Aung San Suu Kyi.. The Fall of a Human Rights Icon..

[Quantum Quack]

They want to be allowed to return home, regain their citizenship and fundamental human rights. We would do wrong by them if we literally forced them to leave their homes, live in some kind of internment camp for their so called protection, and they would still be without rights, still not citizens. You do get that, yes?

please link to the appropriate referendum supporting your claim.
I could just as easily claim they wish to live on the moon.. you do get that don't you?

I don't see how any one who has just had his family murdered would like to go back ... but hey that 's just me maybe...

Well, perhaps you should not be so "naive".

Perhaps I know the Srebrenica genocide** ( killing 8000 Bosnian Muslims) and the UN fiasco there all too well, to trust some sort of UN contrived peace between bitter enemies.

** I have a female friend who survived it, I also taught elementary English (AMES) briefly to a couple of male survivors.

You do get it that it is only recently that the trial of Radovan Karadzic found him guilty of genocide no less than 21 years after the war was resolved, and that even now Bosnian Muslims live in an uneasy state. ( Many having migrated to Melbourne Australia and live in my neighborhood.)

They placed their trust in the UN and that trust failed them, failed them over 8000 times.. you do understand that don't you?

Why would one expect Myanmar to be any different?

Perhaps you can stop making excuses for her.

I am not making up anything... where as the same can not be said for others.

I am granting her the benefit of the doubt and innocence until proven guilty ... blah blah blah....

I am hugely grateful that so many have managed to escape with their lives as there could have been a completely different and considerably more tragic outcome.

She has made her thoughts on the matter clear up to this point. I have to ask, why do you refuse to believe her words and actions on the matter?

because those that are in a position to know are asking her why she is maintaining her silence...and I find their position to be more tenable than yours. You understand don't you?

Yes, we do. Her department has been releasing statements constantly,

Oh I see so she is silent but her department is pretty loud. You do understand that her department is not her don't you? What would you expect when working under a military Junta? The truth!? surely....

she has said plenty when it comes to the Rohingya and their rights. She has denied them their identity, requested that other countries stop referring to them as "Rohingya" (which is basically telling other countries to stop referring to them as being Burmese), she has used her social media platform to spread propaganda against them and labeled them all as terrorists. She has repeatedly stated that the "rule of law" in Myanmar is how to deal with human rights abuses and then reminded everyone that the "rule of law" in Myanmar only applies to its citizens..

all of which you can prove where actually her doings?
You honestly believe that she is in control of her social media account? ( you are kidding yes?)
Why?

She has declared her racism, so what?.. how does that equate to genocide?

At this particular point in time I am not convinced that she is in a position to speak about this issue with any ability to express her truth.

At this point in time we have 100's of thousands of asylum seekers fleeing a country and all you want to do is wave the UN magic wand, disregard Myanmar Sovereignty, place a country under UN law and send them back somehow expecting the enmity between the population groups to be somehow magically resolved.

I find that possibility highly unlikely... to be honest.

 

[Quantum Quack]

News just in:

Speaking to foreign diplomats Tuesday in the national capital, Naypyitaw, Ms. Suu Kyi also said Myanmar would allow Rohingya who could prove they had lived in the country to return. “We are ready to start the verification process at any time,” she said.

Ms. Suu Kyi, who holds the post of state counselor, also urged the rest of the world to view the crisis as an opportunity to address all the ethnic conflicts in the Buddhist-majority nation, not just in troubled Rakhine State, and said that Myanmar had never been “soft on human rights.”
​

src: https://www.wsj.com/articles/suu-ky...l-allow-certain-rohingya-to-return-1505802701
https://www.wsj.com/articles/suu-ky...l-allow-certain-rohingya-to-return-1505802701

Myanmar's de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi has said her government does not fear "international scrutiny" of its handling of the growing Rohingya crisis.

It was her first address to the country about the violence in northern Rakhine state that has seen more than 400,000 Rohingya Muslims cross into Bangladesh.

Ms Suu Kyi has faced heavy criticism for her response to the crisis.

But she said most Muslims had not fled the state and that violence had ceased.

In her speech to Myanmar's parliament, Aung San Suu Kyi said she felt "deeply" for the suffering of "all people" in the conflict, and that Myanmar was "committed to a sustainable solution… for all communities in this state".
​

src: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41315924
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41315924
and many others in the last few hours...

 

[Quantum Quack]

Speech in full on crisis 2017-09-19 AEST

 

[Bells]

please link to the appropriate referendum supporting your claim.
I could just as easily claim they wish to live on the moon.. you do get that don't you?

I don't see how any one who has just had his family murdered would like to go back ... but hey that 's just me maybe...

I linked you articles with interviews of the people who fled to Bangladesh, and yes, after watching their families murdered, who just want to return home.

What part of that did you miss, exactly?

And you want to see a referendum of people who were declared stateless by their own government and who aren't even allowed to vote? Really?

You are applying your own standards to these people who literally just want to return home and reclaim their citizenship and regain their fundamental human rights. If your family was murdered, you'd want be forced to leave your country and never return? They are Burmese. Myanmar is their home and the only home they know and want. They aren't Bangladeshi, despite your proposal that they be kept in a camp in Bangladesh, still stateless and still without a permanent home and base. That home and base is in Myanmar, where they have been for centuries. What part of that is so hard for you to understand?

Perhaps I know the Srebrenica genocide** ( killing 8000 Bosnian Muslims) and the UN fiasco there all too well, to trust some sort of UN contrived peace between bitter enemies.

** I have a female friend who survived it, I also taught elementary English (AMES) briefly to a couple of male survivors.

You do get it that it is only recently that the trial of Radovan Karadzic found him guilty of genocide no less than 21 years after the war was resolved, and that even now Bosnian Muslims live in an uneasy state. ( Many having migrated to Melbourne Australia and live in my neighborhood.)

They placed their trust in the UN and that trust failed them, failed them over 8000 times.. you do understand that don't you?

Why would one expect Myanmar to be any different?

Why do you expect the Rohingya to be the same?

What part of the fact that these people just want to return home can't you understand that you believe they should be forced out of Myanmar, into a 'refugee camp', which would mean they would never get to return home, and their link to their homeland and culture would disappear entirely, escapes you? Their cultural ties, ancestral ties is in Myanmar. Why do you think the Tutsi returned to Rwanda and remain there after the genocide? Because they are glutton's for punishment?

Many Bosnian Muslims chose to return home after the war, QQ. Some even returned to live and work in Srebenica.

And you also forget one thing. Bosnian refugees were never made stateless. They were never stripped of their citizenship.

I am not making up anything... where as the same can not be said for others.

I am granting her the benefit of the doubt and innocence until proven guilty ... blah blah blah....

I am hugely grateful that so many have managed to escape with their lives as there could have been a completely different and considerably more tragic outcome.

Then perhaps you could explain how and why you are advocating from a position that would entail doing the work of the Burmese military and removing every Rohingya from Myanmar and forcing them to live in a UN "camp", and ensuring they can never return and remain stateless?

because those that are in a position to know are asking her why she is maintaining her silence...and I find their position to be more tenable than yours. You understand don't you?

Ya. You mean like the aid organisations who were there, the UN, various other Nobel Peace Prize winners who have all questioned her silence, with aid and human rights groups correctly labeling her original silence and then her spreading propaganda against the Rohingya as making her complicit to what is being described as a slow genocide?

all of which you can prove where actually her doings?
You honestly believe that she is in control of her social media account? ( you are kidding yes?)
Why?

So you also choose to ignore her statements on the Rohingya in the process? Comments she has been making for years.

Even on her own Facebook page. All of this was linked in earlier posts.

And if you think a woman who has never once shied away from criticising the military during her incarceration and after her incarceration is suddenly silent out of fear when it comes to their ethnic cleansing the Rohingya is a viable excuse, then really, you are naive.

 

[Bells]

She has declared her racism, so what?.. how does that equate to genocide?

She is the leader of the country that is committing said genocide.. She has denied that the military is doing anything wrong. She has even stripped them of their identity by refusing to even refer to them as Rohingya and Burmese, she refers to them as "Bengali's" and terrorists and "the Muslims". By she, I mean her, speaking to the media and to other nations who have commented on their plight. She instructed the US to not refer to them as the Rohingya, because to do so would identify them as being Burmese. You didn't read anything I posted on genocide, did you, how State actors who are complicit in acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing will always deny any wrongdoing and that this is a sign of genocide in and of itself.

At this point in time we have 100's of thousands of asylum seekers fleeing a country and all you want to do is wave the UN magic wand, disregard Myanmar Sovereignty, place a country under UN law and send them back somehow expecting the enmity between the population groups to be somehow magically resolved.

What is wrong with you?

They are Burmese. Declaring a genocide would ensure their safety and action on their behalf and allowing them to return home. You are literally advocating from a position which would have the UN do Myanmar's military bidding by forcibly removing them from their own country, keeping them stateless and in a state of homelessness in an internment camp that the UN would run and manage. And you think that is the solution?

News just in:
[snip]

And you accuse me of being naive?

The laws in Myanmar dictate that for the Rohingya to be classified as citizens, they have to trace their ancestry back to the 1800's.

Her declaration that they can return home provided they can prove they live in the country is obscene. Their homes were destroyed, they have no paperwork, they are stateless. So how in the hell can they prove they lived in Myanmar?

Why do you think they have denied the UN entry to the State, QQ? Why do you think her own office has released propaganda targeting not just the Rohingya, but also aid agencies and human rights groups who were there on the ground observing what was happening so that they also had to flee for their lives as the militants and populace turned against them?

Even in her latest statements, she didn't even address them by name. I mean for goodness sake, you still don't see the giant picture in front of you?

With nearly half of Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslim population having fled the country in the past three weeks, Aung San Suu Kyi addressed the crisis publicly for the first time — and called it a mystery.

“We want to find out why this exodus is happening,” Suu Kyi, the leader of Myanmar’s governing party, said Tuesday in a nationally televised speech from the capital, Naypyitaw.

The reasons why more than 400,000 Rohingya have escaped over the border into Bangladesh have been well documented by human rights groups: the Myanmar army, responding to an Aug. 25 insurgent attack, is carrying out deadly “clearance operations” in the western state of Rakhine, shooting civilians as they flee and burning Rohingya villages to the ground. The United Nations’ top human rights official has called it “a textbook example of ethnic cleansing.”

But in a closely watched speech, Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner who led the opposition to Myanmar’s former military rulers, defended the army that once kept her under house arrest for more than a decade. She accused the international community of overlooking the other challenges facing Myanmar, an overwhelmingly Buddhist country also known as Burma, where an estimated 1 million Rohingya Muslims have long complained of persecution.

[..]

Suu Kyi did not refer to the Rohingya by name, in keeping with the government’s view that members of the ethnic and religious minority are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and not among the dozens of national ethnicities officially recognized by Myanmar. Rohingya activists strongly dispute this, saying many families have lived in Myanmar for generations.​

She cannot figure out why they fled? Really? You bought this bullshit?

She blatantly lied when she declared there were no military "clearance operations" since the 5th of September. People are still fleeing for their lives. Satellite images still show how the military is razing villages to the ground.

..although humanitarian workers and journalists in Bangladesh reported fires in Myanmar villages as recently as last week, and refugees have continued to stream across the border.​

Do you know how I know what she said in her latest statement is bullshit?

Because she uttered the exact same bullshit in April of this year.

 

[Quantum Quack]

I think I have said all I am going to say... I have read nothing that has convinced me to change my position... best of luck to you!

 

[birch]

She should be stripped of her nobel prize and her tepid reaction to gross human rights violations happening especially in her country is a shame. what i do think is important is that the UN ask the rohingya themselves what they would like to do. Too often actions are taken pre-emptively without asking the victims themselves what they need. I think the rohingya should be given a choice as to whether they go back to myanmar or seek safe asylum elsewhere.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Speech in full on crisis 2017-09-19 AEST

Is this a critique of that speech?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/19/asia/myanmar-aung-san-suu-kyi-speech-facts/index.html

 

[Bells]

Is this a critique of that speech?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/19/asia/myanmar-aung-san-suu-kyi-speech-facts/index.html

If pointing out how she lied through her backside a critique, sure, it's a critique.

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the widow who defied Burma’s dictators, endured a total of 15 years of house arrest and led a campaign for democracy, was a hero of modern times. Yet today Daw Suu, as the effective leader of Burma, is chief apologist for this ethnic cleansing, as the country oppresses the darker-skinned Rohingya and denounces them as terrorists and illegal immigrants.

And “ethnic cleansing” may be an understatement. Even before the latest wave of terror, a Yale study had suggested that the brutality toward the Rohingya might qualify as genocide. The US Holocaust Museum has also warned that genocide against the Rohingya may be looming.

For shame, Daw Suu. We honoured you and fought for your freedom – and now you use that freedom to condone the butchery of your own people?

[...]

Hundreds are believed to have been killed, but Daw Suu has not criticised the slaughter. Rather, she blamed international aid groups and complained about “a huge iceberg of misinformation” aiming to help “the terrorists” – presumably meaning the Rohingya.

When a Rohingya woman bravely recounted how her husband had been shot dead and how she and three teenage girls had been gang-raped by soldiers, Daw Suu’s Facebook page mocked the claims as “fake rape”.

Based on a conversation with Daw Suu once about the Rohingya, I think she genuinely believes that they are outsiders and troublemakers. But in addition, the moral giant has become a pragmatic politician – and she knows that any sympathy for the Rohingya would be disastrous politically for her party in a country deeply hostile to its Muslim minority.

“We applauded Aung San Suu Kyi when she received her Nobel Prize because she symbolised courage in the face of tyranny,” noted Ken Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “Now that she’s in power, she symbolises cowardly complicity in the deadly tyranny being visited on the Rohingya.”

Another Nobel Peace Prize winner, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, wrote a pained letter to his friend: “My dear sister: if the political price of your ascension to the highest office in Myanmar is your silence, the price is surely too steep.”

Burma tries to keep foreigners out of the Rohingya areas, but I’ve managed to get there twice in the last few years, and even then Rohingya were confined to concentration camps or to remote villages. Many were systematically denied medical care, and children were barred from public schools. It’s a 21st century apartheid.

I saw a 23-year-old woman, Minura Begum, lose her baby because she needed a doctor; I met a brilliant 15-year-old girl whose dream of becoming a doctor is collapsing because she is confined to a concentration camp; I met a 2-year-old boy, Hirol, who was starving after his mother died for lack of medical care.

​

As Mr Kristof notes in his article, while her Nobel Peace Prize may not be able to be stripped from her (there hasn't really ever been a recipient who has gone on to become complicit in ethnic cleansing and genocide, so there are no real mechanisms for them to deal with someone like her), they should try to get their $1 million back and give it to the widows and children "being created on her watch".

Kudos to Jonah Fisher from the BBC though.

"Ms Suu Kyi have you become an apologist for ethnic cleansing?" Mr Fisher asked. "Do you have something to say? What about the people who fled, Ms Suu Kyi?"

Burma's de facto leader, who was walking with an entourage, did not answer the questions.​

 

[Quantum Quack]

Is this a critique of that speech?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/19/asia/myanmar-aung-san-suu-kyi-speech-facts/index.html

Don't know.. CNN is not worth reading... like so many other USA media outlets hysteria seems to be their game at the moment.
I wonder if and when the UN will take advantage of her offer to allow international qualified assessment of the situation?

The Nobel is granted for past deeds not future ones....

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Don't know.. CNN is not worth reading... like so many other USA media outlets hysteria seems to be their game at the moment.
I wonder if and when the UN will take advantage of her offer to allow international qualified assessment of the situation?

The Nobel is granted for past deeds not future ones....

OK. http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/myanmar-rohingya-suu-kyi-1.4296243

 

[Quantum Quack]

Do you think the UN will get in there and have a proper look?
She repeatedly called for international help in her speech. Do you think she will get it?

Yeah that's a better critique...
Trying to find a un-doctored transcript of her speech on the net with no luck so far...

 

[Bells]

I wonder if and when the UN will take advantage of her offer to allow international qualified assessment of the situation?

You are aware that she had banned the UN from entering and investigating the region, yes? And that that ban has not been lifted, yes?

Do you think the UN will get in there and have a proper look?
She repeatedly called for international help in her speech. Do you think she will get it?

She has banned the UN from entering the region, despite repeated requests from the UN to send observers there. What do you think the answer to that question is, QQ?

Five months ago:

Aung San Suu Kyi has rejected a decision by the UN’s rights council to investigate allegations of crimes by Myanmar’s security forces against minority Rohingya Muslims.

The UN body agreed in March to dispatch a fact-finding mission to the south Asian Asian country over claims of murder, rape and torture in Rakhine state.

“We do not agree with it,” Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar’s de facto leader, told a press conference on Tuesday with EU diplomatic chief Federica Mogherini during a visit to Brussels, when asked about the probe.​

A few hours ago:

Myanmar has reiterated its ban on United Nations' investigators entering the violence-wracked Rakhine state despite Aung San Suu Kyi earlier declaring her country's readiness to be "scrutinised by the international community".

Marzuki Darusman, head of the fact-finding mission backed by Australia, told the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva that his investigators needed "full and unfettered" access to Myanmar.​

Gee, what a surprise! Her ban is still in effect! Not much has changed from her policy in regards to UN investigators since the ethnic cleansing began and to today, after she made the invitation to the UN to come and investigate and her Government is still denying the UN entry. I am shocked and appalled that the ban is still in place. Why, given her great levels of integrity when it comes to the Rohingya, that ban would have already been lifted....

She's stalling for time. There are still villages that need to be burned to the ground and more Rohingya to be slaughtered. But hey, her invitation to the UN sure looked good and sounded good on paper. Optics and whatnot. Meanwhile, her Government still won't give the UN access. Nor aid groups and human rights observers. Given she took to social media and labeled all of those groups as being terrorist sympathisers and accused them of aiding terrorists, I don't see how that will change anytime soon.

Yeah that's a better critique...
Trying to find a un-doctored transcript of her speech on the net with no luck so far...

Or you can just watch her speech and then listen the comments, interviews and speeches she has given in the past and you would see that her message when it comes to the Rohingya, sorry, as she has been known to call them, the "Bengalis" or "the Muslims" or "the terrorists" or "the illegal immigrants".. Nothing has changed in her messaging over the last few years in regards to their fundamental human rights.

 

[Quantum Quack]

You are aware that she had banned the UN from entering and investigating the region, yes? And that that ban has not been lifted, yes?


She has banned the UN from entering the region, despite repeated requests from the UN to send observers there. What do you think the answer to that question is, QQ?

Five months ago:

Aung San Suu Kyi has rejected a decision by the UN’s rights council to investigate allegations of crimes by Myanmar’s security forces against minority Rohingya Muslims.

The UN body agreed in March to dispatch a fact-finding mission to the south Asian Asian country over claims of murder, rape and torture in Rakhine state.

“We do not agree with it,” Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar’s de facto leader, told a press conference on Tuesday with EU diplomatic chief Federica Mogherini during a visit to Brussels, when asked about the probe.​

A few hours ago:

Myanmar has reiterated its ban on United Nations' investigators entering the violence-wracked Rakhine state despite Aung San Suu Kyi earlier declaring her country's readiness to be "scrutinised by the international community".

Marzuki Darusman, head of the fact-finding mission backed by Australia, told the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva that his investigators needed "full and unfettered" access to Myanmar.​

Gee, what a surprise! Her ban is still in effect! Not much has changed from her policy in regards to UN investigators since the ethnic cleansing began and to today, after she made the invitation to the UN to come and investigate and her Government is still denying the UN entry. I am shocked and appalled that the ban is still in place. Why, given her great levels of integrity when it comes to the Rohingya, that ban would have already been lifted....

She's stalling for time. There are still villages that need to be burned to the ground and more Rohingya to be slaughtered. But hey, her invitation to the UN sure looked good and sounded good on paper. Optics and whatnot. Meanwhile, her Government still won't give the UN access. Nor aid groups and human rights observers. Given she took to social media and labeled all of those groups as being terrorist sympathisers and accused them of aiding terrorists, I don't see how that will change anytime soon.

Or you can just watch her speech and then listen the comments, interviews and speeches she has given in the past and you would see that her message when it comes to the Rohingya, sorry, as she has been known to call them, the "Bengalis" or "the Muslims" or "the terrorists" or "the illegal immigrants".. Nothing has changed in her messaging over the last few years in regards to their fundamental human rights.

or you can watch her speech and count the number of times she offered and asked for help ....

 

[Quantum Quack]

She has banned the UN from entering the region, despite repeated requests from the UN to send observers there. What do you think the answer to that question is, QQ?

For starters you are talking about a government that is a fledgling democracy.
You are talking about a woman whose claim to power is tenuous to say the least due to constitutional restrictions. ( foreign influence provisions in the constitution)
You are talking about a nation that has been constantly and historically torn apart by rampant militia, vigilante and social civilian anarchy.

She claimed that it was too dangerous for UN inspectors, did she not?
Well reading the statements of refugees indicates for every army member there are at least 200 machete wielding, stone throwing militia.
Suffice to say the national security situation is incredibly tenuous.

In her speech, she repeatedly calls for international help and UN support in determining the truth behind the persons fleeing to Bangladesh.
She has stated that she doesn't know and will not make key decisions based on media hysterics.

For all we know most of the persons fleeing are indeed Bengali, who entered the country illegally and recently due to the flooding or monsoonal crisis in Bangladesh.
Locals crack it, police get attacked, locals decide to send them back.
Plausible? yes
Possible ? yes.
Probably ? yes

Actual fact? No
She is asking for help in ascertaining the truth?
Do you have a problem with the truth?

Gee, what a surprise! Her ban is still in effect! Not much has changed from her policy in regards to UN investigators since the ethnic cleansing began and to today, after she made the invitation to the UN to come and investigate and her Government is still denying the UN entry. I am shocked and appalled that the ban is still in place. Why, given her great levels of integrity when it comes to the Rohingya, that ban would have already been lifted....

It is not her ban....
Can't you tell when someone is being held hostage ....are you that blind?

 

[spidergoat]

Someone needs to punch her in the face.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Someone needs to punch her in the face.

why?

 

[spidergoat]

Lying about genocide and ethnic cleansing makes her complicit. Buddhists are no better than Nazis.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Lying about genocide and ethnic cleansing makes her complicit. Buddhists are no better than Nazis.

You're an American yes?
Genocide has just been publicly and in world view, proposed by your democratically elected leader....what say you?
you post sounds like a Trump tweet... ( )

 

[Beer w/Straw]

You're an American yes?
Genocide has just been publicly and in world view, proposed by your democratically elected leader....what say you?
you post sounds like a Trump tweet... ( )

I wouldn't go that far.

I'm not even going to ask for a quote.