Khaing Marm KhaingIllinois, U.S.A
Phone: 1-617-435-4153
Email: '; document.write( '' ); document.write( addy_text70616 ); document.write( '<\/a>' ); //-->
To:
Christian Solidarity Worldwide
Attn: Benedict Rogers
PO Box 99
New Malden
Surrey
KT3 3YF
Maung Tun Khin
Burmese Rohingya Organization (UK)
& Rohingya Media
Did ‘US Congress’ Really Calls on Burmese Regime Regarding Rohingya?
On September 30, 2010, a press release regarding so called Rohingya from Burma was sent out by Benedict Rogers. The title goes „US Congress Calls on Burmese Regime to Recognize Rohingyas as Full and Equal Citizens of Burma?. It was a joint release of Mr. Rogers? Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) and Burmese Rohingya Organization UK (BROUK). I must say I was delighted to hear the news. These poor people along with other Burmese have been suffering under the brutal regime for years. Though they migrated from Bangladesh during the British colonial rule, most of them have lived in Burma for decades and they deserve to be treated as “Full and Equal” Citizens of Burma.
So I was interested enough to continue reading through the press release and found out that the resolution was merely introduced by US Congressman Christopher Smith with his two co-sponsors. In other words, the bill was simply placed in the “hopper?, a wooden box provided for that purpose located on the side of the rostrum in the House Chamber. A whole lot of procedures still need to follow in order to represent the US Congress. The proposed resolution of one congressman does not represent the US Congress. Therefore, the context of the press release does not match the title at all. So why? Why would Christian Solidarity Worldwide?s Ben Rogers and Burmese Rohingya Organization, UK (BROUK) stated „US Congress? in their press release instead of „One US Congressman? or „Three US Congressmen?? Why would Rohingya media pick it up and irresponsibly repeat that false title to their readers?
According to Library of Congress that tracks all the legislative bills, Rep. Christopher Smith?s bill was introduced on September 29, 2010 and its latest status is “Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs”. According to the congressional proceedings, after the bill is introduced, it is sent to the Government Printing Office to print and copies are sent to the office of the chairman of House Foreign Affairs Committee. Then, the clerk of the committee enters it on the committee?s Legislative Calendar and so on. (For more information on how a bill becomes a law in the United States, click http://thomas.loc.gov/home/lawsmade.toc.html.)
Rightly, Voice of America News pointed out that “Even if the bill comes to a vote and is passed in the House of Representatives, it would not become law unless it also is approved by the Senate and signed by President Barack Obama.” Between introducing a bill and signing by the President of the United States, there are a host of congressional proceedings such as debate, amendments and vote to go through. The proposed resolution represents neither US Congress, as CSW and BROUK suggest, nor the current US Administration. It is ethically and morally wrong for CSW and BROUK to use the term „US Congress Calls? and you both should be ashamed of your deceitful act.
We have known Ben Rogers for years and he even tried to unmask one of the most secretive dictators of the world, Than Shwe, in his recent book. So I am sure Mr. Rogers knows that US Congress is bicameral consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate. I am sure he knows one congressman?s resolution is not equal to 541 elected officials of the US Congress. Then, did he knowingly try to mislead the readers and create a media fuss? Only Mr. Rogers will know how to answer that question.
One thing for sure is his and Maung Tun Khin?s comments are on the press release. They generated media show-off giving interviews to several news agencies and making the fool out of everyone. Both CSW and BROUK letterheads are at the press release?s heading. Therefore, Mr. Rogers and Christian Solidarity Worldwide are responsible for its content and owe an explanation to the public on this matter and so is BROUK. Especially for a young organization like BROUK that has been suspected of sending violent threats to Ambassador Bloomsbury Hotel in London on August 9, 2009, I strongly urge you to refrain from any involvement in insincere and illegal act in the future.
May peace be with you!
Sincerely,
Khaing Marm Khaing
...........
Sources: Rakhapura
Comments