For the last three weeks, the Voice of America Burmese Service has run an interview series that has attracted many interested listeners.
The cause of their interest has been a former officer of Myanmar’s disbanded Defense Services Intelligence agency, Major Aung Lin Htut. In 2005 while Aung Lin Htut was working as deputy chief in the Washington D.C. embassy he sought and was granted asylum in the United States. According to the New Light of Myanmar, the major defected with his family because his wife had been “summonsed to appear before a court in connection with settlement of (a) bad debt for the lease of a building in a commercial case”. But his sudden departure also followed the arrest of his former boss, Lieutenant General Khin Nyunt, and dismantling of the intelligence service apparatus.
The major told VOA that he had decided to speak out in response to the handling of Cyclone Nargis. He echoed the statements of various exiled parties and overseas groups that Senior General Than Shwe is paranoid about being blamed for all sorts of human rights abuses. But whereas the charges often leveled against the senior general rest on conjecture rather than fact, those of Aung Lin Htut cannot be so readily discounted.
In the first part of the interview, broadcast on May 25, Aung Lin Htut described the killing of 81 people on an island near the southern tip of Myanmar. (A pretty good translation of this part is here.) He said that he was sent to Christie Island with a group of officers and their men in May 1998 to cordon it off for military use. They found 59 people on it, including a three-year-old girl and a woman who had recently given birth. The people were eking out a living by cutting and selling wood and bamboo.
Aung Lin Htut said that he expected that the island’s inhabitants would be sent to Kawthaung and then charged or released. But instead the order came just to “clean things up”, meaning, to kill the lot. The officers talked things over and decided not to carry it out immediately. They assumed that it had come from the army commander, General Maung Aye, and that he may have been drunk at the time. They waited until the next morning and double-checked. Then they found out that it was not from “Father Aye” but from “Great Father”, Than Shwe. There was nothing left to discuss.
Nor was this the end of it. A day or two after, a boat from neighbouring Thailand with a license to fish in the western part of the Bay of Bengal had the bad luck to pass close by the island. It was intercepted, the major said, and the 22 fishermen on board were also executed, their remains destroyed and the boat sunk.
(Although the interview has attracted some reporting in the English media, there doesn’t seem to have been any comment so far from Thailand about this claim. However, Aung Lin Htut seems to have enough details on what happened, the keeping of them being what he was trained and employed to do, that if a boat and crew went missing at that time it could easily be established whether or not his account is accurate.)
Aung Lin Htut added that such killings were common in the outlying areas during the 1990s, lending credence to the many reports detailing abuse in civil war and post-civil war zones during the last two decades. He told VOA that the code for an order to kill everyone found in a clearance area was that they were not to leave even a “quarter viss”, i.e. 14.4 ounces, referring to the unborn child in the womb.
The second part of the interview coincided with the fifth anniversary of the attack on a convoy carrying Daw Aung San Suu Kyi at Depayin in Upper Myanmar. At that time, Major Aung Lin Htut was deputed to the ambassador in the U.S. He said that the State Department called to confirm reports it had received about the attack. The embassy had heard nothing. So he contacted Yangon to find out what had happened.
What he pieced together was that neither his “father”, Khin Nyunt, nor Father Aye was privy to the plan, which was prepared through the mass Union Solidarity Development Association, under guidance of its then secretary, U Aung Thaung, now the Minister for Industry No. 1. When the two generals who had been kept in the dark found out about it through sources in Mandalay they went to Great Father. Aung Lin Htut said to VOA that as far as he knows, Khin Nyunt put it to Than Shwe that if the attack occurred it would make a mess of a lot of things, both at home and abroad. The Great Father’s response was coarse and abrupt, “Yeah, so what? I ordered it.”
Aung Lin Htut also reiterated a view he had offered earlier that the objective of the Depayin attack was to kill Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Survivors who fled to Thailand and elsewhere have said that the assault was savage. The numbers of dead to this day are unknown: VOA noted that the official figure is five, whereas some unofficial tallies run to over one hundred. However, Aung San Suu Kyi survived. Aung Lin Htut puts it down to good luck and that her car was at the end of the convoy. But this alone might not have been enough. He said that as far as he knows, her vehicle fled to a nearby police station to report the incident, and it was the regular officers there who during the same night escorted her to Meiktila. (Some people have speculated that because military intelligence was unable to stop the attack it helped in planning her escape, but this did not come up in the interview.) Aung Lin Htut gathered this news through contacts, not from any official correspondence to the embassy, which was never given “the green light” to discuss the matter with the U.S. government.
In the third part, broadcast last Sunday, Major Aung Lin Htut reflected on these events in light of Cyclone Nargis. He said that Great Father, who surfs the Internet (perhaps New Mandala too) and contrary to popular belief does keep up to date with global news and events, is acutely aware of the inglorious ends that came to Augusto Pinochet, Saddam Hussein and Pol Pot, and is determined that nothing will happen to him. It is for this reason that any moves for large-scale involvement by outside agencies in Myanmar, especially from the United Nations or the West, are simply refused.
But does Than Shwe really have anything to worry about? The onus to prove crimes against humanity under international law is notoriously high. Prosecutors must establish first that the necessary criteria have been met for charges to be laid at all and then that there is enough evidence to link the accused to the offences. Those found guilty of atrocities in international courts have typically had some kind of personal involvement in killings, rapes and torture, or have publicly incited others. Jean Kambanda, the interim prime minister during the genocide in Rwanda, held cabinet meetings in which killings were openly discussed, issued a directive to encourage the Interahamwe, ordered the setting up of roadblocks used to search for victims, and backed the radio station inciting the massacres as well as visited areas of bloodshed and congratulated murderers on their work. He pleaded guilty.
Nobody in Naypyidaw has got up to any such things. On the contrary, Aung Lin Htut acknowledged that the senior officers have been scrupulous in not leaving evidence behind to link them to anything, as much out of distrust of one another as of anyone else. So even if bones can still be found in the sand on Christie Island and the major’s secret photos of the victims can be recovered from his old filing cabinet or elsewhere, there remains the problem of showing that the killings really followed Great Father’s order.
It may be a small victory of sorts for international law if Than Shwe really is staying up at night contemplating the life and times of Slobodan Milosevic, albeit a Pyrrhic one for the cyclone victims denied aid as a consequence, but perhaps if he ever comes to a sticky end it will be more like that of Ferdinand Marcos or Soeharto. What chased them to their last days were not so much the ghosts of their innumerable victims as the ghosts of their immensely corrupt dealings. Whereas General Ne Win was careful to keep his wealth behind somewhat closed doors, and his subordinates lived relatively modest lives, the new Great Father and his hangers-on have demonstrably luxurious tastes. Conspicuous displays of excess are now as much a part of Myanmar as is pervasive extreme poverty. It is perhaps in this that the evidence for any future indictment may lie. It is also perhaps where the greatest interest is located: six months from now the number of searches on New Mandala for “Thandar Shwe” will still vastly outnumber those for “Aung Lin Htut” or “Christie Island”. Maybe Than Shwe should be concerned more about what’s in his daughter’s wardrobe than what some foreigners may one day come across by accident on an outlying island. But then again, Major Aung Lin Htut must have a lot more stories that he’s not telling VOA.
14 responses so far ↓
1 thaicrisis // Jun 14, 2008 at 1:18 am
It may be a small victory of sorts for international law if Than Shwe really is staying up at night contemplating the life and times of Slobodan Milosevic, albeit a Pyrrhic one for the cyclone victims denied aid as a consequence, but perhaps if he ever comes to a sticky end it will be more like that of Ferdinand Marcos or Soeharto.
It’s a tragedy. I mean to hope than one day the generals could face justice… is nice. But we have to face… the reality.
Serbia was not protected by… China. Same with Marcos…
I continue to think that Burma is a vivid proof if I may say that China is… the ennemy.
It’s not political correct to say that, it’s even gross. But it’s the harsch reality.
If the burmese junta continue to serve their chinese masters… they they will continue to sleep without any fear.
I mean : can we find another (I would like !) inference regarding the whole situation ?
Can you ?
I’m afraid it’s pure logic. Uggly. But inescapable.
2 Grasshopper // Jun 14, 2008 at 3:35 am
thaicrisis, what is an ennemy? I have a sneaking suspicion you mean enemy, and in that case, I think you need to face some realities about Chinese foreign policy which do not revolve around some foggy allusion to imperialism.
Do you think the benefits of Myanmar being what it is to China outweigh the potential economic benefits if say, Than Shwe was removed by Burmese people? China will do what is best for China regardless of the domestic issues in other countries. Do you think what is best for China amounts to world domination? Do you really think the CCP believe that the Burmese Junta are puppets? Get off it. Go assume some inane accusatory ramblings about something local to you. That way someone local to you could dunk your head in ice cold water and present you with some roses to smell.
3 thaicrisis // Jun 14, 2008 at 5:38 pm
I don’t want to be too ironic, but I think the chinese word “The Finger is not the Moon” applies perfectly here.
What I mean by ennemy is “real responsible”.
It’s totally useless to point your finger at the generals in Burma, and crying.
Instead, look at China, the real responsible, the “ennemy” as far as basic human rights, civilization, compassion are concerned etc.
Got it ?
And don’t patronize me on the “foreign policy” of China. There is no chinese “foreign policy”, just a gross, amazing will of power, without any conscience and ethics.
I repeat : without any.
If you compare with real politik from bismarck, to kissenger and the soviets… I mean those are sweet children…
You’re probably a chinese propagandist, and this is why it seems i’ve touched a nerve there, but you should get used to : the “propaganda fog” about China starts to break. Slowly but surely.
Tragedy in Burma, Darfur… unfortunately… help people to understand the issue : China is the real ennemy.
4 Grasshopper // Jun 14, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Sorry for patronizing you, the finger is not the moon after all. I suggest you wave your finger at yourself. The language of rights, again, are not adequate to succeed in accomplishing a universal protection of human dignity which is obviously required in times such as these. Especially when people say the Myanmar Junta and not mean ‘Burmese’ people, and then hypocritically say China and mean the actions of CCP. This sort of conflation just points to you accepting public knowledge as your private knowledge which is rather lazy. Good luck with your prophecies.
5 NKPVET // Jun 17, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Grasshopper, you have obviously taken your name from the young Kung Fu character in the long ago TV series. So, please be as he was. In other words, lighten up on ThaiCrisis. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
My two cents. China does benefit from the SPDC being in power. China is the major exporter of goods, services, and “hard rice” (as we used to call it) to Burma. By the way, the second largest exporter of military equipment to Burma is India. And of course, our good friend Israel also does a lucrative arms business with the SPDC. Another fact of interest is that Mossad trained Burma’s military intelligence .
Back to the point. Mainland Chinese now occupy almost half of the Shan state. They are also co owners with the SPDC of businesses and government projects. If the SPDC were suddenly deposed, the new government might change to a new weapons vendor or change to different trading partners. Unlikely, yes. But the CCP’s view is probably, “Why rock the boat?”
It is in the interests of Mainland China to keep the SPDC intact. In fact if you think about it, the SPDC is close to what the CCP was under Meo.
I, and many Thai people, have to agree with ThaiCrisis. Mainland China is now an adversary and in reality a potential enemy. The CCP’s long range plan has always been to dominate all of SEA with proxy governments. Tiawan, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, etc. have long known this to be a fact.
I have an open mind. If you can offer an opinion or facts to my post, please do. But do so in a polite manner.
6 Moe Aung // Jun 18, 2008 at 8:54 am
Gentlemen, I think we are in danger of reviving the old “Chinese Question” here. True, Burmese and Chinese rulers are in a symbiotic relationship, and I mean rulers. I don’t think either party wants it otherwise given the long history. Don’t for a moment think the generals are beholden to the Chinese let alone a proxy of any sort. China on her part does realise that despite widespread misconception in the region and the world at large. The only time they well and truly fell out was when violent anti-Chinese riots broke out in Rangoon in 1967 and consequently the Chinese government openly armed and funded the CP of Burma for the next 10 years.
The junta is cleverly playing off and manipulating India and China and of course ASEAN. Trade and arms? Sanctions? No worries. If you won’t Jones will. They are still sitting on substantial gas and mineral resources and a long coastline on the Bay of Bengal. There’s also Russia, and the West is simply missing out.
The CCP did support communist struggles all over the planet not just in the region - an open secret. Regional domination does not quite equate with friendly or fellow communist regimes. Besides the CCP under Mao did not embrace capitalism. Capitalist China of today was always going to be a greater threat not just to the region but the entire planet with its rampant profiteering and resource and market grabbing than Red China ever was despite all the scaremongering and demonising.
Yes, Than Shwe will have his comeuppance one way or another. The Burmese will have their revenge, China notwithstanding.
7 Grasshopper // Jun 18, 2008 at 2:00 pm
NKPVET, why should I lighten up on someone who is propagating such a ridiculous opinion that serves to promote a civilisational clash? Sure, as you say, everyone is entitled to an opinion - even me, and even if my opinion is to belittle another! My position is simply, that people who have nothing directly to do with running the state (ie - Chinese people who are not communist party members, which number over 1 billion) should not be held guilty, the reason being — they would most probably continue to live the lives that they live presently even if the CCP folds - ie. a plumber can always be a plumber.
The 73,500,000o who claim CCP membership and two-hundred million others who have partisanship, OK they are as guilty with supporting the Junta as Republicans and other are for supporting the illegal coalition of the willing War with Iraq. If we take the thaicrisis line, the USA is the enemy too, infact all brothers who do not feel accountable to the greater utility of other brothers welfare are guilty and are the enemy. What happened after the Second World War? Would thaicrisis blame all Germans as the enemy? None were ignorant? All were Nazi party members through willful choice? Are the majority of people aware of their ability to exorcise liberal judgment with all aspects of decision making? If not, then how can one hold “China” as guilty, unless one has confused China as the CCP and Germany as the Nazi party and the USA as the neo-conservatives?
thaicrisis and you, NPKVET, have not countered my position that it would be more economically fruitful for the CCP to be engaged with a Myanmar/Burma not in the clutches of the Junta. Sure China benefits. So does the British oil company Premier, the French oil company Total and the US oil company UNOCAL because they pump oil in a fairly unexploited, uncompetitive geopolitical region. Do you use Junta oil? Maybe you do!! It would be more beneficial for everyone if Myanmar/Burma was liberal and open to a free market — why not China? You say NPKVET, why would the CCP want to rock the boat? International politics takes time, ie pulling troops out of Iraq takes time because rocking the boat is exactly what causes a chaotic world — and that’s not fruitful l for anyone, even those of us who are able to eat three meals a day. How long do you think it takes for a law or a policy to become a social normality?
What has an utterly superficial comparison that China under Mao is comparable to Myanmar/Burma under the Junta got to do with China post the economic reforms of 1979? Are you saying that current CCP foreign policy is guided by some sort of long march sentimentality? Wow. Sure the CCP engages in an arrogant and rampant industrialisation policy and it’s not a globally positive thing, but equally bad is declaring that anyone is an ‘enemy’, as such reactionary politics will lead to worse problems.
NPKVET, you say I, and many Thai people, have to agree with ThaiCrisis. Mainland China is now an adversary and in reality a potential enemy. It is precisely because the public can believe in such a simplistic argument, that one should not believe it and actively seek arguments against it — and avoid the consequences of engaging in the false-prophetic world of Samuel Huntington. Moe Aung says it better than me because I have engaged in a ridiculous argument and have consequently become ridiculous.
To be on topic, irrespective of facing trial, Than Shwe will have his comeuppance because the reasons behind his veil of intolerance are so obviously weak – as seen with the recent submission to Ban-Ki Moon. Pol Pot? Look how he died. Loved by all?? What sort of legacy is important to Than Shwe? What dictator ever got away with a clear conscience?
8 NKPVET // Jun 18, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Moe Aung: Thank you for the nice post. Good point about capitalist China being a greater threat than a purely Communist China.
I believe that a capitalist economy coupled with a Communist government will pose a real threat to the region and world. I don’t necessarily mean a military threat.
As to regional domination not equating with friendly regimes that would depend on what one means by “friendly”.
Look at the history of my country, the USA. We set up friendly regimes in South America and SEA. The USA put their choices in power and the elite and powerful Americans derived massive benefits.
By the way, I’m a Capitalist but I do disagree with one country controlling other countries for economic reasons — or any other reason for that matter. I’m also a patriot, which is why I despise Bush and the present actions of my government.
I do hope that Than Shwe and the rest of the SPDC thugs get deposed and tried for their crimes.
Unfortunately, sometimes that does not happen. Meo died peacefully in his bed. Idi Amin and the President Marcos didn’t do too bad either, or the Shaw of Iran. Money always seems to talk.
I don’t post much, because I don’t have the time. Let me completely stray from the subject of this article, which it seems I continue to do.
You are probably from Burma. I live near your border and come in contact with many ethnic minority organizations. The Pa-O, Shan, Arakan, Karenni, Karen are the main ones.
I used to think that when the SPDC was deposed there would be a federation of states with Aung San Suu Ki as president. All would be peaceful after a brief interim of spats over land grabs.
A guy in the know who works the border completely disagreed with me. His opinion is that because of the history of these minority groups, there will be civil war for quite a while.
After attending some meetings with the ethnic minority representatives and reading up on their history, I now tend to agree with him.
You seem very well informed and a concerned person.What is your opinion on this issue of civil war? I sincerely hope I have a flawed opinion.
9 Grasshopper // Jun 18, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Rather more on topic is that it in regards to prosecuting Than Shwe under international law, the crimes he is responsible for, even if they were obvious and accounted for and not shrouded over by his supporters- because Burma/Myanmar is not 1 of the 106 countries to have ratified the ICC, the ICC has no jurisdiction over Myanmar/Burma. Additionally, because the ICC only came into effect in 2002 and even if Myanmar/Burma had signed the treaty, crimes committed before 2002 are especially difficult to prosecute because there would have been no agreement amongst nations who have signed the treaty in regards to how to prosecute the offender at the time the crime was committed. This may be confusing, but it is argued that if the accused knew of the punishments the ICC could hand out, they would have acted differently - and that to impose the ICC as a standard of justice on all of history would be impossible… It is worth mentioning that Jean Kambanda was tried under a special tribunal set up for Rwanda and that for this to happen in Myanmar/Burma the state would have to essentially collapse. So yes, Myanmar/Burma and Than Shwe has little to fear from the international community unless someone invades and physically brings him to the justice of the citizens of Burma/Myanmar. I feel that this is more appropriate, because I doubt someone who was raped along the Ledo Road, is going to feel vindicated about seeing Than Shwe in the stark white corridors of The Hague.
Also, if Than Shwe has watched what has happened to Saddam Hussein and Pol Pot and is determined for something similar not to happen to him, doesn’t he admit his own guilt? Living in such a hell would far outweigh the comfort of any luxuries he may be able to afford.
10 NKPVET // Jun 18, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Grasshopper: you tend to be emotional and sometimes bitter in your posts. You also belittle people.
This is constructive criticism because you have some very good points, but the tone of your posts detracts from them. We are not your enemy. If you think my post contained a simplistic statement, OK. But don’t go off on a tangent. It helps no one.
If we were in a bar drinking and discussing politics, your ranting (and I would be ranting also) would be perfectly acceptable. But in a discussion group, I believe it is best to be polite and also to show a bit of humility.
Now, I want to thank you for your last pretty much unemotional and informative post. I agree with you that when (hopefully) the SPDC government collapses that the citizens should get the chance to bring the tyrants to justice. Only then can justice be served.
You seem to imply that Than Shwe will not be able to flee to another country and live a life of luxury in safety.
A couple of hours ago I would have disagreed with you. After reading your post and ruminating for a bit, I now agree.
The international community has read about the injustices of the SPDC for so many years that no country would accept him or his cronies and allow them to live in exile.
Emotionally, I hope the people of Burma lynch the SOB, but intellectually I know that law must prevail.
Please read the last four paragraphs of my post before yours. It is off this subject, but I would like to hear your views concerning long term civil wars between the ethnic minorities.
I’m a new guy here. Maybe it is more appropriate to find an article on this site dealing with this situation. If you can point me to one, I’d appreciate it. Then I will post there and you and Ms. Moe Aung can, if you wish, give me your opinions.
Please stay calm. You remind me of me when I was young.
11 Grasshopper // Jun 19, 2008 at 12:35 am
NKPVET, I tend to believe that enforcing the illusion of state apparatus will only serve to promote traditional ethnic conflict. What I would like to see happen by the time the Myanmar regime folds is to Burma/Myanmar geography is incorporated into an ASEAN region … or a region for mainland South East Asia that is not only about fostering economies, but about fostering common laws which reflect views on justice significant to regional citizens, and are not arbitrarily connected to colonialism by either being reactionary or counter-reactionary. So by reducing the importance of borders, the traditional hostilities in Burmese territories are overwhelmed by an influx of multicultural opportunity. If the international community is not evolving into an interregional community, and we are stagnating in state based tit for tat righteousness, then perhaps the inevitable outcome would resemble a self-hating hydra…
There are so many articles on this site about this, I wouldn’t worry. As for my pub like reaction, yes whenever I see the prophecies of Huntington looming in front of me I forget being in lotus position on the top of a sepulchral cliff and instead try to control the lightening… *fades out into deft, deep cymbal chimes* Welcome to New Mandala though, it’s floorboards may only be two years old but there has been enough spilt on them to make it seem much older…
12 NKPVET // Jun 19, 2008 at 2:39 am
Ms. Moe Aung and Mr. Grasshopper: I will be in Narathiwat, Yala, and perhaps Pattani for the next six weeks. So if I don’t answer you posts, please don’t think I an not interested in your comments on ethnic minority civil war in Burma. I am interested in your analysis of this situation and will respond when I return.
13 Moe Aung // Jun 20, 2008 at 1:58 am
NKPVET, the civil war is off topic although it’s important as the context when we are talking about war crimes and human rights violations. BTW what gave you the idea I’m a Ms ?! I’m just another old fogey leading a cosy life in the West and shouting from the sidelines. I am NOT a capitalist. Admittedly there are good capitalists but everyone gets sucked into a deadly vortex of capitalist competition and most lose their innate humanity in pursuit of profit.
True, totalitarian rule and capitalism is a deadly mix. Il Duce and the Fuhrer were the extreme examples, and the Burmese junta is just as detrimental to the nation it rules over though not a threat at least not directly to the region. Burma, let’s not forget, is historically a natural land empire similar to Russia and China, her expansionism at its height in the latter part of the 18th C and the earlier part of the 19th C before she came to grief when she took on the industrial might of the British Empire.
If you are so interested in the civil war in Burma I’d suggest you look up “Panglong Conference” and “Communist Party of Burma” in Wiki for some background. I have no idea how to get the links up here without crashing! Martin Smith’s “Burma - Insugency and the Politics of Ethnicity ” 1991 Zed Books, London, is a definitive reference on the subject. It is a three way struggle between the government and army dominated by Socialists from the early days of independence on one side and the CPB and the nationalities on the other. United fronts come and go among the rebels, the latest one pointedly excluding the CPB as just another bunch of Burman chauvinists like all other Burman groups.
There is no way genuine national reconciliation is going to be happen without the ultimate overthrow of the junta in its current or future incarnations since it is the embodiment of Burman militarism and chauvinism. Above all there is no way the nationalities can do it on their own without involving the majority Burmans both above and underground in an broad and effective united front. Neither side is blameless for the continuation of the conflict, although you have to lay the lion’s share of the blame squarely at the door of the military dictatorship, even if colonialists in their past and present incarnations too did and continue to have a hand in kindling and stoking the fires of communal strife. So “great white saviours” beware as you stand out like a sore thumb, not least compounded by the religious divide.
Civil war, renewed and reinvigorated, is by no means a foregone conclusion once the junta is out of the picture. There just is no political will on the part of the junta though everyone else is willing to find a political solution. The more durable the junta proves to be the more arduous the task. Refugee camps along the border have seen new generations grow up with bitterness and resentment just as in Palestine. Separatist goals are likely to regain currency. There’s a real risk of hard learned and costly lessons from the protracted civil war of six decades and lost generations now being lost to the young, only to repeat the same historical mistakes of fragmentation and disunity in the fight against the common enemy, the military dictatorship. This great nation deserves a real break long overdue. It’s a crime to allow the conflict to smoulder on and keep the country down in this interminable hell of repression and underdevelopment.
Grasshopper, you have a good liberal and legal mind. The sans frontiere idea however is a nice liberal pipe dream just like the world government they were going on about so much 30 years ago. There may be a pretty good viable EU now but it mainly works in favour of international capital, bankers and ruling elites. And it plays into the hands of those who wish to impose their own model of society on the rest of us. Remember TINA that Mrs Thatcher was so fond of?
14 Poetic injustice // Oct 1, 2008 at 3:08 pm
[...] make any difference to the outcome of the case, especially given that the butt of the joke was the Great Father. The journal was also suspended for a week and its editor forced to sign a document to guarantee [...]
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.