The question is out of all the places, why only Xayabury and not anywhere else? What is special or unique about this region that's why it's always being the only place that been offered as the location for our autonomous? Or has there been other places
too but just not getting mentioned?
ML
On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 4:23:19 PM UTC-5,
beemou...@earthlink.net wrote:
On Wednesday, January 25, 2017 at 11:39:58 PM UTC-5, Moobthaibteb Moobtwmzeej wrote:
What is so special about Sainyabuli, Xaignabouli, Xayaburi or Xayaboury ໄຊຍະບູລີ? While it may have the Wat Sisavang Vong that King Sisavang Vong erected himself, Wat Si Bun Huang that's over 500 years old, but all those have little
meaning to us for we didn't practice Buddhism. Why did we want this area of land to be our country?
Had a chance to read something rather interesting so just want to ask.
"In late 1975, the Hmong from Nam Phong and some other camps were re-located to the newly-created Ban Vinai Camp, Pak Chom District in Loei province. Support for the camp was placed with the UNHCR, as with other refugee camps in Thailand. Most of
the Hmong refugee leadership who had escaped from Laos were at Ban Vinai.
In early 1976 Rosenblatt and Daniels arranged a pivotal meeting with the Hmong leadership, so that the U.S. side could hear directly from the Hmong about their own wishes for their people’s future. The Hmong leaders opened the meeting by asking
that the U.S. thereafter refer to them as Hmong, meaning free men or people, and not Meo with its "savage" connotation. We readily agreed to this change in nomenclature and this is why the Hmong who were known as Meo during the war years in Laos became
known as Hmong in the U.S.
At the Ban Vinai meeting, Hmong leaders then stated that they would like U.S. government weapons to take and hold Sayaboury province in Laos, which some Hmong maintained had been promised to the Hmong by the U.S. in the event that Laos fell to the
communists; a list of weapons desired was handed to the U.S. delegation. The U.S. side stated that this was not a viable option.
The second choice of the Hmong leaders was for them to be re-grouped in an area of Thailand where they could live on their own. We indicated that Thailand would not likely agree to this.
The third choice was to resettle in a third country, all living together. The U.S. side indicated that this would not be feasible, but that we would work toward giving Hmong with close associations to the U.S. the opportunity to resettle in the U.S.
We explained that the program was still not finally approved in Washington, but that if and when it was, Hmong would be dispersed around the United States with the voluntary agencies finding sponsors for each family, as was done for the Indochinese
evacuees and refugees commencing in April 1975. We indicated that Jerry Daniels, with his first-hand familiarity with the Hmong role in Laos, would take the lead in selecting the family heads for resettlement, but that no family would be forced to apply
for U.S. resettlement. With some reluctance, the Hmong agreed to these terms"
In early May 1975 US special envoy told VP to resettle Hmoob in Xayabury. VP already gave order to Maj. Yang Xiong commander of T-28 Figter to make ready for the transferring; but his Vaj advisers scared VP not listened to the Special Envoy. In late
1978 China Leader offered VP & PK to take over Xayabury with chinese aid; but they declined it. In 1985 Reagan did the same but PK refused it. In 1990 Prime minister of Thailand did the same, but pattern of the so call nationalist repeated itself.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)