"Sky-Full of Liars"

Kerry Howley | September 28, 2007

An MRTV news brief on the external destructionists threatening stability in the peace-loving land of Myanmar:

Comments

|9.28.07 @ 1:12PM|#

I continue to be majorly creeped out by MRTV.

|9.28.07 @ 1:16PM|#

I can't watch the video where I'm at, but from the still shot she looks like she has something very important to say or her kids will be killed. She looks very uncomfortable.

Jennifer|9.28.07 @ 1:24PM|#

I'll just keep my fingers crossed and hope that THIS will be the uprising that leads to actual change. Maybe this hasn't all been in vain?

|9.28.07 @ 1:27PM|#

If it's at the point where the country is in a media blackout, it's either going to go very well or horribly, horribly wrong. The videos that have come out are a great refresher on the importance of 2nd amendment rights.

ed|9.28.07 @ 1:27PM|#

Better cross your toes while you're at it.

thoreau|9.28.07 @ 1:31PM|#

Here's a question: Say that the regime collapses. What next? I know that Myanmar has some armed ethnic secessionist groups. Does the place descend into chaos?

|9.28.07 @ 1:33PM|#

I hope the good guys win. And I hope, when they write their Constitution, they leave out that commerce clause.

Jennifer|9.28.07 @ 1:36PM|#

I know that in the old Soviet Union, there were jokes about how Pravda was reliable; all you had to do was believe the opposite of what it said. Does anybody in Burma really believe these TV reports? It didn't even sound persuasive.

stephen the goldberger|9.28.07 @ 1:55PM|#

what does she say i can't understand her.

|9.28.07 @ 1:56PM|#

Those font shot remind me of the Family Guy where Peter gets a job with the tobacco company.

They show that "Lassie" clip intermixed with a Tobacco Co. Executive saying "smoke" as a form of subliminal advertising.

ted|9.28.07 @ 2:08PM|#

At what point do we tell these "non-violent" types to defend themselves, before we send over our troops.

I feel deep compassion for them, however, sack up and grab a knife and go to work.

These guys are to the area of a self-defense, what "I don't want to compete" union monkeys are to the job force.

stephen the goldberger|9.28.07 @ 2:19PM|#

anybody?

|9.28.07 @ 2:27PM|#

At what point do we tell these "non-violent" types to defend themselves, before we send over our troops.

I feel deep compassion for them, however, sack up and grab a knife and go to work.

These guys are to the area of a self-defense, what "I don't want to compete" union monkeys are to the job force.

Yeah, tell that to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.

|9.28.07 @ 2:31PM|#

"And I hope, when they write their Constitution, they leave out that commerce clause."

Yeah! That's the first thing I thought of too...the commerce clause. I always think of the commerce clause when I see blood on the streets and watch creepy state television public service announcements. Thanks for putting this all in its proper perspective.

David Ross|9.28.07 @ 2:33PM|#

Taktix, re: "tell that to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi", you are perhaps underinformed. The British as of 1945 believed in playing fair, by and large; they had also just barely survived a large war, perhaps you've heard of it. These handicaps do not afflict the Burmese junta.

|9.28.07 @ 2:35PM|#

"These guys are to the area of a self-defense, what "I don't want to compete" union monkeys are to the job force."

Wow! This is amazing! Union monkeys was the second thing that crossed my mind!

The violence in Burma made me think of the commerce clause and union monkeys in that order. And here I thought I had my priorities hopelessly confused.

|9.28.07 @ 2:36PM|#

Yeah, tell that to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.

And the Osties, Yugos, Czechs, Albanians, etc.

Serious question: are unarmed marchers more successful at toppling governments than armed insurgents?

The Extispicator|9.28.07 @ 2:46PM|#

All I know is that in AD&D (the 1983 version) Monks had all kinds of special attacking abilities. Maybe some of them do not have enough Hit Points to withstand a machine gun, but don't tell me these guys can't fight.

|9.28.07 @ 2:48PM|#

Serious question: are unarmed marchers more successful at toppling governments than armed insurgents?

The Romanians say no. The Filipinos say yes. Maybe it depends on the morality of the thugs in charge.

|9.28.07 @ 2:48PM|#

Yeah! That's the first thing I thought of too...the commerce clause.

I was trying to get across the idea that my wishes were that they'd come out of this with a freer society; that they would survive and prosper.

The commerce clause bit was (supposed to be) some mild tongue-in-cheek; it was, arguably, the loophole that got us in trouble after our own successful revolution here in the US, and may be what makes our next one necessary.

I had no intention of being dismissive of the very real tragedies unfolding in Myanmar.

|9.28.07 @ 2:52PM|#

And the Osties, Yugos, Czechs, Albanians, etc.

I think you mean Ossis. (East Germans, right?) An "osti" is something else. Ask any francophone Canadian.

To answer your question: no. The Velvet Revolutions only succeeded because the Soviets put the Eastern European governments on notice that they were no longer going to prop them up.

This is not the case for Myanmar, alas, which still has China's tacit support. The junta, like Kim Jong Il, will stay in power for as long as it is convenient for China's leaders. The only real question is whether or not we'll see Chinese tanks rolling into Yangon. For all I know that's what the junta are counting on.

Syloson of Samos|9.28.07 @ 3:18PM|#

Kerry Howley,

So, if Total were to leave Myanmar do you think it would make much of a difference? Or would their place simply be taken by some other (perhaps Asian?) firm?

VM|9.28.07 @ 3:22PM|#

Thank you for all of the interesting posts on Myanmar.

Syloson of Samos|9.28.07 @ 3:25PM|#

Kerry Howley,

Also, what nation's political, etc. system (historical or contemporary) would you compare Myanmar's to?

The Wine Commonsewer|9.28.07 @ 3:28PM|#

So what if they gave a demonstration and the police shot into the crowd and the crowd shot back? Then what?

The Wine Commonsewer|9.28.07 @ 3:31PM|#

That skit was on the Daily Show the other night.

|9.28.07 @ 4:13PM|#

David Ross | September 28, 2007, 2:33pm | #
Taktix, re: "tell that to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi", you are perhaps underinformed. The British as of 1945 believed in playing fair, by and large; they had also just barely survived a large war, perhaps you've heard of it. These handicaps do not afflict the Burmese junta.

First of all, Gandhi was doing his thing since 1930. Running a Google search for the founding date of modern India does not equal knowledge.

It is true that British were more warm to "playing fair," but plenty of people were still killed.

they had also just barely survived a large war, perhaps you've heard of it.

Really? What war was that?

Also, it's affect, not afflict. And underinformed[sic] is not a word.

Try learning something before you bring that illegible, ill informed ignorance around here...

|9.28.07 @ 4:14PM|#

Damn, a smack-down like that and I forgot to close a tag.

I'm going home.

Russ 2000|9.28.07 @ 4:16PM|#

Does the place descend into chaos?

It's possible that the place could ascend into chaos.

Syloson of Samos|9.28.07 @ 4:27PM|#

Taktix,

Well, the British did not "play fair" in the wake of the collapse of the 1857 Indian Revolution (or Mutiny depending on your spective). Then again, neither did the Indians. Suffice it to say that atrocities were committed by both sides.

Syloson of Samos|9.28.07 @ 4:33PM|#

Taktix,

Then there is the Amritsar Massacre (by no means an isolated event in British colonial history).

|9.28.07 @ 5:19PM|#

I know that Myanmar has some armed ethnic secessionist groups. Does the place descend into chaos?

I don't have Kerry's 1st hand knowledge of the country, but if I remember correctly from Asian Geography, what armed resistance exists in Burma largely consists of ethnic minority groups (Karen, Shan) on the Thai border.

For the most part, they have been marginalized to mountainous terrain, and many have given up the struggle and live in refugee camps in Thailand.

Given their location on the periphery on the country, and their lack of useful weaponry, it's unlikely they could play anything other than a supplemental role in overthrowing the junta.

|9.28.07 @ 6:36PM|#

At the end of the clip, does she say, "So much for now, we'll bring you more stimulus" or am I not hearing that right?

|9.28.07 @ 6:51PM|#

The supreme court that created the current commerce clause doctrine was looking for a way to give the federal government de facto police power. The commerce clause presented the easiest way to distend and intentionally misinterpret a clause to accomplish this goal. If there had been no commerce clause they would have hung their hat on something else. Lord knows with their butterfly-flaps-its-wings approach to defining interstate commerce, they could have found something else.

|9.28.07 @ 7:33PM|#

I'll just keep my fingers crossed and hope that THIS will be the uprising that leads to actual change. Maybe this hasn't all been in vain?

In other news a new poll shows that American women are far less upset with Buddhist dominated religious states that oppress their women then they are with Muslim dominated religious states that oppress their women.

|9.28.07 @ 11:25PM|#

Well, all-male robed religionists are trying to take over the government and the government's spokesperson is a woman not bearing a burka! I think we should support the government.

jkii|9.29.07 @ 3:24AM|#

She's harder to understand than a 3am Jack in the Box drive through window attendant.

|9.29.07 @ 12:30PM|#

Toxic, the supreme court could do worse than they have done with commerce...

The 1st amendment right of the people to peacably assemble really only covers factory work.

The 2nd amendment protects citizens from having their arms amputated at the shoulder.

The 3rd amendment disallows quartering of soldiers in a residence. Everyone knows what happens to the carpeting when you quarter a soldier in the living room.

The 6th amendment could be interpreted to only allow defendants to present evidence approved by the judge.

Under the 8th amendment they could conclude a ten year sentence or dying from AIDS acquired during a session of forced sodomy is a suitable sentence for a person convicted of growing the wrong kind of plant in his back yard.

The 10th amendment only deals with supernatural powers. That's why this amendment doesn't see much use.

|9.29.07 @ 2:11PM|#

Sadly, it appears that the clampdown will be effective.

Let me offer a "toast" to Than Shwe - may he and his thug scum die soon, and painfully.

Syloson of Samos|9.30.07 @ 2:38AM|#

Interesting interview with a reporter doing work in Burma: http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/burma601/interview_reporter.html