Gaybutton Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 The results for the popular vote in Burma, the vote that assures military rule virtually forever, are in. Somehow, the results remind me of the results Saddam Hussein used to get in Iraq. The following appears in the BANGKOK POST: _____ Unbelievably Popular Rangoon - The Burmese junta claimed on Monday that an extraordinary 92.94 per cent of the survivors of Cyclone Nargis supposedly voted "yes" for a new constitution to perpetuate military rule in the country. State media - there is no other kind in Burma, "reported" that postponed polling in a national referendum was held last Saturday in 47 townships hardest hit by Cyclone Nargis, which slammed into the central coast and biggest city on May 2-3. The cyclone left at least 133,000 dead or missing and about 2.4 million in need of the food, water, shelter and medicines. But they turned out en masse to vote for the junta. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the people living in the cyclone devastated areas have little reason to support the government, which has been blamed for hampering an international disaster relief effort for the storm victims. Since the voting and vote-counting were totally controlled by the military, the polling results are deemed suspicious, if not downright fictitious. The government decision to go ahead with its referendum on May 10, in the wake of the destruction wrought by the cyclone, was one of many complaints the international community voiced against the ruling junta's mismanagement of the disaster relief effort. The vote was delayed in 47 townships hardest hit by the storm, that has affected up to 2.4 million people, especially those living in the former capital of Rangoon and the Irrawaddy delta. According to the government's count, some 92.4 per cent of the populace voted in favour of the charter on May 10. The lead-up to the referendum was marred by a nationwide "vote yes" propaganda campaign by the government, accompanied by intimidation and arrests of opponents to the charter. In February the ruling junta passed a law making it illegal to publicly criticize the new constitution, which will essentially grant the military control over the upper and lower houses in an elected government. The regime has promised to hold an election by 2010. The results of that vote, if it is held, will also support the military junta by a huge percentage. The charter has barred opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi from holding office as she was married to a foreign national, the late Michael Aris, an Oxford professor. Authorities on Friday allowed Suu Kyi to cast an "advance vote" at her home, where she has been under house arrest for the past five years. The Nobel Peace Prize laureate has been under house arrest since May 30, 2003, after authorities charged her with threatening national security after pro-government thugs attacked her and her followers in Depayin, northern Burma, killing 70 Suu Kyi supporters. Suu Kyi is kept incommunicado in her family home and has been unable to comment publicly on the cyclone devastation or the junta's response to it. According to Burmese law, the government cannot keep prisoners charged with undermining national security under detention for more than five years. Although Suu Kyi's detention period will reach five years on Tuesday, it is widely anticipated that the ruling junta will find an excuse for extending it further. The government has come under harsh international criticism for impeding an international disaster relief effort for the victims of Cyclone Nargis, and for going ahead with the self-serving referendum despite the catastrophe. (dpa) Quote
Gaybutton Posted June 1, 2008 Author Posted June 1, 2008 The following appears in the BANGKOK POST: _____ Let Them Eat Frogs Rangoon - The military junta began evicting destitute families from cyclone relief centres on Friday and rejected foreign food aid - because people can survive perfectly well by hunting "large, edible frogs." The New Light of Myanmar "newspaper", a government mouthpiece, also warned that foreign relief workers would snoop inside homes, and condemned donors for linking aid money to full access to the hardest-hit regions in the Irrawaddy Delta. The tirade came as the junta tightened its political grip on the country, extending democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi's house arrest and announcing that its new constitution has been enacted. The regime says the charter will pave the way for democratic elections in two years, but dissidents say it will enshrine military rule in a country ruled by generals since 1962. "It is better that they move to their homes where they are more stable," a government official said at one camp where people had been told to clear out at short notice. "Here, they are relying on donations and it is not stable." Locals and aid workers said 39 camps in the immediate vicinity of Kyauktan, 30km south of Rangoon, were being cleared as part of a general eviction plan. "We knew we had to go at some point but we had hoped for more support," 21-year-old trishaw driver Kyaw Moe Thu said as he trudged out of the camp with his five brothers and sisters. They had been given 20 bamboo poles and some tarpaulins to help rebuild their lives in the Irrawaddy delta, where 134,000 people were left dead or missing by Cyclone Nargis on May 2. "Right now, we are disappointed," Kyaw Moe Thu said. "We were promised 30 poles by the government. They told us we will get rice each month, but right now we have nothing." Why would they want rice? wondered the military regime. After several days of praising the work of the United Nations and charities, the regime's official newspaper renewed its attacks on foreign aid and insisted Burmese could survive without outside help. "The government and the people are like parents and children," the paper said. "We, all the people, were pleased with the efforts of the government." "Myanmar (Burmese) people are capable enough of rising from such natural disasters even if they are not provided with international assistance," the newspaper said. "Myanmar people can easily get fish for dishes by just fishing in the fields and ditches," the paper said. "In the early monsoon, large edible frogs are abundant." "The people (of the Irrawaddy delta) can survive with self-reliant efforts even if they are not given chocolate bars from (the) international community," it added. No aid agencies are known to have provided chocolate bars to victims of Cyclone Nargis. The United Nations estimates that about one million people in the delta are still without emergency aid. (Agencies) Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted June 1, 2008 Posted June 1, 2008 people can survive perfectly well by hunting "large, edible frogs." There is a huge moral problem here that affects not just Myanmar – although it is probably as bad there as anywhere. Last night on BBC World there was a heart-wrenching film about North Koreans who risk their lives to settle secretly across the border in China before making a horrendous illegal overland trip across China, through Laos, into Thailand and the safety of a South Korean Embassy. Elsewhere we are told that North Korea is now facing an even worse famine than in the past. Yet, China will not give North Koreans refugee status because they understandably fear an avalanche of millions – to say nothing of nuclear warheads pointed their way. So what does the world community do when it sees tyrants in control, the people they ‘rule’ being treated like virtual slaves and, in many cases, genocide being committed? (I would add to that the persecution of gay communities, but I don’t want to narrow the focus of the discussion). The desperately sad fact is that our representatives (elected or quasi-elected) do virtually nothing. The status quo has to be preserved, world trade must continue and nothing must interfere with the relentless growth of gross national product. Sure, Bush invaded Iraq, but we all know that was nothing to do with dictatorship and little with genocide. As a result, the Middle East is now more destabilised than ever and Bush’s so called pals in Saudi Arabia do little to halt the frightening rise in the price of crude. Equally true, the 19th/20th century colonial powers bear an awesome responsibility for the situations that exist today in many parts of the world, including Myanmar, the Middle East and Africa. All that apart, the situation in Myanmar has been known for a long, long time – as it has in Darfur, in Zimbabwe, in Palestine and elsewhere. Had it not been for the dreadful cyclone, few people around the world would give much thought to Myanmar. I wonder, however, for how long the present interest will continue. Once all the dead are finally buried, whatever aid is let through distributed and relief efforts wound down, let’s not kid ourselves, Myanmar will return to the back burner whilst another more desperate emergency grabs world attention. The generals (“let them eat frogs”) will pat themselves on the back and the majority of the lovely people of that blighted country will return to their poverty and miserable existence. Will they ever suffer the fate of the Queen with a similar disdain of her people, Marie Antoinette? Do we really care? Do we really think that a donation to emergency relief – and I do hope all readers have been contributing to the relief appeals for both Myanmar and the earthquake in China – is enough to salve our conscience and our own responsibility? Do we in fact have any responsibility? I am sad that I have absolutely no answer. I feel guilty but powerless. Yet I also have a deep anger that I feel should be channeled into something more constructive. I have lived in Asia for almost 30 years and the peoples and cultures of this region feel more like home to me than my native country. But what can I do? What can we do? I realise this is not the right forum, but GB opened up the thread and so I want to add my own rather pathetic thoughts. Quote
Guest tdperhs Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 But what can I do? What can we do? Do what you are doing. I've read your thread and am moved by it. Being a school teacher, I will talk to others about it and maybe some of them will talk to others. Revolutions do not begin with crowds, and guns, and money; they begin with people talking and asking: "what can we do?" You're doing fine. Quote
