Slashdot Mirror


Bloggers Who Risked All In Burma

An anonymous reader sends us to the UK's TimesOnline for a story about dissident Burmese bloggers, who, with the Internet shut down in the country, are no longer posting live stories. Some of them are on the run and fearing for their lives. "Internet geeks share a common style, and Ko Latt and his four friends would not be out of place in cyber cafes across the world. They have the skinny arms and the long hair, the dark T-shirts and the jokey nicknames. But few such figures have ever taken the risks that they have in the past few weeks, or achieved so much in a noble and dangerous cause. Since last month Ko Latt, 28, his friends Arca, Eye, Sun and Superman, and scores of others like them have been the third pillar of Burma's Saffron Revolution."

19 of 338 comments (clear)

  1. Valuable perspective by goldspider · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.

    Indeed. Eerily ironic, no?

    This travesty in Burma is a good chance for all of us living in luxury to get a little much-needed perspective on what real censorship looks like.

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:Valuable perspective by Knave75 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The question is though, have the bloggers (or Burma) actually gained anything through their risky activities?

      The world has noticed the situation in Burma, but we have not actually done anything to stop the oppression.

    2. Re:Valuable perspective by TheLink · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "get a little much-needed perspective on what real censorship looks like."

      Yeah, and instead of going "see it's not so bad here" we should go "we better ensure this sort of thing won't happen".

      --
    3. Re:Valuable perspective by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, the way I see it is this:

      These people wouldn't be uprising if they had the NBA playoffs and Sex in the City to worry about. America is a perfect example of a society that can't be bothered with protecting our liberties and freedom against the infringing and encroaching government powers , because we're too busy worrying about whether or favorite video game will be released on time, what is happening with the girls on Sex in the City, how our teams are doing in the NBA playoffs and complaining about how "secular progressives" are ruining our precious little baby-jesusland.

  2. Serious kudos to them by Enderandrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some people talk about civil liberties while others risk their lives for them.

    Commendable, and I wish them well.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  3. Exactly by geoffrobinson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While debates go on about the balance between security and freedom, this helps put things into perspective.

    This is what real repression and censorship looks like. And there are countries standing behind Myanmar preventing economic pressure to be brought to bear.

    --
    Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    1. Re:Exactly by JonathanR · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes it does. It reminds us that the security-freedom balance is a continuum, and that any compromise of freedom should only be given for the duration of the particular security threat. The oppresive behaviour of particular governements does not provide any justification for the erosion of freedoms in unrelated geopolitical regions.

      The legal basis for restriction of freedoms should have a review period or sunset clause, in order to prevent continued escalation of governement power.

      Of course, we've always been at war with Eastasia.

  4. Free Burma == Boycott Beijing Olympics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Burma falls within China's sphere of influence. China was supposedly preaching restraint to Burma, but in the shadow of the 1989 Tianamen Massacre of China it beggars belief that they'd really do this. Only way to force China to act against Burma and North Korea is to Threaten to Boycott the Beijing Olympics.

    It'd leave egg all over the Chinese Governments Face. This is the only thing they are scared of.

  5. Where is the media? Where are we!? by loconet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Each day that passes I am reminded the disgusting state of our society. Thank God for the internet and its ability to deliver raw information. I turn on the TV and all I see is useless reality TV portraying the lives of rich kids and their "complex" love lives or news about Britney Spears. Mean while, stories about potentially thousands of protesters being killed go barely mentioned. Being killed for wanting the very thing the most powerful government in the world allegedly spent the last 4 years fighting for! Where is the outrage? Where is the day after day coverage the way we saw Ana Nicole Smith's death be covered? Why does our society care more about some washed up singer losing custody of her kids than thousands of peaceful anonymous demonstrators getting killed?

    --
    [alk]
    1. Re:Where is the media? Where are we!? by goldspider · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You might make yourself at least slightly aware of the issue before commenting on it.

      The whole point of this story (and others like it) is that the media has been completely cut off from these demonstrations and the violence that ensued.

      You dislike U.S. news media. That's great; here's a cookie. Try paying attention next time.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    2. Re:Where is the media? Where are we!? by loconet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > You might make yourself at least slightly aware of the issue before commenting on it.

      Oh I paid attention, however, I don't think you have. I understand the media has been cut off, but there are other sources of information. For example, The Daily Mail reports that thousands of protesters have been allegedly killed, yet, I don't see any mention of that on mainstream media, I did see however two stories about Britney's problems tonight.

      > You dislike U.S. news media. That's great; here's a cookie. Try paying attention next time.

      I hope that's a chocolate chip cookie ;)

      --
      [alk]
  6. The question is... by QuantumRiff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Could you put Your Life on the line for an idea? I like to believe that I could, but if it really came down to hitting submit, or seeing my lady, family, etc again, would I hesitate? Would I do it? God, I hope I never have to find out. I can't explain how much thinking about people dealing with this makes me want to help them. I won't insult you by saying I salute you, it is not nearly enough..

    --

    What are we going to do tonight Brain?
  7. Speaking of Slashdot memes by greenguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having just perused the comments on the poll, I would like to propose a deliberately-designed Slashdot meme to honor IT workers or aficionados whose work puts them in direct, physical danger. It probably wouldn't save any lives, but it might be a way to express solidarity with those whose work makes a real difference. Even symbolic gestures take on importance if despots and dictators know that the whole world really is watching.

    I don't have any ideas beyond this in mind, but if ever there was a cauldron of collaborative creativity, it's the comments on Slashdot.

    --
    What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
  8. Exactly. by khasim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oppose the censorship that is inflicted upon us NOW so we will not have to face a situation similar to their's TOMORROW.

    Bitch loudly and fight for even the smallest of your Freedoms because there ARE people who want to take them away from you.

    1. Re:Exactly. by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oppose the censorship that is inflicted upon us NOW

      Which censorship is that, exactly, anyway? You certainly seem able to say whatever you'd like here, without fear of political actions being taken against you. Now, certainly there are plenty of university professors that don't want to hear certain perspectives in their classrooms (or have to grade papers expressing them), and there are workplaces where some actions and attitudes simply aren't tolerated... but there is no central authority preventing you from dealing with those situations yourself (if by no other means, then by simply choosing another school or job). I don't have to listen to what you have to say, but that's not the same as censorship. And I can't call up the government and have you silenced (which WOULD be such).

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:Exactly. by huckamania · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "So Rather is looking to have his day in court, because the memo never was proven false"

      That's a bad way to run a news room. The onus is on Rather and Mapes to prove that the memo is real. Instead of doing that, they hid their source and ran the story any way. What is most telling, is that their source had plenty of other 'documents' that they didn't use. That is pretty damning, in and of itself.

      "Rupert Murdoch's NY POST refused to print any stories that were critical of the Chinese government because he had business deals pending with that same Chinese government....Was that censorship? Sure it was."

      If the NY POST was a government run newspaper, you might have a point. However, there are plenty of newspapers that do run stories critical of the Chinese. There are plenty of newspapers where any story that is embarrasing to the Democrats is front page news. Those same papers bury stories that cast the Republicans in a negative light. Is that censorship? No, because plenty of papers do the reverse.

      Has there been US government sponsored censorship in the past? Certainly, but no worse than any other country that has ever existed. Is there censorship going on now in the US? I don't see how it could be, with a 24 hour news cycle and the web.

      Doesn't seem to have stopped Naomi Wolf from criticizing the US, or the Dixie Chicks, or Sean Penn, or anybody. Even that kid that got tazed for being an idiot had a video up in a few hours. First he was told to ask a question, then he was told to put the mike down, then he resisted arrest and then he was tazed. Sorry, that is not censorship. If anything, he was preventing others from asking questions, which is censorship.

  9. Hunter S. Thompson once said by SlappyBastard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can't have a decent revolution without at least one fax with a line to the outside world. The internet is just the next logical step.

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
  10. It always starts small by Iowan41 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did you not know?

  11. For one, the censorship on coverage of the war by Optic7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Look at how tightly any images of dead soldiers, soldier coffins, body bags, etc are restricted. If that's not real and clear censorship imposed by the government, then what is? Or do some people believe that censorship happens only when the police/army come knocking on your door because of something you said?