35
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: − The source for the addition of info to this article is here: [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bm.html]. This could be a good place to start when adding basic info, then building it up to contain the current events happening now. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:21, 26 September 2007 (EDT)+ − − Nice work - I'll put some of my own stuff up tomorrow. Godspeed! --[[User:SayaSan|SayaSan]] − :Here's the NLD's Manifesto [http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs/NLDElectionManifesto1989.htm]. We should see what thier position on [[abortion]] before posting any of this. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:58, 26 September 2007 (EDT)+ − − − − ==Sept 2007 uprising== − − The viewpoint of Western liberals seems to be that any police shootings of unarmed civilians is absolutely inexcusable, no matter what the provocation is. − − Ref: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070926/ap_on_re_as/myanmar − − Even trying to grab weapons away from police - in response to being told to disperse - is not considered by liberals to be sufficient justification for police to "open fire" on a crowd. I guess the cops are supposed to "take the first bullet", i.e., suffer the first wounds. − − What I suspect is that it may be a strategy on the part of revolutionaries to attract sympathy by artfully provoking the police into -- seemingly -- firing the first shot in the battle. The aim is to blame the initiation of violence on the security forces. The idea that goading someone into harming you is itself a provocation of violence - and that the provocateur is not entirely innocent is never considered by liberals. They claim an unlimited right to provoke, to break rules. Nothing they do ever merits a severe response. − − I am not siding with the government, as several liberals have posted or emailed me privately. I am addressing one issue only: who started what, and is the force used by the various sides justified. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 19:05, 26 September 2007 (EDT) − − :You write as though the "liberals" acknowledge that the protesters did try to grab weapons, and that this is not sufficient justification for the police to shoot. − :But the article you linked to did not acknowledge that the protesters did this. It merely reported the claim from the government that this had happened. As such, there was no clear inference, as you claim, that the provocation was not just cause for the police to fire. − :Possibly another factor is that there are reports of soldiers shaving their heads and of the army buying monks robes, the implication being that soldiers would try and infiltrate the monks, allegedly to provide provocation for police action by making it appear that the monks did not remain peaceful. So even if "monks" did try and grab weapons, were they really monks, or soldiers planted in the crowd? − :Who started what, and was the force justified? We are talking about a largely-peaceful protest against an oppressive military dictatorship. A dictatorship that reportedly did shoot into a crowd of peaceful protesters in 1988, killing ''thousands''. You are correct. Perhaps in specific incidents the police were justified. Overall, justice seems to be on the side of the protesters. − :[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:38, 27 September 2007 (EDT) − − ::We have to take into consideration that Burma/Myanmar went communist after World War II, then a military takeover sometime in the 1970s. It's an Asian contry with ties to China, so what I'm seeing in the news is something similar to the student revolt in Beijing back in 1989. The Burmese want freedom, and those in charge are not going to let it happen. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 09:04, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
Replacing page with 'GO ON LIBERALS, LIBERTARTIANS, AND LEFTISTS! F*CK ALL THIS FASCISTS! F*CK EM ALL!!! ='''LET'S VANDALIZE THIS F*CKIN SHIT!!!!!='
GO ON LIBERALS, LIBERTARTIANS, AND LEFTISTS! F*CK ALL THIS FASCISTS! F*CK EM ALL!!!
='''LET'S VANDALIZE THIS F*CKIN SHIT!!!!!=