Aung San Suu Kyi appears in closed court on corruption charges

[Bob20]

Just because there's nothing in the press here...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/01/aung-san-suu-kyi-appears-closed-court-corruption-charges

[Convert54]

A step forward in performing the expected parody ?

[9S_]

Good riddance 

This lady committed war crimes in her genocidal quest against the Rohingya. Her actions has led to one of the worst human rights disaster since Pol Pot and one of Asia’s largest “trails of tears”

And what did she do with all those tens of millions of dollars the democrats sent her in last years “Covid-relief bill”??

[stevenkongju]

5 minutes ago, 9S_ said:

This lady committed war crimes in her genocidal quest against the Rohingya. Her actions has led to one of the worst human rights disaster since Pol Pot and one of Asia’s largest “trails of tears”

I am not saying she did everything right, but I think the February coup shows wait a perilous state Suu Kyi was trying to govern in. The Tatmadaw had control the entire time. If Suu Kyi spoke out stronger against the repugnant actions of the military, as we all wish she could have, the coup may have come much sooner.

[AussieBob]

Things are crashing and burning all around the Junta in Myanmar. This is just another step on their path to self-destruction.  Myanmar aint Thailand - the Junta will be resisted a lot more than the Thai Junta ever was - both internally and externally.

[9S_]

43 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

If Suu Kyi spoke out stronger against the repugnant actions of the military, as we all wish she could have, the coup may have come much sooner

40,000 innocent women and children and men burned alive so that she can remain in power got it. 

[stevenkongju]

5 hours ago, 9S_ said:

40,000 innocent women and children and men burned alive so that she can remain in power got it. 

Please explain that logic. Suu Kyi stands up to the Tatmadaw and is quickly removed as the head of government. The people would still be dead. What do you think the military would have done? 

Like now, a depraved General would have taken over. Now we have universities shuttered, 1,000 more protesting civilians murdered, more villages burned and no peaceful end in sight. 

Sometimes there are no go choices. I'll wait for you to let me know the scenario where the Rohyinga are left in peace.

Edited October 3, 2021 by stevenkongju
Typos

[Rain]

9 hours ago, 9S_ said:

Good riddance 

This lady committed war crimes in her genocidal quest against the Rohingya. Her actions has led to one of the worst human rights disaster since Pol Pot and one of Asia’s largest “trails of tears”

And what did she do with all those tens of millions of dollars the democrats sent her in last years “Covid-relief bill”??

Indeed. 

She has been a charlatan and a phony from the start, fooling many a romancer that were convinced she was a shining light. 

Bah.

 

[stevenkongju]

3 hours ago, 9S_ said:

Boohoo universities shuttered. 
 

While Suu Kyi burned over tens of thousands of people alive. Tens of thousands of women and female girls raped. Tens of thousands of people murdered systematically village to village city to city house to house and family to family. Because of her she triggered a mass migration of 400,000 people fleeing violence, murder and rape. 
 

and you’re worried about universities being closed?

Whats even worse you’re defending her! If she was innocent then why didn’t she stop it?

If she was innocent then why did she block UN investigators?

She even defended the rapists, murderers and mass slaughterers at the Hague. 

 

Ughh. First, SuuKyi was not in charge of the military. That is simply a fact. Deny it all you want.

Second, I did not defend her. I wish she could have spoken out and changed things, but it would not have. If she spoke against the army, how long would she have headed the government. All the other reforms that benefitted so many would have been flushed down the toilet, as they now have been. 

Yes, she will have to live with the fact that she did some of the army's dirty work by defending them at The Hague. Was that a difficult choice for her? I sure hope so. That is NOT the same as your claim that she was responsible for the murders and rapes.

You ask, "If she was innocent then why didn’t she stop it?". I answer that she could not have stopped it. If that is how you determine innocence then I don't know what to tell you. You are guilty unless you stop something you don't have the power to stop?

I am still waiting for you to tell me the scenario where the Tatmadaw, that is now killing more people, would not have raped and murdered the Rohingya. I was personally hoping the US would send in soldiers to stop the killing.

[9S_]

22 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

Ughh. First, SuuKyi was not in charge of the military. That is simply a fact. Deny it all you want.

She is literally the de-facto leader of Myanmar during SE Asia’s worst human rights violations and genocide since Pol-Pot. Sure she may not have had an “official” government role but her ruling junta gave her new powers. To deny so is to simp for her which is clearly what you are doing. 
https://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/06/asia/aung-san-suu-kyi-state-counsellor-role-created/index.html
 

22 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

Second, I did not defend her. I wish she could have spoken out and changed things, but it would not have. If she spoke against the army, how long would she have headed the government. All the other reforms that benefitted so many would have been flushed down the toilet, as they now hav

Yes you are. You are blinded by your own simping. You think she’s some Angel bathing in the grace of democracy. Are you crazy? She is far from that. She is cut from the same cloth as genocidal dictators. “I wish she could have spoken out sooner” BOOHOO this lady is a bloodthirsty maniac hellbent on preserving power. And she easily easily ravaged up a mob against Muslims to secure her power and influence. 
 

For someone to “speak out sooner” as you simp, she was real quick to denounce any mention of the genocide as “fake news” even to the face of official photographic evidence from the government of Turkey!

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/06/aung-san-suu-kyi-blames-terrorists-for-misinformation-about-myanmar-violence

 

I guess you just don’t like how she spoke out when she definitely spoke pretty quick for example:

“I don’t think there is ethnic cleaning going on,”

“I think there’s a lot of hostility there,” she told the BBC. “It’s Muslims killing Muslims as well, if they think that they are collaborating with authorities … It’s a matter of people on different sides of a divide.

“I’m just a politician,” she told the BBC. I’m not quite like Margaret Thatcher, no. But on the other hand I’m no Mother Teresa either.”

Her government is notoriously anti-Muslim promoting Buddhist teachers who espouse hatred towards Muslims likening them to angry dogs that you are not supposed to live next to. 
 

22 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

Yes, she will have to live with the fact that she did some of the army's dirty work by defending them at The Hague.

And she literally encouraged it, she literally defended it, she literally downplayed saying it was fake rapes, she is responsible for it because she is the literal leader of Myanmar!

24 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

That is NOT the same as your claim that she was responsible for the murders and

Is she the leader of Myanmar? Why didn’t she give the Rohingya citizenship? Why did she deprive them of meaningful aid such as electricity, education, infrastructure, medical care? Why did she routinely denounce Islam and the Rakhine State? It’s common in Myanmar to view the Rakhine state as a foreign occupation why didn’t she change that view? Why you simp for her she’s clearly an evil calculating b***

 

28 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

You ask, "If she was innocent then why didn’t she stop it?". I answer that she could not have stopped it. If that is how you determine innocence then I don't know what to tell you. You are guilty unless you stop something you don't have the power to stop?

LOL yes she could have stopped it but she didn’t. Not only did she NOT stop it she raised the temperature!!

-She not only provided cover and legitimacy for the generals but

-she routinely denounced Islam.

-She deprived the Rakhine state of any official recognition from the government.

-They’re viewed as trespassers and invaders, why didn’t she change that view??

-They never had citizenship, why didn’t she change that??

-she literally downplayed it even in the face of evidence

-Rakhine state is one of the poorest regions in Myanmar by design. Why didn’t she change that?

Shes guilty ASF!! Don’t absolve her because she won some dumb prize that even awarded to Palestinian terrorist and a US President who started 2 wars in Syria and Libya both sh*tholes thanks to him: Syrian civil war which led to ISIS and absolute genocide as well as open air slave markets for black people in Libya. Good job Nobel Peace Prize!!

 

32 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

am still waiting for you to tell me the scenario where the Tatmadaw, that is now killing more people, would not have raped and murdered the Rohingya.

She didn’t stop it. She encouraged it. She defended it. She downplayed it. She helped it. 
 

42 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

I was personally hoping the US would send in soldiers to stop the killing

Why the US? What’s wrong with the UN? That’s their job to stop genocide, you know like “never again” motto after the Holocaust 

[Poolie]

It's nothing to do with the Americans. Don't get them in there messing stuff up again more than they are. There's enough blood been spilt. 

[stevenkongju]

7 hours ago, 9S_ said:

8 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

Ughh. First, SuuKyi was not in charge of the military. That is simply a fact. Deny it all you want.

She is literally the de-facto leader of Myanmar during SE Asia’s worst human rights violations and genocide since Pol-Pot. Sure she may not have had an “official” government role but her ruling junta gave her new powers. To deny so is to simp for her which is clearly what you are doing.

On its face, this is ridiculous. I am not going to continue debating with someone who doesn't acknowledge that Aung San Suu Kyi was not in control of the military that carried out genocide.

General Min Aung Hlaing became commander-in-chief in 2011, taking over amid a transfer to a quasi-civilian government following nearly 50 years of direct military rule. Despite the ostensible democratic reforms in the country in recent years, the military commander-in-chief retained command of the defense, border affairs and home affairs ministries, whose reach is pervasive.

Senior General Min Aung Hlaing occupies the highest office of Myanmar’s military, known locally as the Tatmadaw. The 61-year-old may not have the public profile of Aung San Suu Kyi, but the world is beginning to recognize that he calls the shots when it comes to the military’s crackdown on the Rohingya. https://time.com/5004822/myanmar-rohingya-min-aung-hlaing/

And of course, General Min Aung Hlaing is the leader of the coup that has removed the NLD from the government and imprisoned its leaders, including Aung San Suu Kyi. So, was that "her ruling junta"?

7 hours ago, 9S_ said:

BOOHOO this lady is a bloodthirsty maniac hellbent on preserving power. And she easily easily ravaged up a mob against Muslims to secure her power and influence. 

This is more silliness and hyperbole. There is certainly an anti-Islam strain in Myanmar, largely whipped up by the 969 Movement under the disgusting "Buddhist Monk" Wirathu. The civilian government under Suu Kyi charged him with sedition and he was arrested in November of 2020.  https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-myanmar-election-monk-idUKKBN27I17T

The Tatmadaw (Myanmar's military headed by General Min Aung Hlaing) did not like this jailing and after the coup, they release this piece of crap who in recent years he had appeared at pro-military rallies delivering nationalist speeches and criticising then-leader Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy government.  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-58471535

8 hours ago, 9S_ said:

-she routinely denounced Islam.

Citations please. While she did criticize certain Arakan groups that engaged in some terrorist acts (and that certainly does not excuse the Myanmar military's horrendoes reprisals against innocent civilians), I would like to see citations of her "denouncing Islam".

 

8 hours ago, 9S_ said:

-She deprived the Rakhine state of any official recognition from the government.

-They’re viewed as trespassers and invaders, why didn’t she change that view??

-They never had citizenship, why didn’t she change that??

-she literally downplayed it even in the face of evidence

-Rakhine state is one of the poorest regions in Myanmar by design. Why didn’t she change that?

Again, going against the military would have gotten her ousted even faster than was actually done. And you ask why she didn't raise Rakhine State out of poverty, well, she wasn't able to lift any of the majority Buddhist regions out of poverty either. Is she thus anti-Buddhist?

8 hours ago, 9S_ said:

8 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

am still waiting for you to tell me the scenario where the Tatmadaw, that is now killing more people, would not have raped and murdered the Rohingya.

She didn’t stop it. She encouraged it. She defended it. She downplayed it. She helped it. 

And I am stil waiting for you to answer this question.

 

8 hours ago, 9S_ said:

Why the US? What’s wrong with the UN? That’s their job to stop genocide, you know like “never again” motto after the Holocaust 

I would have loved the UN to do something, but they never do. Would you have been against the US going in to protect the Rohyinga? I hope not.

The people of Myanmar, including, and especially now, the Rohyinga, have been brutalized by the military government for 60+ years. Aung San Suu Kyi suffered at the hands of the military as well. When Thein Sein gave up some power to a civilian government, it was a first step. That civilian government had to tread lightly in order to make any reforms. Reforms were slow and certainly imperfect. You don't throw away real improving conditions, though cetainly not for all, to chase an unobtainable perfect situation. When the NLD won the last election in a landslide, the military worried that their power would be diminished, hence the coup.

[stevenkongju]

8 hours ago, Poolie said:

It's nothing to do with the Americans.

It has to do with humanity and Americans are part of humanity. Or do you take the Chinese Communist Party view that, "Hey, it's an internal matter."?

[stevenkongju]

Here is a related headline. It in no way lends justification to the genocide committed by the Myanmar military, but it does show that there are, in fact, terrorist factions among the Rohyinga. Were they created by the Myanmar military? Perhaps, but it does not mean they are not terrorists.

 

His family blamed militants from the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), a group behind several attacks in Myanmar, with activists claiming they were enraged by his growing popularity in the camps.

"We have arrested five people over the murder of Mohib Ullah," the commanding officer of the police unit in charge of camp security, Naimul Haque, told AFP.

Two of the men were remanded in custody for three days for questioning, authorities said. The other three have not yet appeared in court.

A 28-year-old Rohingya man was also arrested over the murder last week.

All six are being investigated for links to ARSA, which has instead blamed "unidentified criminals" for Ullah's death.  

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/asia/rohingya-leader-mohib-ullah-bangladesh-myanmar-2218711

 

[Rain]

16 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

It has to do with humanity and Americans are part of humanity. 

Yet, Americans don't have a very good reputation of humane offerings to the world, historically. 

Just the opposite, actually. 

 

[AussieBob]

There has been a lot of 'wars' and 'disputes' inside many countries for a long long time. What has been happening since WW2 is that the losing sides, such as Tamils in Sri Lanka and Rohingya in Myanmar, always claim to have been the subject of genocide when the ruling powers decide to take action against them.  I dont know the details in Myanmar, but I do know the details of Sri Lanka and I believe they are very similar.  After decades of bombs and murders and attacks against the ruling authority, the authorities decided the only 'solution' was to return fire and violently suppress and/or remove the uprising 'terrorists' and their supporters.  Think Red Brigade in Italy, Red Army Faction in Germany,. and so many others.  In fact right now down south Thailand has its own terrorists/fighters seeking independence. As the saying goes - one man's freedom fighter, is another man's terrorist. 

[stevenkongju]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

Yet, Americans don't have a very good reputation of humane offerings to the world, historically. 

Sometimes a reputation has more to do with the people who believe the reputation than the actual facts. I am not claiming perfection, far from it, but my guess is, and please, correct me if I am wrong, you would not give the US any credit for any positive thing it has done in the world.

[Rain]

5 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

Sometimes a reputation has more to do with the people who believe the reputation than the actual facts. I am not claiming perfection, far from it, but my guess is, and please, correct me if I am wrong, you would not give the US any credit for any positive thing it has done in the world.

No I wouldn't, as there's no positive credit to be given. 

 

[stevenkongju]

4 minutes ago, Rain said:

No I wouldn't, as there's no positive credit to be given.

Enough said. Now I know to not take you very seriously.

[9S_]

1 hour ago, stevenkongju said:

On its face, this is ridiculous. I am not going to continue debating with someone

How convenient of you. Do you always reject arguments based on incredulity?? Just asking

1 hour ago, stevenkongju said:

acknowledge that Aung San Suu Kyi was not in control of the military that carried out genocide.

Wow and you’re still giving excuses for her. She was absolutely quick to speak out! Speak out to those who disagreed with the genocide. Speak out to those who tried to cover the genocide. Speak out to those who were raped during the genocide. She spoke out alright, you just turn a blind eye to what she really said. 
 

 

1 hour ago, stevenkongju said:

Aung San Suu Kyi. So, was that "her ruling junta"?

She is a war criminal responsible for the deaths of nearly 40,000 innocent people and is directly responsible for the massive refugee crisis of 400,000 people fleeing Myanmar’s genocide when she was in power

To deny so is to agree with Ann Suu Kyi that those girls weren’t being raped (because she did accuse the victims of staging “fake rapes”)

To deny so is to agree that there was no genocide (because guess what she downplayed it too)

To deny so is to affirm Myanmar’s right to extinguish the Rakhine State (because she too blamed them she too regards them as invaders she too never recognized them)

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

General Min Aung Hlaing became commander-in-chief in 2011, taking over amid a transfer to a quasi-civilian government following nearly 50 years of direct military rule. Despite the ostensible democratic reforms in the country in recent years, the military commander-in-chief retained command of the defense, border affairs and home affairs ministries, whose reach is pervasive.

Senior General Min Aung Hlaing occupies the highest office of Myanmar’s military, known locally as the Tatmadaw. The 61-year-old may not have the public profile of Aung San Suu Kyi, but the world is beginning to recognize that he calls the shots when it comes to the military’s crackdown on the Rohingya. https://time.com/5004822/myanmar-rohingya-min-aung-hlaing/

Is she the leader of Myanmar? Yes she is

Does she control 4 key ministries with the ability to deprive the military? Yes she is

Did she give citizenship to the Rohingya? No she did not

Did she provide basic medical care, education, infrastructure? No she did not

Has she ever recognized the Rohingya as fellow Burmese? Never

Did she defend the genocide? Yes she did

Did she downplayed the genocide? Yes she did

Did she say that the rapes were “fake rapes”? Yes she did

Did she bar UN investigators into the Rakhine state? Yes she did

So is she innocent, if she doesn’t deprive the military, doesn’t grant citizenship, doesn’t recognize the Rohingya, doesn’t provide basic human rights, doesn’t denounce the genocide, doesn’t stop defending the genocide, doesn’t stop downplaying the genocide????

Of course not shes guilty plain as day. Why are you defending her? Nobody is defending this woman. Do you love her? 

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

This is more silliness and hyperbole. There is certainly an anti-Islam strain in Myanmar, largely whipped up by the 969 Movement under the disgusting "Buddhist Monk" Wirathu

Why didn’t she grant the Rohingya citizenship? 

Why didn’t she build roads, basic infrastructure in the Rakhine State?

Why didn’t she provide education to the Rohingya?

Why did she say there were fake rapes there?

Why is she closely aligned with Ultra-Nationalist Buddhists?

Why didnt she change the view that the people of the Rakhine State are NOT foreign invaders but people who’ve been there for centuries, they’re just Muslim?

If she did all that would the Rohingya people still be here today? Absolutely. 

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

Citations please. While she did criticize certain Arakan groups that engaged in some terrorist acts (and that certainly does not excuse the Myanmar military's horrendoes reprisals against innocent civilians), I would like to see citations of her "denouncing Islam".

LOL you should look it up yourself. You’d be surprised what she said, who she aligns herself with and her own policies towards the Rohingya. 

 

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

Again, going against the military would have gotten her ousted even faster than was actually done

Uh huh surrreee we believe you. I mean surely she didn’t defend the generals who would do that? Oh yea Ann Suu Kyi defended the generals. She even denounced those reporting on the genocide including the UN, the US and Turkey!

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

she wasn't able to lift any of the majority Buddhist regions out of poverty either. Is she thus anti-Buddhist?

Compared to the cities in Myanmar they do seem better than the Stone Age fishing villages of the Rakhine State. 

Well why didn’t she give citizenship?

Well why didn’t she giver education?

Well why did she block UN investigators into her own country?

Why did she denounce Islam?

Why did she called videographic evidence of rapes as fake?

Why did she say it’s Muslim terrorists doing the burning looting and Murdering?

Does an innocent person do these things? I’m just asking questions here. Answers you know, answers I know and answers we all know. 
 

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

And I am stil waiting for you to answer this question.

She is the leader of Myanmar.

She didn’t even denounce the genocide. 

She defended the generals

She blocked UN investigators

She called the Turkey delegation investigating the genocide liars

She burned families alive

Don’t take my word for it, take the word of everybody in the world:

-Her Nobel Peace prize winners cohorts

-US State Department

-UN

-Holocaust survivors

-Hundreds of investigative journalists

-400,000 Rohingya survivors (you can ask them who they blame I bet you they’ll say Ann Suu Kyi)

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

Would you have been against the US going in to protect the Rohyinga?

It’s the UN’s job to stop genocide NOT the US. 

 

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

The people of Myanmar, including, and especially now, the Rohyinga, have been brutalized by the military government for 60+ years

And what did Ann Suu Kyi do about it about Rohingya people? Nothing

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

Aung San Suu Kyi suffered at the hands of the military as well. When Thein Sein gave up some power to a civilian government, it was a first step

Well I hope she now feels the same suffering she imposed on the Rohingya people karma is a certain word

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

chase an unobtainable perfect situation.

That’s nice of you. Of course giving citizenship to the Rohingya is impossible. Of course recognizing them as human beings is impossible. Of course using key ministries that you control with the ability to stop the military is impossible. Of course sending in UN investigators is impossible. Of course giving aid is impossible. Of course not saying fake rapes is impossible. Of course not calling the Turkey delegation liars even though they have  videographic evidence is impossible. Of course!

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

When the NLD won the last election in a landslide, the military worried that their power would be diminished,

I guess the Myanmar people who cheered on the massacre of the Rohingya will feel the same as they did. 

[9S_]

2 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

It has to do with humanity and Americans are part of humanity. Or do you take the Chinese Communist Party view that, "Hey, it's an internal matter."?

That’s the UN’s job not the US. 

[stevenkongju]

3 hours ago, 9S_ said:

6 hours ago, stevenkongju said:

Citations please. While she did criticize certain Arakan groups that engaged in some terrorist acts (and that certainly does not excuse the Myanmar military's horrendoes reprisals against innocent civilians), I would like to see citations of her "denouncing Islam".

LOL you should look it up yourself. You’d be surprised what she said, who she aligns herself with and her own policies towards the Rohingya. 

So your entire post is, "Nah-nah-nah, you're wrong". You state things that are simply untrue and don't back them up with any evidence. I ask you for citations of things you assert and you tell I need to "look it up myself". I googled "Aung San Suu Kyi denounces Islam", there was one story about her meeting with the disgusting Victor Orban where it was said that Hungary and Myanmar were having difficulty integrating certain Muslem groups. That's it. No denunciation. Were you just lying?

You never answer the question I've asked three times now, what is a scenario where the Myanmar military does not commit genocide? How does Aung San Suu Kyi stop it? Your answer is that she could stop it by stopping it. Your long posts asserting bogus facts are a joke.

[stevenkongju]

3 hours ago, 9S_ said:

That’s the UN’s job not the US. 

It is, and we are still waiting.

[Viggen840]

3 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

It is, and we are still waiting.

The UN? Don't hold your breath waiting. Now nothing but a Middle-East-sponsored upper-class business club with no real clout in world affairs but with dreams of being the seat of one world government. 

[9S_]

15 minutes ago, stevenkongju said:

So your entire post is, "Nah-nah-nah, you're wrong". You state things that are simply untrue and don't back them up with any evidence. I ask you for citations of things you assert and you tell I need to "look it up myself". I googled "Aung San Suu Kyi denounces Islam", there was one story about her meeting with the disgusting Victor Orban where it was said that Hungary and Myanmar were having difficulty integrating certain Muslem groups. That's it. No denunciation. Were you just lying?

You never answer the question I've asked three times now, what is a scenario where the Myanmar military does not commit genocide? How does Aung San Suu Kyi stop it? Your answer is that she could stop it by stopping it. Your long posts asserting bogus facts are a joke.

No my argument is thus follows:

If she is innocent or blameless as you claim then why:

-Didn’t she stop it? She is the literal de-facto leader of Myanmar? She controls 4 key ministries with the ability to prevent genocide! She didn’t do jack squat and everybody knows this

-Didn’t grant citizenship to the Rohingya before the genocide?

-Didn’t stop the inflammatory rhetoric that the Rohingya were some “invading force occupying the Rakhine State”

-Didn’t build infrastructure, give medical aid or education for years to the Rohingya

-Didn’t protect expelled Muslims?

-Did she downplay the genocide?

-Blame some obscure militant group?

-Called rape victims liars and fakers

-Hates Muslims (she obviously doesn’t like being interviewed by them, she aligns herself with ultra-Buddhist nationalist whom she has never denounced, lied to the Catholic Cardinal about the extent of the damages in the Rakhine State)

-Called Turkey a liar to their face even though Turkey had photographic evidence of the genocide

-Did she block UN investigators?

-Defend the generals?

If she is innocent then why:

-Did Nobel Peace Cohorts demands that her prize be revoked

-UN Ban Ki Moon call her out for the genocide

-Are there growing demands for her to be indicted for war crimes?

Are you the one who ran to a mod asking for help? Is that you do, you can’t win so you ask a mod to delete my posts??