American liberals take note: This is what is meant by "speaking truth to power;"
Opposition leader and Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi was freed Saturday in Myanmar after years in detention as a huge crowd presented flowers and chanted "Long Live Suu Kyi." Soldiers armed with rifles and tear gas launchers pushed aside the barbed-wire barriers blocking her street at 5:15 p.m., leading to a gleeful dash the final 100 yards to her gate. Twenty minutes later, the slight pro-democracy opposition figure known here simply as "the lady" popped her head over her red spiked fence to a roar from jubilant supporters.
"It's very happy to see the people," she said, barely audible over the chanting. "It's been a very long time since I've seen you."
Suu Kyi, who has been in detention for 15 of the last 21 years in a country under brutal military rule, promised to speak at greater length Sunday at the headquarters of her political party.
Standing in a room full of like minded media people and making nasty jokes about the president of the United States - while being protected by the First Amendment and the assurance you will not be arrested and thrown into jail - is not, repeat not "speaking truth to power." Nor is making fun of Muslims in their hijab, or asking Mexicans to learn English, or opposing affirmative action in any way, shape, or form "oppression."
This frail woman with a quavering, sing-song voice takes her life into her hands every time she opens her mouth. That, my friends on the left, is what it means by "speaking truth to power." And the Burmese people who risk life and limb when they go into the streets to demonstrate for liberty know more about "oppression" than anyone who lives in any western democracy - minorities included.
Comparing your standard liberal loudmouth or put upon minority with Suu Kyi and the brave people of Myanmar is irrational, arrogant, and actually very silly. It cheapens the acts of enormous courage performed by Suu Kyi and her supporters to equate any supposed liberal acts of "bravery" in simply exercising their constitutional rights to freedom of speech, or refer to being "oppressed" because many disagree with the agenda of the NAACP and other racialist organizations.
Meanwhile, Obama scolded the ruling military junta in Myanmar for "stealing" last week's election. This, before any results have been announced or any real evidence of tampering has emerged. Then recall the aftermath of the Iranian election where the outcome was announced almost immediately after the polls closed and widespread fraud was evident. Our president's response then was to caution against jumping to conclusions.
While there is little doubt the thugs who are running Myanmar are as guilty as the dirty necked galoots running Iran of stealing an election, it is curious our president treated the two elections so differently. Of course, at the time of the Iranian election, he was busy "reaching out" to the 13th century clerics ruling Iran, trying to convince them that the US was not a threat to their dreams of hegemony or their desire to build an atomic bomb. Perhaps if the Myanmar military was attempting to build the bomb, Obama would have given them a pass too.
It will be interesting to see how long Suu Kyi's freedom will last, or whether the regime will allow her to live very long. She is the embodiment of hope for her people which makes her more dangerous to the junta than 10,000 rebels with arms.
Share