Official narrative

For the first time, an outraged United Nations Human Rights Council has condemned the Burmese military junta for its violent crackdown on protesters and demanded it be allowed to immediately investigate the situation in Burma.

My own reaction to the news of the UN envoy visiting Burma says a lot, I think of how conditioned we are by the official narrative. I found myself hoping, along with newsreaders and reporters, that Gambari would be allowed to meet Aung San Suu Kyi, and that he would meet the supreme general Than Shwe. But what difference does that make? We weren't told. Oh sure, the UNHRC is 'outraged'. How can a structure which includes states which not only support other states that practise 'violent crackdowns' but are themselves involved in human rights abuses be suitable 'outraged'? Interestingly, the United States does not see fit to join the UNHRC. A touch of honesty perhaps?

Sources in Rangoon told Mizzima that several bodies of monks have been found floating in the Rangoon River and the bodies bear evidence that the monks had been beaten to death.

Is this a matter for friendly diplomacy?

The HRC, in a rare criticism against a government, agreed to place the findings of the special Rapporteur to the UN General Assembly and to the Security Council, which observers say will give more evidence to discuss at the UNSC.

Indeed, that is how we come to accept the official narrative. Our moral ideals are drastically lowered until we honestly believe, that an expression of 'outrage' against the torture and murder of hundreds or thousands of pro-democracy protesters is extraordinary, and therefore, logically, more than sufficient.

Moral duty2

Jewcy

Zell Kravinsky has been accused of being an extremist, because he dares to put forward the idea, that not doing anything to help the suffering, and more to the point, not giving away a spare and unnecessary kidney, we are guilty of murder. Well, that idea can be discussed, no doubt about it. But is he really an extremist?
This week in France, a popular actress, Fanny Ardant, was attacked for calling the former leader of the italian Red Brigades (a seventies left-wing militant group which killed at least one politician (apparently no more) a "hero". She was forced to explain, that she only admired his steadfast beliefs, not his actions. One wonders if she would have had to explain herself had she called Silvio Berlusconni or George Bush a "hero". Yet, the blood on their hands is somewhat thicker. Talk about double standards.
So, what is extreme? Wanting to give away all you have, including a spare kidney, or allowing, the people we have elected and their murderous actions to continue unhindered?