I bet where your going wrong is either the integration of the texts under a united theme or value (because remember that all these texts MUST be treated not individually but as 1 text with an overriding value, eg Suu Kyi and Keating --> equality. Ostensibly values are equality, freedom, justice, aka democratic values...Stick with that as a thesis and then link in the texts) or your just failing to prove what your trying to say. More quotes, more techniques, and textual integrity or do these texts have an induring value and meaning? and why? what makes this so (for all, it is yes) and you must bring in context both past and present as to why these texts are relevant today which makes the textual integrity, eg Suu Kyi's main value is arguably equality right? so, if read today, one could say that this text possesses textual integrity because of the Arab Spring where people under dictatorships clearly lack equality causing revolt
