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.

No comments: