<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Disaster Profiteering In Burma</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.antiquiet.com/features/2008/05/disaster-profiteering-in-burma/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.antiquiet.com/features/2008/05/disaster-profiteering-in-burma/</link>
	<description>online blogging killed the restroom graffiti industry</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:22:10 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Johnny Firecloud</title>
		<link>http://www.antiquiet.com/features/2008/05/disaster-profiteering-in-burma/#comment-898</link>
		<dc:creator>Johnny Firecloud</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 15:38:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiquiet.com/?p=89#comment-898</guid>
		<description>Oh, wow, the President's wife is speaking out against the atrocities in Burma. Are you seriously trying to pass that off as anything within screaming range of a valid point?

The fact is, nothing substantial will be done in terms of intervention because nothing *can* be done (see: first sentence of 2nd to last paragraph). Mrs. Bush's husband, who you claim "deserves more credit" than I'm willing to offer an international bully, the nation's greatest embarrassment and corporate marionette, will not order any military action in the area under any circumstance - not at the risk of pissing off China and Russia. What's the point? Myanmar hasn't got enough oil to make a possible instigation of WWIII worthwhile to the powers that be.

Besides, there's no chance in hell he'd be able to sell Congress or the American public on the retarded notion that the Burmese will attack us here at home if we don't go obliterate their country, kill their leader and set up our own massive profiteering "reconstruction" scheme by awarding the vast majority of the reconstruction and oil contracts to companies associated with the Bush administration, particularly Dick Cheney. It's been done once already, and we're all still feeling pretty fucking stupid about it all. And in case you hadn't noticed, some of us are even pissed off about it, too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, wow, the President&#8217;s wife is speaking out against the atrocities in Burma. Are you seriously trying to pass that off as anything within screaming range of a valid point?</p>
<p>The fact is, nothing substantial will be done in terms of intervention because nothing *can* be done (see: first sentence of 2nd to last paragraph). Mrs. Bush&#8217;s husband, who you claim &#8220;deserves more credit&#8221; than I&#8217;m willing to offer an international bully, the nation&#8217;s greatest embarrassment and corporate marionette, will not order any military action in the area under any circumstance - not at the risk of pissing off China and Russia. What&#8217;s the point? Myanmar hasn&#8217;t got enough oil to make a possible instigation of WWIII worthwhile to the powers that be.</p>
<p>Besides, there&#8217;s no chance in hell he&#8217;d be able to sell Congress or the American public on the retarded notion that the Burmese will attack us here at home if we don&#8217;t go obliterate their country, kill their leader and set up our own massive profiteering &#8220;reconstruction&#8221; scheme by awarding the vast majority of the reconstruction and oil contracts to companies associated with the Bush administration, particularly Dick Cheney. It&#8217;s been done once already, and we&#8217;re all still feeling pretty fucking stupid about it all. And in case you hadn&#8217;t noticed, some of us are even pissed off about it, too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmie</title>
		<link>http://www.antiquiet.com/features/2008/05/disaster-profiteering-in-burma/#comment-897</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 12:40:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiquiet.com/?p=89#comment-897</guid>
		<description>You ask:
&lt;blockquote&gt;
Could she- or the twenty-three percent or so of Americans who still think Bush knows what the fuck he’s doing, and doing it for good cause- get behind a cause like the liberation of the Burmese people from a corrupt and tyrant government, even if they don’t have horizon-stretching oil fields for us to capitalize on in the process? 
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You are apparently not aware the most outspoken person against the junta in the past week has been the President's wife, who used an official occasion to blister the tyrants with the press watching and writing down every word. She's given, to my knowledge, to such statements on Burma in the past ten days or so.

I've not heard a single person in government who opposes the President say a single world about the junta or conditions there. 

I'd say that Ms. Bush (and her husband) deserve more credit than you're willing to give them at this point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You ask:</p>
<blockquote><p>
Could she- or the twenty-three percent or so of Americans who still think Bush knows what the fuck he’s doing, and doing it for good cause- get behind a cause like the liberation of the Burmese people from a corrupt and tyrant government, even if they don’t have horizon-stretching oil fields for us to capitalize on in the process?
</p></blockquote>
<p>You are apparently not aware the most outspoken person against the junta in the past week has been the President&#8217;s wife, who used an official occasion to blister the tyrants with the press watching and writing down every word. She&#8217;s given, to my knowledge, to such statements on Burma in the past ten days or so.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve not heard a single person in government who opposes the President say a single world about the junta or conditions there. </p>
<p>I&#8217;d say that Ms. Bush (and her husband) deserve more credit than you&#8217;re willing to give them at this point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
