Happy Merdeka, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Please use your liberty to promote ours and freedom of Daw Suu

  

 Happy Merdeka, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad 

Please use your liberty to promote ours and freedom of Daw Suutugu_negara8_001

  

Merdeka means Independence but we Burmese and especially I have the pleasant memories once we heard the word Merdeka. We even had a “Pavlov” like reaction when we hear this word Merdeka.

ASEAN LEADERS ARE BARKING AT THE WRONG TREE WITH THE WRONG CAUSE AND WRONG OBJECTIVE

ASEAN LEADERS ARE BARKING AT THE WRONG TREE 

WITH THE WRONG CAUSE AND WRONG OBJECTIVE

 

ASEAN leaders are complaining about the convenient way to solve the Rohingya problem.

But for the Rohingyas or Burmese Muslims or Christian Chins/Karens/Kachins and Buddhist Mons/Shans/Burmese etc AND the NLDS  and political opponents and armed rebel groups_

Whether the SPDC would accept them back is not their main concern. What is the consequences after repatriation is their only problem.

Jailed? Tortured? Is the main concern for all but ‘Village arrest’ (for Rohingyas only) is the problem.

No democracy, no Human Rights, no political life, no respect for the Rights of religious minorities and Ethnic minorities is their main concern.

But the lack of development, economic problems back home are the most important fact for all of them.

There is no clear cut line to DEFINE OR CATEGORIZE THEM INTO POLITICAL OR ECONOMIC MIGRANTS. 

Continue reading

Deafening silence from Malaysia regarding Myanmar Cyclone?

Deafening silence from Malaysia regarding Myanmar Cyclone?

 

First of all I wish to apologize if I am wrong.

 

If Malaysian Government had already sent the condolence note to Myanmar, I am sorry for writing this.

 

If Malaysian Government, GLCs (government Linked companies), NST, TV3, NTV7, RTM and NGOs (esp. government affiliated) had already started a campaign to help Myanmar, please accept my  apology for wrongly writing this posting.

 

If you all haven’t done anything, it is shame on you.

 

We don’t want a cent from you Kaisu Malaysia!

 

 

We know that we are not Orang Puteh (Whiteman) , no Arab blood and have no Malay-Indonesian blood. We are ALWAYS discriminated in your country.

 

Never mind if you do not wish to recognize the undocumented workers/migrants and asylum seekers.

 

During the great disaster in Myanmar, I hope if Malaysian government could do the followings to help us without spending a cent.

 

Please announce amnesty on all the Myanmar/Burmese undocumented workers/migrants and asylum seekers including those already in the detention camp. (At least if they could work and earn, they could help their families, relatives and friends.)

 

You could put a time limit for example six months to one year.

It is shameful that you are heartless to continue arresting and some of your agents are harassing them daily.

 

Dr San Oo Aung

 

17 Myanmar Illegal Immigrants Held In Kelantan

BERNAMA, RANTAU PANJANG, May 6 (Bernama) — The Anti- Smuggling Unit (UPP) Tuesday arrested 17 Myanmar nationals without valid travel documents in Kampung Kempas, Machang, as they were being smuggled into the country by a syndicate.

Kelantan UPP commander Mazlan Che Hamid said the Myanmar nationals, aged between 16 and 30 years, had been turned over to the Immigration authorities.

He said the van driver, a Malaysian, stopped the vehicle by the roadside and fled after realising that it was being tailed by UPP personnel at 4.30 am.

The UPP personnel had followed the van from Kampung Kedap here, some 40 km from Machang, he said.

— BERNAMA

Race and Xenophobia

   Race and Xenophobia

Posted by Marina Mahathier

We’re not the only people in the world grappling with the issues of race.

I thought this article has some resonance at home too.

 

 

Editorial Observer, “Race and the Social Contract”

by Eduardo Porter, The New York Times

In 1893, Friedrich Engels wrote from London to Friedrich Adolph Sorge, another German Communist then living in New York, lamenting how America’s diversity hindered efforts to establish a workers’ party in the United States. Was it possible to unify Poles, Germans, Irish, “the many small groups, each of which understands only itself”? All the bourgeoisie had to do was wait, “and the dissimilar elements of the working class fall apart again.”

 

America’s mix of peoples has changed in its 200-plus years. Yet when Barack Obama delivered his bracing speech on race, he was grappling with a similar challenge.

“Realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams,” he said. “Investing in the health, welfare and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.”

It is a tall order. Ten years ago, William Julius Wilson wrote that American whites rebelled against welfare because they saw it as using their hard-earned taxes to give blacks “medical and legal services that many of them could not afford for their own families.”

As obviously sensible as Mr. Obama’s proposition might be in a nation of as many hues, tongues and creeds as the United States, it struggles against self-defeating human behavior: racial and ethnic diversity undermine support for public investment in social welfare. For all the appeal of America’s melting pot, the country’s diverse ethnic mix is one main reason for entrenched opposition to public spending on the public good.

Among the 30 nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a club of industrial countries, only Mexicans, Koreans and Greeks pay less in taxes than Americans, as a share of the economy. The United States also ranks near the bottom on public spending on social programs: 19 percent of the nation’s total output in 2003, compared with 29 percent in Sweden, 23 percent in Portugal and almost 30 percent in France.

The Harvard economists Alberto Alesina and Edward Glaeser correlated public spending in Western Europe and the United States with diversity and concluded that half the social-spending gap was due to the United States’ more varied racial and ethnic mix. The other half was mostly due to the existence of stronger left-wing parties in Europe.

Americans are not less generous than Europeans. When private charities are included, they probably spend more money for social purposes than Europeans do. But philanthropy allows them to target spending on those they personally believe are deserving, instead of allowing the government to choose.

Mr. Glaeser’s and Mr. Alesina’s work suggests that white Europeans support a big welfare state because they believe the money will probably go to other white Europeans. In America, the Harvard economist Erzo F. P. Luttmer found that support for social spending among respondents to General Social Survey polls increased in tandem with the share of welfare recipients in the area who were in their own racial group. A study of charity by Daniel Hungerman, a Notre Dame economist, found that all-white congregations become less charitably active as the share of black residents in the local community grows.

This breakdown of solidarity should be unacceptable in a country that is, after all, mainly a nation of immigrants, glued together by a common project and many shared values. The United States has showed an unparalleled capacity to pull together in challenging times. Americans have invested blood and treasure to serve a broad national purpose and to rescue and protect their allies across the Atlantic.

Still, racial and ethnic antagonism all too frequently limit generosity at home. In one study, Mr. Alesina, with Reza Baqir of the International Monetary Fund and William Easterly of New York University, found that the share of municipal spending in the United States devoted to social good — roads, sewage, education and trash clearance— was smaller in more racially diverse cities.

While this tension manifests mainly along racial lines, it has broader ethnic, religious and even linguistic dimensions. A 2003 study by Julian Betts of the University of California, San Diego, and Robert Fairlie of the University of California, Santa Cruz, found that for every four immigrants who arrived in public high schools, one native student switched to a private school.

Politicians, from Richard Nixon to Tom Tancredo, have long exploited racial tensions. But there is nothing inevitable about ethnic animosities, as Senator Obama argued in his speech, which came at an important moment.

Globalization presents the United States with an enormous challenge. Rising to the test will require big investments in the public good — from infrastructure to education to a safety net protecting those most vulnerable to change. Americans must once again show their ability to transcend group interests for a common national cause.

 

 

DSAI would become PM before this Christmas

DSAI would become PM before this Christmas

Malaysiakini (AFP), “I’ll be PM in three years”, says Anwar

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim today confidently predicted he would be prime minister within three years, sketching out the first rough timetable for his dramatic political comeback.

“I don’t think we have established a definite clear time-frame when I will take over (as prime minister) but it certainly wouldn’t reach three years … much earlier than that,” the former deputy premier told AFP.

“(But) I am not in a rush,” he added.

anwar ibrahim april 14 kg baru event 150408Anwar, heir-apparent to long-time former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad before being sacked and jailed a decade ago, has emerged as a serious threat to the ruling coalition after the opposition’s strong showing in parliamentary polls.

He became free to run for office again last week, when a five-year ban stemming from his corruption conviction expired, and claims he has the support of enough defectors to topple the government.

The Barisan Nasional coalition has ruled Malaysia for more than half-a-century since the former colony gained independence from Britain but has been rocked by its unprecedented electoral setback in March.

The Pakatan Rakyat opposition alliance claimed more than a third of parliamentary seats and five states in the polls, putting Mahathir’s successor, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, under heavy pressure.

Anwar, 60, pledged more effective governance and to wipe out corruption and promote racial equality, addressing some of the public’s major concerns.

“Our reform programme will certainly be more secure. We will push for a market economy, judicial independence and equality for all Malaysians,” he said.

Ready to cross-over

Anwar also repeated his claim that lawmakers from Sabah and Sarawak states had indicated interest in defecting from the ruling coalition to the opposition. He spoke to AFP at Kuala Lumpur airport on his way to Sabah.

“Lawmakers in the two states in Borneo island have approached me about switching sides, but so far none has declared their intentions publicly,” he said.

Analysts have backed Anwar’s statement he has enough support to rule, saying turmoil in the ruling coalition could hasten an exodus of lawmakers and propel him to power.

Prime Minister Abdullah is facing growing demands to quit, but has defiantly claimed a mandate to rule and refused to discuss a succession plan.

Anwar had previously been expected to re-enter parliament quickly through a by-election in one of the seats held by his PKR party, but says he is in no hurry to act and will instead focus on building up the opposition.

Some 20,000 supporters attended Anwar’s rally last week. The opposition leader was released in 2004 after spending six years in jail.

-AFP 

UPDATE: Dear readers, I had changed the real heading in the various reports esp the AFP’s THREE YEARS to _DSAI would become PM before this Christmas.

This morning I read the news in Star Online_

Thursday April 24, 2008, by By MUGUNTAN VANAR

Anwar: We have the numbers,

however, we’re in no rush to replace Barisan

KOTA KINABALU: The Opposition coalition of Pakatan Rakyat is in a position to form the federal government and it will be done no later than Malaysia Day which falls on Sept 16, claimed Parti Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Repeating that they have the numbers and were in no rush to replace Barisan Nasional, the former deputy prime minister said yesterday that it would all be in the timing of the announcement.

“God willing, we will be there.

  • If not next month,
  • the following month,
  • then if not June
  • or July, (it will be) on Merdeka (Aug 31)
  • or Malaysia Day.
  • I think we should not go beyond that,”

he told reporters on arrival in Sabah.

As to when exactly the announcement will be made, Anwar said discussions with the Pakatan parties were needed because Umno and Barisan were known to be rough on those intending to move.

“They are using threats and intimidation. I am for example being monitored more closely now,” said Anwar, adding that he would not be discussing with the Barisan MPs interested to move while he was in Sabah and Sarawak.

He said he has his way of discussing with Barisan MPs who have given their commitment to team up with Pakatan.

“My discussions could be done in Singapore, Abu Dhabi and Hong Kong although it might sound like a joke,” added Anwar, who thanked the Barisan MPs for their commitment to cross over. He said Pakatan was ready to take in political parties from Barisan if they subscribed to the Opposition coalition agenda for the country.

On Chief Minister Datuk Musa Aman’s claim that all state leaders were loyal to Barisan, Anwar said: “He (Musa) must know that he does not have all the members he claims to hold now. If he wants to know, I can meet him privately and tell him.”

He said Sabah and Sarawak MPs were keeping the Barisan afloat but were saddened that they were not given due recognition by Umno, which was dictating terms from Kuala Lumpur.

Anwar said he was not making offers of any monetary kind or of personal positions for anyone crossing over as claimed by Barisan but was here to assure PKR’s commitment to Sabahans in addressing issues ranging from higher royalty to problems of illegal immigrants.

Anwar later spoke to a gathering at a ceramah held at the Hongkod Koissan cultural hall here and is scheduled to fly to Sarawak today.

 

Myanmar SPDC should espouse the Political maturity of Nepalese election

Myanmar SPDC should espouse the

Political maturity of Nepalese election

 

Excerpts from Syed Jaymal Zahiid’s article in Malaysiakioni

 

Nepal gave birth to the soul progenitor of one of the world’s most followed religions, Siddharta Gautama and Buddhism, ever conceive this poorest country by material standards to be so rich in its political culture.

Offered a position among five other Malaysian international observers with a regional Thailand-based poll watchdog Asian Network for Free Elections (Anfrel), I had the opportunity to surpass the stigmas and witness directly the mature state of political culture practiced by Nepalese in their historic constituency assembly (CA) elections.

War is over now. A comprehensive peaceful agreement was reached between the Maoists (now known as the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoists or CPN-M) and the two major parties, Nepali Congress (Liberal democrats who headed the interim seven-party alliance government) and the Communist Party of Nepal – Unified Marxist-Leninists (CPN-UML) which is actually, ideologically a social democratic group.

 

It was a sight that reflected political maturity. Ideologies from the far left to the far right was seen free to contest in an equal playing field facilitated by the Nepalese Election Commission.

The Nepal EC’s integrity is unquestionable. Unlike Malaysia where its electoral regulators have suffered a major crisis of public confidence as it is pervasively seen as pro-status quo, the Nepal EC seems impeccable.

Observers from international groups like the European Union, Carter Center of United States of America, the British government and Anfrel all agreed that the Nepal EC functions with integrity. The Nepalese EC was professional and impartial when it comes to executing their tasks.

My arrival in the Nuwakot district, north of the city’s capital Kathmandu, was greeted with the coincidental encounter with thousands of supporters from the Maoists party rallying on the town’s main streets. Security personnel were present but they were there to protect the rally participants instead of cracking their skulls with batons.

The head security of the district known as the Chief District Officer (CDO) when met informed observers that mass rallies are permitted. A permit is not necessary for parties to organise mass rallies. They must however inform the CDO prior to the event and the CDO will consult with the EC officers on how to facilitate the wishes of the pleading party.

By this, observers witnessed a well coordinated regulation pertaining to campaigning to ensure that all parties receive fair and adequate space and time to express ideas. By this it meant that potential violent clashes between different party supporters had been constructively avoided without obstructing them from exercising their fundamental civil liberties.

Another interesting thing to note about Nepal in this particular elections is the practice of the parallel or known to them as the mixed election system. One is the ‘First-Past-The-Post’ system (the one practiced in Malaysia) and the proportional representative (PR) system.

 

PR system will ensure candidates contesting have support from all sectors (women, marginalised groups, youth and the elderly) of society. This is to guarantee that no sectors of the Nepalese society are left out from representation and that their voices and concerns will be mediated when the PR elected candidates convene to draft the country’s constitution.

As far as the electoral process is concerned, the measures introduced by the Nepalese EC mirrored an earnest effort to obviate manipulation. The usage of indelible ink faced no objections from all the parties involved.

Similarly in Malaysia, party agents were allowed to object to any suspicion of foul play. But Malaysia is rife with protests with regards to electoral rolls and registration problems every time it holds a general election. None of such irregularities were encountered in the polling centres throughout Nepal.

Nepal however suffers from tremendous backwardness in the technological sphere. This rendered voter registration process a total mess. Various instances of eligible voters not being able to vote due to the problems arising from the lack of technological resources.

The election materials (ballot boxes, indelible inks, etc) arrived to the rural areas by foot. People walked for miles and hours through cruel landscapes to the polling centres and did not complain about the government ban on public and private transportation (to prevent voters from other areas to vote outside their designated polling locations).

Many would, given the geographical conditions of Nepal, suggest postal voting but it was not accepted by the EC as they felt that the postal voting system can be easily manipulated in favour of the stakeholders.

Material poverty, political cultural wealth

The presence and acceptance of international election observers by the Nepalese government, political parties including the Maoists proved the country’s political will and seriousness to implement a free and fair elections.

Red flags of the Maoists numbering in thousands waved and hung alongside right-wing parties indicated a certain level of political maturity. It indicated the freedom enjoyed by the people to democratically choose any ideology, be it radical or conservative, without suppression or discrimination.

Observers, western or eastern alike, shared the absence of ethnic antagonism in their observation reports. Despite the high illiteracy rate of Nepal (40 percent) and the extremely low tertiary education graduates percentage (0.7 percent), racism was virtually not in the Nepalese vocabulary. Indo-Aryans alongside their Paharis to other smaller groups like Tharus and Dhimals had all voted according to ideologies brought by the political parties and not ethnicity.

Nepal is no Japan nor South Korea or even near Malaysia when it comes to material prosperity. But this country is as rich in its political culture as any developed democracy in commitment to implement an election system that guarantees the voice of the Nepalese people are properly represented in the construction of a new Nepal.

Can we say the same about Myanmar? (Note: I, SOA, changed the name of the country ) I leave it to the readers to decide. As for me, I am writing from Nepal with admiration and hope.

YES or NO? The CHOISE is yours, Myanmar voters

 YES or NO?

The CHOISE is yours, Myanmar voters

 

Malaysiakini, The power of choice Yoga Nesadurai

There are many management theories in the market place to help organisations and individuals improve. I would like to introduce a fundamental theory that is very powerful and easy to apply but often overlooked. I am talking about ‘choice’.

Webster defines choice as, ‘a selection, an alternative, the right or power to choose’.

It comes down to a very simple step – to act or not to act on the choice.

 

It represents a verb, an action, thereby giving the chooser the power to choose from a selection or if just two, an alternative.

What it ultimately points to is that the power is with you.

To make a choice, we need options.

There are times when we have no options and therefore the choice is automatic.

But in most cases we do have options available to us and I want to work through the deduction process here.

Evaluating options

Now that we have deduced options, what does evaluating our options involve? :

It requires courage and commitment to act on your choice.

 

This is the ‘locking in’ step in the ‘power of choice’ process.

This is where courage comes in. No matter what the response, I still hold on to my original intent or choice – the courage to stand by my offering and the commitment to follow through with action.

Information or an event is the stimulus that makes us take action. There are various stimuli that present themselves everyday to us. Between the stimulus and our response, lies choice!.

Attitude is our ‘way of being’ or ‘steady state’. Generally, we are all aware of our general attitude towards people and situations. Sometimes due to circumstances, like having a bad day, our attitude could vary from its natural ‘steady state’.

Where information is the stimulus that helps us derive our options, attitude is the component that helps us make the choice from our options. Attitude is therefore an important ingredient in the choices we make. It has a huge impact in making our choice and its consequences.

Making great choices

We have all made unwise choices at some point in our lives.

 

  1. It is sometimes inevitable,
  2. sometimes intentional,
  3. sometimes regrettable
  4. and sometimes transformational.

Inevitable choices are where the alternative is not a viable option. This is a case where an organisation needs to downsize, assuming all other avenues have been explored. In this instance the best thing one can do is to carry this out in the most humane manner with honesty and integrity.

Intentional choices are where you know that the alternative option is the wisest option, yet you intentionally choose the opposite option. In organisations, this is when we may bypass a certain process or person intentionally for various reasons. Or where we circumvent a certain procedure because we have the power and privilege to do so. Corruption is a classic example of the latter

Regrettable choices are where at the point of making the choice you are ‘aware’ of what the wisest choice is, however your steady state or way of being at that moment stops you from acting on it. These are usually choices made when emotions are running high, where you regret your choice as soon as have you made it or regret the choice as the words have left your mouth.

How many of us have been in this situation in the workplace and personal life? The power is still in the chooser’s hands to undo the wrong and recover the situation.

Transformational choices are what we should all be aspiring to achieve. In this instance, we take control and are accountable for making great choices. Accountability means taking responsibility for the choices made.

Even if you have made an unwise choice, you are in control to remedy it or to deal with the consequences. It is a big responsibility to be accountable, but one with many rewards when executed.

Learning to make transformational choices gives us the power to be extraordinary, therefore directly impacting you as an individual and the organisation that you represent.

Choice is an active process. It is the difference between a customer continuing to do business with your organisation versus taking their business elsewhere. Use it wisely.

 

YOGA NESADURAI is founder of O & C Advisory, which focuses on choice as a basis for leadership and organisational development and executive coaching.

 

 

My comments and advice to all the Burmese 

 

Yes the choice is yours_

There is a saying in Burmese that:

  1. If you made a wrong choice in trade (wrong choice of cargo) trip you would lose one trip or one time only.
  2. If you made a wrong choice in choosing the husband, you would lose your whole life. (Because usually Burmese practice monogamy and rarely divorce and have another marriage.)
  3. But I wish to seriously remind all of you by adding another phrase_

If you all vote wrongly in the coming referendum, the future history of our country would be gone to dogs.

Sorry for using the harsh words, proverbial jokes and defamatory jibes applied to the dogs. It may be an insult to the dog-world, who are known to love and loyal to its owners.

But Myanmar Military or Tatmadaw do not love its owner Burmese people and is not loyal to its owner, Myanmar Citizens or Pyi Thu in Burmese. Although the dog would be willing to sacrifice its life for the master Myanmar Tatmadaw is always willing to sacrifice its masters for its selfish greed of power.

Be careful, think twice before voting. This is not just an election, which consequence would for one term of government only.

This is the referendum to rubber-stamp the continuous dominance of military dictatorship in Burma/Myanmar forever…

Daw Suu, 88 Generation Students, NLD, Ethnic Minorities and opposition leaders of all the religions and races had sacrificed a lot: in the jail, tortured, some away from home and country and many had sacrificed their lives.

  •  What are you waiting for?
  • What are you scared of?
  • Are you not willing to make a minor sacrifice for your country, your race, your religion, your family, your relatives and for your future by taking a small risk of voting NO?
  • Don’t be intimidated by threats of the SPDC affiliated thugs.
  • You have shown your courage in 8888 revolution and Saffron Revolution.
  • This courage to vote is nothing when compare to the above revolutions.
  • If all the people or most of the people vote NO, what could they do?
  • Nothing at all!
  • They cannot arrest, torture or shoot and kill million of voters.
  • Just say NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! by voting NO in the coming referendum.

May you kindly allow me to refer back YOGA NESADURAI’s advice.

Please courageously make a Transformational choice by voting NO to transform our country from poor military dictatorship to truely progressive democracy.

Transformational choices are what we should all be aspiring to achieve. In this instance, we take control and are accountable for making great choices. Accountability means taking responsibility for the choices made.

Even if you have made an unwise choice, you are in control to remedy it or to deal with the consequences. It is a big responsibility to be accountable, but one with many rewards when executed.

Learning to make transformational choices gives us the power to be extraordinary, therefore directly impacting you as an individual and the organisation that you represent.

Choice is an active process. It is the difference between a customer continuing to do business with your organisation versus taking their business elsewhere. Use it wisely.