Two sides to every story

I write of two Nobel Laureates. One deserving of everything commendable ever said about her: the other; not so much.

We acclaimed Aung San Suu Kyi at Westminster Hall in June 2012. Check the video, but you can safely ignore the first five minutes and forty-nine seconds; that’s just Big Mouthed John Bercow (Speaker of the House of Commons) blowing his own trumpet and making noises, but enjoy the rest, she is worth every second!

She consciously did not seek the opportunity to become the Burmese (Myanmar) President after the election; partly because she did not think it appropriate, but mainly because the Burmese military, who wrote their (Amended) Constitution; ensured that she did not qualify, as she had children who carried a foreign passport. So she took the title of State Counsellor. Despite the tremendous win at the polls, she must always remember that the military still holds enormous sway in that Nation, and although Aung San got the votes, the military holds the reins of power; and to a large extent, the military is still popular to large numbers of Burmese. She has come in for much veiled criticism because she does not speak out against the harassment and exiling of the sect known as the Rohingya.

They have been a troubling minority in Burma for many years, the Burmese look upon them as Bengali, or outsiders; but their main problem is, of course, they are predominantly Muslim. They, or the militants amongst them, have attacked Police and Army outposts, during a long and dirty guerilla war against the majority Burmese. The main worry of the Burmese military? They are concerned that the Rohingya will import some of the deadlier ways of their murderous religious compatriots, as evident in the capitals of Europe, and, in the ways of military men the world over; reckon they have the cure, which is to make things so unpleasant for the Muslims that they go, willingly or otherwise; into Bangladesh. If one is to believe the stories published by the aid agencies who have leapt to succour the ‘refugees’, their treatment has been terrible: but do we also remember how we were told of the  desperate ‘child refugees’ waiting to be allowed into England, and what actually arrived on the ferries!

Aung Sang Suu Kyi is a seasoned politician, and must know that she holds a mighty power, out of all proportion to her diminutive frame. Should she speak out, and earn the wrath of the generals: or attempt a middle way, and possibly disappoint some of her more vocal critics, who were of course so pleased to watch her in amongst the ‘den of thieves’ in Westminster Hall?

The second Laureate? That would be the prancing prelate Desmond Tutu, who popped up from seemingly his grave to castigate Aung San Suu Kyi for disappointing him personally, by not speaking out against the military and their actions against the Muslim Rohingya. It’s a bit rich, castigating a Burmese politician for not speaking out: when he kept hidden, and never ever spoke out, of the true terror unleashed by the ANC and their militant ‘Spear of the Nation’ against the South African population, black, white and coloured during their ‘struggle’ and of course the equal ferocity against ANC members who dared question orders and decisions made by the ANC Council. I point the reader towards a video named Tainted Heroes, which was produced by AfriForum; a South African Civil rights group.

It is a long, hard film to watch; some of the things which are pictured in graphic detail, such as the results of ANC-organised ‘Necklacing’, which, to the uneducated amongst my readers, was the lashing of the accused traitor’s arms and legs; then a tyre is forced down across the shoulders, the insides of the tyre is filled with petrol, and the leader of the group then strikes a match………. The resulting images are terrible to behold, but what is worse is the dancing and singing of the mob as they surround the remains as it lies shrivelled, smouldering and smoking on the ground; the remains of what was once a human being who has been accused of ‘collaboration’ with another Black faction. No court, no trial; just an accusation with, usually, no proof ever shown, Just a straight-forward lynching, ANC Africa-style. If you watched the scenes, you probably saw the ‘JURY as they danced, and grinned, and celebrated their small ‘victories’.

Another small segment shows an ANC ‘activist’ as he calmly speaks of the decision to carry on murdering white farmers and with them, their wives and children. Why, because by the ANC standards, the very fact that the farmers organised a self-protection system made them accomplices to the Police and the Army, and they had to suffer, because, in this ‘activists’ words, “they were in our way, and they had to be got rid of; that is why we planted the landmines on the farms, even though the wives and children were along with the farmers! Those same remaining farmers, incidentally, who have suffered almost 4,300 murders and attacks since that same ‘Independence’.

 

Yes, Archbishop Desmond Tutu was a loud voice in the fight against the Nationalist’s apartheid system, but, strangely enough, although he was vociferous when the so-called ‘Truth and Reconciliation’ sessions were proceeding, you never, ever heard him speak out about the corruption, the internal violence, which was, and still is, endemic in the South Africa of today. So, when he speaks on derogatory terms of Ang San Suu Kyi’s silence on the  Rohingyas, and of the Burmese Military’s treatment of those people, just remember to take his words with two pinches of salt!

4 comments for “Two sides to every story

  1. September 8, 2017 at 7:58 pm

    Hmmm, not sure about this one.

  2. Mudplugger
    September 8, 2017 at 8:47 pm

    We must always remember that whilst history is written by the winners, increasingly that also applies to current reportage.

    The ANC, Aung San Suu Kyi, Israel and many others promote reporting and imagery which is, shall we say, economical with the truth to the point of hypocrisy. They all know that ‘perception is reality’, so managing the perception is the name of the game.
    No-one could have succeeded in all their fields of operation without acting in ways which we might consider disreputable, but once having succeeded, they then gain the power to create the perception that they wish in the minds of less informed, less critical observers.

    Some of us may hope for a more truthful and balanced picture, but we will be pushing a very heavy stone up a very steep hill to get there.

  3. September 9, 2017 at 3:24 am

    Excellent piece, Mike.

  4. Lord T
    September 9, 2017 at 10:36 am

    Actually there are three sides. The one by the first party, the one by the second party and the truth. All of which are usually different.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *