Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bloggers Who Risked All In Burma

Posted by kdawson on from the hats-off dept.

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."

33 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 geoffrobinson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From what I hear, countries such as China are preventing sanctions. The other option is to invade.

      Except for saying "pretty please don't supress your own people."

      --
      Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    3. 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".

      --
    4. 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.

    5. Re:Valuable perspective by smittyoneeach · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The interesting thing about this troll is the tension between the liberal guilt in the first paragraph and the libertarian bile in the second.
      A fine Tuesday entry, all around.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    6. Re:Valuable perspective by computational+super · · Score: 3, Funny
      have the bloggers (or Burma) actually gained anything through their risky activities?

      Well, I hear their ad revenue is through the roof.

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    7. Re:Valuable perspective by Lord+Ender · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why do you have to separate everything in to "us" and "them?" It is our damn business because we are all humans, we all share a planet, and the long-term survival of our planet depends on us all cooperating.

      Would you make personal sacrifices to help your family? fellow countrymen? Why should people in asia be any less worthy of your help? Invisible lines and a flag? Bah.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  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.
    1. Re:Serious kudos to them by dolphinuser · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd add that it's not only their livelihood (their means of support or subsistence) that is at stake here, but also their LIVES.

      Speaking out could not carry a higher cost for them.

      --
      The drops of water don't know themselves to be a river; and yet the river flows.
  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 soren100 · · Score: 4, Informative

      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).

      It's the corporate censorship where stories that harm a corporation's relationship with the government are spiked. Do you really think a multinational corporation will pay lobbyists millions of dollars to get beneficial legislation, and then jeopardize those invested millions by criticising the government? For exaample, 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. He wasn't about to screw that up. Was that censorship? Sure it was.

      Dan Rather got fired because he his employer wanted to suck up to the Republicans, and his story about Bush ditching his duty in the National Guard was not helping. He is suing CBS about it, and there's an interesting quote about the Internal CBS panel that reviewed Rather's story about the memo.

      As the panel called witnesses, Sumner Redstone, CEO of Viacom (CBS's owner), declared his interest in the 2004 election. "I look at the election from what's good for Viacom. I vote for what's good for Viacom. I vote, today, Viacom," he said. In fact, Viacom had a number of crucial issues before the Federal Communications Commission, including loosening media ownership rules. "I don't want to denigrate Kerry," said Redstone, "but from a Viacom standpoint, the election of a Republican administration is a better deal. Because the Republican administration has stood for many things we believe in, deregulation and so on. The Democrats are not bad people ... But from a Viacom standpoint, we believe the election of a Republican administration is better for our company."

      So Rather is looking to have his day in court, because the memo never was proven false, and he wants to be vindicated. But the case exposes how Viacom was more interested in supporting and promoting the current government than earning money through a sensational story.

      Censorship also happens when people get tased for using their free speech. Some Americans still think you can say whatever you want here, but you can't -- the guy who tried his "free speech" rights at John Kerry's lecture found that out when he got tackled and tased for merely asking a question and speaking out of turn. He was not doing anything except standing at a microphone and speaking freely, and got tased for his troubles.

      Censorship shows up in other ways, too. You think you might have right to free speech and criticise the government, but you might then find yourself on a no-fly list (like Senator Ted Kerry experienced 5 times until he made personal call to the head of DHS and get it stopped) or on the end of other governmental harassment like political analyst Naomi Wolf, who is now on the "get-searched-every-time-you-fly list".

      For serious censorship, look at the old FBI programs like "COINTELPRO" where trying to start a new party or being anti-war would get you harassed, beaten up, vandalized -- anything to stop you from being able to make a political change. Martin Luther King was surveilled by the FBI and blackmailed in an attem

    3. 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. Isn't it Myanmar now? by camperdave · · Score: 4, Informative

    Isn't it Myanmar now?

    Apparently, the current military regime changed the name, but the change did not receive legislative approval. The US, The Kingdom of UK, Canada, and a number of other countries have not accepted the new name, although the United Nations has. More details here.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  11. Do your deed and fight back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To any skilled people reading and maybe remembering this

    http://www.attrition.org/mirror/attrition/2000/08/01/www.myanmar.com/mirror.html

    Bloggers and other cyber activists within Burma risk their lives by publishing any information counter to the government line, but they still do it because they believe that freedom of expression is worth that sacrifice.

    You don't have to make such a sacrifice, but if you have computer skills, can breach firewalls, routers and web site security then you could greatly assist the people of Burma. By taking down official Burmese government propaganda and posting pictures, information about the protests, information about the lies of the Burmese junta, and news of the huge support being offered by the rest of the world - preferably in Burmese - then you could help free the people from this terrible regime.

    If the information is removed, do it again - automate the attacks, do whatever you can to ensure that the Burmese can see the truth about their government.

    You may have hacked for fun, or personal gain in the past - now you have a chance to hack for freedom.

    Regime sites:

    http://www.myanmar.com/
    http://www.myanmar.com/news/index.html
    http://www.mrtv3.net.mm/ (blocked from external access)
    http://www.mofa.gov.mm/ (blocked from external access)
    http://www.moha.gov.mm/ (blocked from external access)
    http://www.mpt.net.mm/ (blocked from external access)
    http://www.myanmar-information.net/
    http://www.myanmar.com/myanmartimes/
    http://www.mnped.gov.mm/ (blocked from external access)
    http://www.myanmar.com/newspaper/kyaymon/index.html
    http://www.myanmar.com/newspaper/nlm/index.html

  12. Re:what does this story have to do with the iPhone by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Funny

    You can't use an iPhone in Burma. So there. See? It DOES have something to do with the iPhone.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  13. It always starts small by Iowan41 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did you not know?

  14. Democratic voice of Burma - gruesome photo. by arcade · · Score: 4, Informative

    Democratic Voice of Burma, located in Oslo/Norway got a gruesome picture sent to them yesterday:

    http://english.dvb.no/photo1.php

    The result of dicatorship.

    --
    "Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
  15. 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?

  16. Re:Who put them against the wall? by weighn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Have the usual suspects, Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL and Google, been turning over information about these people? I'm not aware of anything to suggest that this has happened. Burma wouldn't have the influence over corporate America that China does. Saturday's Sydney Morning Herald covered Burma's bloggers too. "The junta blocks almost every website that carries information about the country and bars access to email websites."

    The info will continue to get around these rudimentary efforts at censorship, but the pro-democracy movement is beginning to realise that the UN just ain't gonna show up, no matter how many are gunned down in cold blood.

    I submitted a story in March on the role of the intertubes in exposing tin-pot despots.

    Rather than OLPC, many in the third-world would benefit from the gift of a digital camera and a few dollars to outlay at the local internet cafe.

    --
    Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  17. Re:This is an excelent time by Stephen+Ma · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This is an excelent time to realize how powerful, brutal and savage governments are.

    As opposed to the peaceful and harmless corporations, who only kill on the quiet? Any concentration of power, whether public or private, needs to be carefully watched. Thomas Jefferson warned us about this, as did James Madison, Adam Smith, and Thomas Paine.

  18. Not restricted once the bodies get home by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ask the families - if you can find one who is willing to go along with whatever death fetish you have in mind.

    The reason generally photography is not allowed is out of respect for the families, who are allowed to do as they wish once the body has been brought back. There was for example an award winning photojournaism column in the Rocky Mountain News some time ago that showed a weeping widow draped over the husbands coffin.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  19. Skinny long-haired heroes? by quintesse · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "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."

    I could just read this is "but few _persons_ have ever taken the risk..." because unfortunately that's always been true throughout history (and I'm not saying I would do any better).

    But I actually think the author wants to convey the feeling that somehow skinny, long-haired youngsters that like to sit behind a computer are not hero material. So what do heroes look like? The perfectly groomed playboys we know from US cinema?

    Gimme a break. History again shows us that most "heroes" are just people like you and me that "just do what they had to do" because they felt it was the only right option (and most probably didn't even think there _were_ any options to choose from).