Last three weeks, the Lawyer Association of Thailand directly declared that the Ethical Committee has been monitoring the conducto of Mr. Noppadal Pattama, a legal consultant of Thaksin's family, whether he is violating the Thai legal ethics. The Lawyer Association of Thailand stated that Mr. Noppadal has overly acted to protect his client by giving an interviewing regarding his client too much!
It is very strange and ironic for this public authorized organization to declare this preposterous statement! All things deliberated cautiously, Mr. Noppadal acted in compliance with the lawyer's duty sacrifying to his client regardless whether his client committed a crime.
Not only does Mr. Noppadol has the legal obligation to challenge all accusations asserted by the public under the law and criminal procedure as well as the lawyer's ethic, but also do other lawyers . Every petition that does not amount to the frivoluous one can be used as the defense for his client. What is wrong for this action?
Under the Ethics code, an advocate attorney has the legal obligation to act faithfully and keep all confidentality of client. Definitely, s/he might not be able to file frivolous petitions to the court. Under the American Bar Association (ABA) model, the lawyer must declare all inclupritory evidence to the prosecutor or investigative entities. Simultaneously, the prosecutor and other public investigative organizations have the same duties to reveal all exclupritory evidence to defense counsel as well.
Those rules do not exist in Thailand. Both Prosecutors or investigative entities and the defense counsel do not have to reveal any evidence, or exchange any information one another. The defense counsel in the U.S. has to submit all evidence that makes his client subjected to criminal charge or convicton. For example, if his client speaks to him that he used gun to kill the victim, and he concealed the weapon at his home, the defense attorney has to reveal this fact to the prosecutor. The prosecutor, at the same, must reveal all inaccurate testimony of the witness that might make the offender go free from jail.
The defense counsel, of course, cannot lie to court or close his eye when his client intends to testify falsely to the court. The defense cousel must not support any illegal activities and if he disagrees with his client, he must withdraw from representatives.
What is false for Mr. Noppadol? I cannot perceive any false from his conduct. There is no any indication to conclude that he acts unethically! Giving an inteverviewing too much by Mr. Noppadol is actually a legal professional violation? Shame on you - Thai Lawyer Association! Here is the news!
จับตาจริยธรรม"นพดล" : สภาทนายความจ้องสอบ
จับตาจริยธรรม"นพดล", สภาทนายความจ้องสอบ, จากปมแถลงข่าวทุกเรื่องส่อกระทำเกินหน้าที่, ซ้ำยังปกป้องลูกความ"แม้ว"จนดูโอเวอร์เกินไป, แฉแต่ละปีมีทนายความถูกร้องเรียนกว่า500ราย, "อุดมเดช"เร่งยกระดับหมอความทั้งประเทศ
เมื่อวันที่3กุมภาพันธ์ที่โรงแรมอมรินทร์ ลากูน อ.เมือง จ.พิษณุโลก สภาทนายความ ร่วมกับ American Bar Association - Asia Law Initiative โดยการสนับสนุนของ The United State Department of State จัดสัมมนาเชิงปฏิบัติการเรื่อง"จริยธรรมทนายความ แง่คิดเชิงเปรียบเทียบระหว่างประเทศไทยกับประเทศสหรัฐอเมริกา โดยเชิญสมาชิกสภาทนายความในเขตภาค 6 มาร่วมสัมมนาจำนวน 200 คน
นายเดชอุดม ไกรฤทธิ์ นายกสมาคมสภาทนายความ เปิดเผยว่า จุดมุ่งหมายของการสัมมนาครั้งนี้ต้องการให้พัฒนาแนวคิดและการปฏิบัติตนของทนายความที่เกี่ยวของกับจริยธรรมและมรรยาท โดยเปรียบเทียบระหว่างทนายความของประเทศสหรัฐอเมริกาที่เป็นต้นแบบในการสร้างจริยธรรมชั้นสูง นำข้อดีของสหรัฐอเมริกามาประยุกต์ใช้กับสภาทนายความของไทยที่มีสมาชิก 50,000 ราย
ทั้งนี้ ประเทศสหรัฐอเมริกา มีสมาชิกทนายความร่วม 1 ล้านคน มีการควบคุมจริยธรรมและมารยาทในระดับมลรัฐ จากการศึกษาเปรียบเทียบพบว่าทนายความของสหรัฐอเมริกา มีความเข้มงวดด้านจริยธรรมสูงกว่าประเทศไทย ทนายความของสหรัฐ จะเน้นประโยชน์ด้านสาธารณประโยชน์มากกว่าไทย โดยเฉพาะเรื่องผลประโยชน์ทับซ้อน จะมีการแยกชัดเจน เช่น หากทนายความลงเล่นการเมืองท้องถิ่น เป็นนายกเทศมนตรีแห่งใดแห่งหนึ่ง ภรรยาของทนายความคนนั้นจะไม่มายุ่งเกี่ยวกับการจัดซื้อจัดจ้างหรือซื้อที่ดินเหมือนประเทศไทย
นายเดชอุดม กล่าวอีกว่า ในแต่ละปีมีเรื่องร้องเรียนมารยาทสมาชิกสภาทนายความเข้ามาปีละ 500 เรื่อง มีการรับเรื่องไว้พิจารณาเฉลี่ยปีละ 300 เรื่อง และมีการลบเชื่อออกจากทะเบียนทนายความเดือนละ 1-2 คดี ซึ่งถือเป็นโทษที่หนักที่สุดของสภาทนายความ เพราะจริยธรรมและความซื่อสัตย์ถือเป็นหัวใจของผู้ประกอบวิชาชีพทนายความ ที่ขณะนี้สภาทนายความ ได้ประชุมประธานสภาทนายความระดับจังหวัดทั่วประเทศ ในโอกาสที่ร่างรัฐธรรมนูญฉบับใหม่ ได้เสนอให้มีคณะกรรมการจริยธรรมแห่งชาติในรัฐธรรมนูญเข้าไปด้วย
ด้านนายวินิจ กระทอง เลขานุการคณะกรรมการมรรยาท สภาทนายความ กล่าวถึงบทบาทหน้าที่ของนายนพดล ปัทมะ ทนายความของ พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร อดีตนายกรัฐมนตรี ว่ามีการเฝ้าติดตามอย่างต่อเนื่อง ว่าการประพฤติของนายนพดล เข้าขอบเขตประพฤติผิดมารยาทสภาทนายความที่กำหนดไว้ 21 ข้อหรือไม่ หรือถ้าไม่เข้าข่ายจะเป็นการปฏิบัติตนเหมาะสม หรือดำรงตนสร้างความเสื่อมเสียต่อวิชาชีพทนายความหรือไม่
"ประเด็นอยู่ที่คนทำหน้าที่เพื่อประโยชน์ของลูกความ แต่จะโอเวอร์เกินไป มีอะไรก็เปิดแถลงข่าวตลอด ทั้งที่วิชาชีพทนายความอาจจะไม่ถึงขั้นนี้ ไม่ต้องออกมาแถลงทุกเรื่อง สภาทนายความก็มองอยู่ว่าจะเกินหน้าที่หรือไม่ บางครั้งโดยมารยาทอาจจะไม่ผิด แต่จริยธรรมที่เป็นอุดมการณ์สูงสุดเหนือมรรยาทอาจจะผิด" นายวินิจ กล่าว
นายวินิจ กล่าวต่อว่า โดยปกติแล้ว หากสมาชิกสภาทนายความประพฤติตนผิดมารยาท จะต้องมีผู้เสียหายหรือพนักงานสอบสวนร้องเรียนเข้ามาที่สภาทนายความ กรณีทนายอดีตนายกรัฐมนตรียังไม่มีผู้ร้องเรียนเข้ามา แต่กรณีนี้เป็นเรื่องสาธารณะที่เกิดขึ้นแล้ว อาจจะเสนอเป็นเรื่องกรณีความปรากฏที่สภาทนายความสามารถสอบสวนมารยาทได้ทันที โดยระบบไต่สวน ทั้งนี้หากมีผู้ร้องเรียนเข้ามาที่สภาทนายความในเรื่องมารยาทจะมีการสอบสวนข้อเท็จจริงและเสนอให้คณะกรรมการมารยาทสภาทนายความจำนวน 15 คนพิจารณา จากนั้นต้องเสนอผ่านคณะกรรมการสภาทนายความอีก 25 คน พิจารณา
วันเดียวกันนายนพดล ปัทมะ ทนายความตระกูลชินวัตร กล่าวถึงกรณีที่สภาทนายความออกมาระบุถึงการทำหน้าที่ทนายของนายนพดล ที่คอยตอบโต้แทนพ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ โดยเห็นว่าทำความเสื่อมเสียแก่วิชาชีพทนายความว่า ตนยืนยันว่าตนเพียงทำหน้าที่ที่ปรึกษากฎหมาย ทำหน้าที่ทนายความ และไม่ได้ทำผิดกฎหมายอะไร ทำทุกอย่างตรงไปตรงมา ส่วนสิ่งที่ตนทำจะมีความเหมาะสมหรือไม่นั้น ตนไม่สามารถบอกได้ แต่ทุกสิ่งทุกอย่างที่ตนพูดหรือกระทำก็เชื่อว่าประชาชนจะเข้าใจได้
http://www.naewna.com/news.asp?ID=46652
Monday, February 26, 2007
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Retirment of Chief Illiniwek
The Chief Illiniwek has been long used as the mascot of University of Illinois since ๑๙๒๖. It is approximately 80 years for the honest service but it becomes to the end of its fate. Illinois subjected to the final order of the NCAA or National Collegiate Athletic Association to stop using this "hostile mascot" so that U of Illinois may able to take part in the sport competitions hosted by the NCAA. Without any alternative, U of I declared to the retirement of the Chief last week.
To memorize of this honest service, I love to record the story posted in the wikipedia as following link in my blog. Please click: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Illiniwek)
Chief Illiniwek was the mascot and an official symbol of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign associated with the University's intercollegiate athletic programs from 1926 until its final appearance at a Men's Basketball game on February 21, 2007. Chief Illiniwek was generally portrayed by a European American student dressed in Native American regalia (specifically, a Sioux costume), and he performed during halftime of Illinois football and basketball games, as well as during women's volleyball matches (although three students of non European American descent — Mike Gonzalez (who is Latino), Steve Raquel, who is of Filipino descent and Peter Kim, who is of Korean descent; have also portrayed Illiniwek). For over two decades, Chief Illniwek has been the center of a controversy. At the root of the controversy is the view of many Native Americans and others that the symbol is a misappropriation of indigenous cultural figures and rituals and that it perpetuates stereotypes about Native American peoples. As a result of this controversy, the NCAA termed Chief Illiniwek a "hostile or abusive" "mascot" and image, and banned the university from hosting postseason activities as long as it continued to use the "mascot" and image.
Chief Illiniwek and the Chief Illiniwek logo — a stylized front view of a Native American face and headdress — are trademarks of the University. Licensed use of the logo by the university has been increasingly restrictive as a result of the ongoing controversy.
Chief Illiniwek was sometimes referred to as the University's mascot, though the University's Board of Trustees and its supporters have insisted that symbol is the appropriate label. The beginning of the Chief Illiniwek tradition predated the use of mascots in most sports teams.[1]
During sporting events, the Chief was portrayed by a student selected via audition and wearing traditional Sioux Lakota regalia sold to the University marching band by Chief Frank Fools Crow. The portrayal also included a dance of unknown origins, possibly adapted from early 20th century fancy dancing via the Boy Scouts (see History, below). His dance corresponded to the music and lyrics of the "Three in One" performed by the university band, which is an arrangement of three original songs entitled "The March of the Illini," "Hail to the Orange," and "Pride of the Illini." The Chief performs only at major sporting events hosted by the University. The stated intent of the Chief was to celebrate the Native American heritage of the state of Illinois.
Contents[hide]
1 History
2 Controversy
2.1 Position of the Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma
2.2 NCAA involvement
3 Chief Illiniwek and the Fighting Illini
4 Retiring Chief Illiniwek
5 References
6 Films
7 External links
8 See also
[edit] History
The origin of Chief Illniwek dates to 1926, when Ray Dvorak, assistant director of bands at the University of Illinois, conceived the idea of having a Native American war dance performed during halftime of Illinois football games. The first performance occurred on October 30, 1926, during the halftime of a game against the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. At the conclusion of his performance, he was met at midfield by a drum major dressed as the University of Pennsylvania Quaker mascot, offered a peace pipe, and walked off the field arm in arm. Student Lester Leutwiler, an Eagle Scout, created the original costume and performed the dance based upon his studies as a Boy Scout. The expression Illiniwek (meaning "the complete human being - the strong, agile human body, and the indomitable human spirit")[2] was first used in conjunction with the University of Illinois football team by football coach Bob Zuppke, referring to the Illiniwek Confederation of Native Americans who had historically inhabited much of present-day Illinois.
Another student, A. Webber Borchers, solidified the tradition, continuing the performances and soliciting contributions for a permanent costume in 1930. Since then, the costume has been replaced several times, most recently in 1982. The current costume was sold to the University marching band by Frank Fools Crow, chief of the Oglala Sioux (a nation unrelated to the Illiniwek), after being sewn by his wife. The costume contained real eagle feathers, but because eagle feathers are sacred to Native Americans, and because they come from a protected species, the feathers in the headdresses worn by the Chief were replaced with dyed turkey feathers after request of protesters.
Pro-Chief groups and the University's Department of InterCollegiate Athletics suggest that the symbol has the support of the Oglala Sioux[citation needed] while the actual descendants of the Illiniwek oppose the Chief (see Controversy, below). On January 17, 2007, however, the Executive Committee of the Oglala Tribal Council issued a resolution, asking that UIUC cease the use of the symbol, and return the regalia to the family of Frank Fools Crow. The resolution was delivered to UI's Board of Trustees, UI President White, and UIUC Chancellor Herman. UIUC's Native American House was authorized by the Oglala's to distribute the resolution to the public.[3]
The neutrality of this article is disputed.Please see the discussion on the talk page.
Chief Illiniwek's dance was derived from "Indian Lore" studies done by university students who had been Boy Scouts of America. Said organization, then and now, works to preserve elements of Native American culture[citation needed]. The three- or four-minute dance is based on fancy dance, a style that originated in the Great Plains as a means of providing a more secular display than purely sacred dancing, and which is practiced today by many Native Americans at pow-wows. The dance has evolved over time; each student who performs the role of the Chief augments the basic performance with his own movements and steps. Although it is claimed the dance is similar to traditional fancy dance, the Chief's routine includes mid-air splits, which are rarely found in Native fancy dance. Only the music has remained unchanged, with the Chief always performing to the "Three in One." In the 1990s, literature distributed by the University ceased describing the dance as "authentic."
Since 1926 a total of 35 different students have performed the role of the Chief. All but one have been men: one woman, Idelle Stith Brooks, served in 1943 due to the shortage of male students during World War II; she was called "Princess Illiniwek." To date, none of the performers has been a Native American.
[edit] Controversy
From the mid-1970s, the Chief was the subject of debate at the University of Illinois.[2] Protests began in 1989 when Charlene Teters, a graduate student from the Spokane tribe, began protesting the Chief at athletic events after her young son and daughter's reaction to the Chief's dance at a basketball game.[4] Soon, individuals and organizations, some from outside of the University, began to support the Chief's elimination. Some academic departments have adopted official stances in favor of retirement of the symbol. External organizations including the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the National Education Association, Amnesty International, the Modern Language Association, and Society for the Study of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas also took positions in favor of retiring the Chief.[5]
Student and alumni organizations, such as the Honor the Chief Society and Chief Illiniwek Educational Foundation, are dedicated to explaining and preserving the tradition of Chief Illiniwek.
Among the national Native American organizations which called for the retirement of the symbol were the National Congress of American Indians and the National Indian Education Association. At the UIUC campus, the Native American House, the American Indian Studies program, and the Native American student organizations all called for its retirement.
Those in favor of retiring the Chief contended that the Chief misappropriates Native American culture and perpetuates harmful racial or ethnic stereotypes. They argued that this obstructed the creation of a diverse and tolerant learning community, harmed the reputation of the University, and promoted an inaccurate image of Native Americans. Those in support of the Chief claimed that he was a revered symbol representing not only a proud people but the great spirit of a great university.
As a result of student activism calling for support for Native American students and an American Indian Studies program, UIUC established the Native American House and American Indian Studies program in 2003. As reported in the University of Illinois student databook in 2003, students of Native American descent made up 0.2% of the overall student population, and only 0.1% of the faculty are of Native American origin. This is in contrast with the national average of 0.4%. However, it should be noted that the state of Illinois has a lower than average proportion of Native Americans.[6] Some Illiniwek were forcibly removed from the state of Illinois during the time of Indian Removal. The forced relocation of Indian nations between 1818 and 1833 made way for non-Indians to claim the territory as the state of Illinios. Due to government-sponsored assimilation programs, many Native people moved in the 1950s to large urban areas such as Chicago. Founded in 1953, Chicago's American Indian Center is the oldest urban Indian center in the country, and there is a substantial American Indian population in Chicago.
In 2006, the University Board of Trustees opted to study the issue and passed a resolution calling for "a consensus conclusion to the matter of Chief Illiniwek." Many on both sides of the issue find this resolution problematic, given that former trustee Roger Plummer determined that a compromise on the issue was not possible. Thus far, the Board of Trustees has not consulted on the matter with the faculty of the American Indian Studies Program.
In the past few years, opinion polls on the subject have not been much help in defining Native American opinion on the subject. In 2002, a Peter Harris Research Group poll of those who declared Native American ethnicity on a U.S. census showed that 81% of Native Americans support the use of Indian nicknames in high school and college sports, and 83% of Native Americans support the use of Indian mascots and symbols in professional sports. However, the methods and results of this poll have been disputed.[7] A separate poll conducted by the Native-run newspaper Indian Country Today in 2001 reported that 81 percent of those polled "indicated use of American Indian names, symbols and mascots are predominantly offensive and deeply disparaging to Native Americans."
A non-binding student referendum on Chief Illiniwek was conducted in March 2004. Of the approximately one third of the student body who cast ballots, 69 percent of the voters favored retention of the Chief.[8] Faculty have tended to be critical of the Chief.
[edit] Position of the Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma
The Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma are the closest living descendants of the Illiniwek Confederacy, having been relocated to Oklahoma in the 19th century. The position of the tribal leadership has evolved over the years. In a television interview with WICD-TV in 1995, Don Giles, then Chief of the Peoria Tribe, said, "To say that we are anything but proud to have these portrayals would be completely wrong. We are proud. We're proud that the University of Illinois, the flagship university of the state, a seat of learning, is drawing on that background of our having been there. And what more honor could they pay us?" Supporting Chief Giles was another tribal elder, Ron Froman, who stated that the protesters "don't speak for all Native Americans, and certainly not us."[2]
Ron Froman was later elected Chief, by which time his views on the Chief Illiniwek symbol had changed. His opinions shifted following meetings with American Indian students attending the University. In April 2000, the tribal council, with Chief Froman's support, passed by the margin of 3 to 2 a resolution requesting "the leadership of the University of Illinois to recognize the demeaning nature of the characterization of Chief Illiniwek, and cease use of this mascots [sic]". [1] Froman stated "I don't know what the origination was, or what the reason was for the university to create Chief Illiniwek. I don't think it was to honor us, because, hell, they ran our (butts) out of Illinois."[9] This puts Chief Illiniwek in a position different from that of the mascots of other schools such as Florida State University, whose Native American mascots are not opposed by the leadership of the corresponding tribes. In 2005, a new Chief, John P. Froman, when asked his position by the NCAA, indicated that "the Chief was not representative of our tribe and culture, mainly because the costume is Sioux."[10] In 2006, in response to a widely published column by journalist George Will in support of the symbol's use, he wrote a letter reiterating the Peoria Tribe's opposition to the symbol and decrying that the "University of Illinois has ignored the tribe’s request for nearly five years." [11]
[edit] NCAA involvement
In August 2005, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, the primary governing board for intercollegiate athletics, instituted a ban on schools that use what they call "hostile and abusive American Indian nicknames" from hosting postseason games, beginning February 2006. The University of Illinois is among the 18 schools subject to the ban which, among other things, prohibits the University from hosting NCAA-sponsored tournaments. The ban was soon expanded to include Bowl Championship Series-sponsored bowl games, starting with the 2006 football season. The university appealed the ban in October on the grounds that it violates NCAA bylaws and violated institutional autonomy.
On November 11, 2005, the NCAA, stating that it had "found no new information relative to the mascot, known as ‘Chief Illiniwek’ or the logo mark used by some athletics teams that depicts a Native American in feathered headdress,"[12] upheld the ban on the University of Illinois. However, it did allow the continued use of the nicknames "Illini" and "Fighting Illini" by the University because they are based on the name of the state and not of Native American descent. The university appealed the decision again on January 30, 2006, mere days before the deadline.[13] While the NCAA Executive Committee granted an extension to April 28, the committee's next meeting, to other schools affected by the ban, the University of Illinois requested a longer stay until May 15, the end of the current semester. The Executive Committee ignored the request for a longer stay, and denied the university's second appeal while indicating that no further appeals would be entertained.[14]
The Chicago Sun-Times reported on August 31, 2006 that Chief Illiniwek would "no longer be an official university symbol" after the 2006-2007 basketball season. The paper also reported that the ownership of the Chief would be transitioned to an organization called the "Council of Chiefs" and made up of a number of people who have previously portrayed Chief Illiniwek. The next day, however, the University disputed the Sun-Times report. University sources confirmed that several former Chiefs had met with University officials to discuss preserving the symbol's tradition, but stated that the so-called "Council of Chiefs" did not exist as a formally organized group. A University spokesman stated that "no decisions have been made" regarding the symbol's fate. [2]
[edit] Chief Illiniwek and the Fighting Illini
Some have incorrectly linked Chief Illiniwek with the nickname Fighting Illini. Though many assume that both are based on Illinois' Native American traditions, the name "Illini" was first associated with the school by the student newspaper, which changed its name to The Illini in the late nineteenth century. (The paper is now called The Daily Illini.) The addition of the adjective "fighting" originated about five years before the appearance of Chief Illiniwek as a tribute to Illinois soldiers killed in World War I. Similarly, the on-campus football venue, Memorial Stadium, was named in honor of these fallen soldiers. As stated above, the NCAA has exempted the names "Illini" and "Fighting Illini" from its ban on "hostile and abusive" Native American imagery, leading many to believe that the name will continue to be used regardless of the fate of Chief Illiniwek. (Note: the name of the state, "Illinois", from which the paper and the school presumably got their names, derives from the name of the Illiniwek confederacy.)
[edit] Retiring Chief Illiniwek
On February 16, 2007, the University of Illinois Board of Trustees issued a consensus ruling retiring Chief Illiniwek. The last performance by current chief, Dan Maloney of Galesburg, was February 21st at the last men's home basketball game in Assembly Hall of the 2006-2007 regular season. [15]
[edit] References
King, C. Richard, and Charles Fruehling Springwood, eds. (2001). Team Spirits: The Native American Mascots Controversy. Foreword by Vine Deloria Jr. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Spindel, Carol (2002). Dancing at Halftime: Sports and the Controversy Over American Indian Mascots. Updated edition, with a new afterword. New York: New York University Press.
^ Roger Ebert. Chicago Sun-Times. Noble spirit more than just a mascot. March 6, 2001.
^ a b c Louis B. Garippo, Moderator. The Chief Illiniwek Dialogue. History Of The Controversy. March 30, 2000.
^ Native American House and American Indian Studies, UIUC. Current Mascot News. January 17, 2007.
^ Rebecca A. Doyle. Teters uses art to fight racism in sports and media. The University (of Michigan) Record. January 25, 1999.
^ UIUC Faculty Association. Chief Illiniwek and Fighting Illini. Accessed February 20, 2007.
^ US Census Quick Facts
^ King et al. Of Polls and Race Prejudice: Sports Illustrated’s Errant "Indian Wars". Journal of Sport and Social Issues.2002; 26: 381-402. (Subscription required)
^ Mary Johnson . Daily Illini. Students vote in favor of Chief Illiniwek. March 19, 2004.
^ The National Coalition on Racism in Sports and Media (NCRSM). Peoria Tribe Of Oklahoma Request That UIUC Cease Use Of Chief Illiniwek As Mascot. April 13, 1999.
^ Daily Illini. Courtney Linehan. Illiniwek appeal denied. November 14, 2005.
^ John P. Froman. Letter to George Will of The Washington Post. January 6, 2006.
^ NCAA. Statement by NCAA Senior Vice-President for Governance and Membership Bernard Franklin on University of Illinois, Champaign Review. November 11, 2005.
^ The News-Gazette. Jodi Heckel. UI submits second appeal to NCAA. January 31, 2006.
^ Daily Illini. Courtney Linehan. NCAA says Chief must go. April 28, 2006.
^ Official University of Illinois Press Release regarding Retirement
[edit] Films
Chief Video Documentary - The Chief & The Tradition
In Whose Honor? (1997). Written and produced by Jay Rosenstein. Ho-ho-kus, New Jersey: New Day Films.
[edit] External links
Official University of Illinois Press Release regarding Retirement
UIUC Native American House statements on Chief Illiniwek, Fighting Illini, UIUC's response to NCAA
Retire the Chief.org
Honor the Chief Society
Honor The Chief Foundation
The Chief Illiniwek Dialogue - A report to the Board of Trustees regarding Chief Illiniwek.
Plummer Report
Chief Illiniwek Myspace Page
Chief Illiniwek Educational Foundation.org
American Psychological Association Resolution calling for Retirement of Native American imagery in sports
Press Release on NCAA's response to the University of Illinois' appeal
Progressive Resource/Action Cooperative
National Coalition on Racism in Sports and the Media (NCRSM)-- Illinois Chapter
I-Resist
Champaign News-Gazette: Former Chiefs gather to celebrate 80th anniversary of symbol
Last Dance by Chief Illiniwek
University of Illinois' Announcement Concerning the Chief Illiniwek Tradition
Friday, February 16, 2007
Ethics - Media, Facts v. Fiction about Suvarnabhumi - Thailand's National Airport!
I have been reading this interesting article about the New Thailand's National Airport. It is a rumor that this airpost is completely damaged by the problem of corruption. The most unethical media - manager.co.th - reported the overstated statement about this problem. However, it is totolly incorrect based upon these two prominent experts. What the Manager reported is categorized as a fiction, and baseless novel!
BANGKOK: Reports of damage to runways and tarmacs at Bangkok's new airport have been significantly overblown, a government panel of engineers set up to investigate the problems said Friday.
"There are no cracks," Suchatvee Suwansawat, the secretary of the panel, said as he stood over a section of asphalt cut up as part of the investigation. The main problem was ruts, not cracks in the asphalt, Suchatvee and other experts said, contradicting several weeks of reports in local media here.
"The cement base is fine. The problem can be fixed."
While good news for the more than 40 million passengers expected to use Suvarnabhumi Airport this year, the findings may complicate efforts by Thailand's military- appointed government to use shoddy construction at the airport as one of the justifications for the coup that ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who pushed the construction project through during his five years in power.
Plagued by delays and allegations of corruption during four decades of planning and construction, Suvarnabhumi was touted as a regional hub that would take business away from airports in Hong Kong and Singapore.
An ally of Thaksin, Chotisak Asapaviriya, resigned Thursday as president of Airports of Thailand, the government-controlled company that manages Suvarnabhumi. Asapaviriya said the imbroglio over the airport had been so stressful that he needed to resign to maintain his health.
The panel of engineers said it was unusual for tarmacs at Suvarnabhumi airport to be damaged only four months after opening, but played down the magnitude of the problem. Reporters who accompanied officials Friday to what were described as the worst-affected areas saw ruts a few centimeters deep but only a small area with hairline cracks.
"This is a common type of damage. You see it in airports all over the United States," said Noppodol Phien- Wej, a representative from the Consulting Engineers Association of Thailand and a member of the committee investigating the problems.
"What is unusual here is the scale of the problem and the speed it is happening." About 70,000 square meters, or 84,000 square yards, amounting to 2.3 percent of the airport's total pavement, is damaged, said Noppodol, noting that damage to the runways is "minute.
"The finding dovetails with comments from airlines that use the airport. "Everything is normal," said James Ward, a spokesperson for British Airways. "So far we haven't had any reported problems. Takeoffs and landing are normal. We haven't heard any complaints from the staff.
"Thaksin was both credited for speeding up a project that had stalled and criticized for rushing it into completion."
To say that all the corruption was confined to the Thaksin regime is exaggerated," said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a former consultant to Airports of Thailand who helped prepare the company for its listing on the stock market. "But most of the construction was done under Thaksin.
"Thitinan predicted that future investigations would reveal further problems and malfeasance. "What we are seeing today is just the tip of the iceberg."Every aspect of the project, Thitinan said, "the duty free concessions, the parking lost construction, the baggage system — has got something hidden underneath.""This airport is really the embodiment of all that was wrong with Thaksin: the corruption, cronyism, the hubris," Thitinan said. "It's reached a point where it's not just a national embarrassment. It could collapse the aviation industry and the Thai economy could really take a hit."
Initial plans for the airport date back four decades but the bulk of the construction was carried out during the administration of Thaksin, who was prime minister from 2001 until he was deposed in a coup last September.With Suvarnabhumi running close to its capacity of 45 million passengers a year, the government will decide Tuesday whether to transfer some flights to the old airport, Don Muang, which today handles only charter flights. Proposals range from allowing low-fare airlines to use the old facility to reserving Don Muang for domestic flights.
Uamdao Noikorn contributed reporting for this article from Bangkok.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Snow day v. Valentine day 2007
Something special happens on Feb/13-14/2007. It is called "snow day" and causes all classes at my university have been completely cancelled. This made my life be recorded in the history of University of Illinois. The lastest snow day occured in 1979. It took around 28 years ago after the point of time in 1979. Interesting, right? I will write the rest of my blog in Thai; I am terribly sorry for my fan ....which does actually not exist!
วันนี้ เป็นวันที่ตรงกับวันแห่งความรัก ตามสไตล์ฝรั่ง ในเมืองไทย และเป็นวันพิเศษสำหรับนักเรียน U of Illinois ด้วย คือ ว่า มันเป็นวันที่พายุหิมะ ถล่มรัฐ Indiana & Illinois ตั้งแต่เมื่อคืนวานนี้ ประมาณ ๕ ทุ่มที่ผ่านมา ปรากฎการณ์ที่หิมะตกต่อเนื่อง กับการมีลมแรงพักกระหน่ำตลอดเวลา ทำให้หิมะตกทับถมหนาขึ้นเรื่อย ๆ ณ ขณะนี้ ก็หนาเป็นเมตรแล้ว ท่วมรถยนต์เลยครับ
ทางมหาวิทยาลัย เห็นท่าไม่ดี เลยประกาศทางอีเมลล์ว่า หยุดเรียนทั้งหมด เป็นเวลา ๒ วัน คือ วันที่ ๑๓ และ วันที่ ๑๔ กุมภาพันธ์ ๒๐๐๗ ผมเพิ่งทราบว่า ปรากฎการณ์ที่หิมะตกอย่างหนัก ทำให้ โรงเรียน มหาวิทยาลัย หรือ ธุรกิจต้องเลื่อนหรือหยุดการเรียนการสอนนี้ เขาเรียกว่า Snow day ลองอ่านเพิ่มเติมใน ลิ้งก์นี้นะครับ ข้อความข้างล่าง เป็นส่วนหนึ่งที่ผม สำเนามาไว้ครับA snow day in U.S. Culture is a day in which school classes are cancelled or delayed due to snow or heavy ice. Sometimes the phrase 'snow day' is used for the cancellation of work in businesses as well. Similar measures may occur in response to heavy rain, tornadoes, hurricanes, dense fog, and other forms of inclement weather. The criteria for enacting a snow day is primarily the result of the inability of vehicular transportation, as in the inability of school buses to make their routes. Usually secondary concerns are health issues that may arise by students being exposed to the cold weather.
คงน่าเศร้าไม่น้อย สำหรับคนที่มีความรัก และใคร่จะพาคนรักไปรับประทานอาหารเฉลิมฉลองกัน แต่ต้องมาติดพายุหิมะ ไปไหนมาไหน ลำบากไปหมด ทางเมืองก็ทำการกวาดถนนไม่ไหว ขนาดใช้รถยนต์ไล่กวาด กันไม่หยุดหย่อน แต่ก็ดูเหมือนจะไม่มีอะไรดีขึ้นเท่าไหร่ ร้านรวง ก็พากันหยุดไปหมด เพราะลูกค้า ไม่ค่อยมี นี่ดีที่ตุนอาหารไว้ในตู้เย็นพอสมควร ไม่งั้นก็คงจะย่ำแย่ไปด้วยครับ จะว่าไป ก็เป็นความทรงจำที่ดีนะครับ เพราะผมได้อยู่ในประวัติศาสตร์ การปิดโรงเรียนเนื่องจากหิมะตกหนัก ซึ่งการปิดเรียนของมหาวิทยาลัยอิลลินอยส์ของผมนี่ ครั้งล่าสุด คือ ปี ๑๙๗๙ หรือ ประมาณ ๒๘ ปีที่แล้วครับ ....
สุดท้ายครับ .... อย่างไรก็ขอให้ท่าน ผู้อ่านมีความสุขมาก ๆ นะครับ .... สุขสันต์ ตลอดไป และมีความรักที่อบอุ่น เสียสละ และ เกิดจากหัวใจที่มีแต่ให้ ไม่หวงแหน และครอบครอง เพียงฝ่ายเดียว ตลอดไปครับ
Friday, February 09, 2007
Thaksin and A competition to the U.S. Government!
I have read the news about Thaksin's activities in the U.S. The Thai newspapers posted that:
"หนังสือพิมพ์ไทยโพสต์ประจำวันที่ 8 กุมภาพันธ์ 2550 ได้พาดหัวตัวไม้ขนาดใหญ่ที่อ่านดูแล้วก็น่าตกใจ เพราะได้พาดหัวไว้ว่า “แม้วตั้งตนเป็นกบฏ” ซึ่งเป็นเรื่องที่ไม่ค่อยปรากฏในสังคมไทยเนื้อหาของเรื่องระบุว่า พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร ได้ไปทำสัญญาว่าจ้างบริษัทล็อบบี้ยิสต์ที่มีพลังทางการเมืองต่อรัฐบาลและสภาคองเกรสของสหรัฐ เพื่อให้ดำเนินการให้ พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร กลับประเทศไทยได้โดยได้ระบุฐานะว่าเป็นนายกรัฐมนตรีที่มาจากการเลือกตั้ง ซึ่งเป็นครั้งแรกที่ พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร ได้แสดงฐานะตนเองว่ายังเป็นนายกรัฐมนตรีที่มาจากการเลือกตั้งของประเทศไทยอยู่"
In sum, it states that Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has been committing the violent crime by attempting to file his competition to the U.S. government to ask for the fairness for himself. He asserted in his petition that he is the freely elected Prime Minister of Thailand, but was depose from the coup. His endeavor is to go back the mother land - Thailand, which currently he is being prevented from the Thailand National Security Committee or the former Coup Imitation.
"หนังสือพิมพ์ไทยโพสต์ประจำวันที่ 8 กุมภาพันธ์ 2550 ได้พาดหัวตัวไม้ขนาดใหญ่ที่อ่านดูแล้วก็น่าตกใจ เพราะได้พาดหัวไว้ว่า “แม้วตั้งตนเป็นกบฏ” ซึ่งเป็นเรื่องที่ไม่ค่อยปรากฏในสังคมไทยเนื้อหาของเรื่องระบุว่า พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร ได้ไปทำสัญญาว่าจ้างบริษัทล็อบบี้ยิสต์ที่มีพลังทางการเมืองต่อรัฐบาลและสภาคองเกรสของสหรัฐ เพื่อให้ดำเนินการให้ พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร กลับประเทศไทยได้โดยได้ระบุฐานะว่าเป็นนายกรัฐมนตรีที่มาจากการเลือกตั้ง ซึ่งเป็นครั้งแรกที่ พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณ ชินวัตร ได้แสดงฐานะตนเองว่ายังเป็นนายกรัฐมนตรีที่มาจากการเลือกตั้งของประเทศไทยอยู่"
In sum, it states that Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has been committing the violent crime by attempting to file his competition to the U.S. government to ask for the fairness for himself. He asserted in his petition that he is the freely elected Prime Minister of Thailand, but was depose from the coup. His endeavor is to go back the mother land - Thailand, which currently he is being prevented from the Thailand National Security Committee or the former Coup Imitation.
Many Thais disagree with him in filing the competition against the interim government under the coup's support to the United States government. His Exellency attempts to show that he is still in the ligitimate position as the freely elected Prime Minister of Thailand. It is not surprising to me about this position. Indeed, he should have not give up to the coup since September 19,2006.
In my point of view, he deserves to do under the international law doctrine and the democratic system and he should have done it since last year after being illegally thrown away from his elected executive function. Thailand has ratified almost of all human rights protection treaties and international obligation at the begining of 1990s. For this reason, He has the absolute ligitimacy to set up the democratic government to run the country outside Thailand. He, nevertheless, must acquire the advocacy and strong support from other domocratic countries throughout the world to champion his ligitimate governmental entity.
According to the legal authority, nothing can be assumed from his conduct to blame or criminize him as the rebellion or criminal so far. But, in the eye of international law and democratic doctrine, it is true for the current illegitimate interim government under the evil support of coup regime! Let see what will happen after his endeavor to fight with the illegal government in Thailand.
In my point of view, he deserves to do under the international law doctrine and the democratic system and he should have done it since last year after being illegally thrown away from his elected executive function. Thailand has ratified almost of all human rights protection treaties and international obligation at the begining of 1990s. For this reason, He has the absolute ligitimacy to set up the democratic government to run the country outside Thailand. He, nevertheless, must acquire the advocacy and strong support from other domocratic countries throughout the world to champion his ligitimate governmental entity.
According to the legal authority, nothing can be assumed from his conduct to blame or criminize him as the rebellion or criminal so far. But, in the eye of international law and democratic doctrine, it is true for the current illegitimate interim government under the evil support of coup regime! Let see what will happen after his endeavor to fight with the illegal government in Thailand.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Politics and Police in Thailand!
It is not surprising to me that Police General Kowit Watana, the Police Comissioner, was removed from the Royal Thai Police (RTP) Department after numerous severe events occurred in Bangkok and other regions of Thailand in January 2007.
Polic General Kowit is, indeed, a friend of General Sondhi, a coup leader who toppled out Mr. Taksin Shinawatra, the former Prime Minister of Thailand on September 19, 2006. In addition, he presently also acts as the vice president of Thailand National Security Council, which indeed is the group of the coup imitation. In other word, this (illigitimate) commitee is strongly powerful in the current period. However, he was inevitably removed from the RTP under the Executive Order yesterday.
Under this Executive Order, the reason why he was removed from the office was inherently unclear. However, it can be assumed from those violent phenomena since the begining of 2007. Those are unanswerable by Pol. General Kowit until the present. Even though he acts at the second hat as a vice president of the coup elites, he cannot avoid the worst fate, in his life.
The reason why he was removed was inherently unclear in the Executive order. However, it might be able assummed from circumstances that it is not because of his potential in solving the problems, but the political actors usually play the games in finding out some persons to be a victim of political conflicts. Police officers are the main state actors who must be in charge of solving the conflicts in the society. Stemming from several public criticism of his low potential in management, the demands for new leader in RTP is more demanding.
The politics eventually find the new victim to act as the RTP leader. Pol. General. Sa-ri-pi-suit has been appointed as the acting as the interim Commissioner. His image is so clean and excellent that everyone expects that he will make RTP look better at once. However, it might be extremely difficult for him to work in this situation. The conflicts between the coup and the former's group of power - Taksin's supporters - are still prevalent in Thai society.
He and Pol.General Kowit were and still cannot see eye in eye one another. He filed the criminal lawsuit and administrative lawsuit against Kowit at least three cases. After he knows the Executive Order to appoint him as an interim Commissioner, he declars that he would withdraw all lawsuits against Kowit if he completely resigns from the office.
Do you know that it is the most important tactic? Presently, Kowit is officially a Police Commissioner. He can resume his position by being appointed as the Commisser again under the Executive Order. It means that if he does not resign from the office, Pol. Gen. Sa-ri-pi-suit cannot be officially appointed as the Police Comissioner. His declaration is so powerful, right?
Let see the political game and the game of power - whether the police commander can run the RTP effectively, and if he fails, who will be the next victim of the Thai politics?
Polic General Kowit is, indeed, a friend of General Sondhi, a coup leader who toppled out Mr. Taksin Shinawatra, the former Prime Minister of Thailand on September 19, 2006. In addition, he presently also acts as the vice president of Thailand National Security Council, which indeed is the group of the coup imitation. In other word, this (illigitimate) commitee is strongly powerful in the current period. However, he was inevitably removed from the RTP under the Executive Order yesterday.
Under this Executive Order, the reason why he was removed from the office was inherently unclear. However, it can be assumed from those violent phenomena since the begining of 2007. Those are unanswerable by Pol. General Kowit until the present. Even though he acts at the second hat as a vice president of the coup elites, he cannot avoid the worst fate, in his life.
The reason why he was removed was inherently unclear in the Executive order. However, it might be able assummed from circumstances that it is not because of his potential in solving the problems, but the political actors usually play the games in finding out some persons to be a victim of political conflicts. Police officers are the main state actors who must be in charge of solving the conflicts in the society. Stemming from several public criticism of his low potential in management, the demands for new leader in RTP is more demanding.
The politics eventually find the new victim to act as the RTP leader. Pol. General. Sa-ri-pi-suit has been appointed as the acting as the interim Commissioner. His image is so clean and excellent that everyone expects that he will make RTP look better at once. However, it might be extremely difficult for him to work in this situation. The conflicts between the coup and the former's group of power - Taksin's supporters - are still prevalent in Thai society.
He and Pol.General Kowit were and still cannot see eye in eye one another. He filed the criminal lawsuit and administrative lawsuit against Kowit at least three cases. After he knows the Executive Order to appoint him as an interim Commissioner, he declars that he would withdraw all lawsuits against Kowit if he completely resigns from the office.
Do you know that it is the most important tactic? Presently, Kowit is officially a Police Commissioner. He can resume his position by being appointed as the Commisser again under the Executive Order. It means that if he does not resign from the office, Pol. Gen. Sa-ri-pi-suit cannot be officially appointed as the Police Comissioner. His declaration is so powerful, right?
Let see the political game and the game of power - whether the police commander can run the RTP effectively, and if he fails, who will be the next victim of the Thai politics?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)