Establishing an existing Australian Organisation to Myanmar Essay

Establishing an existing Australian Organisation to Myanmar - Essay Example VVRS is a manufacture, Trading Company, distributor and wholesaler; most of their products go through manufacturing before selling. Some products are packed and sold for processing in their destined markets, for example, wheat sold to Myanmar packaged into containers or sacks before exportation. Some wheat exports are in pasta form. VVRS Australia commits itself to providing quality service to its customers. The company’s priority is the customers. Ensuring that they enjoy the services provided by the company. The company also values time that their products take in order to reach customers. This report will cover try and cover all Australia as a business spot for both foreign and local investors. It will cover the political environment legal environment economic environment socio-cultural environment technology; lastly, we shall look at a SWOT analysis. The report aims analysing Australia as a potential investing country. The Myanmar government major focus is maintaining of economic and political stability, according to the Myanmar times in 2011 the Myanmar government had undergone some changes. The process of Initiating reforms was already in operation. The determination of this government to adopt a new political system is evident. This was the report in a U.N meeting in May (staff Writers, political will, 16-22). The Myanmar government was under the rule of a military regime until recently in October 2010 when it carried out its first election in 20years.the commencement of parliament in 2011 saw the election of Gen. Thein Sein as their prime minister. The government provides laws that govern the foreign relations, trade defence. The Myanmar government has good economic relations with its neighbours. In order to attract serious foreign investments’ a significant improvement in economic governance, business climate, and political

Manhood, Power and Respect instead of Childhood Essay Example for Free

Manhood, Power and Respect instead of Childhood Essay Dave Saunders is the main character of the story, the Theme of the Story is â€Å"Looking for Maturity, Respect and Power†. He is tired of been treated as a child, wants to spend his money to whatever he wants, because his mom holds his money, so he just wants to prove to the others that he is a Man. One day he decided to go the local store to buy a gun, which is the store of Mistah Joe, he ask Joe for a catalog, once he gets the catalog he went back home, his mom sees the catalog, and she doesn’t let him to buy, but after he tells her that the house needs a gun and also that he’s going to give the gun to his dad, she gives $2 for him to buy it. Next day he goes to Mistah Joe store to buy the gun, after buying it he goes to the field to admire the pistol. Next day of work, his is so excited that now his has a gun, he takes jenny the mule and goes far away, so he can test the gun, but accidentally he killed jenny. However, when everybody finds out that he is lying about jenny death, he decided to escape and leave all behind. And the story started like this. Dave Saunders 17 years-old, works at Mr. Hawkins fields, there is the place he makes his own money, and also when he begins his desire to get older, powerful and more respect. One day after he works at Mr. Hawkins fields he was heading home and thinking about the discussion that he had with others field hands that day, and also tired of being treated as a child. He resolves to get a gun for himself, so he can show more power to the others. Instead going home he goes to the local store that they offer a mail-catalog, which is the store of Mistah Joe, when he gets there he asks Mistah Joe for a gun, Mistah Joe Surprised says to Dave â€Å"ain’t nothing but a boy,† (Richard Wright) and he does not need a gun, but he nevertheless offer to sell an old pistol left-hand fully loaded for $2 dollars, Dave goes to his house so excited to ask his mom for $2 dollars to purchase the gun, but when he gets to his house Mrs. Saunders is angry because he has kept the dinner waiting, he sits down and Mrs. Saunders sees the catalog in his arm, and she sizes it, she takes the catalog and tells him to go wash his hands, when he comes back, Dave was so infatuated with the catalog that he did not notice that his father had spoken to him and his food is in front of him. But he knows if he asks his father the money the answer would be a straight NO, and he thinks that his mother is a little easier to persuade. But when he starts a conversation with her, she tells him â€Å"git outta here! Don yuh talk t me bout no gun! Yuh a fool! (Richard Wright), but Dave states that the family needs a gun and after he buys it he will give to his father, Mrs. Saunders agrees to buy the gun but with one condition, as soon as he buys the gun it has to come straight to her possession and also make him promise that he will do it as she said. The first thing he does in the next morning is go to the Mistah Joe store and purchase the gun, while he comes back home, he stops in the field just to play with the gun and he starts shooting imagery objects, afterwards he gets home, he breaks his promise because he hide the gun under his pillow and tells his Mrs. Saunders that the pistol is hidden outside, and it is not true. He leaves his house very early in the morning, ties the pistol in his leg with a piece of flannel and goes to Mr. Hawkins field, he hooks up Jenny the mule and go plow the field far away so he can practicing shooting the gun and no one would hear it, but a fatality happened, he shot Jenny at his first shoot, when he realizes that Jenny is been shot he tried to plug dirty into the bullet hole to stop bleeding, but Jenny soon dies, he is frightened about what happened, he goes back to Mr. Hawkins and trying to tell a believable story about Jenny’s death, afterward someone finds Jenny and Dave make up a story that Jenny had something wrong and all of sudden fell on the point of the plow, but Mrs. Saunders knows it’s a lie, Dave is forced to tell the truth, when he assumed that he killed Jenny, Mr. Hawkins tells him that he has to pay $50 dollars for the mule, and he will take $2 dollars every month of his salary until he pays the $50 dollars. Dave feels annoyed because he has to pay back the mule, also very upset because all the others think he is a child more now than ever before. He decides to leave the city, by doing this he will leave all behind, his childhood and he will become a man as his desire. Dave Saunders is a boy that wants to get the power, the respect, the manhood and also the maturity that most of the men have. The gun seems to symbolize all this to Dave’s eyes, but it’s been showed that is just a phony imagination. Work Cited Richard Wright’s Parody of the Hunt Tradition in â€Å"The Man Who Was Almost a Man†(Fall 1986). Detroit: Gale Group, 2000

The Ethics Of Poverty

The Ethics Of Poverty I will begin this delicate topic with some information about poverty and then I will explain the differences between those who believe it is not our duty to provide support to the impoverished and those who do. Regardless of who is morally right or wrong or who is responsible for helping the poor, poverty will always be a part of life in this world. There will always be wealthy people and there will always be poor people. It is a fact of our life struggles that corresponds with Darwins theory, only the strong survive. With the economic condition of the world today poverty is a concern that is becoming a greater issue; despite its being overlooked around the world for many years. Most people would rather turn their heads and ignore the fact that there are millions of individuals who live in some state of poverty every day. It is easy for those who are well off to ignore the realization that poverty does exist; because those who choose to remain ignorant about poverty are not worried about where they will sleep that night or where they will get food from. They are also not forced to live in extreme conditions every day or wonder where they can get a shower or clothes, because they have their basic necessities in life. Maybe if they understood what those poverty stricken people were going through, they might reconsider their outlook on poverty. In the United States, poverty is measured by poverty thresholds and poverty guidelines. (Wikipedia, 2011) According to numerous surveys at one time or another, over forty percent of Americans have had to deal with some type of poverty caused by hardships, such as job loss, financial strains, natural disasters, death, divorce, poor economic conditions, and even war. According to the United States Census Bureau, poverty in the U.S. has spiked to an all-time high surpassing fourteen percent. (CNNMoney.com, 2010) According to National Public Radio online, poverty has not been the main issue for many Americans and in fact it has slowly faded from the headlines. (NPR, 2001) So with all that information; I will pose some questions that are always being asked about who are actually responsible for the lack of attention the poverty issue has received. Is the U. S. Government to blame? Do we blame Globalization? Who in the world can be the sole individual to blame? Do we blame Americans because our nation is more advanced than those third world countries? Whose duty is it to help those in need? These questions are the ones that many human rights supporters and their opponents are quarreling over. Despite this information and the questions I presented; there are Americans who believe poverty is a big problem and they are all in consensus that something should be done about it. Many of those individuals also agree that any aid our government/country gives to those in need is only done because it is in the best interest of our national government and not because the government feels they have to. If our government felt it was their duty as a nation to give continuously to the impoverished, then we wouldnt have poverty stricken people or homeless individuals here in the United States. The worlds poverty numbers would diminish extremely if our government felt it was their duty to help all those in need. There are many philosophers like Peter Singer, Ayn Rand, and Fyodor Dostoyevsky and numerous Human Rights Activists such as Thomas Pogge and Simon Caney as well as other humanitarian organizations that believe wealthy people have a moral obligation or duty to help those who are severely destitute. If the well-to-do opt not to help those who live a life of severe poverty, they are considered human rights violators and the same Activist protest there should be some kind of condemnation for ignoring those who are suffering from poverty. (Saddia, 2010) For example, Peter Singer suggests that if the well off have abundance and are well to do then it is their moral responsibility to assist those in need. (Wikipedia, 2011) Helping those in need comes down to ones beliefs and moral values. It really is up to individuals to decide for themselves as to whether or not they want to help the needy. If they feel bad for those in need, then the answer would be yes, those individuals should help the poor. But, if there are no deep feelings of sorrow, then the answer to whether they should help, would be no. Like I previously stated, it is what the individual believes in their mind and heart. Their moral judgment will give them the answer they are searching for as to whether they are wasting their time and money in trying to help the needy or if they feel helping the needy would make them feel better as a person. In the case of poverty, I believe an individuals morals are based off emotions, reflexes and what they feel in their hearts. Most individuals depend on these emotions, reflexes, and feelings to help them make decisions. There is a possibility the world could benefit from those who help the needy; the total number of impoverished families and people in the world might be reduced with help from the wealthy. But there are too many poverty stricken people in this world to help, that it would take much longer than we have on this earth to see the positive changes. All individuals have a right to basic necessities such as food, water, clothing, and shelter; however, providing the basic necessities to the needy should not be the sole responsibility of those who are better off. An individual who is well off can only do so much for so long and after helping those in need, individuals begin to assume they are being taken advantage of and they start providing less and less assistance to the needy. They tend to find a mindset of why am I the only one helping these people and why should I help them. Other individuals have concerns as to where their monetary assistance is actually going. People who help out by donating money to those charity organizations that support the impoverished, wonder if their monetary support is actually making it to those in need in a third world country or if some organization leader is keeping a majority of the donated money to help cover costs of that organization. Like me I wonder the same thing, because I know there are millions of people and charity organizations who are helping the impoverished, but we cannot assume that all the aid is going to those needy because nothing is really changing for those who are poor. It seems those who support the poor are fighting a losing battle. On the other hand, there are many people world-wide who believe the well-to-do do not have a moral duty or obligation to provide support or provide assistance to those who desperately need it. Individuals who think this believe they have worked too hard to for what they have, that they shouldnt have to just give it away because someone else in another country is not working hard enough to alleviate their plight. They also believe that it is not their concern or their fault that people in other countries are so poor. Forcing the well-to-do to share their wealth with the poor would be considered a violation of their rights since they are not being allowed to choose whether to give or not. If we continue to just provide assistance instead of resources for them, to the impoverished we are just causing more problems down the road, because those who are poor will continue to expect support instead of using the resources to better themselves. Needless to say, the poor continue to reproduce at a greater number than the rich. So those third world countries are practically doubling in population and if we continue to provide some sort of safety net in the form of support from the wealthy, then how can the poor population ever recover. I dont want to venture into religious opinions, but the Bible does state there will always be poor amongst us. Yet many Archbishops state, the rich should help the poor. Garrett Hardin a philosopher as well was opposed to Peter Singers theory that the rich should be influenced to help the poor. There are many well-to-do individuals who claim they have no responsibility for the millions of poor people across the world, because it was not their fault the poor people ended up in that situation. Yet there are those who believe we have several options: we may be tempted to try to live by the Christian ideal of being our brothers keeper, or by the Marxist ideal of to each according to his needs. (Hardin, 2003) Those who believe we should not supp ort the poor are said to have more of an individual egoism (Philosophy Basics, ) which means they are more inclined to act in their self-interest. So with all that being said, what is the morally right thing to do and whos duty is it to help those in need? There is and always will be different views on who is to blame and who should help the impoverished. The absolute fact is that there will always be poverty stricken people in this world no matter if we as individuals feel it is our duty to help those in need or not. From the beginning of time to the present day, people have fallen into two categories, they are either hunters or they are gatherers. Those who fall into the hunter category or have the hunter persona are individuals who fight hard to ensure their families have the basic necessities and more if possible. Then you have those individuals who fall into the gatherer category or have the gatherer persona; they expect others, particularly the hunters to feed and take care of them. There are several reasons as to why people are severely poor and those people who are capable of helping would probably make the better decision and help those who fell into poverty because of a natural disaster, job loss due to businesses downsizing, or even medical related problems which keep people from working. Extreme reasons like that affects individuals differently and they are more inclined to help those who fell into poverty. But for someone to say we should help those in need because they fall victim to drugs or violence is not a severe enough reason to entice someone to help. People are not sympathetic to those kinds of reasons. I however, dont believe it is the rich mans responsibility to take care of the poor simply because we choose our own path in life and there is always room for change. Staying in a state of poverty just because there is a small amount of help is not a justifiable reason to avoid changing their situation. I also dont if someone who was extremely poor suddenly became rich, that they would turn around and give their money to the poor. I believe they would possibly donate some of their money to certain charity organizations or maybe give a little money to friends or family who helped them through the tough times. But how long would they continue to give their earnings to the poor is unknown, because they possibly would become tired of having to continuously support those who have less. So in the end, who is really to blame for the poor being poor? I believe their governments should rise up and do more to alleviate the poverty issues in their respective countries. For example, Africa is known for being a continent with a majority of the population being impoverished and not having basic necessities. Yet they export oil, diamonds, and other goods which would increase their Gross National Product and they could use the increase to help the poor. If the country where those needy live has a failing economy, then who is responsible or who do we blame? Do we blame it on Globalization? I believe the American welfare system does not help the poor or improve their situation, it merely allows them to get by and because of this they do not put enough effort into improving their status. It is true to this day, the rich get richer and the poor, poorer.

Climate Change and Air Pollution in Australia Essay -- Global Warming E

Climate Change and Air Pollution in Australia Air Pollution Fortunately for Alice Springs and much of the Northern Territory, its remote location and low population density mean that the city is not a large source of air pollution. In fact, in a report issued by the Northern Territory Minister of Infrastructure, Planning, and Environment, it is said that while doing testing for the National Environmental Protection Measure the government only tested for particulate matter in Alice Springs, instead of the whole slate of air pollutants, which would have included Carbon Monoxide, Ozone, Sulfur Dioxide, and Nitrogen Dioxide. These other pollutants were not a concern, because of the location and low population density of Alice Springs. While testing for particulate matter, the study found only two days over the entire year where particulate matter levels exceeded the National Environmental Protection Measure standards. This was attributed to bushfires and households burning wood for heat in the winter. Although this particula r study did not test for them, Alice Springs does produce significant amounts of greenhouse gases. In June 2006, the Alice Springs Town Council issued the Local Action Plan to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions, in which they explain how much CO2 the town emitted in 1996, and exactly where the emissions came from. In 1996, the city was responsible for 325,370 tonnes of CO2 emissions. Electricity is responsible for the majority of the emissions, while fossil fuels and waste account for the rest. The Town Council’s plan to reduce these emissions hopes to cut them to 80% of 1996 levels by 2010. They plan to focus on reducing electricity consumption. Within buildings managed by the c... ...n Alice Springs. http://www.alicesprings.nt.gov.au/astc_site/your_council/council_publications/plans/local_action_plan_to_reduce_greenhouse_gas_in_alice_springs. June 2006. Australian Government Department of Climate Change. Australia’s Solar Cities. http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/solarcities/alicesprings/index.html Linacre, E. The last ice age in Australia, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea. http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap15/lgm_oz.html Peatling, Stephanie. Australia tops greenhouse pollution index Sydney Morning Herald. 19 June 2004. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/18/1087245110190.html Vatskalis, Kon. Report to the NEPC on the implementation of the National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure for the Northern Territory. http://www.ephc.gov.au/pdf/annrep_01_02/179-181_Jur_Rep_AAQ_NT.pdf

English Elizabethan Novels

The Elizabethan period is primarily known for its drama and poetry rather than its prose fiction, particularly since the advent of the English novel proper does not occur for another century. However, critics have increasingly stressed the importance of prose fiction in the seventeenth century and its role in the development of the novel. Several factors have played an important role in the emergence of the Elizabethan romance. One of the most significant factors in the development of the romance—the most popular form of prose fiction in this period—was the translation of ancient Greek romances into the vernacular. The popularity of these stories influenced members of the university-educated class to create their own stories, albeit with the same Greek plots, pastoral settings, and emphasis on literary wit. The first important milestone of the age was John Lyly's Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit (1578). In this work Lyly developed euphuism, a style of writing which emphasizes rhythm over content and makes extensive use of alliteration, assonance, metaphor, and classical allusion. Many lesser authors imitated this style, which became a defining element of the period. In contrast to Lyly, Sir Philip Sidney in The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia (1590), generally thought of as one of the most significant and well-written romances of the time, attempted to create more natural dialogue. Despite this difference, for his plot, style, and setting Sidney is also indebted to Greek literature. Robert Greene, one of the most prolific writers of the period, took his plots directly from Greek romance as well. Sometimes basing his stories in part on his own experiences, Greene wrote more than twenty popular romances including Card of Fancy (1584). Thomas Nashe was influenced by a different source, the picaresque novels of Spain. In these stories the hero, or picaro, is a man of no social standing who is free to travel and engage in adventures. Nashe's most famous works are The Unfortunate Travelor or the Life of Jack Wilton (1594) and The Terrors of the Night (1594). Elizabethan society itself underwent numerous and significant developments during this period, including changes in the social structure of London, a rapid rise in literacy rates, a growing middle class, and the emergence of literate bourgeois tradesmen. These changes are reflected in the content and quantity of prose fiction that was produced during the seventeenth century. Aiming at the growing middle-class audience, many writers imitated best-selling authors and turned out formula romances. The works of the former tradesman Thomas Deloney, including The Pleasant History of John Winchomb in his Younger Years Called Jack of Newbury (1597), for example, were more realistic in plot and setting than other works of the period and probably, according to scholars, created a sense of familiarity among his readers. This focus on the emerging bourgeois class, both as an audience for and a subject of fiction, played a significant role in the emergence of the English novel in the eighteenth

Overview of the Sri Lankan Civil War

Overview of the Sri Lankan Civil War In the late 20th century, the island nation of Sri Lanka tore itself apart in a brutal civil war. At the most basic level, the conflict arose from the ethnic tension between Sinhalese and Tamil citizens. In reality, though, the causes were much more complex and arose in large part because of Sri Lankas colonial history. Background Great Britain ruled Sri Lanka- then called Ceylon- from 1815 to 1948. When the British arrived, the country was dominated by Sinhalese speakers whose ancestors likely arrived on the island from India in the 500s BCE. Sri Lankan people seem to have been in contact with Tamil speakers from southern India since at least the second century BCE, but migrations of significant numbers of Tamils to the island appear to have taken place later, between the seventh and 11th centuries CE. In 1815, the population of Ceylon numbered about three million predominantly Buddhist Sinhalese and 300,000 mostly Hindu Tamils. The British established huge cash crop plantations on the island, first of coffee, and later of rubber and tea. Colonial officials brought in approximately a million Tamil speakers from India to work as plantation laborers. The British also established schools in the northern, Tamil-majority part of the colony, and preferentially appointed Tamils to bureaucratic positions, angering the Sinhalese majority. This was a common divide-and-rule tactic in European colonies that had troubling results in the post-colonial era in places such as Rwanda and Sudan. Civil War Erupts The British granted Ceylon independence in 1948. The Sinhalese majority immediately began to pass laws that discriminated against Tamils, particularly the Indian Tamils brought to the island by the British. They made Sinhalese the official language, driving Tamils out of the civil service. The Ceylon Citizenship Act of 1948 effectively barred Indian Tamils from holding citizenship, making stateless people out of some 700,000. This was not remedied until 2003, and anger over such measures fueled the bloody rioting that broke out repeatedly in the following years. After decades of increasing ethnic tension, the war began as a low-level insurgency in July 1983. Ethnic riots broke out in Colombo and other cities.  Tamil Tiger insurgents killed 13 army soldiers, prompting violent reprisals against Tamil civilians by their Sinhalese neighbors across the country. Between 2,500 and 3,000 Tamils likely died, and many thousands more fled to Tamil-majority regions. The Tamil Tigers declared the First Eelam War (1983-87) with the aim of creating a separate Tamil state in northern Sri Lanka called Eelam. Much of the fighting was directed initially at other Tamil factions; the Tigers massacred their opponents and consolidated power over the separatist movement by 1986. At the outbreak of the war, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India offered to mediate a settlement. However, the Sri Lankan government distrusted her motivations, and it was later shown that her government was arming and training Tamil guerrillas in camps in southern India. Relations between the Sri Lankan government and India deteriorated, as Sri Lankan coast guards seized Indian fishing boats to search for weapons. Over the next few years, violence escalated as the Tamil insurgents used car bombs, suitcase bombs, and landmines against Sinhalese military and civilian targets. The quickly-expanding Sri Lankan army responded by rounding up Tamil youths and torturing and disappearing them. India Intervenes In 1987, Indias Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, decided to directly intervene in the Sri Lankan Civil War by sending peacekeepers. India was concerned about separatism in its own Tamil region, Tamil Nadu, as well as a potential flood of refugees from Sri Lanka. The peacekeepers mission was to disarm militants on both sides, in preparation for peace talks. The Indian peacekeeping force of 100,000 troops not only was unable to quell the conflict, it actually began fighting with the Tamil Tigers. The Tigers refused to disarm, sent female bombers and child soldiers to attack the Indians, and relations escalated into running skirmishes between the peacekeeping troops and the Tamil guerrillas. In May 1990, Sri Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa forced India to recall its peacekeepers; 1,200 Indian soldiers had died battling the insurgents. The following year, a female Tamil suicide bomber named Thenmozhi Rajaratnam assassinated Rajiv Gandhi at an election rally. President Premadasa would die in a similar attack in May 1993. Second Eelam War After the peacekeepers withdrew, the Sri Lankan Civil War entered an even bloodier phase, which the Tamil Tigers named the Second Eelam War.  It began when the Tigers seized between 600 and 700 Sinhalese police officers in the Eastern Province on June 11, 1990, in an effort to weaken government control there. The police laid down their weapons and surrendered to the militants after the Tigers promised no harm would come to them. However, the militants took the policemen into the jungle, forced them to kneel, and shot them all dead, one by one. A week later, the Sri Lankan Minister of Defense announced, From now on, it is all out war. The government cut off all shipments of medicine and food to the Tamil stronghold on the Jaffna peninsula  and initiated an intensive aerial bombardment. The Tigers responded with massacres of hundreds of Sinhalese and Muslim villagers. Muslim self-defense units and government troops conducted tit-for-tat massacres in Tamil villages. The government also massacred Sinhalese school children in Sooriyakanda and buried the bodies in a mass grave, because the town was a base for the Sinhala splinter group known as the JVP. In July 1991, 5,000 Tamil Tigers surrounded the governments army base at Elephant Pass, laying siege to it for a month. The pass is a bottleneck leading to the Jaffna Peninsula, a key strategic point in the region. Some 10,000 government troops raised the siege after four weeks, but over 2,000 fighters on both sides had been killed, making this the bloodiest battle in the entire civil war. Although they held this chokepoint, government troops could not capture Jaffna itself despite repeated assaults in 1992-93. Third Eelam War January 1995 saw the Tamil Tigers sign a peace agreement with the new government of President Chandrika Kumaratunga. However, three months later the Tigers planted explosives on two Sri Lankan naval gunboats, destroying the ships and the peace accord. The government responded by declaring a war for peace, in which Air Force jets pounded civilian sites and refugee camps on the Jaffna Peninsula, while ground troops perpetrated a number of massacres against civilians in Tampalakamam, Kumarapuram, and elsewhere. By December 1995, the peninsula was under government control for the first time since the war began. Some 350,000 Tamil refugees and the Tiger guerrillas fled inland to the sparsely populated Vanni region of the Northern Province. The Tamil Tigers responded to the loss of Jaffna in July 1996 by launching an eight-day assault on the town of Mullaitivu, which was protected by 1,400 government troops. Despite air support from the Sri Lankan Air Force, the government position was overrun by the 4,000-strong guerrilla army in a decisive Tiger victory. More than 1,200 of the government soldiers were killed, including about 200 who were doused with gasoline and burned alive after they surrendered; the Tigers lost 332 troops. Another aspect of the war took place simultaneously in the capital of Colombo and other southern cities, where Tiger suicide bombers struck repeatedly in the late 1990s. They hit the Central Bank in Colombo, the Sri Lankan World Trade Centre, and the Temple of the Tooth in Kandy, a shrine housing a relic of the Buddha himself. A suicide bomber tried to assassinate President Chandrika Kumaratunga in December 1999- she survived  but lost her right eye. In April 2000, the Tigers retook Elephant Pass  but were unable to recover the city of Jaffna. Norway began trying to negotiate a settlement, as war-weary Sri Lankans of all ethnic groups looked for a way to end the interminable conflict. The Tamil Tigers declared a unilateral ceasefire in December 2000, leading to hope that the civil war was truly winding down. However, in April 2001, the Tigers rescinded the ceasefire and pushed north on the Jaffna Peninsula once more. A July 2001 Tiger suicide attack on the Bandaranaike International Airport destroyed eight military jets and four airliners, sending Sri Lankas tourism industry into a tailspin. Long Road to Peace The September 11 attacks in the United States  and the subsequent War on Terror  made it more difficult for the Tamil Tigers to get overseas funding and support. The United States also began to offer direct aid to the Sri Lankan government, despite its terrible human rights record over the course of the civil war. Public weariness with the fighting led to President Kumaratungas party losing control of parliament and the election of a new, pro-peace government. Throughout 2002 and 2003, the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil Tigers negotiated various ceasefires and signed a Memorandum of Understanding, again mediated by the Norwegians. The two sides compromised with a federal solution, rather than the Tamils demand for a two-state solution or the governments insistence on a unitary state. Air and ground traffic resumed between Jaffna and the rest of Sri Lanka.   However, on October 31, 2003, the Tigers declared themselves in full control of the north and east regions of the country, prompting the government to declare a state of emergency. Within just over a year, monitors from Norway recorded 300 infractions of the ceasefire by the army and 3,000 by the Tamil Tigers. When the Indian Ocean Tsunami hit Sri Lanka on December 26, 2004, it killed 35,000 people and sparked another disagreement between the Tigers and the government over how to distribute aid in Tiger-held areas. On August 12, 2005, the Tamil Tigers lost much of their remaining cachet with the international community when one of their snipers killed Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, a highly respected ethnic Tamil who was critical of Tiger tactics. Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran warned that his guerrillas would go on the offensive once more in 2006 if the government failed to implement the peace plan. Fighting erupted again, including the bombing of civilian targets such as packed commuter trains and buses in Colombo. The government also began assassinating pro-Tiger journalists and politicians. Massacres against civilians on both sides left thousands dead over the next few years, including 17 charity workers from Frances Action Against Hunger, who were shot down in their office. On September 4, 2006, the army drove the Tamil Tigers from the key coastal city of Sampur. The Tigers retaliated by bombing a naval convoy, killing more than 100 sailors who were on shore leave. After October 2006 peace talks in Geneva, Switzerland, did not produce results, the Sri Lankan government launched a massive offensive in eastern and northern parts of the islands to crush the Tamil Tigers once and for all. The 2007-2009 eastern and northern offensives were extremely bloody, with tens of thousands of civilians caught between the army and Tiger lines. Entire villages were left depopulated and ruined in what a U.N. spokesman termed a bloodbath. As the government troops closed in on the last rebel strongholds, some Tigers blew themselves up. Others were summarily executed by the soldiers after they surrendered, and these war crimes were captured on video. On May 16, 2009, the Sri Lankan government declared victory over the Tamil Tigers. The following day, an official Tiger website conceded that This battle has reached its bitter end. People in Sri Lanka and around the world expressed relief that the devastating conflict had finally ended after 26 years, hideous atrocities on both sides, and some 100,000 deaths. The only question remaining is whether the perpetrators of those atrocities will face trials for their crimes.

CKern_LessonPlan2 Essays (2164 words) - Learning, Education

CKern_LessonPlan2 Essays (2164 words) - Learning, Education Age: Kindergarten Subject: Reading Topic : 5 W's Literary Analysis Give a summary of the text using comprehension skills Answer questions based on things written in the text Make assumptions/predictions about the text using clues from both their own experiences/knowledge and things that occurred in the book Be able to explain why they made these assumptions/predictions (justify their answer) Come up with own reasonable scenarios based on prior experiences and things learned in the text Time + Pacing Central Focus of Lesson: At the end of the lesson, students should feel comfortable answering questions about a book with prompting, and should begin to look beyond what is actually written in the book to draw conclusions about the text. Part 2: Content Objectives Answer questions about a story with prompting. Make predictions about what will happen in a story using reasoning and illustrations. Differentiate between the 5 W's (who, what, when, where, and why) when answering questions List the things that a story needs (5W's). Key Vocabulary Who What When Where Why Prior Academic Learning and Prerequisite Skills: Students should have some prior experience with the 5 W's. Students will be using reasoning and clues from illustrations to make predictions about what will happen in a story. They will also be using prior knowledge and experiences to create a new scene for the book. Students should also have a prior knowledge of how to use art supplies such as markers, colored pencils, or crayons. Materials Needed Blank Paper (one for each child) Markers, colored pencils, or crayons "Pete the Cat: Trick or Pete" by James Dean. Board Projector Back Up Plan: If this lesson does not take place near Halloween, a different book can be chosen. Part 3: Lesson Introduction Gather the children in a group and explain that they are going to be learning about the 5 W's. Ask them to listen carefully to the video/song for the 5 things that a story needs. 5 min Introduction of New Information Play video: The Five W's Song | Scratch Garden After the video ends, ask the children what the 5 things a story needs. If they are having trouble with this, then play the song again Using the information from the song, the children should be able to come up with the 5 question words. When the children say each of the words, write them on the board (Who, What, When, Where, Why). 5 min Learning Activities Tell the children that we are going to be reading a story. Read "Pete the Cat: Trick or Pete" by James Dean. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WWcLKeBIXI) While reading this story, take time to ask questions. Have the children answer these questions. They will be using clues about what they know happens on Halloween and clues from the illustrations to make predictions. Examples: On the first page: What do you think is going to be behind the flap by the moon? On the third page: What do you think is going to be in the tree? On the fifth page: What do you think is going to be in the yard? After the story is finished, begin to ask comprehension questions and write what the children say on the board. First, ask the children if each of the question words on the board were answered in the story. Then begin to ask more specific questions. Examples: Who was this story about? After children answer this question with "Pete the Cat" prompt them to give more characters such as Callie and Pete's dad. This can be done using a question like: Was there anyone else in this story? What was Pete the Cat doing? After the children answer "trick-or-treating" ask other what questions like: What were some things that Pete saw while he was trick or treating? What was Pete the Cat dressed up as? Where was Pete the Cat? This question may be difficult for students, so if they are having difficulty, prompt them using follow up questions like: Was he outside or inside? Where do you normally go trick or treating? When is Pete the Cat going trick or treating? The children will probably answer this question with Halloween, so prompt them to think about the time of day also. This can be done by asking questions like: When do you normally go trick or treating? Is it light or dark out? In the pictures, is the sky light or dark? Why do you think that Pete the Cat is scared? This question requires the