Blood donation rules
As one-time communication director for the Blood Bank of Hawaii, I absolutely commend Fu Yen-wen (傅延文) for his obvious and wholehearted commitment to the lifesaving act of blood donation (“Blood donation rules too restrictive,” April 11, page 6).
However, I do have to respond to his opinion on the Ministry of Health and Welfare’s regulations on when and how often an individual may donate.
We — the blood banking community — truly appreciate each and every person who volunteers to “give so others may live.” Voluntary and regular blood donations are vital to our ability to meet the needs of the thousands of patients who are in desperate need of a lifesaving blood transfusion.
However, we also have a responsibility to ensure the health and well-being of our generous donors. We do not want to run the risk of endangering their health by encouraging them to make another blood donation before their bodies have regenerated and are ready.
Yes, this means that more blood donors are needed day-to-day. This, too, is an ongoing challenge for us.
However, we are more than willing to work harder on our end to ensure a sufficient blood supply to meet the needs of each and every patient, while, at the same time, ensuring the safety of each and every blood donor. Together, we can save lives.
Kirk Hazlett
Adjunct professor of communication at the University of Tampa and former communication director at the Blood Bank of Hawaii
Free Myanmar
This letter is in response to the articles covering the civil unrest in Myanmar.
As a citizen of and believer in democracy, I applaud the efforts of Burmese people. Their efforts are similar to what is happening in Russia and other parts of the world. Along with Burmese people I support their legally elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Believe it or not, one thing that trumps capitalism and political correctness in the US is the right to have one’s voice heard.
This is the foundation on which our democracy is built. Burmese people should continue to defy coup leader Min Aung Hlaing’s powerful security forces so that Myanmar’s democracy can begin to thrive.
It is not the Burmese people who are attempting to seize power, but rather it is the military in power that has engaged in intimidation to prevent the will of the people from being heard. Why else would it stoop to such underhanded tactics to block various means of communication among the citizens of Myanmar? Why is the military in power utilizing such political strong-arm tactics as the use of violence?
Min Aung Hlaing, you have seized power in Myanmar and have failed [Burmese people] by your own choosing. The days of the puppet regime are finally coming to an end as it appears the desire for freedom will continue to sweep among all nations.
Accordingly, let the call go forth among all citizens of Myanmar that your brothers and sisters of democracy from all over the world are with you during every trial and tribulation you might encounter during this crisis.
To the people of Myanmar, the trumpet of freedom beckons you to rise in protest and ensure your voice to preserve your sacred heritage, promote your children’s future and obtain the blessings of liberty we all cherish.
Soldiers and police of Myanmar, have you no decency other than to frighten and beat people of your own families?
Min Aung Hlaing let the people go! Bang the pots and pans Myanmar! Kick the Tatmadaw to Kathmandu!
Joe Bialek
Cleveland, Ohio
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.