Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Should Aung San Suu Kyi be allowed to lead the Myanmar Government?
Aung San Suu Kyi, (Oxford Educated) leader of National League for Democracy, won a fair and decisive election in 1990. The repressive military leaders refused to hand over the leadership to her. The problem remains until today, and the U.N. is unable to help solve it.
By Monday September 24, 2007, the number of protesters reached 100000. The general public rallied three times in the past and each time the soldiers fired with life ammunition killing many of the protesters on the spot. The three uprisings in the past happened in: 1988, 1990 and 1996. In 1988 alone, about three thousand protesters were gunned down by the military government. The whole world watched silently. Where are the human right watchers? The fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters of those gunned down in the past must be sharpening their choppers now?
India claimed there were about 60000 Myanmar refugees living on Indian Territory. What about other countries? Surely there must be lots of Myanmar refugees as well. Isn’t it a shame that people have to run away from the country where they were born to avoid being gunned down by their own soldiers and policemen?
On Wednesday Sept. 26, 2007, many protesters were arrested and four of them were killed on the spot. The soldiers were able to get away with their crimes and there is no way they are going to stop shooting at the protesters.
It is very common in many parts of the world, for governments to allow women to stand for elections and then refuse to handover the power to her after she has won the election. The laws of the jungles still exist. Don't they?
The soldiers ruled Myanmar for over 50 years by force. How many more years are they going to remain there? Honestly, I cannot find a country which is ruled by soldiers and is still progressing well. Can someone please enlighten me on this topic?
Myanmar was, before the military rule, the most prosperous country in South-east Asia. It has many natural resources. Today, it is one of the poorest 20 countries on this planet. Where has all the money gone to?
Ms Suu Kyi is a Christian. The Buddhist monks are willing to risk their life to back her up. The most urgent problem now is bread-and-butter. These monks are trying to help the public, not themselves. People are bringing their children to the monasteries, begging the monks to take care of those children because these parents are not able to feed the children anymore. In some parts of the world, people cannot believe this. They have to see it to believe it.
Before the Second World War, wasn’t it the same in Shanghai? Didn’t some of the Chinese bring their children to the church asking the priests to help feeding the children?
I hope people from outside Myanmar can understand this point. Since no civilians dare to start up any protest because those who did in the past three incidents were killed by soldiers, the monks had to do it this time. To the monks, as long as they do not harbor greed, hatred and delusion, life or death makes no difference. Losing one life is just like losing an old shirt. They know the life-flux lives on.
President George W Bush was right. The world must be tougher with the Military Regime now. Uncle Bush has to stick out his neck again. Poor Bush. But economic sanctions won’t be effective unless China, India and Thailand are willing to participate sincerely.
Many of the generals are obsessed with protecting their legacy and families. Heads will roll unless these despots are given a chance to bow out politely and have a safe place to hide. Can Mr. Bush provide a sanctuary?
The Pentagon did it for Ferdinand Marcos before, by air lifting Marcos out of the country to a sanctuary in Hawaii, to avoid a mass slaughter in the Philippines. Marcos at that time had about USD 100 billion ill-gotten money with him. Why does the Pentagon remain silent now?
In the elementary school, my teachers taught me that those who lived in glass condominium must not throw stone. How can a country censure Myanmar military today unless that country’s own management is in order? Getting involved on human rights in Myanmar would leave them open to a backlash. Of the five members from the United Nations Security Council, only France and Britain can claim their soldiers had never opened fire at unarmed civilians, from 1945 until today.
During the Vietnam War, some United States soldiers (led by Lt. Calley) were caught (1968 ) firing life ammunition at over 110 unarmed civilians, ( refer Times Magazine 1969) many of them were old monks, old men and women, small children and pregnant women. All of them were killed on the paddy-field, at My Lai.
A Vietnamese Memorial at the site listed 504 names. The other deaths ( all unarmed civilians, age ranged from 1 to 82 years) were caused by other United States platoons.
By Monday September 24, 2007, the number of protesters reached 100000. The general public rallied three times in the past and each time the soldiers fired with life ammunition killing many of the protesters on the spot. The three uprisings in the past happened in: 1988, 1990 and 1996. In 1988 alone, about three thousand protesters were gunned down by the military government. The whole world watched silently. Where are the human right watchers? The fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters of those gunned down in the past must be sharpening their choppers now?
India claimed there were about 60000 Myanmar refugees living on Indian Territory. What about other countries? Surely there must be lots of Myanmar refugees as well. Isn’t it a shame that people have to run away from the country where they were born to avoid being gunned down by their own soldiers and policemen?
On Wednesday Sept. 26, 2007, many protesters were arrested and four of them were killed on the spot. The soldiers were able to get away with their crimes and there is no way they are going to stop shooting at the protesters.
It is very common in many parts of the world, for governments to allow women to stand for elections and then refuse to handover the power to her after she has won the election. The laws of the jungles still exist. Don't they?
The soldiers ruled Myanmar for over 50 years by force. How many more years are they going to remain there? Honestly, I cannot find a country which is ruled by soldiers and is still progressing well. Can someone please enlighten me on this topic?
Myanmar was, before the military rule, the most prosperous country in South-east Asia. It has many natural resources. Today, it is one of the poorest 20 countries on this planet. Where has all the money gone to?
Ms Suu Kyi is a Christian. The Buddhist monks are willing to risk their life to back her up. The most urgent problem now is bread-and-butter. These monks are trying to help the public, not themselves. People are bringing their children to the monasteries, begging the monks to take care of those children because these parents are not able to feed the children anymore. In some parts of the world, people cannot believe this. They have to see it to believe it.
Before the Second World War, wasn’t it the same in Shanghai? Didn’t some of the Chinese bring their children to the church asking the priests to help feeding the children?
I hope people from outside Myanmar can understand this point. Since no civilians dare to start up any protest because those who did in the past three incidents were killed by soldiers, the monks had to do it this time. To the monks, as long as they do not harbor greed, hatred and delusion, life or death makes no difference. Losing one life is just like losing an old shirt. They know the life-flux lives on.
President George W Bush was right. The world must be tougher with the Military Regime now. Uncle Bush has to stick out his neck again. Poor Bush. But economic sanctions won’t be effective unless China, India and Thailand are willing to participate sincerely.
Many of the generals are obsessed with protecting their legacy and families. Heads will roll unless these despots are given a chance to bow out politely and have a safe place to hide. Can Mr. Bush provide a sanctuary?
The Pentagon did it for Ferdinand Marcos before, by air lifting Marcos out of the country to a sanctuary in Hawaii, to avoid a mass slaughter in the Philippines. Marcos at that time had about USD 100 billion ill-gotten money with him. Why does the Pentagon remain silent now?
In the elementary school, my teachers taught me that those who lived in glass condominium must not throw stone. How can a country censure Myanmar military today unless that country’s own management is in order? Getting involved on human rights in Myanmar would leave them open to a backlash. Of the five members from the United Nations Security Council, only France and Britain can claim their soldiers had never opened fire at unarmed civilians, from 1945 until today.
During the Vietnam War, some United States soldiers (led by Lt. Calley) were caught (1968 ) firing life ammunition at over 110 unarmed civilians, ( refer Times Magazine 1969) many of them were old monks, old men and women, small children and pregnant women. All of them were killed on the paddy-field, at My Lai.
A Vietnamese Memorial at the site listed 504 names. The other deaths ( all unarmed civilians, age ranged from 1 to 82 years) were caused by other United States platoons.
