and most of all it has shown lately that not even a revolt by the most revered caste in Burmese society will budge it from power.

No, I foresee a very sad future for the Burmese people.

Since it's obvious they pretty much got away with mass murder...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/burma/story/0,,2195188,00.html

Activists exasperated at the failure of diplomacy to apply pressure on Burma's military regime are resorting to a new means of protest against the regime's recent crackdown: sending female underwear to Burmese embassies.

Embassies in the UK, Thailand, Australia and Singapore have all been targeted by the "Panties for Peace" campaign, co-ordinated by an activist group based in Chiang Mai, Thailand.

The manoeuvre is a calculated insult to the junta and its leader, General Than Shwe. Superstitious junta members believe that any contact with female undergarments - clean or dirty - will sap them of their power, said Jackie Pollack, a member of the Lanna Action for Burma Committee.

They have embassies in the UK and Australia? :mad:

As long as they let us move cargo though.. all will be forgiven!

'They have embassies in the UK and Australia?'

- Hmm, find that hard to believe, especially as we participate in sanctions against Burma and do not recognize the revolution (hence still calling it Burma).

Obviously he mis-spoke, and meant Russia; UK standing for Uber Kremlin.

Or Utter Krap?

Ok, that one wasn't so good.

Pictures of Burma. Some of these are a little graphic, including bodies:

http://english.dvb.no/photo3.php?cat=6

Two updates from Burma, one from Der Speigel, and the other from the BBC:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,513302,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7058610.stm

The first article appears to be a couple of weeks old, from the print magazine, but contains an excellent interview with one of the former major economic advisors inside Burma, discussing the complete economic ineptitude with which the country is being 'run', and the ignorance and insularity that led to the decision to raise gas prices this summer (to recoup some of the staggering expenses associated with moving the capitol in 2005).

The second link contains dispatches from people in Burma, one month post the protests and their suppression. Both articles stress that the arrests and persecutions are continuing, and that the situation continues to degenerate, with starvation worsening as the economy continues to collapse. Burma's leaders, meanwhile, are increasingly looking to China to bail them out, and in the last several years, over two million Chinese have immigrated *to* Burma to run various businesses, one of them quoted as saying:

What attracts Ma to Mandalay, he says, are the city's "calm and stability."

He seems rather unconcerned that that 'calm and stability' are paid for in blood and suffering.

Regards,
Nydia

A matter of perspective. Sorry no time to read the links yet, but if Ma migrated from China ... well, it's probably not much different than the blood and suffering existing where he lived before. I'd say he got a nice pay raise going to Burma though, yeah, I could see him overlooking a few slaughtered monks. Nothing new, the victims are just wearing different clothes.