China's Charter 08

China's Charter 08
New York Review of Books
Volume 56, Number 1 · January 15, 2009

Translated from the Chinese by Perry Link

The document below, signed by more than two thousand Chinese citizens, was conceived and written in conscious admiration of the founding of Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia, where, in January 1977, more than two hundred Czech and Slovak intellectuals formed a

loose, informal, and open association of people...united by the will to strive individually and collectively for respect for human and civil rights in our country and throughout the world.

The Chinese document calls not for ameliorative reform of the current political system but for an end to some of its essential features, including one-party rule, and their replacement with a system based on human rights and democracy.

The prominent citizens who have signed the document are from both outside and inside the government, and include not only well-known dissidents and intellectuals, but also middle-level officials and rural leaders. They chose December 10, the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as the day on which to express their political ideas and to outline their vision of a constitutional, democratic China. They want Charter 08 to serve as a blueprint for fundamental political change in China in the years to come. The signers of the document will form an informal group, open-ended in size but united by a determination to promote democratization and protection of human rights in China and beyond.

Following the text is a postscript describing some of the regime's recent reactions to it.

—Perry Link

I. FOREWORD

A hundred years have passed since the writing of China's first constitution. 2008 also marks the sixtieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the thirtieth anniversary of the appearance of the Democracy Wall in Beijing, and the tenth of China's signing of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We are approaching the twentieth anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre of pro-democracy student protesters. The Chinese people, who have endured human rights disasters and uncountable struggles across these same years, now include many who see clearly that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values.

By departing from these values, the Chinese government's approach to "modernization" has proven disastrous. It has stripped people of their rights, destroyed their dignity, and corrupted normal human intercourse. So we ask: Where is China headed in the twenty-first century? Will it continue with "modernization" under authoritarian rule, or will it embrace universal human values, join the mainstream of civilized nations, and build a democratic system? There can be no avoiding these questions.

The shock of the Western impact upon China in the nineteenth century laid bare a decadent authoritarian system and marked the beginning of what is often called "the greatest changes in thousands of years" for China. A "self-strengthening movement" followed, but this aimed simply at appropriating the technology to build gunboats and other Western material objects. China's humiliating naval defeat at the hands of Japan in 1895 only confirmed the obsolescence of China's system of government. The first attempts at modern political change came with the ill-fated summer of reforms in 1898, but these were cruelly crushed by ultraconservatives at China's imperial court. With the revolution of 1911, which inaugurated Asia's first republic, the authoritarian imperial system that had lasted for centuries was finally supposed to have been laid to rest. But social conflict inside our country and external pressures were to prevent it; China fell into a patchwork of warlord fiefdoms and the new republic became a fleeting dream.

The failure of both "self- strengthening" and political renovation caused many of our forebears to reflect deeply on whether a "cultural illness" was afflicting our country. This mood gave rise, during the May Fourth Movement of the late 1910s, to the championing of "science and democracy." Yet that effort, too, foundered as warlord chaos persisted and the Japanese invasion [beginning in Manchuria in 1931] brought national crisis.

Victory over Japan in 1945 offered one more chance for China to move toward modern government, but the Communist defeat of the Nationalists in the civil war thrust the nation into the abyss of totalitarianism. The "new China" that emerged in 1949 proclaimed that "the people are sovereign" but in fact set up a system in which "the Party is all-powerful." The Communist Party of China seized control of all organs of the state and all political, economic, and social resources, and, using these, has produced a long trail of human rights disasters, including, among many others, the Anti-Rightist Campaign (1957), the Great Leap Forward (1958–1960), the Cultural Revolution (1966–1969), the June Fourth [Tiananmen Square] Massacre (1989), and the current repression of all unauthorized religions and the suppression of the weiquan rights movement [a movement that aims to defend citizens' rights promulgated in the Chinese Constitution and to fight for human rights recognized by international conventions that the Chinese government has signed]. During all this, the Chinese people have paid a gargantuan price. Tens of millions have lost their lives, and several generations have seen their freedom, their happiness, and their human dignity cruelly trampled.

During the last two decades of the twentieth century the government policy of "Reform and Opening" gave the Chinese people relief from the pervasive poverty and totalitarianism of the Mao Zedong era, and brought substantial increases in the wealth and living standards of many Chinese as well as a partial restoration of economic freedom and economic rights. Civil society began to grow, and popular calls for more rights and more political freedom have grown apace. As the ruling elite itself moved toward private ownership and the market economy, it began to shift from an outright rejection of "rights" to a partial acknowledgment of them.

In 1998 the Chinese government signed two important international human rights conventions; in 2004 it amended its constitution to include the phrase "respect and protect human rights"; and this year, 2008, it has promised to promote a "national human rights action plan." Unfortunately most of this political progress has extended no further than the paper on which it is written. The political reality, which is plain for anyone to see, is that China has many laws but no rule of law; it has a constitution but no constitutional government. The ruling elite continues to cling to its authoritarian power and fights off any move toward political change.

The stultifying results are endemic official corruption, an undermining of the rule of law, weak human rights, decay in public ethics, crony capitalism, growing inequality between the wealthy and the poor, pillage of the natural environment as well as of the human and historical environments, and the exacerbation of a long list of social conflicts, especially, in recent times, a sharpening animosity between officials and ordinary people.

As these conflicts and crises grow ever more intense, and as the ruling elite continues with impunity to crush and to strip away the rights of citizens to freedom, to property, and to the pursuit of happiness, we see the powerless in our society—the vulnerable groups, the people who have been suppressed and monitored, who have suffered cruelty and even torture, and who have had no adequate avenues for their protests, no courts to hear their pleas—becoming more militant and raising the possibility of a violent conflict of disastrous proportions. The decline of the current system has reached the point where change is no longer optional.

II. OUR FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

This is a historic moment for China, and our future hangs in the balance. In reviewing the political modernization process of the past hundred years or more, we reiterate and endorse basic universal values as follows:

Freedom. Freedom is at the core of universal human values. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom in where to live, and the freedoms to strike, to demonstrate, and to protest, among others, are the forms that freedom takes. Without freedom, China will always remain far from civilized ideals.

Human rights. Human rights are not bestowed by a state. Every person is born with inherent rights to dignity and freedom. The government exists for the protection of the human rights of its citizens. The exercise of state power must be authorized by the people. The succession of political disasters in China's recent history is a direct consequence of the ruling regime's disregard for human rights.

Equality. The integrity, dignity, and freedom of every person—regardless of social station, occupation, sex, economic condition, ethnicity, skin color, religion, or political belief—are the same as those of any other. Principles of equality before the law and equality of social, economic, cultural, civil, and political rights must be upheld.

Republicanism. Republicanism, which holds that power should be balanced among different branches of government and competing interests should be served, resembles the traditional Chinese political ideal of "fairness in all under heaven." It allows different interest groups and social assemblies, and people with a variety of cultures and beliefs, to exercise democratic self-government and to deliberate in order to reach peaceful resolution of public questions on a basis of equal access to government and free and fair competition.

Democracy. The most fundamental principles of democracy are that the people are sovereign and the people select their government. Democracy has these characteristics: (1) Political power begins with the people and the legitimacy of a regime derives from the people. (2) Political power is exercised through choices that the people make. (3) The holders of major official posts in government at all levels are determined through periodic competitive elections. (4) While honoring the will of the majority, the fundamental dignity, freedom, and human rights of minorities are protected. In short, democracy is a modern means for achieving government truly "of the people, by the people, and for the people."

Constitutional rule. Constitutional rule is rule through a legal system and legal regulations to implement principles that are spelled out in a constitution. It means protecting the freedom and the rights of citizens, limiting and defining the scope of legitimate government power, and providing the administrative apparatus necessary to serve these ends.

III. WHAT WE ADVOCATE

Authoritarianism is in general decline throughout the world; in China, too, the era of emperors and overlords is on the way out. The time is arriving everywhere for citizens to be masters of states. For China the path that leads out of our current predicament is to divest ourselves of the authoritarian notion of reliance on an "enlightened overlord" or an "honest official" and to turn instead toward a system of liberties, democracy, and the rule of law, and toward fostering the consciousness of modern citizens who see rights as fundamental and participation as a duty. Accordingly, and in a spirit of this duty as responsible and constructive citizens, we offer the following recommendations on national governance, citizens' rights, and social development:

1. A New Constitution. We should recast our present constitution, rescinding its provisions that contradict the principle that sovereignty resides with the people and turning it into a document that genuinely guarantees human rights, authorizes the exercise of public power, and serves as the legal underpinning of China's democratization. The constitution must be the highest law in the land, beyond violation by any individual, group, or political party.

2. Separation of Powers. We should construct a modern government in which the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive power is guaranteed. We need an Administrative Law that defines the scope of government responsibility and prevents abuse of administrative power. Government should be responsible to taxpayers. Division of power between provincial governments and the central government should adhere to the principle that central powers are only those specifically granted by the constitution and all other powers belong to the local governments.

3. Legislative Democracy. Members of legislative bodies at all levels should be chosen by direct election, and legislative democracy should observe just and impartial principles.

4. An Independent Judiciary. The rule of law must be above the interests of any particular political party and judges must be independent. We need to establish a constitutional supreme court and institute procedures for constitutional review. As soon as possible, we should abolish all of the Committees on Political and Legal Affairs that now allow Communist Party officials at every level to decide politically sensitive cases in advance and out of court. We should strictly forbid the use of public offices for private purposes.

5. Public Control of Public Servants. The military should be made answerable to the national government, not to a political party, and should be made more professional. Military personnel should swear allegiance to the constitution and remain nonpartisan. Political party organizations must be prohibited in the military. All public officials including police should serve as nonpartisans, and the current practice of favoring one political party in the hiring of public servants must end.

6. Guarantee of Human Rights. There must be strict guarantees of human rights and respect for human dignity. There should be a Human Rights Committee, responsible to the highest legislative body, that will prevent the government from abusing public power in violation of human rights. A democratic and constitutional China especially must guarantee the personal freedom of citizens. No one should suffer illegal arrest, detention, arraignment, interrogation, or punishment. The system of "Reeducation through Labor" must be abolished.

7. Election of Public Officials. There should be a comprehensive system of democratic elections based on "one person, one vote." The direct election of administrative heads at the levels of county, city, province, and nation should be systematically implemented. The rights to hold periodic free elections and to participate in them as a citizen are inalienable.

8. Rural–Urban Equality. The two-tier household registry system must be abolished. This system favors urban residents and harms rural residents. We should establish instead a system that gives every citizen the same constitutional rights and the same freedom to choose where to live.

9. Freedom to Form Groups. The right of citizens to form groups must be guaranteed. The current system for registering nongovernment groups, which requires a group to be "approved," should be replaced by a system in which a group simply registers itself. The formation of political parties should be governed by the constitution and the laws, which means that we must abolish the special privilege of one party to monopolize power and must guarantee principles of free and fair competition among political parties.

10. Freedom to Assemble. The constitution provides that peaceful assembly, demonstration, protest, and freedom of expression are fundamental rights of a citizen. The ruling party and the government must not be permitted to subject these to illegal interference or unconstitutional obstruction.

11. Freedom of Expression. We should make freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and academic freedom universal, thereby guaranteeing that citizens can be informed and can exercise their right of political supervision. These freedoms should be upheld by a Press Law that abolishes political restrictions on the press. The provision in the current Criminal Law that refers to "the crime of incitement to subvert state power" must be abolished. We should end the practice of viewing words as crimes.

12. Freedom of Religion. We must guarantee freedom of religion and belief, and institute a separation of religion and state. There must be no governmental interference in peaceful religious activities. We should abolish any laws, regulations, or local rules that limit or suppress the religious freedom of citizens. We should abolish the current system that requires religious groups (and their places of worship) to get official approval in advance and substitute for it a system in which registry is optional and, for those who choose to register, automatic.

13. Civic Education. In our schools we should abolish political curriculums and examinations that are designed to indoctrinate students in state ideology and to instill support for the rule of one party. We should replace them with civic education that advances universal values and citizens' rights, fosters civic consciousness, and promotes civic virtues that serve society.

14. Protection of Private Property. We should establish and protect the right to private property and promote an economic system of free and fair markets. We should do away with government monopolies in commerce and industry and guarantee the freedom to start new enterprises. We should establish a Committee on State-Owned Property, reporting to the national legislature, that will monitor the transfer of state-owned enterprises to private ownership in a fair, competitive, and orderly manner. We should institute a land reform that promotes private ownership of land, guarantees the right to buy and sell land, and allows the true value of private property to be adequately reflected in the market.

15. Financial and Tax Reform. We should establish a democratically regulated and accountable system of public finance that ensures the protection of taxpayer rights and that operates through legal procedures. We need a system by which public revenues that belong to a certain level of government—central, provincial, county or local—are controlled at that level. We need major tax reform that will abolish any unfair taxes, simplify the tax system, and spread the tax burden fairly. Government officials should not be able to raise taxes, or institute new ones, without public deliberation and the approval of a democratic assembly. We should reform the ownership system in order to encourage competition among a wider variety of market participants.

16. Social Security. We should establish a fair and adequate social security system that covers all citizens and ensures basic access to education, health care, retirement security, and employment.

17. Protection of the Environment. We need to protect the natural environment and to promote development in a way that is sustainable and responsible to our descendants and to the rest of humanity. This means insisting that the state and its officials at all levels not only do what they must do to achieve these goals, but also accept the supervision and participation of nongovernmental organizations.

18. A Federated Republic. A democratic China should seek to act as a responsible major power contributing toward peace and development in the Asian Pacific region by approaching others in a spirit of equality and fairness. In Hong Kong and Macao, we should support the freedoms that already exist. With respect to Taiwan, we should declare our commitment to the principles of freedom and democracy and then, negotiating as equals and ready to compromise, seek a formula for peaceful unification. We should approach disputes in the national-minority areas of China with an open mind, seeking ways to find a workable framework within which all ethnic and religious groups can flourish. We should aim ultimately at a federation of democratic communities of China.

19. Truth in Reconciliation. We should restore the reputations of all people, including their family members, who suffered political stigma in the political campaigns of the past or who have been labeled as criminals because of their thought, speech, or faith. The state should pay reparations to these people. All political prisoners and prisoners of conscience must be released. There should be a Truth Investigation Commission charged with finding the facts about past injustices and atrocities, determining responsibility for them, upholding justice, and, on these bases, seeking social reconciliation.

China, as a major nation of the world, as one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and as a member of the UN Council on Human Rights, should be contributing to peace for humankind and progress toward human rights. Unfortunately, we stand today as the only country among the major nations that remains mired in authoritarian politics. Our political system continues to produce human rights disasters and social crises, thereby not only constricting China's own development but also limiting the progress of all of human civilization. This must change, truly it must. The democratization of Chinese politics can be put off no longer.

Accordingly, we dare to put civic spirit into practice by announcing Charter 08. We hope that our fellow citizens who feel a similar sense of crisis, responsibility, and mission, whether they are inside the government or not, and regardless of their social status, will set aside small differences to embrace the broad goals of this citizens' movement. Together we can work for major changes in Chinese society and for the rapid establishment of a free, democratic, and constitutional country. We can bring to reality the goals and ideals that our people have incessantly been seeking for more than a hundred years, and can bring a brilliant new chapter to Chinese civilization.

POSTSCRIPT

The planning and drafting of Charter 08 began in the late spring of 2008, but Chinese authorities were apparently unaware of it or unconcerned by it until several days before it was announced on December 10. On December 6, Wen Kejian, a writer who signed the charter, was detained in the city of Hangzhou in eastern China and questioned for about an hour. Police told Wen that Charter 08 was "different" from earlier dissident statements, and "a fairly grave matter." They said there would be a coordinated investigation in all cities and provinces to "root out the organizers," and they advised Wen to remove his name from the charter. Wen declined, telling the authorities that he saw the charter as a fundamental turning point in history.

Meanwhile, on December 8, in Shenzhen in the far south of China, police called on Zhao Dagong, a writer and signer of the charter, for a "chat." They told Zhao that the central authorities were concerned about the charter and asked if he was the organizer in the Shenzhen area.

Later on December 8, at 11 PM in Beijing, about twenty police entered the home of Zhang Zuhua, one of the charter's main drafters. A few of the police took Zhang with them to the local police station while the rest stayed and, as Zhang's wife watched, searched the home and confiscated books, notebooks, Zhang's passport, all four of the family's computers, and all of their cash and credit cards. (Later Zhang learned that his family's bank accounts, including those of both his and his wife's parents, had been emptied.) Meanwhile, at the police station, Zhang was detained for twelve hours, where he was questioned in detail about Charter 08 and the group Chinese Human Rights Defenders in which he is active.

It was also late on December 8 that another of the charter's signers, the literary critic and prominent dissident Liu Xiaobo, was taken away by police. His telephone in Beijing went unanswered, as did e-mail and Skype messages sent to him. As of the present writing, he's believed to be in police custody, although the details of his detention are not known.

On the morning of December 9, Beijing lawyer Pu Zhiqiang was called in for a police "chat," and in the evening the physicist and philosopher Jiang Qisheng was called in as well. Both had signed the charter and were friends of the drafters. On December 10—the day the charter was formally announced—the Hangzhou police returned to the home of Wen Kejian, the writer they had questioned four days earlier. This time they were more threatening. They told Wen he would face severe punishment if he wrote about the charter or about Liu Xiaobo's detention. "Do you want three years in prison?" they asked. "Or four?"

On December 11 the journalist Gao Yu and the writer Liu Di, both well-known in Beijing, were interrogated about their signing of the Charter. The rights lawyer, Teng Biao, was approached by the police but declined, on principle, to meet with them. On December 12 and 13 there were reports of interrogations in many provinces—Shaanxi, Hunan, Zhejiang, Fujian, Guangdong, and others—of people who had seen the charter on the Internet, found that they agreed with it, and signed. With these people the police focused on two questions: "How did you get involved?" and "What do you know about the drafters and organizers?"

The Chinese authorities seem unaware of the irony of their actions. Their efforts to quash Charter 08 only serve to underscore China's failure to uphold the very principles that the charter advances. The charter calls for "free expression" but the regime says, by its actions, that it has once again denied such expression. The charter calls for freedom to form groups, but the nationwide police actions that have accompanied the charter's release have specifically aimed at blocking the formation of a group. The charter says "we should end the practice of viewing words as crimes," and the regime says (literally, to Wen Kejian) "we can send you to prison for these words." The charter calls for the rule of law and the regime sends police in the middle of the night to act outside the law; the charter says "police should serve as nonpartisans," and here the police are plainly partisan.

Charter 08 is signed only by citizens of the People's Republic of China who are living inside China. But Chinese living outside China are signing a letter of strong support for the charter. The eminent historian Yu Ying-shih, the astrophysicist Fang Lizhi, writers Ha Jin and Zheng Yi, and more than 160 others have so far signed.

On December 12, the Dalai Lama issued his own letter in support of the charter, writing that "a harmonious society can only come into being when there is trust among the people, freedom from fear, freedom of expression, rule of law, justice, and equality." He called on the Chinese government to release prisoners "who have been detained for exercising their freedom of expression."

—Perry Link, December 18, 2008

Barack Obama is TIME's Person of the Year 2008

Read all about it here

Bush(whacked)

After winning 13 year court battle, Malaysian human rights activist plans to run for parliament

When it comes to persecuting activists, the Singapore government is no different from their Malaysian counterparts. Just to mention some very recent examples, see my posts here, here and here.


Rights Champion Seeks Political Career
By Baradan Kuppusamy

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 3 (IPS) - After winning a gruelling 13-year court battle to avoid being jailed on charges of maliciously publishing false news, Malaysia's best-known human rights champion seeks a political career to continue defending migrant workers and other vulnerable sections of society.

"I refused to yield, I was focused and relentless and in the end won," said Irene Fernandez, executive director of Tenaganita, a leading human rights non-government organisation (NGO) that has a reputation for defending migrant workers against ill treatment and exploitation.

"It is also a major victory for human rights activism," she told IPS in an interview. "The authorities now know that we will fight and fight good and hard and will not be cowed."

Fernandez now plans to run for parliament. "It’s important that I have the opportunity to be a member of parliament, to be a voice for the communities that I have been working with," she said.

It was widely believed by diplomats, the political opposition and human rights organisations that Fernandez was targeted by the authorities for her persistent efforts to protect and champion legions of Asian migrant workers from mistreatment and exploitation by employers, a vigilante force called ‘RELA’ and other enforcement agencies.

Her ordeal began in 1996 when she was charged under Section 8A (1) of the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, with publishing "false news" -- a serious crime in Malaysia punishable with a mandatory one year in prison.

That year she had circulated a memorandum to the media, foreign missions and international human rights organisations in which she drew attention to deplorable conditions in overcrowded detention centres and the shoddy treatment meted out to migrant workers.

She alleged, in the memorandum, that migrant workers were mistreated, poorly fed, abused and regularly beaten.

The memorandum, based on research conducted by her staff and other experts, sparked an international outcry that severely embarrassed the government, but brought immediate relief to depressed migrant workers.

The government took steps to improve camp conditions, provide more nutritious food and medicine and assure the international community but charged Fernandez in court.

After a long and harrowing trial and despite international objections, she was found guilty in 2003 and sentenced to the mandatory one year in jail.

She appealed the sentence immediately but for five years she was dragged from one court to another as her appeal suffered numerous delays and postponements.

On Nov. 24, eight years after she filed her appeal, the Attorney General finally made the decision to withdraw the charge on the grounds that the appeal record was incomprehensible.

At one point in the appeal the court was informed that notes of evidence of important prosecution witnesses were missing. Later the notes were miraculously found but not legible. Further delays occurred after a computer virus wiped out notes required for the trial.

"The trial and sentence were hanging over me like a sword for 13 years," Fernandez said. "I suffered hugely but remained unbowed."

"The 13-year long trial was a heavy burden. I could not travel, stand for elections, raise funds or even speak at some forums," Fernandez,62, recalled. "This is a case of political persecution designed to force me to give up on my campaigns and retire."

By persecuting her the authorities had wanted NGOs to do charity work and leave advocacy and political activism alone, Fernandez said.

"They wanted to cow human rights activists by making an example out of me," she said. "They wanted to show the people that rights activism is dangerous and dirty work and anti-national."

She has vowed to step up her work helping migrant workers, women and HIV/AIDS campaigns.

"The struggle is far from over...there is a significant rise in the number of cases of sexual and physical abuse, torture of migrant workers," she said. "Conditions at detention centres and prisons remain deplorable."

"In fact the struggle has just started with the world economy in turmoil and millions of migrant workers on the front line of unemployment," she said adding that nearly four million -- legal and undocumented-- Asian migrant workers in Malaysia might end up being jobless if the turmoil persist.

In 2005 Fernandez won the Right Livelihood Award -- the alternative Nobel Prize -- in recognition of her wide-ranging human rights activism. "Migrants are human beings. They have the same rights as all of us.’’

"It is bad that Fernandez had to suffer for 13 years before justice was finally granted,’’ said Bar Council chairman Ambiga Sreenevasan. "The ordeal is over for her but for the Malaysian judiciary the journey ahead is long to regain its lustre as an equal and capable branch of a democratic government."

"If Malaysia had respected rights, freedom, democracy and an independent judiciary the system would have never charged her in the first place," said Brad Adams, Asia director of the New York-based Human Rights Watch.

"It is a trial where freedom of expression was challenged, where human rights defender is criminalised and where there is absolute disregard for the rights of detainees and minorities like migrant workers and refugees," he said.

India's 9/11

A fellow Singaporean, 28-year-old Lo Hwei Yen, was one among many who were killed in the cowardly and brutal attacks in Mumbai. I would like to express my condolences to the husband, family & friends of Ms Hwei Yen.

My condolences also goes out to the families & friends of the many others who were killed.

And to those who were injured, I pray for your quick recovery.

Click here for CNN-IBN website

India clears last Mumbai siege site
By JENNY BARCHFIELD, Associated Press Writer, 1 Dec 08

MUMBAI, India – As authorities finished removing bodies Monday from the bullet- and grenade-scarred Taj Mahal hotel, a Muslim graveyard refused to bury nine gunmen who terrorized this city over three days last week, leaving at least 172 people dead and wreaking havoc at some of its most famous landmarks.

The United States, meanwhile, has told Pakistan it needs to fully cooperate on investigations into the siege.

Pakistan must "follow the evidence wherever it leads," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said during a press conference aboard her plane en route to London. "I don't want to jump to any conclusions myself on this, but I do think that this is a time for complete, absolute, total transparency and cooperation and that's what we expect."

Rice said she was cutting short a European trip to visit India later this week.

In Mumbai, security forces declared the landmark 565-room Taj Mahal hotel cleared of booby traps and bodies. The hotel was the scene of the final battle Saturday morning.

"We were apprehensive about more bodies being found. But this is not likely — all rooms in the Taj have been opened and checked," said Maharashtra state government spokesman Bhushan Gagrani.

The army had already cleared other sites, including the five-star Oberoi hotel and the Mumbai headquarters of an ultra-Orthodox Jewish group. Israeli emergency workers sorted through the shattered glass and splintered furniture at the Jewish center Monday to gather the victims' body parts. At one point, one of the men opened a prayer book amid the rubble and stopped to pray.

The only gunman captured after the attacks said he belonged to Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistani militant group with links to the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir, said Joint Police Commissioner Rakesh Maria. Maria added that the gunman, Ajmal Qasab, said he was trained at a camp in Pakistan.

Pakistani President Asif Zardari's spokesman, Farhatullah Babar, dismissed the claim, saying Islamabad has "demanded evidence of the complicity of any Pakistani group" but has received none.

Qasab was among 10 who paralyzed the city in the attack, which also wounded 239 people.

A Muslim graveyard in Mumbai said Monday it would not bury the dead gunmen, with an official saying they are not true followers of the Islamic faith.

"People who committed this heinous crime cannot be called Muslim," said Hanif Nalkhande, a trustee of the influential Jama Masjid Trust, which runs the 7.5-acre (three-hectare) Badakabrastan graveyard in downtown Mumbai. "Islam does not permit this sort of barbaric crime."

While some Muslim scholars disagreed with the decision — saying Islam requires a proper burial for every Muslim — the city's other Muslim graveyards are likely to go along because of the authority of the Jama Masjid trust.

Mumbai returned to normal Monday to some degree, with parents dropping their children off at school and many shopkeepers opened their doors for the first time since the attacks began.

"I think this is the first Monday I am glad to be coming to work," said Donica Trivedi, 23, an employee of a public relations agency.

The attack revealed the weakness of India's security apparatus. India's top law enforcement official resigned Sunday, bowing to growing criticism that the attackers appeared better trained, better coordinated and better armed than police.

Maharashtra's top official, Vilasrao Deshmukh, offered to resign Monday, as did his deputy, R.R. Patil, who had sparked outrage by referring to the attacks as "small incidents."

The announcement blaming militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba threatened to escalate tensions between India and Pakistan. However, Indian officials have been cautious about accusing Pakistan's government of complicity.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Vishnu Prakash denied a news report that India was preparing to end a 2003 cease-fire with Pakistan. An intelligence official, speaking on customary condition of anonymity, said there was no unusual mobilization of troops along the India-Pakistan border.

Pakistan has warned that any buildup of troops on its border with India would require troops to be pulled from its western frontier, where it is fighting militants suspected of launching attacks throughout the country and on American troops in Afghanistan.

The group the Indians have blamed, Lashkar, has long seen as a creation of the Pakistani intelligence service to help fight India in disputed Kashmir. It was banned in Pakistan in 2002 under pressure from the U.S., a year after Washington and Britain listed it a terrorist group. It is since believed to have emerged under another name, Jamaat-ud-Dawa, though that group has denied links to the Mumbai attack.

As more details of the response to the attack emerged, a picture formed of woefully unprepared security forces.

"These guys could do it next week again in Mumbai and our responses would be exactly the same," said Ajai Sahni, head of the New Delhi-based Institute for Conflict Management and who has close ties to India's police and intelligence.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh promised to strengthen maritime and air security and look into creating a new federal investigative agency.

Singh promised to expand the commando force and set up new bases for it around the country. He called a rare meeting of leaders from the country's main political parties, hours after the resignation of Home Minister Shivraj Patil.

The death toll of 172 was revised down from 195 Sunday after authorities said some bodies were counted twice.

Among the 19 foreigners killed were six Americans. The dead also included Germans, Canadians, Israelis and nationals from Britain, Italy, Mexico, Japan, China, Thailand, Australia, Singapore and Mexico.

Associated Press reporters Ravi Nessman, Paul Peachey, Anita Chang and Ramola Talwar Badam contributed to this report from Mumbai, Ashok Sharma contributed from New Delhi and Asif Shahzad from Islamabad, Pakistan.

Videos - Remembering Nov 25; Behind the revolt

Its been a year since this,




This is a 3-part, 2008 documentary called Nov25-Behind the revolt: Chronology of a Rage which "analyzes and highlights the chronology of the events that led Malaysian Indians to the street protesting on Nov 25, 2007",

International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People; Statements by President of UN General Assembly

This is my playlist of some videos i've collected so far related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

See here for more information about 29 Nov, the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. See here for my post on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

These are two statements by Father Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, President of the 63rd session of the United Nations General Assembly,

On the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinan People
UN Headquarters , New York, 24 November 2008

It is with mixed emotions that I join you today to observe the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People at this event organized by the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. As you know, Solidarity is a concept that is central to my work as the Assembly President. I want to thank the Committee for its dedicated efforts to rally our solidarity with the Palestinian people, pursuing the mandate entrusted to it by the General Assembly.

Today we recall that, 61 years ago this month, the General Assembly adopted the historic resolution 181, calling for the creation of a Jewish State and an Arab State. The State of Israel, founded a year later in 1948, now celebrates 60 years of its existence. Shamefully, there is still no Palestinian State to celebrate.

As I stated in my first address to the General Assembly last September, I believe that the failure to create a Palestinian State as promised is the single greatest failure in the history of the United Nations. It has been 60 years since some 800,000 Palestinians were driven out of their homes and property, becoming refugees and an uprooted and marginalized people.

We cannot avoid the bitter irony that next month we mark the 60th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which enshrines the right to self-determination of these very same people. We are witness to decades of the terrible conditions endured throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, yet the promise – the right -- of the Palestinian people to a homeland remains as elusive as ever.

As I speak here today, almost 1.5 millions Palestinians are enduring an unprecedented blockade of the Gaza Strip. All border crossings into Gaza are closed, blocking even the delivery of emergency humanitarian relief supplied by the United Nations. Lack of fuel is plunging the population into darkness and cold; basic medicines are running out; malnutrition is chronic and peoples’ coping mechanisms are being exhausted.

In solidarity, I urge the international community to raise its voice against this collective punishment of the people of Gaza. We must call for an end to this massive abuse of human rights. I call on Israel, the occupying Power, to allow humanitarian and other supplies to enter the Gaza Strip without delay.

The situation in the West Bank is often overshadowed by the humanitarian crisis facing Gaza. We cannot overlook, however, the existence of over 600 checkpoints and other obstacles to freedom of movement within the West Bank. We must denounce the resumption of house demolitions during the cold months and the unabated settlement expansion that is still being officially authorized. The unprecedented rise in violent attacks by settlers against the Palestinian population must also end. Although different, what is being done against the Palestinian people seems to me to be a version of the hideous policy of apartheid.

This untenable situation highlights the urgent need for the resumption of a genuine peace process that can yield tangible results in the foreseeable future. So far the endless negotiations between two very unequal partners have not borne fruit. What we need is a renewed sense of solidarity to inspire political will, courage and a broader perspective of the conflict. This should include the revival of the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002.

The international community should spare no effort in assisting both Israelis and Palestinians to reach a solution that will fulfill the goal of two States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. The United Nations has an ongoing responsibility to resolve the question of Palestine in all its aspects and in accordance with international law. Let us be sure that this not become a permanent responsibility.

The enmity between our Palestinian and Israeli brothers and sisters is a bitter and self-perpetuating tragedy. We must find new ways to defuse this enmity, to enable both peoples to reassert their historic bonds of brotherhood and sisterhood. I urge the international community to defuse the political deadlock that cynically perpetuates this hatred, isolation and abuse. Our solidarity must prompt concrete action to realize those elusive rights that most of us can take for granted.

Thank you.

---

At the 57th Plenary Meeting on Agenda Item 16, the Question of Palestine
UN Headquarters , New York, 24 November 2008

I am pleased to open this plenary session in which we take up the Question of Palestine. This morning, with heavy heart, we observed the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. I joined the Chairman of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, H.E. Ambassador Paul Badji, and Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to voice our ongoing concern for the terrible situation in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and express our solidarity with this long-suffering People

We heard the comprehensive report of the Chairman on the current situation of Palestinians living under occupation. As well, the Secretary-General summarized the complex initiatives that are being undertaken by the international community to move forward peace talks and the establishment of the Palestinian state.

I urged the international community to raise its voice against the collective punishment of the people of Gaza, a policy which we cannot tolerate. We demand an end to this massive abuse of human rights and call on Israel, the occupying Power, to allow humanitarian and other supplies to enter the Gaza Strip without delay.

I spoke this morning about apartheid and how Israeli policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories appear so similar to the apartheid of an earlier era, a continent away.

I believe it is very important that we in the United Nations use this term. We must not be afraid to call something what it is. It is the United Nations, after all, that passed the International Convention against the Crime of Apartheid, making clear to all the world that such practices of official discrimination must be outlawed wherever they occur.

We heard today from a representative of South African civil society. We know that all around the world, civil society organizations are working to defend Palestinian rights, and are trying to protect the Palestinian population that we, the United Nations, are failing to protect.

More than twenty years ago we in the United Nations took the lead from civil society when we agreed that sanctions were required to provide a non-violent means of pressuring South Africa to end its violations.

Today, perhaps we in the United Nations should consider following the lead of a new generation of civil society, who are calling for a similar non-violent campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions to pressure Israel to end its violations.

I have attended a great many meetings on the rights of the Palestinian People. I am amazed at how people continue to insist on patience while our Brothers and Sisters are being crucified.

Patience is a virtue in which I believe. But there is nothing virtuous about being patient with the suffering of others.

We must endeavour, with all our heart, to put an end to the suffering of the Palestinian People.

I have great love for the Jewish People and this has been true all my life. I have never hesitated to condemn the crimes of the holocaust or any of the many abuses committed against our Jewish Brothers and Sisters.

However, their suffering does not give anyone the right to abuse others, especially those who historically have such deep and exemplary relations with the Jewish People.

Having said this, I would like to remind our Israeli Brothers and Sisters that even though they have the protective shield of the United States in the Security Council, no amount of arm twisting and intimidation will change the Security Council resolution 181, adopted 61 years ago, calling for the creation of two states.

Shamefully, there is no Palestinian state to celebrate today and the prospects are as distant as ever. All explanations notwithstanding, this central fact makes a mockery of the United Nations and gravely hurt its image and prestige. How can we continue like this?

I call upon our dear Brothers and Sisters at the decision-making level in our Host Country to end the policy that only retards justice in the Middle East.

The international community should spare no effort in assisting both Israelis and Palestinians to reach a solution that will fulfill the goal of two States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. The United Nations has an ongoing responsibility to resolve the question of Palestine in all its aspects and in accordance with international law. Let us be sure that this not become a permanent responsibility.

The enmity between our Palestinian and Israeli brothers and sisters is a bitter and self-perpetuating tragedy. We must find new ways to defuse this enmity, to enable both peoples to reassert their historic bonds of brotherhood and sisterhood.

I urge the international community to defuse the political deadlock that cynically perpetuates this hatred, isolation and abuse. Our solidarity must prompt concrete action to realize those elusive rights that most of us can take for granted.

Thank you.

Tomboys. Yoga. What's next? Ramly Burgers?

I just shook my head when i first heard about the ban on yoga by Malaysia's National Fatwa Council.

I was wondering, with tongue in cheek, maybe the famous Ramly Burger will be banned next for some reason or other. (Watch a video on how a Ramly Burger is made at the end of the two reports. I just love the burger!!!)

Islamic ruling bans Malaysia's Muslims from practising yoga
Ian MacKinnon, south-east Asia correspondent
The Guardian, Monday November 24 2008

First it was the insidious habit of young women wearing trousers. Now Malaysia's Muslims have been warned off the perils of practising yoga.

The country's leading Islamic council has issued an edict prohibiting people indulging in the exercise, fearing its Hindu roots could corrupt them.

The national fatwa council's latest decision again reflects a tilt toward an increasingly conservative strain of Islam in predominantly Muslim Malaysia. It is causing consternation among the country's other ethnic groups that make up a third of the 27-million population.

The fatwa, or decision, prompted sneering remarks from liberal commentators who urged people not to be cowed by the "robed and the turbaned" who made such rulings.

But Abdul Shukor Husim, the council's chairman, said: "We are of the view that yoga, which originates in Hinduism, combines a physical exercise, religious elements, chanting and worshipping for the purpose of achieving inner peace and ultimately to be at one with god. For us, yoga destroys a Muslim's faith. There are other ways to get exercise. You can go cycling, swimming and eat less fatty food."

The ruling comes after the council said young Muslim women who wore trousers risked becoming sexually active or "turning" to lesbianism. Gay sex is outlawed in Malaysia.

The government recently had to back away from a proposal to restrict women travelling abroad alone, after derision from women's activists across the country.

But it has banned the use of the word Allah by other religions. An influential Christian group claimed Bibles were also being seized at border entry points.

Of Malaysia's non-Muslim population, 25% are ethnic Chinese and 8% are ethnic Indian, mainly Hindu. The council's ruling does not apply to them and is not legally binding. But most of the country's Muslims heed the edicts out of deference.

Marina Mahathir, a prominent columnist and daughter of the former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad, wondered where it would all stop.

"What next? Gym? Most gyms have men and women together," she wrote on her blog. "Will that not be allowed any more? What endangers a society more ... corrupt citizens and leaders, or yoga practitioners and females who dress in a masculine fashion?" (Read Marina Mahathir's posts here and here)

---

Pas, PKR and ordinary Muslims criticise yoga ruling
By Shannon Teoh, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 22 - Muslim opposition leaders want the National Fatwa Council to be more specific in its edict so that Muslims can decide what forms of yoga are permissible.

Pas research chief Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad told The Malaysian Insider that the council should not make a blanket ban but “lay down what is or is not permissible about yoga.”

“This allows a Muslim to be critical of their own faith and empower them to make judgments based on convictions.”

The Kuala Selangor MP added that if the intention of taking up yoga was for the well-being of the body, mind and spirit, then religion need not come into it.

“There is no need for this siege mentality where everything is viewed from the perspective of encroaching on Islam and attacking us,” he said, adding that if one wanted to stray from Islam, there were other ways besides yoga to do it.

PKR Youth’s chief strategist Yusmadi Yusoff also said that the council needed to be more specific with what forms of yoga it found objectionable as generalising the entire art under a ban was discriminatory and denied Muslims a choice of a healthy lifestyle.

“The form of yoga practised in Malaysia is simply a healthy exercise. If the fatwa is on the basis of religious rituals or inclinations, then it must be more specific and detail what parts exactly,” he said.

The Balik Pulau MP also noted that other martial arts, including those in Malay culture, had religious inclination but were not banned outright and doing so, as with yoga, would sacrifice a lot of benefits as a physical and mental form of exercise.

The National Fatwa Council, the country’s top Islamic body, today ruled against Muslims practising yoga, saying it has elements of other religions that could corrupt Muslims as it includes Hindu spiritual elements of chanting and worship.

Though the council’s decisions are not legally binding on Malaysia’s Muslim population, many abide by the edicts out of deference, and the council does have the authority to ostracise an offending Muslim from society.

This has come after it recently banned Muslim women from “tomboy” behavior, ruling that girls who act like boys violate the tenets of Islam. The majority of yoga practitioners in Malaysia are female.

Both Dzulkefly and Yusmadi, however, believe that the fatwas did not reflect gender discrimination against female Muslims as claimed by women’s group Sisters in Islam.

Dzulkefly said that it was wrong in principle for women to behave like men or men to behave like women and the earlier fatwa presented a set of guidelines rather than a ban on an entire artform.

Sisters in Islam programme manager Norhayati Kaprawi also came out strongly against the fatwa, calling it the latest in a regressive trend for the country’s multiculturalism.

“There has been no report or complaint of any practitioner converting to Hinduism or that yoga has caused a Muslim’s faith to weaken,” she added.

The spokesperson for the Muslim women’s group said that many Muslims have been practising yoga for decades but no one has seen it as a religious matter up to now.

She said that there was no need to be suspicious of other religions and that these presumptions were the cause of the edict.

“When you come up with a national ruling, there must first be evidence of a problem. This is all based on negative presumptions.

“Any activity done with bad intentions can lead to negative implications,” she said, in refuting council chairman Datuk Dr Abdul Shukor Husin’s statement that the physical aspect of yoga should be avoided by Muslims as “doing one thing could lead to another.”

Several Muslims have also expressed consternation with the edict.

The Associated Press reported that yoga teacher Suleiha Merican, who has been practising yoga for 40 years, called yoga “a great health science” and there is no religion involved.

“We don’t do chanting and meditation. There is no conflict because yoga is not religion based,” Suleiha, 56, had said.

Putri Rahim, a housewife, said she is no less a Muslim after practising yoga for 10 years.

“I am mad! Maybe they have it in mind that Islam is under threat. To come out with a fatwa is an insult to intelligent Muslims. It’s an insult to my belief,” Putri told AP.

In a recent blog posting, social activist Datin Marina Mahathir criticised the council for even considering a yoga ban, calling it “a classic case of reacting out of fear and ignorance.”

Sharizal Shaarani, an executive told The Malaysian Insider that he could not see how yoga could affect a Muslim’s relationship with God.

“It is a petty thing. There are more important fatwas like on corruption for the council to address,” he said, adding that as practising yoga did not adversely affect the lives of others, others should not impose a set of values on the practitioners.

Blogpost updated at 2020hrs on 26 Nov 08 with this Reuters report,

Malaysia backs down from yoga ban

KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) – Malaysia's prime minister said on Wednesday Muslims should still take up yoga, reversing an outright ban that has drawn widespread protests amid concerns over growing Islamic fundamentalism in the multiracial nation.

Malaysia's National Fatwa Council, comprising Islamic scholars, told Muslims at the weekend to avoid yoga because it uses Hindu prayers that could erode Muslims' faith.

But the decision drew a sharp rebuke from many Muslims and even Malaysia's sultans, or hereditary rulers, who said that they should be consulted on any matters involving Islam.

Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi moved to contain the damage, telling the national news agency Bernama that Muslims could carry on doing yoga but minus the chanting.

"I wish to state that a physical regime with no elements of worship can continue, meaning, it is not banned. I believe that Muslims are not easily swayed into polytheism," he said.

Just before Abdullah spoke, the eldest son of the ruler of the central Negeri Sembilan state took the government to task over the yoga ruling.

"Islam is a progressive religion and the ulama (scholars) should be confident of the followers' faith rather than micro-managing their way of life," Tunku Naquiyuddin told a luncheon.

"If I go to a church or a Buddhist temple, is there any fear of me converting? ... Where do we draw the line?" the online version of the Star newspaper quoted him as saying.

The yoga fatwa ruling came hot on the heels of another edict against young Muslim women wearing trousers.

Fatwas or religious edicts are not legally binding, but they are highly influential in Malaysia, where Malay-Muslims form just over half of the country's 27 million people.

The fatwa council has said that by wearing trousers, girls risked becoming sexually active "tomboys." Gay sex is outlawed in Malaysia.

Malaysia's sizeable minorities include ethnic Chinese and Indians who practice either Christianity, Buddhism or Hinduism. (Reporting by Jalil Hamid)

The Gaza humanitarian crisis

About a week ago, a fellow blogger posted an open letter Did Singapore raise the Gaza humanitarian crisis issue with Israel? in which he wrote,

Given the close trade and diplomatic relationships between Singapore and Israel, there is a need for Singaporeans and the Singapore government to highlight this particular concern to Israel. At the very least and for a start, we need to urge the Israelis to stop the economic blockade imposed in Gaza which has subjected the population to greater economic misery.

In his follow-up post today Humanitarian crisis in Gaza is worsening - why is everyone keeping mum? he writes he's appalled with the silence,

It has been close to a week since I have sent out my emails to the Ministers and MPs of Singapore who went on a delegation trip to Israel; the Association of Muslim Professional (AMP) and possibly concerned bloggers which included some prominent Singaporean citizen bloggers. With the exception of World Without War, who has kindly posted my letter on their blog, I have yet received any replies from any of the parties.

There'll surely be some who might be wondering if i'm one of the prominent bloggers mentioned. (Yes these are very petty issues compared to the crisis which is happening but unfortunately there are very petty individuals out there who will rather nitpick on such stuff) So to those nitpickers, here's my answer(s). I'm hardly a prominent blogger. In fact, i don't even come close to being prominent. So no i didn't receive any email.

I created a post, and saved it as a draft, when i first read his open letter but I didn't get round to publishing it. Among other things, i was looking for related stuff about the crisis to go along with this post but eventually decided to keep it short and simple with this two-part video of a recent episode of an Al-Jazeera English programme, Inside Story, about the Gaza humanitarian crisis. You can watch these and other videos of this crisis at their youtube channel.

Malaysia's Guantanamo Bay

From al-jazeera english YouTube page.

ASEAN should stop "passing the buck" on Burma

This is a Oct 2007 report from ALTSEAN-Burma. You can either download it here or carry on reading,

ASEAN should Stop Passing the Buck on Burma

Get your own at Scribd or explore others: Politics Campaigns and Electi Burma

Burma's best given brutal prison sentences

Commentary
By KYAW ZWA MOE
The Irrawaddy
Tuesday, November 11, 2008

The family members of 39 Burmese dissidents have tears in their eyes today.

Fourteen leading activists of the 88 Generation Students group, including five women, were given 65-year prison sentences in a court in Insein Prison. At the same time, 25 other activists, including five monks and women who took part in the September 2007 uprising, were sentenced to up to 26 years imprisonment. The well-known labor activist Su Su Nway was sentenced to 12 and half years.

The lengthy sentences demonstrate that the oppressive regime is determined to crack down on pro-democracy groups in keeping with its slogan “annihilation of destructive elements and foreign stooges.” It also shows that the regime is simply ignoring calls from the international community for the release of political prisoners.

Among the 14 activists were Min Zeya, Jimmy (known as Kyaw Min Yu) and his wife, Nilar Thein, and Mie Mie, another prominent female activist. Most had also served lengthy imprisonment following the 1988 pro-democracy uprising.

Jimmy and Nilar Thein served 15 years and seven years imprisonment respectively. Many readers are familiar with the couple and have great sympathy for them and their young daughter, who remains with her grandparents ever since her father was jailed last year and while her mother was in hiding before her arrest in September.

Many of the activists are in their late 30s and 40s. If they have to serve their full sentences, many will die in prison. After 1988, the ruling regime generally gave dissidents three to five years as a basic sentence. In 1990s, the junta handed down longer imprisonment, such as up to 10 years. Now it’s different, and the future seems to be harsher and longer sentences.

How about Min Ko Naing, the leader of the 88 Generation Students group? Min Ko Naing and eight other members of the group were transferred to Maubin Prison in the Irrawaddy delta on 31 October as punishment two days after the group was sentenced to six months imprisonment for contempt of court. It’s expected that they will soon receive sentences of 65 years or longer.

The longer sentences are designed to discourage dissent. And the new, harsher policy is also being directed at attorneys who are brave enough to represent activists. In October and November, three lawyers who represented dissidents also were sentenced to from four to six months for contempt of court.

Just before his arrest, attorney Aung Thein told The Irrawaddy that justice would win in the end—and he quoted Buddhist teaching. “Ah-dhhamma (injustice) is winning now, but one day dhamma (justice) will win.”

Three lawyers Aung Thein, Khin Maung Shein and Nyi Nyi Htwe, are now being detained in Insein Prison. Four other defense lawyers who are representing several dissidents have also been barred from representing their clients since early November.

But even such a harsh policy hasn’t stifled the spirit of dissent.

After hearing his sentence this morning, Min Zeya, a leading member of the 88 Generation Students group, loudly ridiculed the sentence, “Only 65 years!”

Mie Mie, one of the female activists, shouted, “Never frightened!” Their determination and courage is beyond words.

Sadly, however, the history of the 20 year uprising has proved that spirit alone can’t achieve the democracy movement’s goal. All dissident groups have been seriously beaten down by the military regime. The government plans to hold an election in 2010 but many dissidents are very likely to be serving sentences in prison by then.

The international community has pushed the regime to reconcile with pro-democracy groups, especially Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy which was the winner of the 1990 election. But the regime simply ignores the pleas.

The military leaders understand well that the world is divided into at least two camps: a sanctions-oriented policy versus engagement-oriented.

The world is divided and the junta has benefited. If the world united behind a single policy that combined elements of both strategies, some progress might be possible, using a combination of economic sanctions, engagement and other creative approaches.

New ideas and tactics are needed. Otherwise, the leading activists who were just sentenced to 65 years will languish in prison. Thet Win Aung, 34, died in Mandalay Prison in 2006 while serving his 59-year imprisonment. His elder brother, Pyone Cho, a leading member of the 88 Generation Students group, is now in Maubin Prison and is expecting a long sentence, together with his colleagues including Min Ko Naing.

It’s clear the regime is getting even tougher.

It’s past time for the international community to come up with new policies designed to counter such inhuman, brutal treatment of freedom-loving activists.

28 year old Burmese blogger, Nay Phone Latt, sentenced to 20 years in prison

Two reports about Nay Phone Latt,

Young Burmese Blogger Sentenced to more than 20 Years in Jail
By SAW YAN NAING, The Irrawaddy, Monday, November 10, 2008

A young Burmese blogger who was a major source of information for the outside world on the brutal regime crackdown on the September 2007 uprising was sentenced to 20 years and six months imprisonment on Monday.

Nay Phone Latt, 28, was sentenced by a court in Rangoon’s Insein Prison, according to his mother, Aye Than. He was convicted of contravening Public Offense Act 505 B by posting a cartoon depicting junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe on his blog site.

Nay Phone Latt’s colleague Thin July Kyaw was sentenced to two years imprisonment, Aye Than reported.

Another dissident who ridiculed the regime, Saw Wai, was sentenced to two years imprisonment for publishing a poem mocking Than Shwe in the weekly Love Journal, according to Rangoon sources. The first words of each line of the Burmese language poem spelled out the message “Senior General Than Shwe is foolish with power.”

Nay Phone Latt’s blogs during the September 2007 uprising provided invaluable information about events within the locked-down country.

Two Rangoon journalists, Htun Htun Thein and Khin Maung Aye, of the privately-owned weekly News Watch, were arrested on November 5 and are being detained in Insein Prison. The media rights organizations Reporters without Borders and Burma Media Association have demanded their immediate release.

The current regime crackdown is also aimed at silencing legal attempts to ensure fair trials for dissidents now appearing before judges in closed court sessions.

Two weeks ago, three defense lawyers, Nyi Nyi Htwe, Aung Thein and Khin Maung Shein were imprisoned for between four and six months for contempt of court after complaining of unfair treatment.

Four other defense lawyers, Kyaw Hoe, Maung Maung Latt, Myint Thaung and Khin Htay Kyew have been barred from representing their clients since November 5, according to Kyaw Hoe. The lawyers are representing several dissidents, including members of the 88 Generation Students group.

“I asked a prison authority why I was not allowed to appear in court,” said Kyaw Hoe. “He said there was no reason and that the order had come from higher officials.”

Members of the 88 Generation Students group were now appearing daily in court without their defense lawyers, Kyaw Hoe said.

Two lawyers, Myint Thaung and Khin Htay Kyi, who represent the prominent labor activist Su Su Nway, withdrew from court proceedings at the weekend, citing unfair treatment, according to the accused’s sister, Htay Htay Kyi.

Htay Htay Kyi said Su Su Nway would be sentenced on Tuesday. The winner of the 2006 John Humphrey Freedom Award was originally charged with “threatening the stability of the government,” under articles 124, 130 and 505 of the penal code, but new charges have now been added.

In a statement in Washington, the US State Department criticized the imprisonment of the four defense lawyers and urged the Burmese regime to drop all charges and release them.

Deputy Spokesman Robert Wood called on the junta to stop harassing and arresting citizens for peacefully practicing their internationally recognized human rights, to release all political prisoners, and to start a genuine dialogue with democratic forces and ethnic minority groups for democratic reform in Burma.

---

Court sentenced blogger for over 20 years, poet for two years
by Than Htike Oo, Mizzima News, Monday, 10 November 2008

Chiang Mai – A court in Rangoon's notorious Insein prison on Monday has sentenced a popular Blogger Nay Phone Latt to over 20 years in prison.

Nay Phone Latt, who was arrested on 29 January, on Monday was sentenced by the Insein prison court on three counts including charges under section 505 (b) of the Penal Code - crime against public tranquillity.

The Blogger's mother Aye Aye Than, told Mizzima that her son was sentenced to two years under section 505(b) of the Penal Code, three and half years under sections 32(b)/36 of the Video Law and 15 years under section 33(a)/38 of the Electronic Law.

"We were waiting outside during the court proceedings and after the court session we asked the judge about the quantum of punishment. The judge and prosecutor informed us regarding the judgement," she said.

The 28-years-old, Nay Phone Latt, a famous blogger, is also a youth member of Burma's main opposition party - National League for Democracy. He runs internet cafés in several townships in Rangoon including "The Explorer" in Pabedan Township, and "Heaven" in Thingangyun Township.

His mother Aye Aye Than said that she had no idea why they had sentenced her son to such a long term in prison.

"He is the first ever blogger to be arrested in Burma. I have no idea why they punished my son with such a harsh judgement. Blogging is perhaps a very serious crime in the opinion of the authorities," his mother said.

Meanwhile, Nay Phone Latt's defense counsel, Aung Thein, was also sentenced to four months prison-term in absentia on November 7, for a charge of contempt of the court.

Similarly, poet Saw Wei was also sentenced to two years in prison on Monday with charges of 'inducing crime against public tranquillity'.

He was arrested in February, after his poem entitled 'February 14' was published in the Weekly 'Ah Chit' (love) Journal. In his Burmese poem, putting together of the first words of all the lines spells out 'Power Crazy Snr. Gen.Than Shwe', which provokes the authorities and he was immediately arrested.

"I am worried about his health. I want to arrange proper medical treatment outside the prison for him, where X-ray facility would be available in order to diagnose his back and waist pain. Currently, he cannot get these treatments inside the prison. He has to cover his body with a towel all the time. This morning too at the court, he could not sit for a long time and had to stand up frequently to ease his pain when speaking," Saw Wai's wife told Mizzima.

Soe Maung, the defense counsel of Saw Wai said, despite of the court's verdict, he will continue filing appeals for revision, as he thinks the trial were not free and fair enough.

"We will file an appeal against this judgment at all levels of the courts including an appeal for a revision case. We intend to do as much as the law and judicial proceedings permit us to, within the legal framework, until we reach the last stage. I am preparing for an appeal on my client's instruction," Soe Maung said.

Meanwhile, media watchdogs the Reporters Without Frontiers (RSF) and Burma Media Association (BMA) has slam the junta for its unfair trials on the two writers – Nay Phone Latt and Saw Wai – and the verdict to sentenced them.

The two organisations said, they are appalled by the combined sentence of 20 years and six months in prison that a special court in Insein prison passed on Nay Phone Latt and two years to poet Saw Wai.

"This shocking sentence is meant to terrify those who go online in an attempt to elude the dictatorship's ubiquitous control of news and information, and we call for his immediate release. Saw Wai, for his part, is being made to pay for his impertinence and courage as a committed poet," the two organisations said in a press statement.

The two media watchdogs also call on all bloggers and poets around the world to show their solidarity towards Nay Phone Latt and Saw Wai.

"There is an urgent need now for bloggers all over the world to demonstrate their solidarity with Nay Phone Latt by posing his photo on their blogs and by writing to Burmese embassies worldwide to request his release. Similarly, we call on poets to defend their fellow-poet, Saw Wai, who has been jailed just because of one poem," said the two organisations.

"Remembering 10-Eleven" rally in Malaysia disrupted by police, 24 arrested (includes videos)

The Remembering 10-Eleven rally yesterday was disrupted by police and 24 were arrested.

10-Eleven refers to 10 Nov 2007 when thousands of Malaysians took to the streets in peaceful protest,


This video shows what happened yesterday night,



Public gatherings are a democratic right, says Zaid

Kuala Lumpur, November 10- Former de facto Law Minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim today criticized the harsh measures taken by the police last night in cracking down on the Bersih rally in Petaling Jaya.

"A public gathering for the people to show their emotions and desires is one of the natural aspects in a democracy," he added.

Datuk Zaid Ibrahim believes that the police must realize that the public have a right to express their opinions and peaceful assemblies must be tolerated like in any other democracies.

By denying this right, he said Malaysia was reverting to the manners of its colonial masters.

Police arrested more than 20 people and allegedly manhandled MP Tony Pua and other other community leaders.

More than 250 people had gathered to commemorate the anniversary of the Bersih rally.

Zaid argued that the police should not have forcefully dispersed the crowd as a similar rally was held in Ipoh the night before and the police had allowed the event to take place.

He said the police and the higher authorities should not be mistaken that more force will bring an end to future gatherings.

Meanwhile, the DAP has also slammed Inspector General Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan for the arrests and the crackdown, pointing out that on the same night a Mat Rempit mob assaulted five people in Kuala Lumpur.

Speaking to reporters in Parliament, parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang said that Musa "has lost his sense of priorities" resulting in a rise from 156,315 criminal cases in 2003 to 209,559 last year, an increase of 34 per cent.

The rally had seen the arrest of PJ Utara MP Tony Pua, Selangor exco Ronnie Liu and Kampung Tunku assemblyman Lau Weng San as well as two members of the press and a Catholic parish priest.

Several newspapers reported that a Mat Rempit mob on Jalan Loke Yew beat five people unconscious after in the aftermath of another accident where an off-duty policeman allegedly made an illegal U-turn leading to the death of a motorcyclist and serious injury to five others.

"The police under Musa have got its priorities misplaced and this is illustrated in a most outrageous manner by what happened in the last 24 hours," Lim said, referring to the two events.

"What has Musa to say about the disgraceful mayhem where mob rule imposed a regime of sheer lawlessness without any police presence or intervention?" he said.

The Ipoh Timur MP also poured scorn on Musa's statement in The Star today, where the police chief assured the public "that the security of the country was very much under control" as the crime rate is not expected to increase this year.

"This is like a student who has scored an F7 for a subject last year still being proud he is still getting an F7 this year," Lim rebuked.

One on One with Robert Fisk

Read Robert Fisk's reports, articles and commentaries here at The Independent

The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy

Barack Obama's choice of Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff reminded me of a controversial article in 2006 which was later expanded and published as a book in 2007 which was equally controversial. The controversies were mostly concentrated in the U.S given the subject matter.

This is a 2007 documentary by Netherlands VPRO Television for its current affairs program Backlight,


I created this playlist with videos about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and related issues. More videos will be added as and when I come across them.