(name withheld by my desire to keep her public comments on Facebook, uh, ah, private...)
April 26, Monday
“oh Don, C'MON and be the big MAN you say you are and stop whining!! D#@-w&% can call himself by his Korean or Swiss or Swiss Korean or any other name he damn well pleases- and he doesn't have to have anyone's *$%! approval to do so; and if he any other adoptee, or person chooses to disclose his/her personal reunion story,or past life or personal that is their RIGHT to CHOOSE and not for anyone else to post or publish without their consent!!
And Don, as a leader of any organization, respecting people's privacy and personal information is NUMBER 1 on the list of professional abilites....and damn it soldier,you fail in that regard BIG TIME.
I get your anger and rage and cursing and hate but invasion of other people's right to privacy and using your wall as to do this bs is WRONG,so WRONG.”
The Korean War Baby responds:
I think his story is indicative of how important it is to get a chance to get into the newspapers or on television. It is one of the services that GOA'L has done a steady job on, and perhaps greatly influenced by Mr. Wenger's own PERSONAL experience, but one he felt was "too personal".
BUT Mr. Wenger definitely lied to me about having any relationship with Rev. Kim DoHyun, and I cannot understand why? Rev. Kim DoHyun is very involved in helping adoptees in many ways, he and his wife founded KoRoot that provides a place to stay and get help on living in Korea:
"KoRoot is basically founded upon this need to resolve the challenges that the prospective returnees face, providing them with accomodation and assistance to ease them into Korean society, and to help them enjoy their visit by conducting a number of special events and having necessary resources available during their stay in Korea."
Many hundreds, perhaps thousands have come and stayed in KoRoot during brief or long periods of stay in the motherland.
BUT on matters such as stopping Inter-Country Adoptions it is no secret that Rev. Kim strongly believes that International Adoptions should stop. I believe that he also is against local, civil or domestic adoption, preferring only "Family Preservation" or supporting Unwed Mothers to be able to raise their child. The Korean War Baby agrees on these principals but with the understanding that at the current time 63% of Unwed Mothers in 2008 CHOSE to relinquish/give up for adoption. Yes, according to the Korean Women's Development Institutes KWDI 37% of Unwed Mothers DID keep their babies, but shall we demand the 63% to take care of their babies? Of course NOT, they by law have the Right to relinquish. NO ONE IS FORCING them to give up their babies. It is just the REALITY that an Unwed Mother with NO SUPPORT from her family, or bio-Sperm donor (not a father) nor his family, SOCIAL PREJUDICE against her and her Illegitimate child, and little government financial support...THIS IS THE MOUNTAIN SHE MUST FACE.
So with all this, it is amazing that some 37% of women ARE keeping their children. I marvel at their bravery and determination. OF THE REMAINING 63% of mothers, I hold absolutely NO bad feelings, Nada, Nyet, Opsoyo. These woman will wonder all their lives "How is my child doing? Where did they go? I hope they can forgive me...will I ever see them again?" I am not making this up.
For every child sent overseas last year, THREE, yes (3) were adopted (out of the 63% given up for adoption) IN THIS COUNTRY. Jane Jeong TRENKA and I are currently comparing notes on the CIVIL COURT Adoptions allowed and privately done. The adoption numbers, based on the MOHWFA and KWDI figures are roughly 75% of the babies GIVEN UP FOR ADOPTION, wind up in SECRET adoptions. This is so wrong on many levels, both for the relinquishing mother, who may expect that the child will go abroad to USA, or EU. but most importantly for the child who may discover LATE IN LIFE by 'accident' that they were Ipyangin, adopted.
(KOREA can NEVER SIGN THE HAGUE CONVENTIONS if this is so...checking with SNU LAW professor Suk Kwang Hyun, at Seoul National University School of Law. He is working on the Hague Convention matter for Korea. Keep you posted on this.)
Does the "RIGHT OF THE MOTHER" to keep override the rights of a woman to NOT RAISE her child? Certainly, more effort must be made to give all women TIME to decide, more than 72 hours as proposed in the Adoption Revision Law to be decided this year. Some women cannot stand emotionally to be with "her child". Shall we "FORCE" mothers to take care of the infant for a week, THEN maybe she will change her mind and remember her RIGHTS of motherhood? That sounds absurd, doesn't it?
Mr. Wenger why did you not want to tell me that you CO-Founded Dongari_Switzerland with Rev. Kim DoHyun, uh, why not? Was that 'too personal', or were you playing me? Oh, I was beginning to smell the "Stench of a dead rat" back in February.
Mr. Wenger presented himself as wanting "GOA'L to be Neutral" and fighting to keep it that way, but I find that hard to believe after what happened at the elections. I am waiting for his explanation of the events and why after telling me, "Don't worry about those two guys (Kim Su Rasmussen and Eli Park Sorensen) I spoke with them and they won't be a problem."
But many irregularities in the election rules and allowing candidates to be nominated at the last minute, change of membership regulations, voting procedures, etc. WARRANT public answers. But most of YOU don't give a rat's ass, you cannot take five minutes to write an email demanding answers. Some could not take off the half day from drinking soju with your friends to come and cast your vote. OH, I know over 2,000 "Current Paid-up Members" from 2009, WELL, wait, the rules on THAT changed as well, only from DEC. to March 27, 2010 members LIVING IN KOREA could VOTE. Can you say "Disenfranchised"?
Kim Su Rasmussen announced, in Jan. 2010 at the ASK dinner, PUBICLY 'proposed to take over GOA'L by democratic means to Politicize' it, because it is a Korean Non-Government Organization that can give them more leverage to stop InterCountry Adoptions. ASK and TRACK are NOT Korean NGO's. Adoptee's Solidarity Korea does not represent ALL adoptees from Korea but only has a membership of less than 400 KAD's on Facebook, check and you will see that perhaps 50 are NOT even Korean Adoptees. Do they represent ALL KAD's or just a small minority? Yet they would present themselves as such and have tried to influence Korean people that they represent the 'NEW generation of Korean Adoptees'. The HELL I say!! You Do NOT RESPRESENT ME, nor thousands of those in the middle of the BELL CURVE.
TRACK has demonstrated publicly and personally to me that they took action to separate themselves from the plan of the so called 'dangerous danes'. Their request to publish a Memorandum of Understanding was ignored by Kim Stoker and leaders of ASK, and by GOA'L.
Get your facts straight, this is not about my own anger but the blatant lies by leaders of ASK and GOA'L in league with the Politicizing of so called Neutral GOA'L to become used as an Anti-Adoption Adoptees' Association. I FIGHT THEIR IDEAS of STOPPING ICA, for the children, who though unwanted by KOREANS still need a loving home, even in a Trans-cultural or Trans-racial family that would give them a chance. Notice I don't use the term "lucky or grateful to be adopted", ADOPTION IS THE NEXT BEST OPTION. For those who grow up in an Orphanage less than 3% will graduate from a university.
You may call yourself any name you want but it is NOT a LEGAL NAME to take your old name, is it? He is NOT legally recognized as KIM DAE-WON, period by Swiss or Korean authorities. Even your name is just what you want to call yourself as a way of identifying with your ethnicity. I have no problem with this but IT IS NOT YOUR LEGAL NAME. Perhaps after 2011 when the Duel citizenship law is passed and goes into effect some adoptees may chose to do so. Not clear on the name change aspects. Some may decide to “go native” and that is their prerogative but it is NOT LEGAL YET.
Mr. Wenger told me that "don't worry about those two guys, Kim Su Rasmussen and Eli Park Sorensen. I told them they cannot take over GOA'L".... Then HE basically allowed them to nominate candidates on the very day of the election? Limited voting to only those present at the General Meeting.
The Annual General Meeting should be presided over by the Chairman of the Board, according to Article 18 of the Bylaws of the Incorporation. HE was not present. I know most of you are too busy to check but it can be found HERE
A vote to decide how to vote for Board of Directors (in Corpore As a Group) or Individually was first presented. The number of members present forming a quorum:
A quorum is the total members present. A simple majority is one more than half of the quorum. Total members were 49, so a simple majority was 25 votes.
The motion to vote Individually was counted by me and others as only “20”, twenty is NOT A DAMN simple majority, is it? But they went ahead and voted Individually.
THIS IS MY BEEF, Illegal procedures.
Counting Abstentions as NAY.The College of Denver notes on a page on Robert's Rules:
"...Abstentions do not count in tallying the vote; when members abstain, they are in effect only attending the meeting to aid in constituting a quorum..." From Washington University:http://cialab.ee.washington.edu/Marks/P/IEEE/RobertsRules/RobertsRules/Majority.htm
a 3-3-5 vote as you asked would indeed, be a tie.
"A Majority Vote consists of over 50% YES's of all the YES and NO ballots counted."
EXAMPLE: A tie is not a majority.
EXAMPLE: 23 votes are yes, 21 votes are NO and 345 votes are ABSTAIN.
This is a majority and the motion passes."
So, it would seem that the abstained votes are not counted at all and
“Stop whining?” I AM BITCHING NOT whining, dear. I am Hitting back with TRUTH, FACTS, LAWs OF THE LAND, KOREA not European Rules of Order.
This is NOT for me personally, it is for those children who will NOT BE ADOPTED by Koreans and NEED A FAMILY if the Anti-Adoption Adoptees Association have their way.
Insert ASK postcard here: