Friday, 27 May 2011

Brad Adams, if violation of Human Rights is your interest, turn your attention to what USA,France and UK are doing in Libya

Lt.-Col. Sylvain Menard, right, stands amid laser-guided bombs used to enforce a UN no-fly zone over Libya, as he talks with, from right, Gen. Walter J. Natynczyk, Ambassador James Fox, Col. Donald Denne and Chief Petty Officer First Class Robert Cléroux during a visit to the Canadian detachment based out of Trapani, Italy. (Canadian Forces Combat Camera)

Brad Adams is a prejudiced individual who is unable to see things objectively, therefore the Human Rights Watch of which he is the Director for Asia, cannot be any thing but anti progressive, reactionary, and far from seeking human welfare, despite its boastful label “ Human Rights Watch”. It only “watches “ the interest of some groups and countries, and seeks to deliberately discredit and weaken the developing countries meaninglessly throwing disparaging remarks on matters it is ignorant about and even refuses to understand.

All these Western human rights activists, including Brad Adams human rights watch are not interested in the specially coloured ethnic community any where in the world, they are working as paid employees. They work with Western Governments, and their primary interest is to give credit not to a government that fights terrorism but to the “terrorists” in defense. Of their cause.

For them terrorism as long as it does not affect them is a “ rebellion” and the terrorists, “ the rebels”. Therefore, in supporting the “rebel cause” they condemn the government, invariably a developing country which they would like to keep in the “ Western Orbit” with a “puppet” government set up by them.

The West and individuals of the West like Brad Adams, think that only those of the West or an Institution even partly composed with persons from the West, could give « enlightened » information and make authoritative, acceptable investigations, on any matter, technical, military or humanitarian. They do not accept any person however qualified coming from a country outside the Western orbit is capable of making valid contributions on such issues.

How long are we willing to accept this myth they have created- only a White man takes a correct decision ?

We see that with the Ban Ki Moon’s Panel. Its report is taken as more acceptable well examined and credible than a report from the Committee appointed by the Government of Sri Lanka the LLRC which met and interviewed the actually affected people. The Committee consisted of a member from the Tamil community.

Where as Ban Ki Moon’s panel consisted of an Indonesian, South African and an American. None of them had visited Sri Lanka nor interviewed people from the areas that were affected by terrorism in Sri Lanka. But yet the West is making use of that report as giving the correct ground situation of the final phase of the military operations against the terrorists in Sri Lanka.

The West could go on only statements recorded or photographs produced by persons, journalists, NGO representatives, and other Westerners who happened to be in the terrorist controlled areas who were sympathetic to the cause of the terrorists. What they provide are doubtful evidence as far as Sri Lanka is concerned. Such as those video clips by the UK Channel 4.

Sri Lanka is the only country in the world that eliminated terrorist who had been defying the government Armed Forces, fighting gun in hand unto the last. Even Osman bin Laden the leader of the Al Qaida who mounted terrorism in America in September 11th, 2001, was not a terrorist with a gun in his hands, like Prabhakaran the leader of the terrorists in Sri Lanka, when he was “murdered” by the Joint Special Operations Command of the America’s “mighty” military machinery. They not only murdered the unarmed Osman bin Laden but also killed his innocent wife who defended him standing helplessly in front of him.

What has the great Humanitarian Brad Adams pretends he is, got to say about the assassination of unarmed Osman Bin Laden and his wife on the night of 1 May, 2011 of which the former President Bush of USA said “…….a "momentous achievement" that "marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001.

"I congratulated him and the men and women of our military and intelligence communities who devoted their lives to this mission. They have our everlasting gratitude. The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done."

That Brad Adams was on the 1st May, 2011, of which you have apparently nothing to say, but you are accusing the Government and the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka for what happened two years ago, and for killing terrorists who were facing the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka with guns in hand.

Yes, Mr. Brad Adams our well disciplined Armed Forces in their rightful duty of defending the country and its people against a ruthless group of terrorists, rescuing at the same time a milling mass of civilians running pell-mell, away from the terrorists who had kept them as a human shield, shot and killed the terrorists to the last one of them to finally end the suffering of a whole population, of a whole country that had been going on for thirty long years.

Nor Brad Adams, nor Ban Ki Moon, nor Navi Pillai, nor Louise Arbour, nor Yolanda Foster accusing Sri Lanka Armed Forces for violation of human rights in its military operations against terrorism will ever understand the tearful suffering and condition of the people of Sri Lanka living every day in fear of painful death to one self , a husband, a wife, a brother or a sister returning after work , or a son or a daughter returning from school, from the blast of a bomb set by a black terrorist bomber, in a bus, a train or on the way side.

Sri Lanka is a nation that was sitting on a « terrorist bomb » for thirty years, watching the deaths, murders and assassinations , until the President Mahinda Rajapakse took over the rein of government and with determination to end the suffering of the people and the possible breaking away of the country, inspired the Armed Forces to wipe out terrorism for good. And our valiant soldiers faced almost « certain death » against a well equipped group of terrorists who would stop at nothing to kill and massacre soldiers or innocent civilians to set up their dream Eelam State, and yet despite all those odds won the battle against terrorism.

But the West, did not took time off to evaluate the ability of a small sovereign nation with an Armed Force with a minimum of military power, but maximum of courage winning against terrorism, but began almost immediately accusing the Sri Lanka Armed Forces for war crimes in the elimination of terrorism.

Of Course our Armed Forces are capable of sharing their “know-how “ acquired after that terrible experience with other nations who may have a similar situation.

While you Brad Adams, were sitting in your comfortable chair in a spacious room in your cozy comfort, dictating to a elegant secretary information you had read in journals or gathered from else where a draft report trying to accuse Sri Lanka Armed Forces in best possible English, you could not have imagined the suffering of the Sri Lanka soldiers- crawling their way in reptile infested forests taking cover from bullets of the hiding terrorists, having had no proper meal for days, drenched in rain, wading neck deep in flooded muddy waters, seeing some of their comrades swept away in the flooded water, climbing earth bunds where they were sitting ducks for terrorist guns.

It is that experience they lived and strategies they set that finally resulted in victory over terrorism that they wish to share with other nations who may find themselves in a similar situation. For that Brad Adams they should be congratulated for their initiative which is a generous and thoughtful contribution in the global war against terrorism.

But mean as Brad Adams as the Director of the Human Rights Watch makes a deplorable statement informing the 54 countries invited to attend the « Seminar on Defeating Terrorism : The Sri Lanka Experience » organized by the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka, that « Governments should decline the invitation to attend a Sri Lankan military conference that seeks to legitimize the unlawful killing of thousands of civilians during the armed conflict with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).”

This Brad Adams the vicious man he is, has further added accusing Sri Lanka, that "Sri Lanka's self-proclaimed ‘model' of counterinsurgency included repeatedly shelling civilians, targeting hospitals, and trying to prevent the world from finding out about it," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "This conference is nothing more than a public relations exercise to whitewash abuses. No professional, law-abiding military should take part in this farce." This is a despicable pronouncement of his ignorance of the reality.

Brad Adam’s negative reaction to a worthy cause is reprehensible. It is still more deplorable as he as the Director of Human Rights, is commenting on a war against real terrorists that was successfully fought and won, and which is already history, refuses to see the violation of human rights and breach of all legal norms under his very nose TODAY in Libya, by USA, France and UK using their powerful NATO armed forces.

NATO War Planes targetting many places in Libya

Brad Adams is it not naïve on your part to speak about, “…accountability for abuses, from the Sri Lankan government ……..” instead of demanding for accountability for currently continuing abuses of violation of human rights in Libya by USA, France , UK combined military operation and the NATO operations since 31 March,2011” on the one hand, and for the “murder “ of an unarmed Osman bin Laden and his wife in Abbottabad in Pakistan by the Joint Special Operations Command of the USA, on the other.

Brad Adams do you know that UN Security Council Resolution 1973 was only for surveying the air space over Bengazi, and not to bombard Libya. But immediately after the bombardments commenced on Libya by the USA, France and UK Forces President Barrack Obama “asked colonel Gaddafi the Leader of Libya a sovereign State to leave Libya. Is that the democracy you seem to support ?

Do you know Brad Adams that France and Italy had said that they would join Britain to send Military Liaison Officers to support the rebel army (Libyan terrorists) on the ground in Libya to support the insurgency leader (a puppet of the West) (International Herald Tribune 21.4.2011 reported by Steven Erlanger) ?

It is also reported that , “Reinforcing that view American Officials disclosed Wednesday that the Obama Administration planned to give the Libyan opposition Dollars 25 million in nonlethal assistance in what would be the first direct US aid to the rebels.”

Does not all that amount to indirectly deploying French, Italian and UK and USA soldier on the ground ? Did they get UNSC Sanction for that ?

If not in not reminding the USA, France and UK that they are acting in contravention of the UNSecurity Council Resolution 1973, and that they should stop further involvement in Libya, Ban Ki Moon, SGUN is in fact aiding and betting in a war by Western military powers in Libya ?

Despite the UN Security Council Sanction under Resolution 1973, was only to control the Libyan air space not to bomb Libya or deploy a foreign army on ground, Cameron the Prime Minister of UK had boasted "extremely skilful and dangerous" work of airmen who have targeted dictator Muammar Gaddafi's forces while "doing everything possible to avoid civilian casualties".

They had dropped 2600 bombs in Libya and are we to accept Cameron’s word that no civilians had been killed, when we have reliable information that it was the NATO bombardments that killed Colonel Gaddafi’s youngest son and his two children.

Brad Adams as the Director of the Human Rights Watch (Asia), you should request Ban Ki Moon UNSG to call a special sitting of the Security Council to demand USA, France and UK NATO Forces to stop bombarding the Libyan people and stop handing over the Libyan Oil fields in Bengazi to French Total and British Petroleum Companies. Both bombardment and taking over oil wells are an abuse of the sanction granted by the UNSC under its Resolution No.1973.

Canada refuses to say how many bombs they have dropped in Libya , but it has been reported that, « Curiously, the (Canadian) military has just published -- publicly -- a request to buy 1,300 new $100,000 laser-guided bombs, reportedly all for use in the Libyan campaign. So, Canadians might not know how many bombs have already been dropped, but they know how many more could be on their way. »

Libyan people have not revolted against their Leader Colonel Gaddafi , it was only when a few disgruntled men in Bengazzi followed a campaign against the Libyan government imitating their neighbours in Tunisia and Egypt, that France seized the opportunity to call them Libyan rebels revolting against Colonel Gaddaffi and recognised a few Libyans in France as a provisional Government and got together with USA, and UK to bombard Libya with the intention of killing or chasing away Colonel Gaddafi and place a puppet government in place to exploit the Libyan Oil fields. Their rallying call was defending the revolting Libyans in Bengazi. There was in fact a talk about France, USA and UK opening embassies in the rebelled control areas in Bengazzi.

Are the developing Nations –Sovereign States, safe from the “terrorism” that is being deployed by the West, which in Libya is not in reality to defend the people, but to rid a Leader of a sovereign state whose presence derange the International Community, and set up a puppet government to benefit from the rich oil fields of Libya ?

Brad Adams speaking about Sri Lanka you said that, “ …. But these lessons will not be learned as long as the Sri Lankan government distorts the truth and tries to keep its atrocities hidden."

Brad Adams you should swallow your own words if you cannot admit that it is the USA, France and UK Governments that « distort the truth and try to keep their atrocities hidden."

Brad Adams, if you are genuinely interested in Human Rights, it should not only be the human rights of the Tamil terrorists in Sri Lanka you should be interested , but also the human rights of the Libyan people who are at the moment in need of help to stop the “ terrorism of the USA, France and UK”

The elimination of terrorists in Sri Lanka has turned out to be a gold mine for many, the Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, diverse journalists, Websites, are the primary beneficiaries, and then the Authors writing fiction and non-fiction. Long live accusations for the employment of some Westerners and writing of books by others all sympathetic towards the terrorists of Sri Lanka, and accusing the brave soldiers of the most humanitarian Armed Forces of Sri Lanka.

Saturday, 21 May 2011

Dayasiri Jayasekara UNP MP from Kurunegala a rising star in UNP is a potential Leader .

UNP is in shamble, as usual Ranil Wickramasinghe is on his erratic path of finding means to defeat the government and send the President home. He had been at it from the time he became the Leader of the Opposition, and he will continue until the cows come home if he manages to keep his leadership role in a party whose members seem to have lost interest in the party, the leader of which fatigues them with his political antics, walking in circles with complete lack of ideas.

Batalanda torture chambers, and the Millennium safe house betrayal follow Ranil Wickramasinghe like his shadow .

He did not try to stop terrorism but he tried to accommodate terrorists giving them the assurance of safety to develop their terrorist capabilities with a CFA prepared by Norway in collaboration with the terrorist leader. He was ably supported by his Secretary Bradman Weerakoon who helped Norway to transport without control by the customs, directly to the terrorists, containers containing modern communication equipment and other unknown items, without even road checks.

He started peace negotiations with the terrorists, allowing the Norway Mediator to put the terrorists on an equal footing with the government by giving the terrorists Military ranks and making one of them a political head, another Head of the Police Force, and some others as spokesmen for the terrorists. Negotiations he started with the terrorists gave them more power, and allowed them to build a military force stronger than that of the Government.

Eventually through his short sighted actions he enabled the terrorists to have a provisional government in the territories in their control under the provisions of the CFA, with a police force, courts, tax collectors and even banks.

Ranil Wickramasinghe is not a patriotic political leader. He cared less for the country and its people, his only desire was to become the Chief Executive of Sri Lanka- the President. In order to realize that dream he was ready even to share the country with the terrorists.

In 2001 having won the General Elections Ranil Wickramasinghe formed the UNF Government of which he became the Prime Minister, under the President Chandrika Kumaratunga . He was a predominantly a pro-western politician. Even though his foreign policies allowed him to show an economic benefit, he projected himself as the real leader pushing the President in to the back ground.

He reduced the President to a mere ceremonial nomenclature. He was making every possible move to take over the powers of the President of Sri Lanka.

Fortunately for Sri Lanka, the President Chandrika Kumaratunga finally found the courage in the absence of Ranil Wickramasinghe in the country, to sack three ministers and take over the Ministries. She thereafter dissolved the Parliament thus putting an end to Ranil Wickramasinghes destructive political moves.

Ranil Wickramasinghe thought he would be able to re-conquer the political powers that eluded him under the President Chandrika Kumaratunga at the following Presidential elections. But unfortunately for Ranil Wickramasinghe and fortunately for Sri Lanka in the 2005 Presidential elections, the people elected Mahinda Rajapakse.

That was the end of Ranils ambition to take the Presidential chair. However, he became the Leader of the Opposition. From the day one of his being elected the leader of the Opposition he was acting with a mind made up for utter vengeance without any intention of cooperating with the elected President Mahinda Rajapakse, refusing to cooperate with him in any of his projects in the interest of the country and its people.

Even with Chandrika Kumaratunga Ranil Wickramasinghe refused to cooperate with her in her attempts to settle National issues. When he was invited to discuss the political package she was to propose to the terrorists as a preliminary to a peace settlement, he refused to participate in the discussions.

In 2005 the Governments changed and Mr.Mahinda Rajapakse was elected President of Sri Lanka. Ranil Wickramasinghe became the Leader of the Opposition . But he continued his negative approach of non cooperation with the President Mahinda Rajapakse as it had been with the President Chandrika Kumaratunga.

Every action Ranil Wickramasinghe took since 2005, as the Leader of the Opposition was to oppose all political moves of the President Mahinda Rajapakse. He was out to make the President unpopular, taking every opportunity to gather his collaborators around him to make noisy press conferences and manifestations. He did not cooperate with the President in any of his actions which was beneficial to the country and the people.

He was critical of the Military operations against the terrorist. He with his followers Tissa Attanayake, Ravi Karunannake, Laksman Kiriella and the rest mocked the Army Commander and the Armed Forces belittling their victories against the terrorists. Every funeral of a journalist or a Tamil leader assassinated by unknown criminals were made an occasion for a manifestation against the Government, he himself participating in them.

He did nothing positive worthy of a Leader of the Opposition that would make the ordinary people accept him as an honourable political leader fit to be a President some day in the future . In developing countries the role of the Opposition is not to be critical of the activities of the Government, but to make constructive criticism and cooperating with the government in the matters of National interest.

Ranil Wickramasinghe refused to participate in the All Party Representative Committee. He refused to come before the LLRC. He never participated in the Independent Day Celeberations. Each time he was invited to these celebrations he left Sri Lanka to India. When the GSP+ was withdrawn he did not appeal to the EU along with the Government for the reconsideration of the withdrawal. He was absent at the opening of the Hambantota Harbour.

When the terrorists were finally eliminated on the 18 May, 2009, he did not as the Leader of the Opposition call on the President of Sri Lanka to felicitate him on behalf of the UNP. He did not participate in the Victory Celebrations following the elimination of terrorists having left Sri Lanka to either visit Europe or India.

Ranil Wickramasinghe did not change even at the end of the first five years of the Presidency of Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse. When the Presidential elections were due, he thought the best trump to defeat Mahinda Rajapakse was to Present the Army Commander Sarath Fonseka as the rival Presidential candidate to Rajapakse.

He therefore proposed Sarath Fonseka to contest as the common Candidate of the political parties opposed to Mr.Mahinda Rajapakse lead by UNP despite the fact that he was a bitter critic of the Army Commander Sarath Fonseka during the military operations against the terrorists.

Ranil Wickramasinghe did not fail to take up any ones cause provided it is against the President and the Government, to exaggerate its importance and call a press conference to defend the “cause” and blame the government.

When the University lecturers threatened to resign if their demand of higher salaries was not met the UNP immediately took up their “cause”, appointing Kabir Hashim MP, as the Convenor of a UNP Committee to study the developing situation in Universities.

This UNP convener told a news conference in Colombo that the UNP would be meeting the Federation of University Teachers Association (FUTA) to discuss their grievances and demands. "We will identify the problems faced by the lecturers and act on their behalf, both in and outside parliament", he said.

The UNP when in power never proposed a pensions scheme for the Private Sector. But now the Government of the President Mahinda Rajapakse has proposed such a pensions scheme for the first time in the history of Independent Sri Lanka, UNP has come forward to oppose it and warn the government of UNP staging a mass public protest against the proposal.

The latest cause Ranil Wickramasinghe has taken up is against the Government’s Leadership training programme for the new entrants to Universities. Ranil will continue his anti-government “projects” like a bull in a China shop. It will take a long time for him to understand that those tactics of his will help neither the UNP nor the Country, and least of all himself.

He continues his non cooperation with the government and continues opposition to every undertaking of the government without giving any credit to any of the Government’s progressive development projects.

When the now infamous Ban Ki Moon Advisory Panel report- the so called Darusman report was “illegally” published by UNSG, the Opposition Leader Ranil Wickramasinghe who instead of joining with the President to condemn it, did not make even a statement against it, other than appointing Bradman Weerakoon to examine the report and make his recommendations.

But on the other hand the young UNP Member from Kurunegala Dayasiri Jayasekara was the first to condemn it and as a true patriot say that the UNP should work together with the government against allegations leveled against the country in the report on Sri Lanka prepared by the UN panel of experts.

Dayasiri Jayasekara further added as a true leader of the UNP should have , that

party rivalries needed to be cast aside when facing allegations leveled against the country by the UN panel of experts.

Dayasiri Jayasekara has showed true qualities of leadership, and being a young politician of the people he appears to be a better politician to lead the UNP, than Ranil Wickramasinghe who is stepping away from the masses to seek his own ambition to become one day the President of Sri Lanka. A young politician like Dayasiri Jayasekara will be a better leader in all respects to lead the UNP in place of Ranil Wickramasinghe.

Sajith Premadasa though he is vociferous about reforms to the UNP, and demands that Ranil Wickramasinghe should step down at press conferences and at meetings, he seem to be weak kneed in the presence of Ranil Wickramasinghe, and the UNP Working Committee . Therefore, Sajith Premadasa is weak political aspirant for the leadership of the party, and if selected will not be able to give UNP the necessary political force.

The UNP pro-reform group is handicapped having Sajith Premadasa as its leader. To oust Ranil Wickramasinghe and carry out radical reforms in the UNP, there should be a better politician than Sajith Prelmadasa to turn ideas to action, to lead the pro-reform group of the UNP.

Dayasiri Jayasekara is a very strong voice in the pro-reform group and his leader ship would be more effective to out manoeuvre Rani Wickramasinghe and the UNP old guards.

Thursday, 19 May 2011

Ban Ki Moon should withdraw his Panel Report on Sri Lanka, in the face of continued “terrorism “ of USA, France and UK” against the people of Libya. P

While Ban Ki Moon awaits Sri Lanka Government’s reaction to his advisory Panel’s Report “Democracy” is being ridiculed under his very nose by the powers to which he has become a stooge- USA, France and UK.

In the most scandalous manner in which the terrorist leader of Al Qaida Osama bin Laden was murdered, USA, France and UK managed to divert the attention of the world from the other scandal in which they are engaged in since the 19 March,2011- the attempting to murder Colonel Gaddafi the Leader of the Sovereign State of Libya. This “war” they started with Ban Ki Moon’s apparent connivance, which was the getting of the sanction of the UN Security Council to keep free the air space in Libya against air attacks in Bengazi.

Ban Ki Moon seems no doubt in connivance, because the sanction of the UN Security Council was deviated to a war to murder Colonel Gaddafi. If Ban Ki Moon was genuinely unaware of the “murder plan” of the USA, France and UK , he should have called for a meeting of the Security Council the moment the USA bombed Libya, (killing many civilians and recently even killing the youngest son of Colonel Gaddafi, Saif al-Arab Gadhafi and two of his little children in an inhuman bombardment), to demand these “ murderers” to stop bombardments in Libya.

But even to-day after many bombs have been blasted and many a civilians have been killed in Libya Ban Ki Moon as the Secretary General of UNO has not moved his finger to stop this illegal bombardment by USA, France and UK.

If Ban Ki Moon has any sense of priority, and knows his duties and responsibilities as the Secretary General of the UN, he should have withdrawn his Advisory Panel Report on Sri Lanka and concentrated on what action he should take against the “terrorism “ that is being practiced by USA, France and UK against the people of Libya, and USA Special Force’s infringement of the international Laws in entering the Sovereign State of Pakistan without its consent, to murder an unarmed terrorist.

Again, Ban Ki Moon has to withdraw his Panel Report on Sri Lanka as it would otherwise be a paradox in comparison to military operations by USA, France and UK against a innocent people in Libya.

Sri Lanka was within its right to wage military operations in its own country against a group of terrorists creating mayhem in the Northern and Eastern parts of its own country . But the USA, France and UK are bombarding another country, which is not theirs and killing innocent people of that country. That is “terrorism” by the International Community.

If there were deaths and massacres in the last phase of the military operations of the Sri Lanka Armed Forces against the terrorists, they were inevitable as massacres of civilians had been what the terrorists were up to during thirty years of terrorism, and the shooting at the terrorists by the Government Armed Forces was to finish with terrorism and their massacres of the innocent, and end the suffering of the Tamil civilians.

The Ban Ki Moon’s Panel report does not give the whole picture of the ground situation at that particular phase of the military operations of the Armed Forces against the terrorists. It gives only those hearsay material provided to the Panel by the LTTE Front Organizations of the Tamil Diaspora, those information given by Navi Pillai, and those culled from the numerous terrorist supportive websites like the Tamil Net, and the web site of the Tamil Sangam.

The Ban Ki Moon advisory Panel report should be withdrawn , as there are other factors which the Advisory Panel had not taken into consideration before coming to certain of their conclusions, without which there report remains “irrelevant and incomplete”.

The Advisory Panel had gone into investigate the crimes committed by the terrorists, and violation of human rights by the Sri Lanka Armed Forces , without investigating the humanitarian activities carried out by the Sri Lanka Armed Forces during the height of the military operations, such as the rescue operations of three hundred thousand Tamil Civilians. That itself puts in to shade the accidental deaths that may have occurred in the cross fire between the terrorists and the Government Armed Forces.

The Ban Ki Moon Advisory Panel report should be with drawn, as the Panel had failed to examine and take into account the mental state of the Sri Lanka Armed Forces and that of the terrorists , in coming to the conclusion who it was capable in that very crucial stage to act with humanitarian considerations , and who it was capable of shooting indiscriminately at any one with the only consideration of saving its own skin.

You cannot of course speak of investigating who was fighting with human rights consideration in his mind in a “war” against terrorists. And “stuff” like human rights, their violation, what is legal, and what is illegal are not in the mind of a soldier fighting a war against terrorist without any assurance of coming alive out of it. Demanding whether there was any violation of human right in such a situation, makes human rights a ridiculous concept.

The desire to know the mental state of the “fighters” should have been at the core of the advisory panel’s investigation.

It was otherwise easy to go by the figures, statistics, information of number of buildings bombarded, how many hospitals have been shot at, how many dead bodies were strewn about on the sandy beaches etc., and come to the conclusion that both sides- the terrorists and the Armed Forces had killed masses of people , some say 40,000, another says 20,000.

Even with those figures there are the questions that have to be asked.

Who really counted the bodies ? Were they all dead bodies they counted or some dead and others wounded ? Were they of the civilians, were they of the terrorists , or were they of the soldiers ?

Then, there are more questions to ask.

Who went round in that terrible situation, where bullets were wheezing past, where there was a din of noise of shooting, blasting, incoherent shouting of the people caught in the frenzy of the moment , crying of children , screaming of women , people running for their lives, soldiers taking cover, or reaching out to help an old woman, or a child, …. Who went round , with a pad in hand to take notes of people dead and strewn on the ground and finally say there were 40, 000 civilians dead ?

Were they all killed by the shooting of the terrorists and the Armed Forces or were some of them killed in the stampede of 300,000 or so civilians running away from being the human-shields of the terrorist to finally be saved by the Army Soldiers doing their best to rescue them unhurt ? Were they all killed by the Armed Forces or some killed by the Armed Forces and others by the terrorists ?

For an advisory Panel to come to a conclusion whether there was any violation of human rights by the Government Armed Forces (or the terrorists), those “dry “ information unfortunately do not provide the essential information.

The essential information comes from investigating the psychological make up, the mental state of the fighters in a situation like it was happening in a last ditch fight in a “war” to save their lives at any cost, or fight unto death by one party, and fight with responsibility, to save oneself, not to kill the wrong person, and save another in need of help.

It is the investigation of the psychological state at the time of the “soldiers” on the one hand and the “terrorists” on the other” during the last phase of the military operations against the terrorists which would enable one to understand who would have been able to distinguish one as an enemy, and the other as an innocent civilian, child, or a woman, and avoid the innocent, and shoot at the enemy.

The Ban Ki Moon Panel should have taken into consideration this mental state of the “fighters” to conclude whether it was the Government Forces that violated human rights at that crucial phase of time or the terrorists. ( in the case of terrorists their mental state is that of terrorists all the time) . But the Ban Ki Moon Panel had failed to take that important aspect in to consideration, therefore their report is incomplete and incoherent, and should be withdrawn.

Going back to the “terrorism” of the International Community, for which Ban Ki Moon has not appointed an Advisory Panel to investigate whether there is violation of Human rights. USA, France and UK have no right to continue their bombardment in Libya, as they haven’t got the sanction for bombardment from the Security Council.

USA said they will not deploy troops on ground, but there was an article in the New York Herald Tribune of 21 April, 2011 written by C.J.Chivers –“The will, but not the means to fight a war “.

It has been said that the Benghazi “rebels” have arms but cannot use them and they are disorganized and incapable of fighting against the armies of Colonel Gaddafi . Therefore the NATO is proposing to send a group of advisors to form the rebel army.

Now the question is, has that been sanctioned by the UN Security Council ? The West with NATO is fighting an illegal war, and Ban Ki Moon should call a meeting of the UN Security Council to demand USA, France and UK to stop further involvement in Libya either to bombard or to help the so called “liberation” army which is no more than “terrorists” helped by USA, France and UK.

If Ban Ki Moon is not prepared to do that, he will be aiding and abetting “ Terrorrism of USA, France, and UK” ( which is same as state terrorism – which was coined by some human rights activists).

He therefore forfeits the to right call the Government of Sri Lanka to answer the “false” allegations of the Ban Ki Moon Panel, which is also called the Darusman Panel Report.

Ban Ki Moon should therefore withdraw immediately his Advisory Panel Report on the investigation of violation of human rights by the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka during the last phase of military operations against terrorist.

Monday, 9 May 2011

Leading the Buddhist Lay followers away from rituals and ceremonies to the path of the Dhamma is the duty of the Buddhist Monk

Rituals, which are procedures for conducting religious practices cannot all be eliminated, because they are the customary practices that kept a belief system alive. Different religions have different rituals and religious practices some of which such as animal sacrifice, and smearing of animal blood are unacceptable and should be removed by all means . Even the worship of « lingam » though it is an ancient custom seems out of place in an environment of sanctity and worship, but they are not connected to Buddhism and therefore no further elaboration seems necessary.

As far as Buddhism is concerned some of the rituals and ceremonies have their origin in ancient religious environment into which the teachings of the Buddha was introduced. That is more evident in Mahayana Buddhism, Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. In Sri Lanka most of the rituals and ceremonies are the later additions to the Buddhism, which are a mild version of rituals and ceremonies of Hindu religious « cults » that had found their way into our Buddhist Temples and Viharas. For instances the devalas and the statues of Hindu Gods like Ganesh, Vishnu and so on with connected rituals and ceremonies certainly have no place in Buddhist places of worship.

A culture of a people has the religion it practices as its base. Therefore, some of the cultural symbols , functions and ceremonies have got mixed up with Buddhism, and they remain an outer covering of the teachings of the Buddha which is the core. It is the rituals and ceremonies that attract the lay devotees to the sublime teachings, they play a role in the perpetuation of the « Dhamma » and keeping the people and the Temple together. The Dalanda Perahera and such other festivities have also taken a religious character, though they are a distant away from the teachings of the Buddha.

Even a Sinhala Buddhist marriage is a mixture of many cultures. Specially the low country wedding where the bride wears a veil which is undoubtedly a Christian influence, then there is the auspicious time and exchange of rings which seems to be of Hindu influence and the “poruwa” ceremony takes a Buddhist turn in the recitations of gathas which are descriptive of the Buddhist teachings, and invariably there is the recitation of Jaya Mangala Gatha. Therefore a Sinhala Buddhist Wedding has a religious character though not performed in a Temple and Buddhist monks.

The Buddha did not speak of the practice of ceremonies and rituals, but there are instances when the Buddha had given in to symbolic performances of rituals by his followers. One such is when Anathapindika constructed the Jetavanaramaya Monastery for the Buddha and dedicated it to the Buddha and his Sangha. It is said that the people came to the Jetavanaramaya bringing along with them garlands of followers and other offerings which they left near the Gandhakuti, where the Buddha was residing.

Anathapindika who visited Jetavanaramaya every day, saw that people who came to see the Buddha were disappointed when the Buddha was not there and went throwing away the offerings they had brought with them. Anatapindika informed this to the Venerable Ananda who went to the Buddha and asked what were the objects of veneration. And the Buddha said that they are those appertaining to the body (saririka) , appertaining to personal use(paribhogika) and object reminiscent of the Buddha(uddesika) .

The Buddha told Venerable Ananda that no objects of reverence (cetiya) appertaining to his body should serve as an object of reverence during his life time, as an object of reverence reminiscent of the Buddha has no physical basis ; it is purely mental. He said that the great Bodhi tree used by the Buddha whether he is alive or dead is an object of reverence(cetiya).

Then the Venerable Ananda told the Buddha of the disappointment of the people who come to see him when he is away from Jetavanaramaya and asked whether he could bring a seed from the Great Bodhi tree and plant it in the compound of the Jetavanaramaya as an object of reverence for the people . Then the Buddha asked him to do so and said that the tree would be a reminiscent object of reverence. (The Buddha and his teachings-by Narada Thero) . It is said that when the bo sapling which is now known as the Ananda Bodhi had grown the Buddha sat meditating under it for one whole night giving it a special sanctity.

The Buddhist rituals and ceremonies have a great attraction to children. The Buddhist children growing up in such pleasant environment of rituals and ceremonies will remember them as catalysts that awakened them to Dhamma. What a pleasure it is to enter silently into a shrine room of a Temple glowing in the weak yellow flames of oil lamps on a poya day, where the devotees clad in white kneel down reciting in a mixed mumble the gathas and see the smiling face of the seated Buddha, and kneel in sacred admiration at the foot of the reclining statue of the Buddha ?

It is a special joy specially for the young children, a joy different from any other, to recite the gathas ( the stanzas) together with the family, imitating the father or the mother , in sacred muted voice coyly smiling when making a mistake in recitation, offering flowers trying to remember the correct gatha praying at the dagaba and light lamps and inhale the odour of incense sticks in the shrine rooms. These lead later to keep the higher precepts to observe “ sil “, and even take to meditation. Hence the ceremonies and rituals are in a way the stepping stones to follow the teachings of the Buddha.

A Buddhist family goes to the temple on the poya day clad in white carrying with them flowers to offer, oil for lamps, and incense sticks to burn. These have been adopted by the laity to venerate the Buddha and his teachings in their way, though the Buddha had not given such instructions of what to wear, and what to offer. But turning away from those practices which are also rituals, is turning away from devotion to the Dhamma which represents the living Buddha. The Statues are symbols conceptualizing the compassion of the Buddha, mere looking at the statue of a serene Buddha statue reciting silently the nine qualities of the Buddha inflames one’s piety and devotion to the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha.

Without the ceremonies and ritual the temples and shrine rooms will be abandoned by the people. The life of the Buddhist people will be monotonous and boring as it is not all who take to meditation, and it is not all who seek an intellectual understanding of teachings bereft of rituals, and ceremonies The teachings of the Buddha are more pragmatic. The teachings show that there are three aspects of worship. There is generosity (dana) offering of alms to the Sangha, there is the keeping of the higher precepts on the “poya” days (sila), and then the meditation (bhavana) .

Generosity or offering of alms(dana) to the Buddhist monks is shrouded with rituals and ceremonies. In a home the preparation of alms is done with utmost faith (sardha). Best vegetables are selected, all ingredients are prepared fresh, sure to keep clean every pot, pan and plate used in the kitchen in the preparation of the dana. The food is not even tasted to see whether there is enough salt or condiments. The rituals continue through faith, saddha or bhakti.

There is a time, before which the alms offerings have to be taken to the Temple. Those who carry the food are dressed in white , carrying pots and pans duly covered in white on their head. There is the Buddha puja an offering in reminiscent of the Buddha, which is preceded by drums (hevisi pooja), flute (horane) and the sound of the conch “sak”.

The offering of the Dana is preceded by the Offering to the Buddha where every one repeats the stanzas after the Monk who conducts the ceremony. At the end of it every one is happy that everything had gone off well . They have accumulated maha kusala kamma.

Even during the time of the Buddha there may have been such ceremonies but less elaborate. The Buddha after sitting down always asked for the head of the household or the one who offers the dana.

Some of these ceremonies may have been mixed up with those of Hinduism but yet they serve their purpose. But these rituals and ceremonies inspire the Buddhists in Dhamma the teachings of the Buddha.

Certain of these rituals also give psychological comfort, such as listening to pirith ceremony which is a very satisfying experience. Every stanza in “pirith” has a special way of being recited, and one is kept attentive to the recitations. The “pirith noola”, which certainly has a Hindu influence nevertheless gives a person who had gone through the whole recitation of pirith a great satisfaction, a mental fulfillment. Recitation of “pirith” and sprinkling of water was even recommended by the Buddha.

In Vesali there was a famine, a pestilence , and was haunted by evil spirits. The Buddha asked Venerable Ananda to tour Vesali with Licchavi citizens reciting the Ratana Sutta and sprinkling the sanctified water to give protection to the people of Vesali from famine, pestilence and evil spirits. Venerable Ananda returned Back to the town hall where the Buddha and his retinue of Bikkhus had assembled. Then the Buddha recited the Ratana Sutta to the people who had gathered there.

There will always be those who listen to sermons, or recitation of “pirith”, or discourses superficially pretending to be devout Buddhists but those hypocrites are common but that should not be the reason to eliminate rituals and ceremonies from Buddhism.

Politics and spirituality have a complex relation ship. Some of the Politicians go bear bodied to attend a Hindu Ceremony in the morning and come in pure white dress to attend Buddhist ceremonies in the evening. Most of them wear excessive number of “pirith nool” even without having listened to the recitation of “pirith’.

There are no doubt the more intelligent who would prefer to practice meditation and follow the path of Buddhism more meaningfully, but the ordinary people want rituals and ceremonies without which the Buddha Sasana will not exist. Buddha Sasana is not the practice of higher Dhamma and meditation alone, but rituals and ceremonies are also a part of it. There should be Buddhist laity to provide alms, shelter and robes. Those are also necessary activities expected of the Buddhist laity for the Community of Buddhist monks, which result in wholesome kamma for worldly existence.

Of course there are certain influences that have crept into the ritual and ceremonial aspect of Buddhism which should be removed lest we loose the importance of the teachings of the Buddha. These are the worship of Hindu Gods in Buddhist temples. There are the Kapuralas conducting their thevavas as a part of Buddhist worship with their different Devalas dedicated to Vishnu, Pattini, Natha, Ganesha, Dadimunda and Huniyamn devathavo within the Buddhist Vihara premises. The statues of Gods in the Shrine rooms of the Buddhist temples should be removed. Devales should not be allowed to function within Buddhist temple premises.

Katharagama Devale has become a shameless business enterprise. These Diyawadane Nilames and Kapuralas have no place in a country dedicated to Buddha Dhamma and Sanga by the good King Devanampiyatissa at the behest of Venerable Arahat Mahinda more than 2300 years ago.

Then there are the rituals around funerals where a Mataka vastha is offered to the Sangha, followed by a Mathaka Dana. There are pinkamas to transfer merit from the third day after the death, then the seventh day, third months and one year after death. Then there are also Bali and Thovil to chase away evil spirits.

These rituals console the people but the necessity to turn them away from these false views ( micca ditthi) is the duty of the Maha Sangha. The Buddhist monk has to protect the Buddha Sasana and therefore they should be alive to the fact they are suitable for that task.

These rituals that have crept into Buddhism are outside the teachings itself of the Buddha, but nevertheless they are a part of the Buddhist culture. The Buddhist culture which are the customs, rituals and ceremonies, and the teachings of the Buddha are bound together and one cannot remove one without removing the other.

It is therefore the duty of the Buddhist monk to lead the Buddhist laity away from the rituals and ceremonies towards the path of the Dhamma. This the Buddhist monks could do by making every Temple in Sri Lanka a meditation Centre, so that any villager who wants to meditate could do so at his convenience by coming to the temple and asking for meditation instruction from the monk in charge of meditation.

That is why the Buddha organized the Order of the Sangha from those who gave up their householders lives to follow a homeless life which is bereft of rituals and ceremonies a middle path leading to meditation and Nibbana. When the Buddha had 60 disciples who had attained the state of noble Arahats, he told them:

Charatha Bhikkhave charikam, bahujana hithaya bahu jana sukhaya- Go Bikkhus, not two in the same direction and spread the teachings for the good of all beings.

Buddhist Lay followers


Saturday, 7 May 2011

Why the Government should not send a reply to the report of the UNSG’s advisory Panel ?

When a case is presented before a judge in a court of law the judge could refuse to accept it for hearing if the respective documents do not meet with court procedures. Similarly the Government of Sri Lanka as a member state of the UN should not accept to respond to a document presented by the Secretary General of the UN, which has not received the sanction of either the Security Council, or the General Assembly of Member States.

The Secretary General of the UNO according to the UN Charter has no right to act independently without the authority of the Assembly General of the UNO or its Security Council. Therefore, the report of the Advisory Panel of the UNSG which is strictly a private document prepared by the Panel as it is said in the document it self:

“ On 22 June, 2010 the SG announced the appointment of a Panel of Experts to advice him on the implementation of the joint commitment included in the statement issued by the President of Sri Lanka and the Secretary General at the conclusion of Secretary General’s visit to Sri Lanka on 23 March,2009.”, without even obtaining the approval of the Government of Sri Lanka as a Member State of UN, has no legal limb to stand on.

Therefore, a response to this document, which had not even the right to be published as a UN Document, will only give it a “legal sanction” which it lacked initially when it was published against the demand of the Government of Sri Lanka. Such an initiative by the Government of Sri Lanka to answer the “report”, will further more give a precedent for the Secretary General of the UNO take arbitrary decisions against any member State of UNO, without consulting the Security Council or the General Assembly.

The joint commitment , mentioned in the above excerpt is the agreement of the Government of Sri Lanka for an accountability process, to take measures to address those grievances.” The government of Sri Lanka fulfilled its part of the agreement in appointing the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Committee, consisting of highly qualified persons coming from different Communities of Sri Lanka.

There was therefore no necessity for the SGUN to appoint a panel of his own to advise him on, “ modalities applicable, international standards and comparative experience relevant to an accountability process….”. Unless he wanted to “insult “ the honourable men of our own country as not qualified to apply” modalities applicable, international standards, and without comparative experience relevant to an accountability process”.

The LLRC is far better qualified than his own Panel of three members who have no knowledge of the cultural back ground of the soldiers who took part in the final stages of the elimination of terrorists, “to understand the nature and scope of alleged violations of international humanitarian and human rights law during the final stages of the armed conflict.

That knowledge goes a long way to understand and analyse the mental make up of the soldiers of Sri Lanka Armed Force fighting a group of terrorists in their own homeland, who are also of the same origin though ethnically different, with the knowledge of their responsibility that in their military operations they have to do their best to avoid putting in danger the lives of the Tamil civilians who are also their own people. That obligation towards their own people sharing the same mother land is more important to avoid harming those people in the last stages of the conflict than any obedience to a humanitarian or human rights law.

If the SGUN cannot accept the conclusions of the LLRC appointed by Sri Lanka Government is his problem, but he has no right to publish the findings of a panel appointed by him to advise him before the LLRC had concluded its investigations and issued its own report.

Secretary General of the UN should understand that he holds an important position. He is above politics, and independent of allegiance to any country or Nation. He is representative of all Nations. His position should remain independent and unbiased so that he could take objective decisions not influenced by any other Nation or a political system.

But unfortunately Ban Ki Moon as the Secretary General of UN in appointing a Panel under the pretence of it being a Panel appointed by him to advice him and then publishing the report of the panel as a UN Document calling the Government of Sri Lanka to answer the “very questionable” accusations raised in the panel’s report, is overstepping the bounds of his mandate as the Secretary General of UNO. He therefore stands accused as a man biased against a Member State and confiscates his right to be the Secretary General of that August body which is the UNO.

In conclusion, it has to be mentioned that it was infantile to accuse the terrorists equally responsible for the violation of human rights and humanitarian Laws, as it was wrong to have put both the terrorists and the Sri Lanka Armed Forces on the same footing and secondly the members of the panel should have at least known better that terror is what the terrorists are capable of and they are not bound by any laws, religious fear, or a feeling of human oneness. Therefore it is “stupid” to hold them accountable to their acts of terrorism.

On the other hand as terrorists are no more to make them accountable to their terrorism, the Panel should have held those front organisations of the terrorists in the Tamil diaspora, such as Father Emmanuel of the LTTE Front Organisation, and those terrorist front organisations in USA, UK, Canada, Australia, Netherlands and elsewhere, and Rudrakumaran responsible for the terrorism of the terrorists and hold them accountable.

This unfortunately, had been left out by the UNSG’s Panel. Why ?

However, the Government should acknowledge the receipt of the report, which had been published despite its opposition, with appropriate comments to show its disagreement, and request the Secretary General to await the issue of the report of the LLRC.

Monday, 2 May 2011

When another terrorist was killed people danced in the streets in Sri Lanka and the West called it triumphalism .

When President Barack Obama announced the death of Osama bin Laden, it was reported:

« The news touched off an extraordinary outpouring of emotion as crowds gathered outside the White House, in Times Square and at the Ground Zero site, waving American flags, cheering, shouting, laughing and chanting, “U.S.A., U.S.A.!” In New York City, crowds sang “The Star-Spangled Banner.” Throughout downtown Washington, drivers honked horns deep into the night.”

We Sri Lankans can understand it but when our people in Sri Lanka broke out into similar “outpouring of emotions” on the killing of the terrorist leader, the Western media called it triumphalism. It is strange how the reaction of the people of two worlds on similar issues could be seen differently one as an out pouring of emotions , and the other as rude triumphalism.

It is good to be a rich powerful country to rid of terrorists and be happy that there would be no one to “question how did it end ? ” but just peace and happiness thereafter. But regrettably a developing country which gets rid of terrorism is not allowed to enjoy that peace after terrorism, without quickly being accused for war crimes.

In Sri Lanka we suffered 30 years of ruthless terror our innocent villagers were massacred, our Security Officers assassinated, 600 policemen who surrendered to terrorists were all massacred, innocent village men, women and children were killed by suicide bomb blasts, and snipers, our Ministers, Parliamentarians and Presidents were killed or disabled for life, our school children were massacred in trains, innocent travelers in buses were bombed, a bus load of our Buddhist priests were butchered inside a bus, our children were kidnapped to be trained as terrorist suicide bombs, our airports were bombed and terrorism restricted our daily existence.

But yet when we finally eliminated terrorism and saved the suffering of the people and loss of our valued leaders and heroes, the very same America that rejoices today the death of a terrorist who was the prime mover for the massacre of innocent Americans, “ just on one day ” through utter terror, accuses Sri Lanka Government and Armed Forces for war crimes and violation of human rights, for eliminating that group of terrorists who practically every day for thirty years killed and massacred over 70 000 of our people in side our own country.

Where is justice, and why is it that suffering through terrorism is understood only when it happens to the big and powerful, and not when the sufferer is not oneself but others poorer and less powerful.

It was 10 years ago in a September that the American people were attacked , and the American Government sent its Army to Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan in search of the perpetrator and finally he was hunted and killed. But in Sri Lank the attacks were a daily happening and the perpetrator was helped by the West and the Tamil diaspora living in America and other foreign countries who collected funds to allow the terrorist in Sri Lanka to keep on killing the innocent people.

When Sri Lanka finally caught the perpetrator in his den and killed and removed terrorism from the country, and the Government started a massive rehabilitation project and cleared the areas held by the terrorists and removed the mines and re-settled the displaced Tamil people back in their villagers, the West comes round along with the Human Rights activists, Amnesty International, UN and Ban Ki Moon, Navi Pillai, investigation Panels, Robert Blake , and American State Department to pontificate to us how we should have carried out the elimination of terrorists, and accuses the Government and the Army for war crimes.

No one can assert that there was no Zero civilian loss in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan through out the hunt for Osama Bin Laden during the past 10 years. Will the American State Department advise Ban Ki Moon to appoint a panel of investigators to look into any violation of human rights in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan through intense bombardments and drone attacks in the hunt for Osama bin Laden, as it was done for Sri Lanka Government and Armed Forces ?

We agree with the President Barrack Obama when he says , “And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world. The empty seat at the dinner table. Children who were forced to grow up without their mother or their father. Parents who would never know the feeling of their child’s embrace. Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts. “

Yes that was 3000 citizens lost to a country and fathers, mothers, and children lost to families. We suffered these losses more frequently for 30 years and in all it was more than 70 000 of our citizens, and fathers, mothers, children, and some time the only “bread earner” to the families.

May be in the rescue operations and the elimination of terrorism some of our citizens may have died in that effort but those civilians who also died in the hunt for Osama bin Laden may be countless though they are from families poorer than those in America and whose loss are not felt by any one in far away America.

It was worst for us in Sri Lanka because it was not hunting and eliminating terrorists in a foreign land. Sri Lanka soldiers had to face the terrorists face to face, and had to rescue the innocent civilians (our own people) who were herded by the terrorists to be their human shield and that was the most difficult task that fell on the shoulders of the poor soldiers to avoid being killed, avoid killing the civilians, but kill the terrorists, what happens in such an effort only a soldiers in the midst of it would know.

That onerous task cannot be understood by Ban ki Moon or his advisory panel, Robert Blake, David Milliband, Hillary Clinton, Amnesty International, human rights activists , UK Channel 4 or numerous critics of Sri Lanka, it has to be one inside doing the difficult task of a soldier, who would know what it was like, it could be explained by this one sentence of the President Barrack Obama, “And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world. “

It was the same with our President Mahinda Rajapakse when he announced the death of the terrorist leader Prabhakaran, it marked the “ most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat terrorism in Sri Lanka”.

As much as the President Barack Obama asserted to his people:

“As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not — and never will be — at war with Islam. I’ve made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam. Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al-Qaida has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.”

our President Mahinda Rajapakse also said very clearly that his Government and the Armed Forces were not and never will be at war with the Tamil people… that the war was not against the Tamil people, and that Prabhakatran was not a leader of the Tamil people, he was a mass murderer of his own people and the rest of the communities of Sri Lanka. His demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

We appeal to the President Barrack Obama to understand that, as he said no country “……..will ever tolerate its security being threatened, nor stand idly by when its people have been killed. All countries will be relentless in defense of its citizens and friends and allies.” ,and request his State Department, and other countries sympathetic to terrorist front Organizations of the Sri Lanka Tamil Diaspora, and Ban Ki Moon of UN to get off the “back “ of Sri Lanka, and stop threatening to take it before a war tribunal for the elimination of its terrorist under those very difficult conditions, and “ understand the cost of war.”