Sunday, 26 February 2012

Louise Fre’chette an Arrogant woman lacking in politeness or Diplomatic integrity

We now know what UNO is made of – it is made of falsehood, arrogance, money grabbing, and egocentrics. Its Administrators like Louise Fre’chette  besides  lacking social nicety and moral soundness of a  Senior UN executive,  also lacks diplomatic integrity.  

This is what had taken place on the 21 February, 2012 in a room at the panel of the Senior  Advisory Group ( the Peace Keeping Panel) of the UNO, where rates of reimbursement to troop contributing countries and related issues were to be considered.

The meeting was Chaired by Louise Fre’chette from Canada.   Different countries of  regional groups had appointed their  representative that make up the Senior Advisory Group.  The Asia group had elected the Deputy Ambassador and  Permanent Representative  for Sri Lanka  Major General Shavendra Silva as its member.

Louise Fre’chette the Chari person,  apparently receiving instructions from some source  outside UNO had called the Deputy Ambassador General Shavendra Silva.

This is what transpired:

“ On Tuesday (21st February 2012) evening, Madame Louise Fre’chette, Chair of the Senior Advisory Group to consider rates of reimbursement to troop-contributing countries and related issues (SAG) asked Ambassador Maj. General Shavendra Silva, Deputy Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka, who is the representative of the Asia Pacific Group in the SAG to meet her.

She had brusquely informed him that she will not let him participate in the discussions of the SAG and will have him removed from the room should he insist on coming into the room.”
She had actually said, “…. You may have been nominated by the Asia Pacific Group, but I will decide whether you participate or not. ”

We can use so many abusive words to show our disapproval of this Fre’chette’s high handedness, intolerance and arrogance.  But this however is the malaise from which the whole of the UN System is suffering.  Being not unknown to the working of the UNSystem  this UN Official’s  undemocratic attitude is not unusual amoung some of the high ranking UN officials.

UN  is a august  institution with a very  noble Charter in which the highest of  human relationship and attitudes are woven into it in words and phrases well selected not to give dubious meaning to highest principles on which an august Organization should function. 

But  unfortunately the  staff selected and appointed to  highly placed position with  salaries in keeping with the dignity of the position are furthest from the noble principles written down  in the UNCharter .  That is to say the UNO is one thing and its Staff another. 

The Senior grade Staff is for the most part not an example of  what the Organisation represents.  Most of them  are racists, proud, inhuman, pompous, and pretentious. They think of themselves as  a new creed- International Civil Servants above the ordinary human beings.  They are masked men and women. They are masked with the aura of being members of UNO a noble institution, but with personal prejudices, hatred and intolerance.

Fre’chette had been a Minister  of her Government and an Ambassador before being named as the Deputy Secretary General of the UNO by Kofi Annan. Fre’chette may not  have even read the UN Charter or the Declaration of Human Rights, despite having been the Deputy Secretary General of the UNO for eight years.

The Qualifications , professional distinctions and social status do nothing to make a person fit to work  in an organization like the UNO  unless there is an attitudinal change to become humane, simple, people loving, to be in the service of human beings.  At least that is what the founding fathers of UNO wanted its administrators to be.

At 66 years  Fre’chette’s  position had gone into her head,  unless there is some thing else more “ remunerating “  to breakaway from the very principles of UNO to turn against a representative of a Member State General Shavendra Silva to  obviously help “ the pro terrorist Canadian Tamils” to take revenge against a Sovereign State of  Sri Lanka.

To  Fre’chette giving a piece of her mind to a General and asking him to “keep off” the meeting place may have given a self elation, a sadist pleasure at her age.  

What ever Fre’chette’s  seniority in the UNO what ever her  high qualifications she may have, what ever distinctions she had received from her own country, as a human being  she has lost  her human touch, and above all  her “bashing” of General Shavendra Silva has made her lose her right to be a member of that Noble Orgnaisation the UNO.  

UNO is a place of dialogue, where every one is expected to be treated equally where  every one has the right  to speak and participate in deliberations. A person of authority may take a strong decisions against some one, yet in communicating that decision  he or she should be able to maintain the dignity of the position heor she  holds. Fre’chette has failed to maintain that dignity of the position she holds and therefore has forfeited the right to that position of being the Chairman of the SAG.

Even the Secretary General of the UNO has not the right to deprive a representative of a member state  elected by a Regional Group to represent that group in any  Panel Meeting, attending such Meetings and participate in them.

We remember very  well the Canadian Prime Minister Mr. Stephan Harper, hollering against Sri Lanka  calling for an international investigation and  demanding not to hold the next Commonwealth  Head of State Meeting in Sri Lanka.  We also remember  another Canadian Louise Arbour  pointing her finger of accusation against Sri Lanka. 

These Canadians are ironically defending the interests of the expatriate Tamil immigrants while they have completely neglect the indigenous Canadian Indians having no problem from them as they have  been completely weakened and neglected to the extent they would not even make a whimper in protest of ethnic discrimination.

But the expatriate pro terrorist Tamils in Canada could make not only Louise Fre’chette, and Louise Arbour dance to their tune , but also Stephen Harper  the Prime Minister himself.
These incidents have a common back ground.  We can also remember that Navi Pillai had also made a Statement against the appointment of the Deputy Ambassador and Permanent Representative General Shavendra Silva  to the SAG.

This also has a reference to the expatriate  Pro terrorists Tamils  of Canada making a hue and cry about  General Shavendra Silva being appointed to the SAG in the UNO, preceded by two Tamils filing legal action in America demanding the arrest General Shavendra Silva and take him to a tribunal accused  for war crimes.

Hence Louise Fre’chette    has not acted in the interest of the UNO in speaking to General Shavendra Silva and saying, ““…. You may have been nominated by the Asia Pacific Group, but I will decide whether you participate or not. ”,  but in the interest of these expatriate Tamils in Canada who are also supported by her Prime Minister.

Reviewing this in the light of the above it is evident that Louise Fre’chette is another  UN High official  that has been “commandeered”  by the Pro Terrorist Tamil expatriates  in Canada in their  campaign to discredit and destabilise Sri Lanka as an extension of their “terrorist manoeuvres”  outside Sri Lanka.

It has nevertheless to be pointed out to Louise Fre’chette, that her reprehensible  method of using authority as the President of the SAG, affects herself and not the General Shavendra Silva.  

Even though, Fre’chette in her mean  way took it on herself to insult the  General Shavendra Silva, he cannot be insulted, because he stands higher than her in Status, achievements, and the esteem of a Nation.  It is a priviledge Fre’chette does not seem to appreciate to be able  sit in the same room with a man of the caliber of General Shavendra Silva, a hero, a great soldier.

While Louise Fre’chette was seated in a comfortable cushioned chair before a shining  clean table in a air conditioned room, the Major General Shavendra Silva was in a battlefield  dodging the terrorist bullets,  avoiding serpents  in drenching rain or under sweltering sun
He was a man who was fighting a ruthless group of terrorist armed to their “teeth” risking his life 24 hours of the day.  We have seen him in live television shot from the battlefields how efficiently he commanded his detachment of soldiers under him with firmness and with a fatherly  concern and always telling them not to take unnecessary risks and wishing them well before they were dispersed.

He was a soldier of high principles, well disciplined and kind.  Though as a military man he was fighting the terrorists he was extremely kind  to the civilians without distinction of  what community they belonged. He would help a wounded  or a captured terrorists with kindness and not with hatred.

The  expatriate Tamils in Canada cannot appreciate that man as they were and are completely out of touch with Sri Lanka which they only know by name and from what they read.

Louise Fre’chette what ever experience she has , and length of the period of service in  UNO, and whatever her  other professional distinctions cannot hold a candle to General Shavendra Silva he who is a being far above her pretentious  official egocentric self.

Friday, 24 February 2012

Is Miriam Shahrzard Schive, Robert Blake’s undercover agent in Geneva to have a resolution passed against Sri Lanka ?

Robert O Blake has taken it seriously to take revenge from Sri Lanka for the elimination of his dear  terrorist friends. Could any one understand why the USA is taking such a low and an incomprehensible attitude to  pass a resolution in the coming HRCouncil meeting in Geneva against Sri Lanka, when Sri Lanka compared to most other countries in the world has carried out a remarkable military operation  to remove terrorism from Sri Lanka ? 

Sri Lanka did not in any way put the people of the country into danger or to any risk in its military operations against the terrorists.

In Libya USA and its Western allies had found a strong man –a Dictator who would not listen to the West. But the Leaders of the Government of  Sri Lanka on the contrary listen to the West, when they are not seeking disruption of the country. 

In the Middle East the West continues to view the massacres and almost an unending  situation of confrontation to step into encourage the rebellious elements, rather than forcing  the political leaders in the  area into a dialogue.  Best way out in the Middle East is unite all  Arab States  and let them  find  a suitable political system.

The USA and its allies  should stop intervening and  arm rebels to continue the people’s manifestations culminate into civil wars.  The intention of the USA and its allies   is to intervene militarily with the NATO Forces as they did in Libya, when the manifestations supported by them turn into a civil war.          

In Sri Lanka the USA and the West should stop  intervention  as there is nothing Serious taking place in Sri Lanka after the elimination of the terrorists.  Therefore the ridiculous “drama” that is being enacted by the USA and its Western allies along with the UN Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay is uncalled for interference in to a Sovereign state which after  30 years of suffering under terrorism is trying to organize the Communities and develop the country.

On the 21 February, 2012  e-mails had been sent to participating Member States of the UN Human Rights Council  and the Diplomatic Missions, signed by one  Miriam Shahrzard Schive of the USA Mission in Geneva, trying to mislead the Member States that the  resolution that is to be presented by the USA at the Meeting  on the 27 February, 2012 has the agreement of the Government of Sri Lanka .

It is very unbecoming of a supposed to be Leading Nation of the world resort to such low ruse to get the independent Member States of the HR Council to vote for  a resolution it is  putting forward to which Sri Lanka government is overwhelmingly opposed.

Without asking the very pertinent question why there is no such resolution against the USA and its Allies for violation of human rights and war crimes  is not presented to the HR Council, it is nevertheless important to emphasise that Sri Lanka needs no resolution passed against it  at the HR Council as there is no proof of Human Rights violations,  as what Sri Lanka did to eliminate terrorism is what any government in its place would do to eliminate terrorism in its own country.

If there had been any wrongs done to the people of the country, it is up to the country to make an investigation and not a foreign power which would know of “violation of human rights”  looking from far.  What you see from far is not the same as what is seen in the close up.  In order to have a clear conscience on the matter the Government of Sri Lanka appointed its own  Commission of investigation the LLRC and it is conscientiously preparing to carry out the recommendations of the LLRC.

The Government of Sri Lanka is therefore not responsible for any one, but to its own people that justice is done to them.  Therefore the high level meetings and false criminal underhand moves that are being enacted in Geneva by the USA and  its Western allies are unnecessary, other than to discredit and destabilize a developing country.

Three years  after  the elimination of terrorism in Sri Lanka the country has taken tremendous steps forward  for the  Development  of the country in different fields such as that of economy, social welfare , education, health, agriculture and building construction and road development.  Through out that period the USA and  its allies had given in to the pro-Tamil expatriate Tamil Communities and on their behalf is even to day carrying out a campaign of destabilisation.

It is time that the USA and  its allies look after their own problems of which they are not short,  without unnecessarily interfering into the affairs of the Government of Sri Lanka seeking investigation into its past, as Sri Lanka has turned a new page and needs peace and independence from  unnecessary intruders to disrupt its progress. 

These interference of the USA and the West is all the more unnecessary as an investigation into what ever happened  at the last phase of the elimination of terrorists helps neither the people of the country or the Tamil expatriates who have no real interest in the country other than to disrupt the development of the country as a revenge for the elimination of  their venerated Terrorists.  Their interference only bars the efforts of reconciliation of communities in Sri Lanka.

Tuesday, 21 February 2012

NGOs asked to leave terrorist controlled areas as Armed Forces cannot assure security cried “violation of human rights” by Sri Lanka Government.

 Second part

In the midst of terrorism, Sri Lanka became a victim of a terrible natural disaster on the  26 December , 2004,  when a  tsunami  of a magnitude of 9 earth  quakes  swept over the east coast of Sri Lanka taking a toll of  35 322 lives.  The people of the Western countries who are extremely generous and often moved by the suffering of other people  donated freely and generously to help the victimised people to re construct their disaster affected lives. 

Though these foreign  people  were generous their  Governments distrusted the government of Sri Lanka with such large sums of money and refused to transfer the people’s donations directly to  government of Sri Lanka.  Therefore these donations  of these generous  people were offered to various Non-Governmental  Organisations . 

These Organisations sent hordes  of NGOs with loads of money  to help the people of Sri Lanka affected by the tsunami  to reconstruct  their lives after the devastation they had suffered.  These NGO’s were people with prejudices , some with their own Agendas, and some seeking an  employment, rather than offer humanitarian services.  Large numbers of them went to the terrorist controlled areas to which the entry was closed to the people of South  Sri Lanka or Government Officials.

Some of these NGO’s in the terrorists controlled areas became  a part of the terrorist group. They transferred number of  earth moving and other heavy  machinery to the terrorists controlled areas, and set up workshops for the terrorists to construct boats , submarines, bombs and air strips . They even transported air planes in parts to the terrorists controlled areas.  As there were no government officials the NGOs in the terrorist controlled areas became important persons respected by the terrorists and looked to these NGOs to help them  divide the country  and set up a separate Tamil Eelam State.

The NGOs created the ethnic  problem as they really believed that the terrorists were seeking  freedom from the Majority Sinhala people who were discriminating against the minority Tamil people because of their ethnicity.

When finally the military operations against the terrorists in Sri Lanka commenced the government asked the  NGOs resident in the terrorist controlled areas to leave as their safety cannot be assured as the Government Armed forces have begun a  military operation with the determination to wipe out the terrorists. 

These NGOs who were well settled in the areas and leading   a very high life style looking after the terrorists, helping them  in various ways militarily and socially were reluctant to leave but they were compelled to leave as their safety was at stake.

These NGOs who had given up their luxurious existence amoung the “poor people “ in the terrorists controlled areas after leaving Sri Lanka was determined to help the terrorists they had befriended during their stay to fulfil their aim to set up a separate Tamil Eelam State.  The only way they could do it was by discrediting the Government and stop its military offensive  against the terrorists.

They activated the Human Rights Watch , Free Media Organisations, and Amnesty International  and started a campaign  against Sri Lanka accusing  its Armed Forces as violating the human rights of the  Tamil people in the North and East of Sri Lanka.

When terrorism was finally erased from Sri Lanka on the 19 May, 2009, the pro-terrorist Front Organisations among the expatriate Tamil Community in various foreign Countries, were left with large sums of money they had collected to assist the terrorists carry out their  armed terror, at their disposal. 

These terrorist Front Organisations of the expatriate Tamils  organised themselves to continue the terrorism , by using the large collections of money  remaining with them  not by starting another terrorist group in Sri Lanka ,  but by utilising the large sums of funds  available with them to get various organisations in the European countries such as  the Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and pay for Attorneys like Bruce Fein , western  media, and other influential Members of European Parliaments and even Senators of USA to launch a campaign against the Government of Sri Lanka . 

The one time Commissioner of Human Rights of the UN HRC Louise Arbour started her own Organisation -International Crisis Group and continued to accuse Sri Lanka for violation of Human rights and  war crimes.

That is how “violation of Human rights” became the major slogan on which they were proposing to accuse Sri Lanka, and hoist before the foreign public the savagery of the Sinhala Majority government against the minority Tamils, and the necessity for them to be recognised as a separate ethnic group for whom a Separate territory  should be carved out from Sri Lanka.

But curiously “violation of human rights”  has not the same definition as a Convention, and “Violation of human rights” cannot be  applied for separation of communities or in war situations. No where in the 30 Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human rights  “violation of human rights ” in war situations has been mentioned .  

Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not even distantly connected to the Geneva Convention.

Therefore the “violation of human rights “ in war situation is not an offence under the Universal Declaration of Humana rights for which, any one has the right to ask  Sri Lanka  for accountability.

No laws could be passed after the end of  terrorism to accuse the Government Armed forces to answer for “violation of human rights, war crimes or demand accountability “.  Such laws may be applicable for future events and not for what happened in the past when there were no such laws , even by manipulation of  existing declarations such as the Declaration of Human Rights or even the Geneva Convention

But under the Universal Declaration of Human rights no case could be brought against the Government or the Armed forces of Sri Lanka for violation of human rights  as there is no Article in the Universal of Declaration  of Human Rights to accuse Sri Lanka for violation of human rights even by implication.

This is how the Violation Human Rights came to be heard for the first time in reference to the elimination of terrorism in Sri Lanka   

Resolution against Sri Lanka to be placed before the Human Rights Council in Geneva on the 27 February, 2012.

Why has Sri Lanka been singled out for Violation of human rights and war crimes in the last phase of  the military operations against the terrorist ?

Why have not other perpetrators of violation of human rights and war crimes not included in the resolution that is being presented to accuse Sri Lanka and demand accountability?

If it is proposed to send an Independent Commission of investigation to Sri Lanka, why such an Independent Commission of Investigation is not recommended to be  sent to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya to see to what extent USA, UK, Canada, and France are accountable for violation of human rights and war crimes in those countries?

What is highly offensive about this “violation of human rights” and war crimes  accusation is   that while they accuse Sri Lanka for its genuine  military operations to eliminate a group of Sri Lankan  terrorists  who terrorised Sri Lanka for 30 years,  the  Western countries such as USA, UK, FRANCE, GERMANY and CANADA  who are “ violating of human rights and committing  military crimes”  in foreign countries away from their own counties against innocent civilians of those countries like  Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya or Vietnam are not been sighted in the resolution that is being put before the UN Human Rights Council on the 27 February,2012.

This is how the West is modernising the World inventing  machinery of all sorts to pollute the atmosphere, the air and the seas of the world and invent  “ modern  terms”  such as “VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS,”, “R2P” and “ACCOUNTABILITY” to accuse non-Western countries   demanding “investigations “ by Independent International Commissions. While  being very careful to leave out their own countries which are in fact the worst of violators of human rights and war crimes taking cover under accusations levelled against Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka despite being quite conscious of the fact that its Armed Forces  did not commit any violation of human rights in the elimination of the terrorists in its own country or committed any war crimes, appointed its own investigation Commission the LLRC and it will also implement the recommendations made in the Report of the LLRC.
In order to implement the recommendations of the LLRC Sri Lanka does not need a representative of a Nation Violating Human Rights- the US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Robert O, Blake to tell Sri Lanka what it should do,  as he did in his statement to the press:
“We’ve explained in some detail our views on the LLRC report, both on its merits and also on its shortcomings. As you know, there have been a number of other reports such as the UN Panel of Experts Report that describe in some detail some of their concerns about human rights violations and potential war crimes that occurred, particularly at the end of the conflict from January to May of 2009. You all are familiar with those, I don’t need to address those.
In our view the LLRC report did not cover in sufficient detail some of those allegations. So again, we think it’s very important as part of finally achieving a just and durable settlement and reconciliation process that those be fully addressed, so we talked in some detail about that with our friends in the government today.”
What is repugnant in the statement of  Robert O Blake  a representative of USA is that Sri Lanka which they accuse for violation of human rights, war crimes  and demand an accountability is,  that Sri Lanka, acted  as a responsible Sovereign State to protect its territory and  its people carried out appropriately careful military operations  against the terrorists.

Where it was necessary not to put in danger  the lives of the Civilian Tamil population kept as a human shield by the terrorists, the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka in the last phase of the elimination of terrorists, even gave up the use of heavy artillery against the terrorists and using small arms risking their own  lives, while evacuating nearly 300000 Tamil civilians, successfully defeated the terrorists. 

In the cross fires at the last phase of the military operations against the terrorists some civilians may have got killed caught in the cross fire and  if there were such deaths it was not because the Sri Lanka Government Armed forces deliberately killed the civilians.

And to say that there were 40, 000  deaths is a deliberately exaggerated  “lie” to put the blame on the Government Armed Forces.

40 thousand is a large number and as the 40 thousand  bodies could not have been buried at that “last phase” of the end of terrorism,  they may have been strewn all over the small  “no war zone ”  where the final fighting took place and it could have been seen in the photographs, video clips, or films of the area made at the time.  But there were no such strewn dead bodies.  The Army could not while attacking the terrorists dragged away the dead bodies of the civilians in to the sea.  So how can you account for such large numbers of  deaths which has been  imagined by the anti Sri Lanka West ?

In such a situation an  intelligent person who has no bad faith will know that it is “stupid” for any one, a government or an Armed Force to be accused for violation of human rights” or even demand accountability for such deaths.

Despite all the confidence that  the Government of Sri Lanka has  on its  Armed Forces that they did not  either violate any human rights nor  committed any war crimes had the courage and  a great sense of responsibility to appoint its own Commission the LLRC to investigate how the military operations had been pursued against the terrorists and what wrongs  the civilians Tamils had suffered during the period of terrorism.  

This type of investigation has not been done by USA the boastful Robert O Blake represents or any of the Western countries like UK, France, Canada Germany etc. responsible for innumerable deaths, violation of human rights in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or Vietnam , despite this, these  Western Countries  being the pontificators of Democracy, high principles, and honesty, shamelessly come forward to accuse others for crimes which they have not committed, forgetting that they are the guilty party who have committed more war crimes  and violated human rights many times over.


Modernisation of world by the West has brought it to brink of disaster. Violation of Human Rights is another Novelty introduced by the West.


The west had invented Human Rights after the second world war, and today they are  turning it into  the worst of  all “arms” to  keep  powerless  poor nations poorer and remain dependent on the powerful.

The Assistant Secretary for Central  and South Asia of US State Department Robert O Blake  said in Sri Lanka “

 “ US will support a resolution against Sri Lanka at the forthcoming UN Human Rights Council sessions in Geneva, as the Rajapaksa administration has not done enough to address accountability issues.”

This statement of Robert O Blake is  arrogant , pretentious like the pompous  words of a world dictator  who has the god given right to evaluate other governments  making derogatory remarks as the government leaders of other nations are his servitors

To see the farce that the West continues to enact pretending it is for the welfare of our people in Sri Lanka ( as much as elsewhere in the developing  countries of the world- Maldive for instance where Robert O Blake seems to have had some hand), let us see how the West had from the beginning of not too ancient time, done things they thought were to modernise  the world, but  have instead brought the world to the brink of disaster and extinction.

We are made to believe that the West modernised the world.  From the low explosive black powder they discovered from China,  the West invented the gun.

China  had discovered black powder in the 9 th Century , but used it as fireworks  even to chase the Mongolian invaders .  It was only in the 18 Century the West discovered it and  turned  it into high explosive gun powder.

The West invented the Gun.  Then Nobel invented the explosive dynamite, and then America invented the Atomic bomb on  a proposal of Einstein in what was called the Manhatton project which commenced in 1939. 

The first nuclear weapon  of the project Trinity was tested on the 16 July,1945 in Almagordo in Mexico.  Eight days after Harry S. Truman had informed Soviet Russia its nuclear capability and thirteen days after,  the first nuclear bomb” little boy” was dropped in Hiroshima, and three days after the next bomb , the “fat man” was dropped in Nagasaki.

What wonderful contributions the West gave for the development of the world.  The West made loads of money producing guns and bombs of all sorts  and selling them to poor countries with which they began to shoot each other. 

Along with the guns came alcoholic drinks they had also invented.  They sold alcohol to American Indians until they drank themselves almost to extinction.  The West then discovered China. China was rich under Qing Dynasty. China opened only one port for the British traders.

China had more to sell  to British East India Company than they had to sell to China. As China accepted only silver in payment , the British East India company had to sell their gold to buy silver from elsewhere , hence the British East India was  running a trade imbalance in favour of China. In order to set off that imbalance British East India Company  along with the American traders  brought  Opium  from British India  and sold it to Chinese Smugglers. 

This resulted in the drain of  Chinese silver and an increase in drug addiction. China passed laws to stop trade in opium.  It was the beginning of the Opium Wars in  1839.  The British and the French seized Beijing burnt down Chinese palaces and weakened  China which was forced to accept their treaties on their terms and agree to more concessions to British and French traders.   That is how the West contributed to modernise the world ,  talk democracy , began human rights, and  demanded accountability to imagined crimes of developing nations. All that contributed to the destruction of some nations and raising others to world leadership.

In the West  today  the BBC, Sky Way  TV documentaries on  developing  countries, show the negative side of life in the developing countries , their utter poverty, unclean sickly children, slums and dirt in which some of them live or conflict areas, manifestations, anti government violence,  or critical government activity. 

Never do they show development and progress taking place in these countries despite attempts of the developed countries to keep them poor through political strategies they invent such as human rights,  sale of guns to encourage tribal or clan warfare, without helping these countries to develop by transfer of technology, or offering unconditional aid. Despite all that they dare accuse these countries for human rights violations.  If their condition of living is a violation of human rights the rich West is directly or indirectly responsible.

More than 4000 years ago asphalt derived from  petroleum had been used to build the walls of the towers of  Babylon.  There were oil pits  and the oil was used to light lamps. The Persians and in the 9th century produced  kerosene oil  with which they lit their lamps. and lived happily. In 347 AD China drilled oil wells.  They used the oil to heat salty waters to produce salt.  China also used natural gas .

That was all before America discovered oil somewhere in the 19th century .  The West  discovered the combustion engines.  Then began producing mechanical engines of all sorts, cars, buses, planes, and ships all in the name of modernising , but began polluting the world , the air, the skies, and the seas.  The West with their inventions have overheated the earth, polluted the air and poisoned the seas and  have brought the world to the brink of a catastrophic extinction.

The ancient  Egyptians had invented the perfumes and kept their bodies pleasant smelling.  The west discovered it to  make mixtures  most expensive, and cheap sprayers to keep the atmosphere clean, and  they polluted the atmosphere until the worlds ozone layers began to give way.

The West imported the Christian teachings and spread it among the poor nations subjugating them and  making them blind believers of the Western God.  In the ancient world the women walked about half naked  and they were  in complete safety.  The west met the naked beauties of the poor nations raped them and spoke about sex until raping women became a pastime of invading marauders. In the west Sex became a great entertainment , they abused not only gown up women, but boys and girls, until pedophile became the worst from of sex  crime in the West.  That is the Western modernising of the world Christian values.

The west introduced Democracy.  This killed peace and stopped development and progress in all poor countries in the world.  The political leaders of the poor developing countries took democratic opposition to ruling government too seriously, which  resulted in regular confrontations with the government, which  stopped progress and development, leaving the developing countries poor as they had always been.

Nothing  that had been invented by the West to modernised the world made the world rich, peaceful or civilised.  The latest they have invented is the “ Human rights.”  Human Rights did not exist as a political arm to subjugate nations. But has now been invented not to protect the human rights of persons to be protected ,  but it is being used as another “arm” to subjugate nations that rebel against the system introduced by the  West.
“The ancient world did not possess the concept of universal human rights.  Ancient societies had “elaborate systems of duties, conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realise  human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights” ( Wikipedia)  It sprung from the concept of natural rights.
The application of violation of Human Rights, became a means for the West to bring charges against those countries that do not follow their weird democratic system.  Application of  the term “violation of human rights “  is incorrect  in a war situations, as  there are conventions such as the Geneva convention which are more  appropriate .

The application of the term of  “violation of human rights “ in the precise case of Sri Lanka is irrational , as Sri Lanka had to  fight almost a “conventional” army of trained well armed terrorists who even had sea and air power. It was  not different from a conventional war except that the terrorists were no respecters of  legal or moral laws. 

Being terrorists they did not have to account for any body, and therefore no convention or rules of law could have been applied to them.  If the Geneva Convention cannot be applied to one party to the war for whatever reason, it cannot also be applied to the other. The military operations  agains the terrorists  was like a conventional war , but it was not a conventional war.

The term” human rights violations” was spoken of in relation to Sri Lanka only after the end of  terrorism . Before that there was real violation of human rights  committed by the terrorists, who killed un-armed poor villagers working in their fields, or religious devotees in  Buddhist temples, or  busloads of  young Buddhist monks in yellow robes going on  a pilgrimage, ordinary  village men and women taking a bus to work, visit relatives or children  going to school or men and women going  for shopping in the nearest town, but no one was then there to speak up for the dead, accusing the terrorists for violation of human rights or accuse the terrorists for “terror crimes” ( if not war-crimes)

UKChannel 4 is not representative of a UN Member State, but nevertheless the The UN Commissioner of Human rights Navi Pillay having no principles, had even requested the presentation of a document prepared by UK Channel 4, to the Human Rights Council in Geneva last year.  The video footage was fictitious  without any substantiated evidence to support its images and statements as valid.

It was presented  merely because it was damaging to Sri Lanka. It is an insult for a UN Agency  to come down to that low level to accuse a member State, which has done nothing wrong   but eliminated a ruthless group of terrorists that had terrorised the country for 30 years.

But how is it that Sri Lanka came to be accused for Violation of Human Rights and War Crimes for the elimination of terrorists at the final phase of a determined military operations to end terrorism from Sri Lanka.

This is how it has come about. 

To be continued:

Wednesday, 15 February 2012

Navineetham Pillay’s services as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights should be terminated for being a racially prejudiced person.

Navineetham Pillay a Tamil, has already taken her stand on the issue with regard to Sri Lanka Tamil terrorists, and therefore she cannot be objective, and cannot act as an Independent Commissioner of  the UN Human Rights Commission.

When I recently read in an article that, «…….. Navi Pillai, ….started a “Tamil EELAM in Ceylon” movement, in South Africa when she was a teenager at high school.  »  I was hesitating  to quote it  as there was no mention of the source  of  the information.

But reading  the following reports  the extracts of which I have given below, I think I have reason to believe that she was as a poor school going teenager victimised for her poverty and the colour of her skin  was a « fan » of the Sri Lanka terrorists  :

Recently at a press conference,
« ………….. Pillay was asked by blogger Mathew Lee of Inner City Press what she thought about General Silva's appointment. "It's a matter of concern," Pillay said in response. "The United Nations has very clear policies on vetting and this is part of the work that my office does," she added.

"We keep a list of individuals who are suspected of committing human rights violations and I have addressed a letter of concern to the secretary-general about this individual," the human rights chief said. »
I thought that it is most reprehensible  that a person who is the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights  makes such a seriously disrespectful statement  about, (i)  a Deputy Ambassador of a Member State of the United Nations, and  (ii) who is also a person selected to serve in the UN Secretary General’s Advisory Panel on Peace Keeping, by the Asia Group of countries.

She  has to be cautious about statements she makes in her position as the UNHCHR., and not make statments like Sampanthan of the Tamil National Aliance. After all General Shavendra Silva had been selected to the UNSG’s Advisory Panel by the UN Asia Group Member Sates.  Her irreverent  or more appropriately the « stupid »comment is an insult to the Asia Group of Countries who are Member States of the UN.

Navi Pillay spoke of United Nations having “very clear policies on vetting”.  But it is regrettable that these clear policies on vetting do not seem to have been followed in her appointment  to her position as the High Commissioner for the UN HRC.

Then examining precisely where this deep seated  prejudice  of this woman, which is almost a hateful obsession against  Sri Lanka Sinhala Community and every one connected to Sri Lanka other than Tamils, could have come from, I found that this  depraved psychological  hatred is embedded in her mind as she had been from her childhood a victim of strong rabid apartheid of the South African Government and its Adminstration.
She has in many interviews mentioned difficulties she had as a Lawyer in the apartheid regime into which she was born, but nothing of her anti apatheid activities and thoughts about racism and apatheid prior to that.
In order to understand Navi Pillay’s  hatred towards Sri Lanka and her all out  efforts as the UNHCHR  to incriminate the President and the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka for violation of human rights and war crimes, we have to go into her past beyond her legal professional period.

She also has misunderstood terrorism for apartheid.  Apartheid is defined as  a social policy or racial segregation involving political and economic and legal discrimination against people who are not Whites.  In Sri Lanka there is neither apartheid nor racism.

She was born to a poor Tamil family of Indian origin in Clairwood  Durban, South Africa, in 1941.  Her  father was a bus driver  whose entire monthly wage was R5.  It was her neighbours who contributed for her studies. They were Tamils and therefore she has a duty by them if not to them all Tamils in general. That may be part of her prejudiced agains the Government of Sri Lanka thinking it is against Tamils, whether those Tamil be terrorists or not.

In an interview to  Vino Reddy on 11 August, 2002 she had said, “  We lived in Clairwood …… a victim of race riots in 1949 and that’s what caused the fear on part of the residents of Clairwood, including my parents. With me, firstly, when I was six-years old I was the victim of robbery. My mother had given me my father’s entire monthly wages, which was R5 to take to him. He was a bus driver I was supposed to meet him at the corner and hand this money to him. Meanwhile he had not asked for the money it was his conductor who had planned that ruse and he grabbed the money from my hand off he went.

My mother beat me up for that. I don’t know why the victim gets beaten. Anyway, and I ended up giving evidence in court at the age of , (seven) six in the same Durban High Court where I many years later sat as a judge. And this individual was sentenced to three months imprisonment. But what really bugged me is that we didn’t get the R5 back and I felt so guilty as a child that I had caused the loss to my parents. “

That is when seeds of racial hatred germinated in her.  She could not distinguish apartheid and racial difference.  In her mind as a six year old she despised the idea of being treated differently.  When she was old enough to understand  the terrorism in Sri Lanka of which she had heard , she understood it in personal terms as the Sinhala majority government a regime of apartheid and the Tamils, like she is in Durban , were victimised by the Sinhala Government and its Armed Forces.  That became therefore another cause she would be fighting later on in her life.
Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, an independent human rights group wrote after an interview with her : « While understandably cautious on her first day in the job, Ms Pillay says she sees her new role as returning to that of being an advocate.
"This is the only office at the UN to be fiercely uncompromising and independent about human rights standards. The commissioner is the voice of the victim everywhere."

“ So when human rights groups and some American officials expressed scepticism before her appointment on Thursday, she said she was used to it. As a member of a minority from a poor Indian neighbourhood in apartheid-era South Africa, she was long kept from becoming a judge by the colour of her skin. For years, although she was a lawyer, she could not even sign a contract without her husband’s consent. »

She grew ap constatnly being a victime of the South African apartheid regime and this made  her a fanatic Tamil swearing to defend her people victimised by any one she thought was racists, « The commissioner is the voice of the victim everywhere. »

Hence Navi Pillay’s statement to the press, « she had informed U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon of her misgivings about General Shavendra Silva, Sri Lanka's deputy U.N. ambassador, who commanded the Sri Lankan army's 58th Division during the final assault against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in 2009 »

Navy Pillay because of her intense racial prejudice cannot look at a problem independent from her personal experience, and therefore she does not fit into the role of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

If we were to look further into her past through her own words in the interview to Vino Reddy as far back as 11 August, 2002,


we will understand better why she is not fit to Serve as the High Commissioner  in the UN Human Rights Commission.

She tells Vino Reddy :

«  I married Gaby Pillay. His full name is Paranjothi Anthony Pillay, and his background is he grew up in the Hlobane Mines, the colliery; so of course, his favourite food was the hard porridge that the miners used to eat. He spoke absolutely fluent, beautiful Zulu. And he was at the university with the help of his brothers because he was an orphan. And he started teaching and later became a lawyer and we ended up as partners in the same law firm. So we married in January 1965, he started teaching and I served two years of Articles with Mr NT Naicker who was the secretary-general of the African National Congress, here in Durban. »

Her life was thus shaped according to the circumstances that prevailed under apartheid. Her short stint working for the ANC further shaped her mind against apartheid and every form of  racial discrimination.  It is that which has stopped her from making a distiction between terrorism and a government’s inherent duty to use its Armed Forces to eliminate terrorists if they  do not agree to any approach for a peace settlement, and continue with   determination to win the cause for which they fight through use of « arms » and terrorising the country.

Then she goes on to say how she acquired experience in her work as a Lawyer, and found that suffering of people  and everything  boils down to   politics : « Mr NT Naicker who was the secretary-general of the African National Congress, here in Durban. And he was banned and house-arrested, he could not leave his home, which meant that he sent me to cases in, outside Durban and to the rural areas. And I then picked up experience from day one, but also learnt firsthand the suffering of people and how everything was political. »
In her understanding that people’s suffering  is basically political, she  also understood terrorists Tamils in Sri Lanka  subjected to suffering by the « apartheid »  Sri Lanka Goverment as mere political victims.  That comes closer to US State Department’s view repeated by Robert O.Blake that there is no military solution to terrorism, but a political solution.
Again she says ,
« I learnt many lessons from the clients themselves. These rural farmers would explain to me why, on principle grounds, they would refuse to have their cattle dipped because I would say, "Why don’t you just dip your cattle in there and then you are over with this case."And they would say no they would rather go to jail because the political movements had taken a stand on these issues and these poor farmers were paying huge sacrifices to stand by that principle.”

e had never heard that the Tamils in Sri Lanka were never ever treated differently from others, be it  by the Sri Lanka Government or by the Ordinary people from different Communities.  It was only the terrorists who  were « created » by the Indian RAW and let loose in the North of Sri Lanka that were  treated “differently” as terrorists.

She explains her utter disappointment  being a  coloured Tamil growing up in apartheid South Africa.  Perhaps assuming all the Tamil people who are a minority in a country have the same problems as those she had  to suffer in apartheid South Africa.
« At high school some teachers discouraged me and they said you know "You can only become a lawyer if your father is very well to do; or if there are lawyers in your family. But you are a bus driver’s daughter you shouldn’t even think about that." And when I completed my Articles under Mr NT Naicker then, of course, nobody would employ a young woman. And so I had triple burdens I was a woman, I was black, and I was poor. And so that’s why I started my own law practice. And I know that some colleagues said, “She’s very presumptuous to start a law practice.” So mainly, I think, what motivated me, and most of the other law students, is this injustice that we saw all around us. All the laws, which we regarded as immoral and unjust laws and that, we had to defend our people against those laws » 

The Tamils never suffered that much in Sri Lanka and Navi Pillay cannot assume that their suffering was equal to her’s, though the Tamils in the terrorist controlled areas had to suffer the most under terrorists. Now three years after they may  perhaps say that they were better off with the Terrorit Prbhakaran than  being a free people in  a peaceful Sri Lanka under the the Govrnment of the President Mahinda Rajapakse . 

At least that is what the TNA Tamil MPs are trying to put into the minds of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka.  There is nothing new in that,  in the West there are those who believe that  there was no hollocaust under Hitler and the Auschwuitz is a fabrication.

Then she speaks of her husband who was detained under the South Adfrican Terrorism Act of 1967 :
My husband Gaby Pillay was detained and so I went as a wife to the Security Police, shivering and weeping like any other wife, shocked by these events. Suddenly your husband is detained and the Security Police, I said to him, "Under what law are you detaining him?" Because as far as we knew, a person could only be detained for 48-hours and has to be brought to court after that. And the Security Policeman said to me: "You call yourself a lawyer, and you don’t know which law." And then he wrote it down for me, that it was the Terrorism Act of 1967 or something. And as far as we were concerned that law was passed in Parliament - they said at the time in Parliament "to arrest infiltrators at the borders." And here it was being used for ordinary people. It was first used to detain Winnie Mandela and a whole lot of people who had held meetings or called a street march, or something. Shanthi Naidoo, Winnie Mandela, all these people were detained and this was the second incident where the act was used for people who had held meetings. ”
So much for the reason of her prejudice against Sri Lanka coming from her battle with apartheid in South Africa, and living with that prejudice accepting any one who goes against Tamils even if they are terrorists as a  case she should defend prosecuting even  governments that eliminate Terrorists who are  of Tamil origin, as war criminals.
Then there are criticism  of her  questionable sense of priorities as the High Commissioner for UNHuman Rights Commission,  investigated  and highlighted by the  UNWatch an Independent Human Rights group .  I give bellow  some of the  findings.
Ms. Pillay turned a blind eye to most of the world’s worst abusers. She made no statement on the human rights situations of 146 countries. She failed to voice any concern for victims in 34 countries rated “Not Free” by Freedom House—meaning those with the worst records, and the most needy victims. She failed to criticize another 50 countries rated “partly free” and 63 countries rated “free.” Among the countries not criticized: Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Brunei, Cambodia, Cameroon, Congo (Brazzaville), Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Gabon, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Mauritania, North Korea, Oman, Qatar, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Swaziland, Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.
There were 21 statements on countries in the Middle East and North Africa. However, of these, 9 were on Israel, the only democracy in the region.

In an “unprecedented effort to engage” with the Arab countries, Pillay made a 10-day tour of the six Arab countries comprising the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) from April 17, 2010 to April 26, 2010.  Public statements during or in reference to this tour were largely positive and benign. While the High Commissioner did raise some human rights concerns, the discussion of human rights situations in those countries was largely muted. In instances when Pillay raised a human rights concern, she favored praising the country’s progress over naming recorded abuses or highlighting ongoing violations.

 In view of this scandalous attitude of  Ms.Navi Pillay the UNHCHR,  the Secretary General of the United Nations in order to re organise the Adminitration of the UN to provide a justifiable Forum which evaluates  the activities of its Member States not with preconceived opinions , but with objective  investigations in dialog between  member states, not taking  instructions or unsubstantiated evidence from outside organs and individuals who have their own Agenda. It was abject injustice an irreverent act contrary  to the Principles of the United Nations Organisation to call the UK Channel 4 to provide  evidence against a Member State. UK Channel 4 is neither a member state nor  a representative of a member State .

In order to do that the UNSecretary General should in the first instance terminate the Services of Ms.Navi Pillay as the Commissioner of UNHuman Rights Commission for her evident prejudices with which she had grown up , which  continue to cloud her objective decision making capacity.

Whatever the sufferings she had undergone for being different through racism and apartheid, as the High Commissioner of  the august body of the UNHuman Rights Commission, she has to forget that past and perceive  world problems objectively without allowing them  to take the colour of her inner prejudices.  If she is unable to do so she should tender her resignation which is the most noble thing for her to do.

Sri Lanka was not playing any games with the Tamil terrorists.  Unknown to Navi Pillay, the terrorists of Sri Lanka had caused immense suffering to Tamil people of Sri Lanka themselves and the people of other Communities. 

The Tamil Alliance MPs who go round demanding retribution against  the Government of Sri Lanka for eliminating Sri Lanka terrorists, were the group of Tamils selected by the Sri Lanka terrorist leader Prbhakaran to represent not the TAMILS but the TERRORISTS in the Parlaiament to help the terrorists to partition Sri Lanka to form a separate Tamil Eelam State.

It is this  very same dream of the terrorist leader Prabhakaran that the TNA MPs lead by Sampanthan are trying to realise by putting the International Community against Sri Lanka.

The Armed Forces of Sri Lanka with Generals like Shavendra Silva did not fight poor unarmed Tamil rebels or freedom fighters.  General Shavendra Silva and the Armed Forces led by him were fighting trained well armed terrorist forces in a terrain  well known to them,  but unknown to the Sri Lanka Armed Forces who were  risking their lives every minute of their  Armed Operations . 

No military operation  is clean and beautiful.  No military operation against terrorists, or a conventional war between armed forces of Sovereign States are free from deaths to civilians. That is why war is called “dirty”.  And victory depends on the number of deaths .  But exaggerating numbers of deaths is to cloud the issue and blame the winner without taking into account to defeat what sort of an enemy the war was fought.

No body can give the exact number of deaths. Why diminish the importance of victory , if through that victory peace has dawned and the people are gathering force to reap the benefit of victory which is to unite and swear never again to have another war ?

Therefore, Navi Pillay should take note  before pointing her finger at General Shavendra Silva as “ this individual”, that for the Armed detachment led by General Shavendra Silva  the elimination of terrorists in Sri Lanka  was not a joyful walk over well define territories  shooting at pleasure killing unarmed terrorists and civilians. 

Today General Shavendra Silva undoubtedly regrets all those deaths as any one else,  but he was only doing his duty to protect his country and his people against a ruthless group of TERRORISTS.

But Navi Pillay through her prejudice using the position as the High Commissioner of the UNHRC, to take revenge against a heroic Soldier who helped to eliminate terrorism  from Sri Lanka, and accuse Sri Lanka Armed Forces for war crimes, she is failing in her duty as the High Commissioner of the UNHRC, which is a highly esteemed position which should remain unspoilt by personal prejudices of any sort of its holder. 

Therefore, she should resign to keep intact the halo of the Noble Institution that is United Nations Organisation.

Thursday, 9 February 2012

To Stephen Rapp, Robert O Blake and Marie Otero and all those who ask accountability from Sri Lanka.

Stephen                                  Blake
Otero Blake

On the 27 February,2012  in Geneva Sri Lanka is to be “hanged by the neck until dead”

The  “prosecution” lead by Navi Pillai, UNCHRC, has presented the case against Sri Lanka, with the key witnesses lead by Stephen Rapp the USA Ambassador at Large for war crimes, Robert O Blake a longtime sympathiser of the Sri Lanka terrorists, and Ms Marie Otero US latest  recruit to Civilian Security, democracy and Human Rights.   Even if they were not be physically present in Geneva they hope to influence many members of the  UNHRCouncil vote to “pin ” Sri Lanka.

Then of course there are the British, Canadian, Australian and Swedish Foreign Ministers and their friends, Ban Ki Moon and UK Channel 4 which is even seeking nomination for a “nobel prize”. They have all been briefed by the Sri Lanka terrorist Front Organizations of the Tamil Diaspora in their respective countries.

They have presented the case against the “ accused “ beyond reasonable doubt, that is what they presume. In the circumstances, it is to be found the accused guilty of the  crimes committed in elimination of a group of ruthless terrorists that terrorized Sri Lanka, but remained harmless to the International Community.

With regard to Navi Pillai the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, a  last minute surprise witness discloses a well kept secret that Navi Pillai as a teenager hero worshipped Sri Lanka terrorists and started a fan Club in their honour.  In the light of that evidence the  question arises  whether she should continue as the Chief Prosecuter against Sri Lanka.

Navi Pillai in a hurry to have the accused hanged has already put up the scaffolds. The prosecution has now closed its case.

But the defendants have yet to show cause why the case for the prosecution is full of loop holes and therefore cannot stand on its two feet. 

The defendant rises to point out that the prosecution has depended on the  evidence of interested parties whose evidence is not acceptable. The Prosecution has not presented  direct evidence. The evidence provided are hearsay, conjectured or assumed. The digital evidence does not show actual process of war but scenes of killing  that had been rehearsed outside the field of action, which are therefore not even remotely related to the restricted period  that is under investigation “the last phase of the military operations against the  terrorists.” 

Further more the Video clip presented by Channel 4 is fictitious, imagined depending on photographs of earlier  scenes of massacre- most of them by the terrorists, put together to make a “horror film” of sorts.  The video clip had not been certified as authentic  by an independent expert.  The Prosecution has not allowed the defendant to examine the video clip and verify its authenticity.  It is evidently a  video put together by an amateur film maker with fictitious scenes.

The Physical evidence  which  are in this case the testimony of the so called witnesses cannot be accepted as they are closely related to terrorists, their evidence is  not direct evidence,  or the witnesses have come forward to take revenge from the defendant for depriving the chance they had  in a war situation to enhance their personal and professional situations and loss of financial benefits through elimination of terrorism..

The video scene of naked men seated on the ground  with their arms tied behind  and  men  in  army fatigue holding guns in  the  action of shooting  has no relation what so ever to the last phase of  the elimination of terrorism.    

The prosecution depends on circumstantial evidence, but in accepting circumstantial evidence .  The court has to be very objective not to accept the prosecutions version of the allegation as they have presented only the negative aspect which is  more advantages for them to win the case against the accused- Sri Lanka

Then with regard to the  Chief witnesses the defendant has the right to impeachment of witnesses.

The  United States envoys Stephen Rapp , Robert Blake, and Marie Otero ,the under secretary for civilian security, democracy and human rights, represent the USA. USA had in many of its “theatres of war”  overseas  in foreign countries like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya worked  along with the rest of the Witnesses to the prosecution  namely, UK, France, Canada, Germany, Netherlands and  Australia. 

They are therefore collectively responsible if they have committed  War Crimes individually or collectively. Therefore the  defendant could demand the impeachment of these witnesses. 

Impeachment is processed in cross examination. But if that is  not  possible.  Their votes against the defendant should not  be counted, as these witnesses  represent countries against whom war crimes have been proved .They should not be allowed the right of their vote unless they are willing to accept accountability for their crimes.

The word “war crimes” have more to do with America than Sri Lanka and one wanders what Stephen Rapp  is doing here.  Of course finding  witnesses and investigating war crimes in Sri Lanka may be a  much more convenient exercise  without risk, than it would be in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya or even in Vietnam. But apart from direct war crimes, USA had aided and abetted war crimes in Chile, Vietnam, Cuba, Iran of Mossadeq, Panama  and so on and so forth .

USA has also  committed crimes by imposing murderess trade embargoes. In Iraq, Cuba.  And the proposed sanctions against sale of oil from Iran will cause further violation of human rights of many developing nations. 

In Sri Lanka Mr.Stephen Rapp will of course be well entertained and carry out all his investigations without any fear as Sri Lanka has cleared the country of terrorists.  He need not fear about  claymore bombs, sniper attacks or suicide bombs.  The environment is safe and pleasant for investigations and Mr. Rapp may meet the Tamil Alliance who represent no one; least of all the Sri Lanka Tamils despite their having been voted into Parliament.  What TNA wants is political power to “lord over” the low caste Tamils in the North and the East.

Mr.Stephen Rapp may be reminded that Tamils as the TNA MP Sumanthiran says, want to be  a “distinct people. A distinct people in international law have certain rights called self-determination.”  It is that sort of ideas that make it difficult to work with these Tamil MPs of the Tamil Alliance.  Sri Lanka has just come out of a terrorist” war” waged by a ruthless  group of terrorists to separate  Sri Lanka on this same  “ idea” of being a distinct people.

It want work any more in  Sri Lanka,  which is now working to unite the communities  to build a true Nation of Sri Lankan people.   This is the difference with the Tamil Community in Sri Lanka … their thinking that they are distinct and therefore different.  They are distinct and ungrateful, you give them a finger they will want the whole body. Therefore it is impossible to reconcile the communities with these fanatics of the TNA. 

If Mr. Stephen  Rapp were to go to the North and East he may see the tremendous development works that had been carried out by the government, while Sunanthiran and the TNA had been talking about their “distinction” and going around the world to bring disrepute to the Government of Sri Lanka and keep the people apart.

Any thing is possible in Sri Lanka and any one can put their unwanted noses into the Affairs of Sri Lanka. Mr. Stephen Rapp apparently is interested in former Army Commander Sarath Fonseka.  It is good America is showing interest because some say that Sarath Fonseka decided to stand for Presidential Elections after Coming from a visit to USA.  That had gone into his head and with two Sri Lanka political parties the UNP and JVP who wanted  to use him to defeat the President Mahinda Rajapakse’s  Election campaign and make political mileage, made use of  Sarath Fonseka.

Now he is in the prisons on a decision of a legal court of law and therefore  it does not give any “legal” right for America through Mr.Stephen Rapp to interfere in to the Justice of Sri Lanka.  Mr. Sarath Fonseka has no problem he has only to meet the President of Sri Lanka and tell him that he is sorry that he brought disgrace to Sri Lanka by accusing the Armed Forces as having given orders to murder some terrorists carrying a white flag. A story fabricated by him like the video fabricated by the UK Channel 4. 

It is said our old friend “the hypocrite from the land of vanity” Robert O Blake is also come to Sri Lanka along with Marie Otero, the under secretary for civilian security, democracy and human rights.  So with Stephen Rapp, US Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes, it will be quite a crowd of Americans come to investigate “we do not know what” in Sri Lanka.

If it is accountability they are after,  there is not much that  Stephen Rapp the US Ambassador-at-large for War Crimes  in the Obama Administration could keep him occupied here in Sri Lanka, but  he will  have his hands full if he were to seriously start investigating  the war crimes of USA Armed Forces in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Libya.

Because in Sri Lanka the Armed Forces did not have to go to other countries to hunt for terrorists, they were fighting their own terrorists in their own country.  That is the difference with the  Sri Lanka Armed forces  and the  Armed Forces of USA  which killed the terrorists and the civilians “collaterally”, fighting terrorism,   as President Barack Obama put it, where ever it is found.

Perhaps USA  and  Mr.Stephen Rapp the Ambassador-at-large for War Crimes, are probably of the view that  if there were any war crimes in fighting terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya they were committed outside USA and therefore not accountable.  Do such deaths in fighting terrorism become war crimes if they were committed in fighting terrorism in one’s own country as it was in Sri Lanka ?

What clever logic Mr.Stephen Rapp, perhaps that is why you are  called the Ambassador at Large for war crimes. 

And then what is the other one Ms.Marie Otero the under secretary for civilian security, democracy and human rights going to do in Sri Lanka ?  What is her job, is it to investigate  about Civilian Security, Democracy and human rights in Sri Lanka or does it include Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya ?

However if Mr.Stephen Rapp is of the opinion that  war crimes had been committed in Sri Lanka in fighting and eliminating  terrorism , we would like to ask him what he thinks  the USA and its  Army did in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and  Libya and many other countries in the world.  Mr.Stephen Rapp do you think  that  there is no question of accountability  for these Crimes committed by the USA Army ?

If the Sri Lanka terrorists who did not commit terrorism in USA are accepted by you as rebels and their elimination is considered an accountable  war crime, is it correct for Sri Lanka to accept Al Qaeda  as nationalist not terrorists as they did not commit any terrorism in Sri Lanka ?

USA Before trying to become the Policeman of the World should put some order in its own house.

The War Crimes Committed by the USA Armed Forces are two gruesome to recount. Nevertheless, as Mr. Stephen Rapp is investigating war crimes committed by Sri Lanka soldiers in the last phase of  the military operations to eliminate terrorism, it seems appropriate to recount those most inhuman war crimes Committed by the USA Army. Without giving too many details.

American War Crimes In Vietnam:

My Lai Massacre

On the morning of March 16, Charlie Company landed following a short artillery and helicopter gunship preparation. Though the Americans found no enemy fighters in the village, many soldiers suspected there were NLF troops hiding underground in the homes of their wives or elderly parents. The US soldiers, including a platoon led by Second Lieutenant William Calley, went in shooting at what they deemed to be an enemy position.
Once the first civilians were wounded or killed by indiscriminate fire, the soldiers began attacking humans and animals alike, with firearms, grenades and bayonets. The scale of the massacre grew, the brutality only increasing with each killing. BBC News described the scene: "Dozens of people, herded into an irrigation ditch and other locations, were killed with automatic weapons."
 A large group of about 70–80 villagers, rounded up by the 1st Platoon in the center of the village, were killed on an order given by Calley, who also participated. Calley also shot] two other large groups of civilians with a weapon taken from a soldier who had refused to do any further killing.
Members of the 2nd Platoon killed at least 60–70 Vietnamese, as they swept through the northern half of Mỹ Lai 4 and through Binh Tay, a small subhamlet about 400 metres (1,300 ft) north of Mỹ Lai 4. The platoon suffered one dead and seven wounded by mines and booby traps.
After the initial "sweeps" by the 1st and 2nd Platoons, the 3rd Platoon was dispatched to deal with any "remaining resistance." They immediately began killing every living person and animal they could find. This included Vietnamese who had emerged from their hiding places as well as the wounded, found moaning in the heaps of bodies. The 3rd Platoon also rounded up and killed a group of seven to twelve women and children.
Over the following two days, both battalions were involved in additional burning and destruction of dwellings, as well as mistreatment of Vietnamese detainees. While most of the soldiers did not participate in the crimes, they neither protested nor complained to their superiors.[
Between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians in South Vietnam was killed on March 16,1968, by US Army Soldiers of “Charlie” Company.

De Classified papers show US atrocities went far beyond My Lai : Nick Turse and Deborah Nelson reports to The Times  on August 6,2006

The men of B Company were in a dangerous state of mind. They had lost five men in a firefight the day before. The morning of Feb. 8, 1968, brought unwelcome orders to resume their sweep of the countryside, a green patchwork of rice paddies along Vietnam's central coast.
They met no resistance as they entered a nondescript settlement in Quang Nam province. So Jamie Henry, a 20-year-old medic, set his rifle down in a hut, unfastened his bandoliers and lighted a cigarette.
Just then, the voice of a lieutenant crackled across the radio. He reported that he had rounded up 19 civilians, and wanted to know what to do with them. Henry later recalled the company commander's response:
Kill anything that moves.
Henry stepped outside the hut and saw a small crowd of women and children. Then the shooting began.
Moments later, the 19 villagers lay dead or dying.
Back home in California, Henry published an account of the slaughter and held a news conference to air his allegations. Yet he and other Vietnam veterans who spoke out about war crimes were branded traitors and fabricators. No one was ever prosecuted for the massacre.
Now, nearly 40 years later, declassified Army files show that Henry was telling the truth -- about the Feb. 8 killings and a series of other atrocities by the men of B Company.
The files are part of a once-secret archive, assembled by a Pentagon task force in the early 1970s, that shows that confirmed atrocities by U.S. forces in Vietnam were more extensive than was previously known.
The documents detail 320 alleged incidents that were substantiated by Army investigators -- not including the most notorious U.S. atrocity, the 1968 My Lai massacre.
Though not a complete accounting of Vietnam war crimes, the archive is the largest such collection to surface to date. About 9,000 pages, it includes investigative files, sworn statements by witnesses and status reports for top military brass.
The records describe recurrent attacks on ordinary Vietnamese -- families in their homes, farmers in rice paddies, teenagers out fishing. Hundreds of soldiers, in interviews with investigators and letters to commanders, described a violent minority who murdered, raped and tortured with impunity.
Abuses were not confined to a few rogue units, a Times review of the files found. They were uncovered in every Army division that operated in Vietnam.
Retired Brig. Gen. John H. Johns, a Vietnam veteran who served on the task force, says he once supported keeping the records secret but now believes they deserve wide attention in light of alleged attacks on civilians and abuse of prisoners in Iraq.
"We can't change current practices unless we acknowledge the past," says Johns, 78.

American soldiers Killing Iraqi  Civilians  in Haditha.

By James M Skelly a senior fellow at the Baker Institute for Peace & Conflict Studies, Juniata College, Pennsylvania

The complicity of senior United States military leaders in the killing of Iraqi civilians at Haditha and elsewhere should be investigated, says James M Skelly.
Why do American and British soldiers in Iraq kill innocent Iraqi civilians? To understand properly how massacres like those in the Iraqi town of Haditha in November 2005 can occur, it is important to appreciate how the stresses that soldiers experience are playing out in Iraq. It is true that soldiers suffered post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and committed war crimes in Vietnam, but one of the differences between Vietnam and Iraq is in the nature of the collapse of the armed forces: in Vietnam this was ultimately because of combat refusals, whereas in Iraq it tends to be more profoundly psychological in nature.

American Soldiers killing Afghan Civilians for pleasure.

I have left out Killing of Civilians in Afghanistan by American Soldiers and cutting off fingers as trophies. As a detail account is provided at the following  blog page.

American Soldiers Urinating on dead bodies of Talibans
American Soldiers urinqating on dead bodies of Talibans

In Afghanistan the American Soldiers killing  Talibans and Urinating on the bodies.

American Soldiers torturing Iraq Prisoners in Abu Ghraib Prison

Americans humiliated and Torture  the Iraq prisoners in the Prisons of Abu Ghraib:
Please see the following blog page for details;

Torture in Guantanamo Camps

The torture of Prisoners  in Guantanamo Camp which the President Barack Obama said he would stop are still being carried out.

Following is what a Sri Lanka Pro terrorist group of the Tamil Diaspora had said when an American Law court had dismissed a legal action against the Sri Lanka Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nation Major General Shavendra Silva

“Interpreting the law to provide a diplomatic ‘cloak’ of protection to Silva—who is seen as a war hero in Sri Lanka, but as a war criminal by the United Nations Panel of Experts—contravenes the U.S. Congress’s intent behind the law,” said Ali Beydoun, co-director at SPEAK and director of the UNROW Human Rights Impact Litigation Clinic.

The USA State Department should stop taking information from this type of Tamil Front Associations in America to discredit Sri Lanka, as acting to please a terrorist rump in USA is not keeping with country that boasts of a healthy democracy.