On May 9, 10:05 pm, Pēteris Cedriņš (Peteris Cedrins)
gmail.com> wrote:> On 10 Maijs, 01:22, ostap_bender_1...@
hotmail.com wrote:
>> On May 6, 9:07 pm, Pçteris Cedriòð (Peteris Cedrins)
>
>>> _The Sunday Times_ (South Africa):
>
>>> "In January this year, shortly after assuming its two-year seat on the
>>> Security Council,South Africa joined China and Russiaas the sole
>>> members to oppose a resolution urging Burma to free political
>>> detainees and end sexual violence by the military.South Africahas
>>> often dismissed such initiatives as campaigns by the wealthy North.
>
>> What is the reason why South African president Thabo Mbeki - a world-
>> famous fighter for human rights, the Secretary General of Non-Aligned
>> Movement, and the succesor to the imprtal human rights fighter Nelson
>> Mandela - voted against?
But this is NOT an article explaining and defending the position taken
by the Honorable Secretary General of Non-Aligned Movement Thabo
Mbeki. It is yet another article DENOUNCING his position. You seem to
have paid a lot of attention to Burma. But of all the articles you
have read on this subject, you don't seem to have read and tried to
understand even a single article explaining and defending the other
side of the story.
>
>> What is it that our brainwashed public is not being told this time?
>
>> Which side would you vote for: the side of the Secretary General of
>> Non-Aligned Movement or the side of the international criminal Bush?
>
> Why don't you mount a full-throated defense of little defenseless
> Myanmar/Burma, Karlamov?
>
Because I don't know what's actually happening there and which side to
fight for, if any. Burma is of low interest to me at the moment, and I
haven't yet seen an objective, thoughtful, analytical, politically non-
engaged report and analysis on the Burmese situation. I guess I could
conduct a search through respectable Indian or Russian newspapers, But
as I said, I have no tine for such search.
Until mid-1990s, I used to form my opinion simply by reading NY Times,
but now that I know how biased it is on foreign policy issues, I have
to seek out objective sources and to read what both sides of the
conflict say, before I form my opinion.
Try this approach some time. It takes more time and it forces you to
do the most uncomfortable thing for you: work your brain, but it pays
off in the end: you won't look like such a one-sided, knee-jerk,
brainwashed/brainwashing, double-standard hypocrite.
