September 13, 2017
Who the good guys actually are.
Who the Jews tell you the good guys are.
Aung San Suu Kyi was a hero of the left. A female “POC” who fought against a military regime for a more popular government system which they were conveniently able to fit in their “Democracy” box.
They gave her a Nobel Peace Prize.
And then the Buddhist leader got attacked by an Islamic ethnic minority, and decided to just go ahead and ethnically cleanse the terrorists from her people’s homeland.
Now they’re confused as to how to deal with “WELL AKSHUALLY she’s pure evil now.”
It’s the 120 IQ range – what I call the Dunning-Kruger Clan – that cares about this to begin with.
So the BBC has come out with a rambling insight piece entitled “How much power does Aung San Suu Kyi really have?” to go along with their “muh oppression Moosleems” pieces. The article claims that Daw Suu doesn’t really have that much power and maybe she isn’t really making the call on the genocide.
The piece is written by BBC News Southeast Asia correspondent Jonathan Head, but is clearly a narrative control piece brainstormed by the editorial board.
They blame the President and the military.
Then they even claim that the media is just too free.
The media is also a factor. One of the biggest changes in Myanmar over the past five years has been the proliferation of new, independent media outlets, and the dramatic growth of mobile phone and internet use, in a country that scarcely had landlines a decade ago.
But very few media have shown what is happening inside Bangladesh, or the suffering of the Rohingya. Most have focused instead on displaced Buddhists and Hindus inside Rakhine, who are far fewer in number. The popularity of social media has allowed disinformation and hate speech to spread quickly.
lol where have I heard “the media is too free, it’s inflaming hate speech” before.
Anyway – the BBC ultimately clears Daw Suu of culpability in the genocide she is overseeing.
So Aung San Suu Kyi has very little power over events in Rakhine State. And speaking out in support of the Rohingya would almost certainly prompt an angry reaction from Buddhist nationalists.
Whether, with her immense moral authority, it might start to change public prejudice against the Rohingya, is an open question. She has calculated that it is a gamble not worth taking. She is known to be very stubborn once she has made up her mind.
But the BBC just assumes that she would want to stop a genocide if she could.
Because women and democracy and stuff or whatever.
Even though she has shown zero indication that she gives any micro-fraction of a single fuck about these inbred terrorist animals.
Is there a risk that the military might step in and replace her, should she challenge what they are doing in Rakhine? They have the power to do so. In the current climate, they might even have some public support.
Of course they would have public support to oust her if she tried to interfere on the behalf of a foreign horde of parasite terrorists – the same way they would have public support to oust her if she started eating babies on TV.
This article is like it’s written by a small child who has only ever watched a documentary about all of this.
Anyone who has ever been around Buddhist Asians knows that they hate Moslems. And anyone who has been around Asians at all knows that they don’t get all touchy-feely about ethnic cleansing.
This is just pure projection.
If the author even believes it – not that it matters either way. Publishing it is narrative control, regardless.
But it is worth remembering that the current power-sharing arrangements with the NLD are more or less what the military was aiming for when it announced its Seven Stage Roadmap to Democracy back in 2003.
At the time this was dismissed as a sham. But it turns out Myanmar’s political development over the next 14 years followed that roadmap closely. Even after its own political party was trounced in 2015’s election, the military remains by far the most powerful institution in the country.
Only this time, it has Aung San Suu Kyi as a shield, to be battered by the international outcry over its actions.
Daw Suu isn’t a shield – she is the sword of the people!
Instead of fetishizing Suu as their perfect little nonwhite female democracy advocate, maybe they should instead actually try to understand her and thereby understand why so many people the world over want to exterminate Moslems and other disgusting “minority” populations!
Because genocide is gaining popular support as a method of dealing with social and economic problems.