Jun 10, 2010

which idiot ordered to change the logo?




ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေတြကုိ ပန္းခ်ီအေၾကာင္း နည္းနည္းပါးပါး သင္ေပးရင္ ေကာင္းမယ္။ မွတ္မိတယ္ မဟုတ္လား၊
visit myanmar year:1996 ဆုိၿပီး
ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေတြ ကမ္ပိန္း လုပ္္တုန္းက လုိဂုိတခု ေရြးခ့ဲဖူးတယ္။ အရမ္း မုိက္တာပဲ။ ခ်စ္စရာ ဖုိး၀ရုပ္ေလးကုိ လုိဂုိ လုပ္ထားတာ။ အေပၚကပုံ။ တႏုိင္ငံလုံးကုိ ဖိတ္ေခၚၿပီး ေရာက္လာတ့ဲ လုိဂုိေတြထဲက အေကာင္းဆုံးကုိ ေရြးထားတာ။

သိပ္မၾကာပါဘူး (တႏွစ္ေတာင္ မၾကာဘူး ထင္တယ္) လုိဂုိ အသစ္ ေျပာင္းလုိက္တယ္။ အသစ္ကလည္း ခ်စ္စရာ ေကာင္းပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမယ့္ အေဟာင္းေလာက္ မေကာင္းဘူး။ ေအာက္ကပုံ။

ဖုိး၀ရုပ္ အသစ္မွာ ေျခေခ်ာင္း လက္ေခ်ာင္းေတြ ပါလာတယ္။ အရုပ္နဲ႔ ပုိတူတယ္။ လုိဂုိနဲ႔ မတူေတာ့ဘူး။ ႏုိင္ငံတကာ ခရီးသည္ေတြအႀကိဳက္ မဟုတ္ဘဲ ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေတြ အႀကိဳက္ ေျပာင္းလဲလုိက္တာလုိ႔ ယုံၾကည္ရတယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ ေျပာတာေပါ့ ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေတြကုိ ပန္းခ်ီအေၾကာင္း နည္းနည္းပါးပါး သင္ေပးရင္ ေကာင္းမယ္ လုိ႔။ လုိဂုိ ဖုိး၀ရုပ္က ကံဆုိးခ်င္ေတာ့ အေပၚမွာ ျမင္ရတ့ဲအတုိင္း လူ၀င္ျပီး လႈပ္ရွားတ့ဲ ဖုိး၀ရုပ္ ျဖစ္သြားေတာ့ အင္မတန္ ၾကည့္ရ ဆုိးသြားတယ္။

လုိဂုိ ဆုိတာ ကုိယ့္ရဲ ့ လုပ္ငန္း လူမွတ္မိေရး အတြက္ ဖန္တီးတ့ဲ ဒီဇုိင္း ဆုိတာကုိ ေအာက္ေျခ အရာရိွေတြကလည္း မတင္ျပရဲၾကဘူး ထင္တယ္။ ခုေတာ့ ျဖစ္ခ်င္တာေတြ ျဖစ္လာေတာ့တာပဲ။ ဖုိး၀ရုပ္ကို ေရာင္စုံ ျခယ္ၿပီး လက္ေခ်ာင္းေတြ လုိက္ထည့္ခုိင္းတာ ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္သန္းေရႊ မျဖစ္ႏုိင္ဘူး။
ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္သန္းေရႊက သူ႔ ကုိယ္ပုိင္ လုိဂုိကုိေတာင္ ျပင္တာ မဟုတ္ဘူး။ ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲ ဆုိေတာ့ ရွင္းျပပါမယ္။

၂၀၀၇ တုန္းကေတာ့ ေပါတာႀကီး သန္းေရႊအတြက္ စကင္ဒီေနဗီးယား ခရီးသြား လုပ္ငန္း တခုက ျမန္မာတုိင္းမ္ ဂ်ာနယ္မွာ
Ewhsnahtrellik စာလုံး ပါတ့ဲ ေစ်းကြက္ ျမႇင့္တင္ေရး ေၾကာ္ျငာ ထည့္ခ့ဲတာ မွတ္မိမွာေပါ့။ အဲဒီေၾကာ္ျငာ စာလုံးကို ေျပာင္းျပန္ ျပန္ဖတ္ရင္ Killer than shwe ျဖစ္သြားတယ္။ အင္း - အဲဒီ ခရီးသြားလုပ္ငန္း လုိဂုိ ကုိေတာ့ ေပါတာႀကီးက ျပင္ဆင္တာ မေတြ႔ရပါဘူး။

ဒါေၾကာင့္ ေျပာတာေပါ့၊ ဖုိး၀ရုပ္ကုိ လက္ေခ်ာင္းေတြ တပ္ခုိင္းတာ ေပါတာႀကီး မျဖစ္ႏုိင္ပါဘူး လုိ႔ း)
ေတာ္ေသၿပီ။

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

ဆရာ
ေပါတာျကီးကုိ ေက်းဇူးတင္ရမယ္။
လူေတြကုိ ဖုိး၀ရုပ္လုိ ၀တ္ခုိင္းျပီး လမ္းဆုံ လမ္းခြေတြမွာ မရပ္ခုိင္းခ့ဲဘူး မဟုတ္ လား။
ေက်းဇူး တင္ လုိက္ပါ ဆရာ။
ရဲေက်ာ္

kay said...

comment ေရးဖုိ႕ စဥ္းစားလုိက္ေတာ့ မဆီမဆုိင္ အေၾကာင္းအရာတစ္ခု က ကန္႕လန္႕ခံလာတယ္။ ၁၉၉၆ ခရီးသြားနွစ္မတိုင္ခင္ေလးကေပါ့။ သိတဲ့ အုပ္စုထဲက ဆရာ၀န္တစ္ေယာက္ပါတဲ့ အဖြဲ႕ ကစာတမ္းတစ္ေစါင္ျပဳစုတင္ျပတယ္။ ေခါင္းစဥ္အတိအက် မမွတ္မိ -အင္းေလးကန္ ေကာသြားမဲ့အေၾကာင္း-
၁) သစ္ေတြခုတ္လြန္းလုိ႕ ေတာင္ကတုံးေတြျဖစ္၊ ဒီေတာ့မုိးေရကတုိက္စား။ အင္းေလးကန္ထဲကုိ ၀င္တဲ့ေရေတြမွာ နုံးေတြပါ။ ကန္ကုိဖုိ႕။
၂) ကန္ထဲ ကၽြန္းေျမာေတြအလြန္အကၽြံဖုိ႕ ဟင္းသီးဟင္းရြက္စုိက္။ ဓါတ္ေျမၾသဇာေတြသုံး။ ေရေတြ အဆိပ္ျဖစ္။ ငါးေတြေသ။ လူေတြေဘးေတြ႕။ ကန္ၾကီးလဲေကာ။
က်န္တဲ့ အခ်က္ေတြပါေရးေနရင္ ေဆာင္းပါး ျဖစ္ေတာ့မယ္။ လုိရင္းက သူတုိ႕အုပ္စု ကုိ ခရီးသြားနွစ္ကုိ ဖ်က္လုိဖ်က္ဆီးလုပ္တယ္ဆုိျပီး နွိပ္ကြပ္ခံၾကရ။ စာတန္းလဲေဖ်ာက္ဖ်က္ခံရ။ အလြန္စိတ္ထိခုိက္ခဲ့ရတာပါ။ အခု ေတြ႕ရတဲ့ ခရီးသြားနွစ္ရဲ႕ ဖုိး၀ရုပ္ က နာက်ည္းခံခက္မႈေတြကုိ လႈပ္နွဳိးေနျပန္ျပီေလ။ ကုိယ္မရီနုိင္ေတာ့ဘူး။ း(

Anonymous said...

တစ္ကယ္ေတာ့ ေက ေရးလုိက္တဲ့ အေၾကာင္းအရာေတြက အခုလက္ေတြ႕ျဖစ္ေနျပီေလ။ ကန္ၾကီးေကာပါေပါ့။ ေနပူလုိ႕ပါလုိ႕ အေၾကာင္းျပၾကဦးမွာျမင္ေယာင္ေသး။

Visit Myanmar Year 1996 ရဲ႕ေအာင္ျမင္မႈကေတာ့ အမ်ားသိေတာ္မူ ခဲ့ၾကတဲ့ အတုိင္းပါဘဲ။ အင္း..-ဖုိး၀ရုပ္ ကၾကိဳးရွဳပ္သြားခဲ့သကုိး။
ကူကူး

Anonymous said...

ပန္းခ်ီအေၾကာင္းသင္ေပးမလုိ႕လား တုိ႕မအားေသးဘူး။ လူသတ္ရဦးမယ္။ သိလား။
ပုံ
သန္းေရႊ

Ko Paw said...

ကုိဇာနည္ဝင္းေရ....

ဒီပုိ႔စ္ကုိ ေတြ႕စကတည္းက ကြန္မင့္ခ်င္တာ လက္ယားေနတယ္။ အဲဒီတုန္းက ႐ုံးမွာ အဆင္မေျပေသးလုိ႔။

က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ တကၠသုိလ္ၿပီးစ အခ်ိန္မွာ အဲဒီသူငယ္ေတာ္႐ုပ္ႀကီးကုိ ဆယ္မုိင္ကုန္း ေလဆိပ္လမ္းခြဲ မုခ္ဦးေဘးမွာ လုပ္ထားတယ္ဗ်။ အ႐ုပ္ႀကီးက ဆုိးရတဲ့ၾကားထဲ သူက အလာလမ္းေရာ၊ အျပန္လမ္းက ျမင္ရေအာင္ မ်က္ႏွာႏွစ္ဖက္ ေက်ာခ်င္းကပ္တဲ့ ေက်ာခ်င္းကပ္အမႊာအ႐ုပ္ႀကီးေပါ႔ဗ်ာ။

က်ေနာ့္သူငယ္ခ်င္းေတြနဲ႔ေတာင္ ေျပာရေသးတယ္။ ေလဆိပ္က ဝင္လာတဲ့ ကမၻာလွည့္ခရီးသည္ေတြအဖုိ႔ ဖုိးဝ႐ုပ္က ဘယ္လက္ျပ ေနတာကုိ ျမင္ရၿပီး ျပန္အတြက္က်မွ ညာျပေနတာပါကလားလုိ႔ သေဘာေပါက္သြားတယ္ ဆုိတဲ့အေၾကာင္း။

ဒီမွာ ျမန္မာခရီးသြားႏွစ္နဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လုိ႔ အဲဒီတုန္းက ႏုိင္ငံျခားသား ဂ်ာနယ္လစ္တေယာက္ေရးတဲ့ ေဆာင္းပါးကုိ မွ်ေဝခ်င္ပါတယ္။ က်ေနာ္ဖတ္ရတုန္းကဆုိ ရယ္ရလြန္းလုိ႔ အူႏွိပ္ေနရတယ္။

ေနာက္ကြန္မင့္မွာ ထည့္ေပးမယ္။

Ko Paw said...

Burma -- a Land Where Nonsense Holds Sway

by Dominic Faulder.

Call the country what you will, it's no place for a visit. By Dominic Faulder, in Asiaweek published on August 13, 2001.

A combat-ready infantryman fixed me with an unfriendly gaze, his assault rifle pointed in my direction. Before I could pass, he flicked open the flap on my bag and rummaged through my cameras, lenses and tape recorder. Presumably satisfied that I was not an off-duty ninja, he pushed open the door into a gloomy chamber I knew all too well. Right beside the Sule Pagoda in the center of Rangoon, I was once again in the reception room of the Ministry of Hotels and Tourism. In fact, I was there to meet Burma's 'Mr. Hospitality' himself.

The gentleman concerned rose from his chair. He wasted little time on pleasantries before sounding off on one of his pet peeves: foreign journalists. Lt.-Gen. Kyaw Ba was a powerfully built man who bristled in his crisp, dark-green uniform. He brought rare experience to Burma's embryonic hospitality industry. Previously, he had held one of the northern commands, a job that involved shooting Kachin insurgents when they popped up from their jade mines. One of the greatest disappointments of his career was failing to capture a Swedish journalist who had taken an extended walking tour across northern Burma with his wife and daughter but without, shall we say, "official permission."


ဆက္ရန္

Ko Paw said...

Kyaw Ba was still vexed by this incident from nearly a decade before, and an aide had to remind him gently that I was actually a different journalist. With that cleared up, we got down to talking serious hospitality. We discussed hotel developments, airline capacity, visas, and promoting winter sports (that's another story). I have to say this was one of the stranger interviews in my career. Kyaw Ba spoke good English but was a big-picture man who didn't trouble himself much with detail. Whenever I asked a specific question, he would nod in the direction of a large pot plant. A junior officer would pop up from behind this camouflage, stand to attention and bark out the correct answer. "Can you tell me how many visitors came here last year?" Pot plant rustles. "Sixty-one thousand, sir."

That odd encounter came flooding back to me as I read the latest issue of Holiday Asia, which devotes many pages to the charms of Burma, unquestionably one of the most enticing and photogenic countries in Asia. Some things never change. Amid glorious scenes from the Irrawaddy, Pagan and Inle Lake was an announcement from Burma's Ministry of Transport concerning a new aviation tie-up with Singapore's Region Air. And what Burmese delight is showcased in the accompanying photograph? A welcoming inflight crew? A golden pagoda? No. It is a mug shot of the transport minister, Maj. Gen. Hla Myint Swe, in full uniform with all his campaign medals on display. Nice gongs.

Clearly, it still has not dawned on the powers that be in Burma that the last thing prospective visitors want to see is generals flaunting their battle honors. Holidaymakers and soldiers just aren't a natural mix. But it's very hard to explain this kind of thing to soldiers. Take just one example: Burma's delegation to the Beijing Women's Conference in 1995 was led by a man, the social welfare minister, Maj. Gen. Soe Myin. Keep that in mind next time you read some overly optimistic prediction of an early political settlement with Burma's most famous lady, Aung San Suu Kyi. In November 1996, Kyaw Ba launched a massive charm offensive on all fronts. Visit Myanmar Year was slated to attract 500,000 foreign tourists, never mind the problems of accommodation and airline capacity. "Negative publicity will not dampen the success of Visit Myanmar Year," boomed Kyaw Ba. The target was hopelessly missed -- even after Visit Myanmar Year had been extended for another year. Did foreigners stay away because they perceived Burma to be unsafe or because of the boycott campaign endorsed by Suu Kyi? Hard to say. But however safe Burma actually was and is, there is no question that most foreigners do not want to visit a country where the military may be prowling around on the streets living up to its well-earned reputation for treating the locals badly. That's a bit of a non-starter, boycott or not. Perception is everything.

ဆက္ရန္

Ko Paw said...

Some argued that it should have been Myanma, and others plunged into obscure and pedantic debate about whether Burma or Myanmar was more etymologically correct. In fact, if the generals had renamed the country Slorcland, the issue would have been the same. "Although in Burmese 'Bama' and 'Myanma' are used interchangeably for the name of the country, the choice of names in English has political connotations," explains Cristina Fink in Living Silence, a recent study of the country under military rule. "The military unilaterally changed the English name of the country without consulting the country's citizens."

To be even more contrary, the generals changed a lot of place names too. Rangoon became Yangon, Pagan became Bagan, Pegu became Bago, and so on. For a country supposedly promoting tourism, this was asking for trouble. The confusion continues to this day. There is also a muddle over the correct related adjectives and nouns. For example, are the good people of Myanmar (the Burmese as most people still call them) Myanmars, Myanmarish, Myanmaries, Myanmies, Myanmaies, Myanmaese, Myanmese, Myanmarese, or what? Got a headache? Join the club. I fear the militarily correct, but linguistically sad, answer is that the Burmese are now, officially, Myanmars.

The good news is that this battle will be fought not in Myanmar, but in the English-speaking world, and it will be common usage that dictates whether the people of Myanmar are referred to as Burmese or Myanmars, not the junta. I hope it's Burmese because at the end of the day it is simply a much more beautiful word in English. Saying that, of course, invites immediate official condemnation for being a sentimental colonialist stooge, so I'll go a step further: Burma is one of the most evocative and enchanting place names in the world -- a name to conjure up unforgettable holidays.

The more clipped Myanma would be an improvement on Myanmar, but I fear that irritating 'r' will be rolling around for years to come. But I shall of course be calling the country Myanmar in print except when referring to it when it was still known as Burma. Like it or not, this is the official name of the country accepted by the United Nations, ASEAN, etc., and tacitly by any country that accredits an ambassador there.

It does not matter whether I approve of that state of affairs or not. The world is chaotic enough already without having journalists running around making gratuitous political statements. Perish the thought.