[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

Burmese paper says no leniency for (r)



THIS ONE'S A CLASSIC OF POLITICAL PORNOGRAPHY.  PLEASE DO A PRINT-OUT IN A
GOTHIC FONT AND FRAME IT.  SOME PHRASES MIGHT EVEN BE WORTH IMMORTALISING
ON A T-SHIRT.

ONE OR TWO COMMENTS:

IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT THE AUTHOR BEGINS BY INVOKING THE UN CHARTER AS
AUTHORITY FOR THE JUNTA'S ACTIVITIES, QUOTING SOME SECTIONS ON SOVEREIGNTY.
 THE QUESTION OF WHAT CONSTITUTES "SOVEREIGNTY" IS A RATHER HOT ISSUE
THESE DAYS, WHAT WITH IRAQ AND EAST TIMOR, RECENT STATEMENTS BY THE
SECRETARY-GENERAL AND THE WHOLE ISSUE OF GLOBALISATION.  JUST TO TAKE ONE
ASPECT, BY JOINING THE UNITED NATIONS AND SIGNING ONTO TREATIES,  STATES
TAKE ON OBLIGATIONS., WHICH THEREBY LIMIT INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL SOVEREIGNTY
(A CONCEPT THAT ALSO CORRESPONDS TO BUDDHIST TEACHING -- SEE THE
"DASA-RAJA-DHAMMA" ATTACHED BELOW).  


ARTICLES 55 AND 56 OF THE UN CHARTER STATE:

Article 55

With a view to the creation of conditions of stability and well-being which
are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations based on
respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of
peoples, the United Nations shall promote:
a. higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic
and social
progress and development; 
b. solutions of international economic, social, health, and related
problems; and
international cultural and educational cooperation; and
c. universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental
freedoms
for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.


Article 56

All Members pledge themselves to take joint and separate action in
co-operation with
the Organization for the achievement of the purposes set forth in Article 55.


PARAGRAPH C OF ARTICLE 55 IS DEVELOPED IN THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF
HUMAN RIGHTS AND REFINED IN HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES. ARTICLE 56 SHOWS A CLEAR
OBLIGATION TO RESPECT THIS AND OTHER PRINCIPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS. 

NOW, BACK TO SERIOUS MATTERS:

DNA

***********************

BBC Summary of World Broadcasts 

October 05, 1999, Tuesday 

Burmese paper says no leniency for jailed Britons 

 'Myanmar Alin', Rangoon, in Burmese 18 Sep 99 p 4 


All nations are entitled to have their sovereignty respected and Burma will
not back down and order a release of the detained Britons, no matter what
pressure is used, according to a Burmese newspaper.
Referring to the jailed Britons as "creatures" supporting anti-government
"vermin" who are entitled to no sympathy, such as they have received from
Western media such as the BBC. The article also criticizes the British
embassy for its conduct in the affair. 

Text of article by Nga Khin Nyo entitled: "Afloat in spittle" published by
Burmese newspaper
'Myanmar Alin' on 18th September 

By the way ... [ellipsis as published] just as Myanmar [Burma] is an
independent country with
sovereign power, it has also been a member of UN for over 70 years. The
sovereignty of a country
denotes its legislative, administrative and judicial powers. The country on
the other hand is the
depository of its sovereignty and powers. 

Clause 2, sub-clause (5) of UN Charter states as follows: "The United
Nations cannot intervene in
matters over which a country has sovereign powers." 

Well? 

If even the United Nations cannot intervene in matters over which a country
exercises sovereignty there is no need to take notice of the rest of the
countries, and organizations and individuals that go under different names. 

There is also the resolution No (36/103) passed by the General Assembly on
9th December 1981
relating to prohibition of interference in the internal affairs of countries. 

One point clearly stated in the declaration was: 

"No country or any group of countries shall interfere in another country's
internal affairs or external
matters for any reason or in any way whatsoever." 

In that declaration a special clarification on human rights was made as under: 

"Every country must avoid the wrongful use of human rights issues with a
view to interfere in other
countries'internal matters. Every country must abstain from exercising
pressure to create instability and mistrust between countries or groups of
countries." However, some organizations with various names backed by a few
powerful countries and other multihued creatures are blatantly destroying
and ignoring the above mentioned UN Charter, declaration, and resolution
and creating havoc by interfering in Myanmar's internal affairs. 

If anyone from whichever country or planet contravenes any existing law,
published orders and
directives within the sovereign country of Myanmar, action can be taken.
The existing government need not be responsible to anybody for doing so. 

What is the meaning of the hue and cry like a flock of crows expressing
worry and fear over the legal
action taken by Myanmar government according to the enacted laws of the
country for intentionally
and blatantly insulting the sovereignty of Myanmar. 

It will be a mistake to think that the government frightened by the uproar
will relax and order the release.
On previous occasions foreign intruders were treated leniently and merely
deported as a gesture of
generosity and that not be taken as a gesture of fright. It was to avoid
lengthy talks between nations just over some small fry vagrants and
mercenary hooligans. 

Foreign media are doing everything to magnify what are routine matters for
the responsible authorities taking action and making inquiries regarding
the two white persons - male and female - who challenged Myanmar's
sovereignty with disregard and brazenness. There must be something more
than innocent behind the dissemination of exaggerated news by the media to
cause an uproar all over the world. 

"The Britons were arrested at a time when severe repressive measures were
being taken to prevent
efforts to organize anti-government demonstrations on the 'Four nines Day'
falling on 9th September
1999." That was a news release by the VOA [Voice of America] and by
observing that you can plainly see how distorted it was. Does it not appear
as if the government unfairly arrested the British citizens on flimsy
grounds? Why not call these two - two creatures - why use the noun citizens? 

Who are the two white creatures? Are they ordinary tourists? How much has
the white male James
Mawdsley exceeded the limits? Everyone knows how generous and flexible the
authorities concerned have been with him the first two times. 

The other one, the white female called Rachel Goldwyn, who is she? Before
entering Myanmar, she
openly challenged the government in her interview with RFA [Radio Free
Asia]. Later on she arrived in Rangoon and single-handedly started to shout
unmannerly things at street corners. It is to be thanked that this
shameless woman did not take off her clothes and hold a nude demonstration. 

They feel bored being deported by the government. They regard deportation
as the floor price from the foreign based so-called democratic forces
comprised of outlaws and vermin, then enter Myanmar and shout mispronounced
phrases, distribute the fliers provided by the exiles. They then label this
kind of activity as Democracy and Human Rights Movement. Goodness! 

Do you know what the BBC broadcast about that fellow Mawdsley? " Arrested
while bringing
pro-democracy articles." It was only after BBC's broadcast that it was
known such an item exists. To
coin such phrases. "Pro-democracy articles!" Better be careful, chaps.
According to your praise
"condom" becomes a pro-democracy item. 

The British Foreign Office and those with the rank of consul at the British
embassy in Myanmar made a big issue of the matter. Mawdsley's father who
could not control his son also made meaningless remarks. He claims to be
concerned that his son would be tortured. 

To make the story worse, foreign media also spread the news that when
Mawdsley was jailed the
second time he was held in solitary confinement. People inside the jail
know best how the fellow gorged himself in jail. As there are no huts
inside the jail he was kept in a brick building and provided with boiled
rice early morning, meat for morning and evening meals, and boiled noodles
at night. On top of that he had bread everyday. This fellow sang loudly
during his stay. 

The consul from the British embassy in Yangon [Rangoon] began muttering
about consular access
because he could not get to see his fellow at the time he wanted. Jail
visits have prescribed dates.
Moreover, regarding consular access, you may not get it the same day you
applied. Office working
procedures must be understood. Are such matters done expeditiously in
England too? 

I am dissatisfied about one thing. The way Myanmar people who were born and
brought up in
Myanmar and now working for BBC, VOA, and RFA could fabricate and
exaggerate the news
relating to these two foreigners in order to please their western masters,
little knowing that the dignity of the motherland and people had been
grossly insulted. I wonder if the situation isn't similar to providing
aphrodisiac to a person about to meet one's sister. 

However, the programme broadcast by BBC TV on its The World Today programme
featuring the
interview between Myanmar Ambassador to UK Dr Kyaw Win and the producer,
Stephen Cole, was
able to present the truth to the world viewers. 

With regard to the query relating to the arrest of the white male and
female the Myanmar ambassador's reply was: 

"Every country, every state has laws enacted for its own. Governments have
to act in accordance with such laws and regulations. In the presence of
existing laws it is immaterial whether a person's view is right or wrong
but a decision must be made according to law." 

Of the two persons arrested, James Mawdsley infringed existing laws three
times. This was done with the intention to create unrest in Myanmar, which
is already tranquil and peaceful. Government
authorities suspended punishment and released him previously. He, himself,
gave an undertaking that a similar behaviour would not be repeated in the
future. 

The second person arrested, Ms. Goldwyn, did not come to sing songs as
mentioned by the media.
She, herself, tied her legs with iron chains to create unrest in the
country through anti-government
propaganda. 

Laws are intended to protect a country's peace and prosperity. We cannot
allow Myanmar to become another East Timor. 

In the case of the two foreigners, the government did not refuse to grant
consular access. The
government is still in the process of considering the request to give
consular access. The two not only infringed the law of Myanmar but also
that of their own country. 

Should a Myanmar national come to England and meddle in Northern Ireland
matters and the British
government take action, the Myanmar ambassador would not give sympathetic
consideration but tell that person that it was not his or her concern and
to face the consequences. 

No sympathy would be shown to anyone breaking the laws of the country. The
silent majority desire to lead a peaceful life. The government must protect
these people and prevent anything that will affect them. 

I appreciate the ambassador's explanation. Why cannot the restless people
in the British embassy in
Myanmar adopt the same attitude? Are the two male and female creatures that
came to Myanmar
and grossly insulted the country trying to promote the glory of the British
Union Jack? 

The words and deeds by the British embassy in the treatment of those two
persons, who had made
prior arrangements to systematically encroach and interfere in Myanmar
after having established some form of connection to the anti-government
exiles, amounted to acceptance and recognition of their activities and an
assessment ought to be made whether that conform to diplomatic conduct. 

You can ask what happened after concerted efforts were made to create
unrest in Myanmar in line
with "Four-nines." Nothing happened. There was peace and quiet. There was
heavy downpour in
Mandalay and Monywa in Upper Myanmar and wonderfully calm. It was the same
in Yangon. Wasn't it? 

It was only in some foreign countries that lawless elements to earn their
fee kept on howling and barking in front of embassies. There were also some
multicoloured hybrids among them. 

According to the information I obtained, the ageing NLD people felt
disconcerted on that 9-9-99 day. Should any disturbance occur some place,
they were ready to go with flapping jackets and upraised sarongs. Believe
it. This was the programme prepared by the powers that be. It is learned
that they did not do anything to create unrest and demonstrations. It was
the work of anti-government exiles. These people had no objective or
purpose. NLD has an objective, a programme. Should there be unrest NLD
would take control with a view to establish an objective and guidelines.
They planned to side with the demonstrations and steer their movement. 

They are glorifying themselves as if should there be a mob, only they could
control it. You know it. They did the same thing in 1988 and gained
foothold. If there is intense desire to be in control why not take a
whistle and volunteer to work as old policemen at traffic lights and
pedestrian crossings? Some tea-money can be earned if the relationship is
cordial and quick of hand. Don't let the bus conductors know that these are
the old men from NLD. They will spit in the face. 

However, there ought to be no problems because all the fugitives, including
the old NLD people, with the dedication for 9-9-99 who are scheming to ride
the hearses are those afloat in the peoples' spittle. 

***************************

DASA-RAJA-DHAMMA

The basic framework of Buddhist ethics for rulers is set out in the "Ten
Duties of the King" (dasa-raja-dhamma). Here, as in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, legitimacy is grounded in the will of the
people ("The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of
government" -- UDHR Article 21, para 3) -- Western values? Asian values?
Universal values?

1. Dana -- liberality, generosity, charity.  The ruler should not have
craving and attachment for wealth and property, but should give it away for
the welfare of the people.

2. Sila -- a high and moral character.  He should never destroy life,
cheat, steal and exploit others, commit adultery, utter falsehood, or take
intoxicating drinks.

3. Pariccaga -- sacrificing everything for the good of the people.  He must
be prepared to give up all personal comfort, name and fame, and even his
life, in the interest of the people.

4. Ajjava -- honesty and integrity.  He must be free from fear and favor in
the discharge of his duties, must be sincere in his intentions, and must
not deceive the public.

5. Maddava -- kindness and gentleness.  He must possess a genial temperament.

6. Tapa -- austerity of habits.  He must lead a simple life, and should not
indulge in a life of luxury.  He must have self-control.

7.  Akkodha -- freedom from envy, ill-will, enemity. He should bear no
grudge against anybody.

8.  Avihimsa -- non-violence, which means not only that he should harm
nobody, but that he should try to promote peace by avoiding and preventing
war, and everything which involves violence and destruction of life.

9. Khanti -- patience, forbearance, tolerance, understanding.  He must be
able to bear hardships, difficulties and insults without losing his temper.

10. Avirodha -- non-opposition, non-obstruction, that is to say that he
should not oppose the will of the people, should not obstruct any measures
that are conducive to the welfare of the people. In other words he should
rule in harmony with his people.

(Translated by Ven Walpola Rahula in "What the Buddha Taught") 
Internet ProLink PC User