Slashdot Mirror
Satellite Images Used to Monitor Burmese Junta
BurmesePython writes "Human rights groups are using high-resolution satellites images to reveal the activities of Burma's junta as it gets tough with pro-democracy protesters. Apparently 'it should be easy to spot groups of monks because of their distinctive maroon robes'. Like previous efforts to use satellites to monitor the humanitarian crisis in Darfur, the hope is it will prod the UN and other international actors into putting pressure on the Burmese rulers."
National Geographic has a small copy of one of the images: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070928-burma-satellite.html
the UN needs to step up or pull the plug
sure we all want the Burmese leaders to be accountable, we want everyone to be accountable, unless it US
like when nicaragua brought charges against the us to the UN security comission
and SOMEHOW the US was able to veto their own charges
the UN is nothing but a bandaid, that keeps falling off
back in the day we didnt have no old school
It could be that the US tends to ignore what the UN says anyways. Not like they were right about Iraq or anything. And not like the US actively sanctions another nation ignoring numerous resolutions to return land acquired by force. The UN is useless because the US has shown that if you are powerful enough, you can ignore the rules.
Last I heard, amateur radio was either illegal or very tightly restricted in Burma.
rj
Similar reports came out during 1989's Tiananmen Square Massacre, only to be proved untrue later.
No, there were PLA units marching with the protestors in 1989, which is a large part of why the kleptocrats panicked, brought in troops from way out in the countryside, and ordered a massacre.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Yes, even though the world bank says he actually reduced corruption in the country more than what had previously been done. But I guess he reduced other peoples corruption and added his own. And bombings? Who suspects that? I mean, apart from the people behind the recent military coup of a democratically elected president?
I'm sorry, but you just seem to be someone who has completely swallowed the propaganda of anti-democrats. If you want to live like that, fine, I don't care. I just want you to know that from a bystanders point of view, you appear quite insane. If many people in Thailand shares your views, it would be very bad if the UK sent him back; he might very well be killed by a bunch of lunatics!
Burma's the name that the last democratic regime in the country called it. Myanmar's what the military junta renamed it in 1989. Burmese opposition groups still call it Burma because they don't recognize the legitimacy of the military regime.
You can read more about it here. Personally, I use Burma. Let a legitimate regime change the English name one ever comes around.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Let's get one thing straight. I never said the UN didn't do any good (you may have me confused with many other people here). But I do think that states that are as blatantly violating human rights as, say, Syria or Zimbabwe have no business on any human rights council. The mere fact that such states could find their way on it discredits one facet of the UN, as a primary advocate body for human rights in dignity on the international stage.
It fails on many counts, and most importantly on its basic structural arrangement which has, for the most part, allowed dominant states to render it completely useless. The Soviets and the Americans pretty much paralyzed it during the Cold War, and now China and Russia are doing it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.