Sunday, 31 March 2013

Does Sri Lanka need a US Resolution for it to continue to do what it is doing to reconcile the Communities and rebuild the country after 30 years of Terrorism ?

Though the  President of USA Barack Obama’s father was from a developing country, the President is not interested in poor developing countries, preferring to hobnob with the  White Nations of the West, and those prosperous Nations in  Asia.  He visited India perhaps for political reasons and because pandering it  would help US political strategy against China.

Kenya which he visited as the country of his father and where he met his relatives was not so much to his liking. In one of his books he says that his wife Michelle  coming back after  visiting Kenya said she was happy to have got away to find her America where she is comfortable and happy.

Hillary Clinton made a special trip to South India to meet Jayalalitha probably first to encourage  Jayalalitha’s anti Sri Lanka stance and also perhaps as a leverage in case a US State Foreign policy may change to breakup India as it did to Russia.  Robert O’Blake who recently said that he had known Sri Lanka for six years and considers he is a friend of Sri Lanka, did not arrange Hillary Clinton to come to Sri Lanka and see for her self Sri Lanka after terrorism.

America’s Foreign Policy remains the same who ever is the President.  The President Barack Obama will have to follow the State Department, and the State Department will not  follow the President Barack Obama.  America’s foreign policies are not even made by the Secretary of State but by people like Robert O’Blake  who comes from George Bushe’s era. 

American governments  had been  from the very beginning  trying to assert its National identity first fighting against the American aborigine Indians , then in secessionist wars, and now asserting its world leadership stumping underfoot the developing countries. 

In recent times it helped rebels in Bengazi to oust Colonel Gaddafi, it helps rebels in Syria to oust Asad. And now with regard to Sri Lanka it is helping the pro-terrorist Tamil diaspora to oust the Government in Sri Lanka. The US resolution against Sri Lanka is without any valid substance.  It has been presented merely to  undermine the efforts of  a fast developing Sri Lanka, to discourage its efforts to reconcile the communities and go  forward as a progressive nation, without being dependent on USA or its allies of the West. 

USA does not want any third world  country to develop.  It even  tried to stop the development of China,  recognizing Taiwan as representative of the Chinese people and keeping Peoples Republic of China out of the UNO.

Later on USA and the West   gave  Tiananmen  square protest in China  undue publicity  expecting it would be the beginning of  the break up of China. The cold war against Russia was planned to break up USSR.  These are the tactics of USA purposely designed to keep away any Nation competing against Americas “established” leadership.  USA would allow countries to develop to a certain limit subject to their being  dependent on USA and the West. USA keeps Cuba inhumanly under trade embargos hoping it would succumbed to Americas superiority.  That is America’s  slave driving mentality.

USA made a big show  at the UNHRCouncil in Geneva to bring a resolution against Sri Lanka,  a small country which was terrorized by a group of terrorists trained by India purposely to breakup the country and annex the North and East of it as a Tamil Eelam State. USA went all out to help the terrorists to force the government to surrender to them.  Robert O’Blake’s repeated attempts to dissuade the Sri Lanka Government from using a military solution to settle the terrorist problem was a planned project of the US State Department.

Having failed to make Sri Lanka comply to its agenda, USA State Department now seeks  to divide Sri Lanka by  making use of its pretended  interest in the Sri Lanka  Tamil Community , and accusing Sri Lanka for its just war against terrorism.  It has selected only a part of the  military operations against terrorism to make accusations against Sri Lanka and its Armed Forces. It has conveniently left out the previous  30 years of terrorism to avoid  accusing terrorists and those who aided and abetted the terrorists in those atrocious years of terror. 

There being nothing  justifiable to  present a resolution against Sri Lanka, US state Department  held on to a biased anti Sri Lanka report presented by Navineetham Pillay who is not objective and independent in her position as the Commissioner of the UNHRCouncil.  She  being a Tamil her sympathies are with the eliminated terrorists of Tamil origin, and therefore biased against Sri Lanka Government and its Armed Forces. 

Her report is based on a questionable report made by a panel appointed by the Secretary General of UNO for his personal use.  The Panel did not visit Sri Lanka in preparing the report, but depended on documents, and evidence presented to it by the pro terrorist Tamil expatriates.

 US resolution against Sri Lanka is a paradox. The resolution states in its preamble,

 Reaffirming also that States must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism complies with their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights law, international refugee law and international humanitarian law, as applicable,”  

What a hypocrisy ?

Is  USA following these strictures it makes   against Sri Lanka, in its wars against terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria far away from America? In Pakistan  40 000  civilians have been killed in drone attacks-is it within human rights Law ?

Then the  US resolution goes on to give advice (which it does not follow), first by acknowledging the work so far done by the Government of Sri Lanka, adds to it :

“…..noting nonetheless that considerable work lies ahead in the areas of justice, reconciliation and resumption of livelihoods, and stressing the importance of the full participation of local populations, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in these efforts.” 

Has USA that devastated Iraq, and Libya in their search for terrorists in the first and to assassinate Colonel Gaddafi in the second, gone back to those countries to reconstruct what it destroyed to allow the civilian population to resume their normal lives ?    

Next  item in the resolution  is a groping in the dark without knowing the intentions of the Sri Lanka governments in appointing the LLRC,   and states,

“………….Taking note of the National Plan of Action to implement the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission of the Government of Sri Lanka …………Noting that the national plan of action does not adequately address all of the findings and constructive recommendations of the Commission. “

This is a wrong interpretation of the LLRC recommendations.  The intention of the government is only to make it a catalyst to search essential ways and means to avoid  perpetuating the existing compartmentalisation of the Communities, but bring all the communities together, whether they are Sinhala ,Tamil or Muslim to be united together as Sri Lankans. In order to make a reality of that intention only selected recommendations  of the LLRC could be implemented to help in the greater task of building a Nation.

The US resolution  demonstrates the inability of the USA to understand the underlying principle for which the LLRC was appointed.  It also shows that a foreign country  not conversant with the culture and social structure of the people of another country  is unable to understand the reasons behind another nations progressive actions. USA  jumps to accuse Sri Lanka having failed to understand  the  Sri Lankan way of  reacting to a cultural and a social  situation. 

The US resolution  continues to elaborate whole series of  issues the Government of Sri Lanka is quite aware of and is preparing to solve these problems adequately at its own pace in view of the fact that the Government is dealing with a people who had undergone  a perilous period of fear and uncertainty,  and is still in the throes of psychological fear of what it suffered under terrorism., which US and its allies  foreign to the way of thinking of a people will never understand.

The USA and its allies, insults the intelligence of the Government of Sri Lanka and its Armed Forces which without their advice, help or assistance fought on its own, adopting appropriate war strategies to defeat the aims of ruthless terrorists  and eliminated them in a fair military operation.
 Devolution of political authority is not what the ordinary Tamil people demand, it is the demand of the egoist Tamil politicians who are “descendents” of the defunct terrorists. USA and its allies  have got the wrong “picture” of Sri Lanka and has the pretention to teach Sri Lanka what are its duties to its people.

Calling upon the Government of Sri Lanka to fulfil its public commitments, including on the devolution of political authority, which is integral to reconciliation and the full enjoyment of human rights by all members of its population “,

USA in the  absence of any reasons on which to accuse Sri Lanka, resorts to the biased report of Navineetham Pillay the UNCHR  to state:

Noting the High Commissioner’s call for an independent and credible international investigation into alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law,”

Why should there be a credible International  investigation  when the Government of Sri Lanka  has already done an adequate investigation to attend to whatever sufferings the war against terrorists had caused to the civilian population. The fact that such findings are considered not credible by the USA and its Allies is not surprising as they look at it from their own point of view.  Sri Lanka belongs to the people of Sri Lanka and it is to their satisfaction that investigations should be carried out to redress any wrongs the war has caused to them.

US State Department has  burrowed the defective report of the Office of UNHCHR, which itself is not based on facts but on a report of a Panel appointed by the Secretary General of UNO for his own purposes. The  defect of that report comes from the fact that the  Panel did not move away from their comfortable office at the UNO and collected documents from pro terrorist websites and hearsay evidence from the anti Sri Lanka  terrorist Front Organisations of the  Tamil Diaspora.  None of the facts stated in the report of the Panel is substantiated  with eyewitness accounts or examination of the venue ware the violation of human rights is said to have taken place.

The item one of the US resolution based on these absurdities reads:

“1. Welcomes the report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on advice and technical assistance for the Government of Sri Lanka on promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka[1] and the recommendations and conclusions contained therein, in particular on the establishment of a truth-seeking mechanism as an integral part of a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to transitional justice;”

It is just meaningless verbiage and says nothing  factual.  Why should Sri Lanka now seek advice and technical assistance from foreigners, who did not come forward to give Sri Lanka any technical advise when Sri Lanka needed them during the military operations against the terrorists ?

What advice and technical assistance could they give to Sri Lanka when Sri Lanka is well equipped with knowledgeable people and perhaps with a higher IQ than any foreign technician, and can  do without them to bring the Communities together and settle  difference in intelligent dialogue. 

The country needs no truth seeking mechanism as neither the Government of Sri Lanka nor the people engaged in reconciling the communities have anything to hide.  The problem is only with the US  State Department and its Allies, whose relentless  interference to accuse  Sri Lanka for its elimination of terrorism four years ago  hampers its programme of  development and the unification of the people.

The second item in the US Resolution reads:

2. Encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations made in the report of the Office of the High Commissioner, and also calls upon the Government of Sri Lanka to conduct an independent and credible investigation into allegations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, as applicable;

Sri Lanka does not trust the UNHCHR and her report which the US resolution refers to as a panacea to solve problems of Sri Lanka. Her “cut and pasted” report  is not worth the paper on which it has been written.  The US State Department should stop talking about the Human Rights Law and the International Humanitarian law as USA acts in breach of those laws with impunity with its Armed Forces posted in foreign countries, looking for Al Qaida terrorists. USA stands as the police man of the developing world without any one to questions its own deplorable breach of all Human Rights and  Humanitarian laws. 

Sri Lanka has ended terrorism in its own country with its own Armed Forces, and rescued 300 000 of its own people  held forcibly by the terrorists. Sri Lanka  is not answerable to any one for deaths of “Civilians” which in USA parlance is “ collateral damage”. If that explanation is good for the “goose it is also good for the gander”.

Those civilians who voluntarily stayed with the terrorists  were aiding and abetting the terrorists and Sri Lanka is not responsible for the death of such “civilians”

The next item in the US resolution is the most ridiculous.  It  states:

3. Reiterates its call upon the Government of Sri Lanka to implement effectively the constructive recommendations made in the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, and to take all necessary additional steps to fulfil its relevant legal obligations and commitment to initiate credible and independent actions to ensure justice, equity and accountability, and reconciliation for all Sri Lankans;

It demands Sri Lanka to implement the report prepared by its own LLRC. US State Department  as usual is unable to understand all the  implications of the issues in Sri Lanka.  The LLRC was appointed to study the terrorist situation and the conflict that ended with the elimination of the terrorists.  The LLRC was not mandated to make recommendations.

The recommendations they had nevertheless made cannot be implemented without taking into consideration other vital factors that ensues the end of a 30 year struggle and a suffering of the people.  The Government has to evaluate the situation and forge a different progressive path of development, reconciliation and unity. That is some thing that had to be undertaken by people who understand the culture , customs, and social values of different communities. 

It is therefore some, thing that had to be undertaken by the government of Sri Lanka and not at the behest of  the USA and its allies or Navineetham Pillay.  This was well spelt out by the president immediately after the elimination of terrorism, when he said “ there are no more minorities and a majority, but there are only good or bad Sri Lankans”. 

This is a profound philosophical statement made by a generous man who would not hesitate  giving up every thing  for the betterment of his country and its people. It is  a clarion call for an essential unity.  This the Americans, the West or the separatist Tamil Diaspora will not understand. 

It is better they take a moment to understand what it involves.  This makes the US resolution against Sri Lanka a worthless impediment to a greater project the President  and the Government of Sri Lanka has in mind  for the people of Sri Lanka.  Implementation of the US Resolution to the letter will only help separatist politics putting one community against the other when what is needed to day is Unity of all Communities.

The next two items, propose continued interference  into Sri Lanka’s reconciliation and development efforts.  If it is allowed Sri Lanka would only be a subject State of USA and the West.   Sri Lanka should refuse any mandate holders or interfering NGOs or specialists into Sri Lanka, either by invitation or as visiting dignitaries.  We have had enough of interference from the USA and the West ever since we rid ourselves of the terrorists.  None of them came to our  rescue then , therefore there is no reasons to invite these “disasters” into, our midst now.

4. Encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to cooperate with special procedures mandate holders and to respond formally to their outstanding requests, including by extending invitations and providing access;

5. Encourages the Office of the High Commissioner and relevant special procedures mandate holders to provide, in consultation with and with the concurrence of the Government of Sri Lanka, advice and technical assistance on implementing the above-mentioned steps;

The last item in the US resolution is to bind Sri Lanka to their “ beck and call”,  making  Sri Lanka a subject Nation.  If this is allowed we will have this self same comedy being enacted at the UNHRCouncil in Geneva every year in and year out, until Sri Lanka or USA and its allies put an end to it.

Therefore, it is best that Sri Lanka take the initiative to end it refusing to cooperate with the UNHRC.  The resolution if allowed to stand will see the end of the reconciliation of Communities , encourage enhanced   activities by the separatists Tamil expatriate groups against the Unity of Communities to  take the Nation forward, and perhaps revive terrorism once again in Sri Lanka. 

6. Requests the Office of the High Commissioner, with input from relevant special procedures mandate holders, as appropriate, to present an oral updateto the Human Rights Council at its twenty-fourth session, and a comprehensive report  followed by a discussion at the twenty-fifth session, on the implementation of the present resolution

In considering the whole of the US resolution against Sri Lanka, it is evident that it is going to be an annual exercise of the US State Department and its Western allies against Sri Lanka, therefore, the US Resolution against Sri Lanka is only good to be thrown into the waste paper basket.

It is not just and fair that USA that is violating  human rights, human rights Law and International Humanitarian Law in its different theatres of war  go scot free without any one making any resolutions against America’s blatant violation of human rights. Sri Lanka should propose China, Russia and the SAARC to set up a Committee to make America answerable for its violation of human rights, in Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Afghanistan and helping  rebels arming them and assisting them to fight against Governments in place.

Thursday, 28 March 2013

Please do not say any more India is a friend of Sri Lanka.

One cannot understand the naivety , and simple stupidity of  Sri Lanka ‘s inability  to Stand  against the continued humiliation by India and  Tamil Nadu.  Is it important that Sri Lanka Cricket team should play in Tamil Nadu ? Is it not possible for the pilgrims to Buddhagaya find another route of access  avoiding  Tamil Nadu or postpone pilgrimage to Buddhagaya  until such time as India realises its error and  improve its relations? 

Many Sri Lankans also  go to India for shopping, more often to by sarees ,  jewelry and accessories for weddings. Sri Lanka produces enough clothes and jewelry therefore it is not necessary to buy Indian Sarees, bangles and golden necklaces.  Sri Lankan’s are very extravagant  in wedding and spend lavishly more often competing with others.  We should  learn to have simple weddings making them  a private and a personal event. We cannot impose trade embargos but we could certainly curtail purchasing Indian goods.

Sri Lanka should stop importing Indian films, and Indian books and magazine.  The ordinary Indians should be made to feel the injustice being committed by Tamil Nadu, and Indian government against Sri Lanka.

Import of motor vehicles,  luxury goods, buses,  and railway carriages from India should be stopped.  India with its claim to leadership in Asian is still not civilised.  The behaviour of the Tamils of TamilNadu is  ample evidence of their uncivilized savagery , as it was manifested in the  assault of  Buddhist monks.  There should be a campaign against visiting India.  India should apologise for the assault of monks and pilgrims, and take action against those Tamilnadu criminals.

The images of the uncivilized savage Tamils  of Tamil Nadu beating Buddhist monks should be produced as posters and pasted on Bill boards all over Sri Lanka, for our people to know the savagery of the Tamils of Tamil Nadu and the hypocrisy of India.

The Government cannot  demand the closing down of Indian Embassy, but it could ask India to close down the Indian Consulates in the North and the South.

India’s relationship with Sri Lanka is arrogant.  In voting  for the US resolution against Sri Lanka, India has shown its  rank indifference in its  relation with Sri Lanka preferring the  thugs and bullies of the West. Indian delegate before voting against Sri Lanka,  could have avoided his  speech which only confirmed India’s hidden agenda.

It was reported that the “India’s envoy Dilip Sinha made a strongly worded statement on Sri Lanka, saying that it was imperative that Sri Lanka implemented the recommendations of the LLRC and moved forward in accordance with the 13th amendment to its constitution. “It is vital that Sri Lanka addresses issues like missing persons, detainees, and the return of private lands by military”, Sinha said, adding that the measures taken so far were unsatisfactory. And advised Sri Lanka, “it was India’s belief that the end of the conflict provided an unique opportunity to Sri Lanka for reconciliation and the opportunity needed to be grabbed.”

Not failing to display its utter hypocrisy  he shamelessly stated, “India is Sri Lanka’s closest neighbour and share thousands of years of relationship. We cannot be but untouched by what happens in Sri Lanka……and said  that, “.. India would continue to engage with the country.” That was not a message of friendship.

India had outwardly shown that it was a friendly neighbour, but  worked against Sri Lanka behind its back.  The terrorism in Sri Lanka was the making of India. It helped the terrorists in various ways  by training them within  India territory.  India came to the help of the terrorists when they were about to be defeated by the Sri Lanka Armed Forces in 1987. India refused  to sell arms and ammunitions to the Government of Sri Lanka, and even demanded that not to purchase arms from China.  India refused to provide  transport to Sri Lanka Armed Forces when they were sieged by the terrorists.  India  even sold to Sri Lanka a second hand radar system that failed to detect  the ramshackle terrorist planes.

Sri Lanka  had  kept close relations with India as it did not want  the Western countries playing a damaging role in Sri Lanka , as it is  understood  from the introduction to  C.A.Chandraprema’s book “ Gota’s War”.  It states  “ ….After India lost control of things in 1990 and stepped aside, the Western powers began playing a role in the Sri Lanka Conflict.” 

It also explains why the West has taken an anti-Sri Lanka stand ever since the end of terrorist war, going all out to stop its development and reconciliation efforts under the President Mahinda Rajapakse. 

“ Usually, foreign interventions would mean that a foreign country would be able to influence, guide or control events in the country subject to the intervention.  Yet in Sri Lanka, no foreign power ever held the reins in their hands.  No foreign power could switch things on or off in Sri Lanka as they pleased.  The epicentre of the conflict always remained  firmly in Sri Lanka.  All foreign powers who thought  they could manipulate  or even influence  things in Sri Lanka  were to realise that they were only handmaidens and not mistresses.  A recent Norwegian government commissioned report on their peace mediation efforts in Sri Lanka candidly admitted as such.”

Sri Lanka therefore suffers the consequence of its determined effort to eliminate the terrible terrorism without being distracted by the powerful West, and against India’s expansionist intentions.
India’s friendly relation with Sri Lanka began with the reign of King Asoka and ended thereafter.  Now it is time that Sri Lanka begins to assert itself.  It is important in the first instance to remove the 13 Amendment from the Constitution, which was a part of India’s plan  for  division and annexation of the north and East of Sri Lanka.  Secondly Sri Lanka should either ban TNA or file action against them for the breach of the Sri Lanka Constitution. TNA is a barrier against reconciliation of Communities.

India and its allies the USA and the West may repeat what it had been doing to  Cuba with trade embargos and sanctions.  Sri Lanka should be strong to stand against their manipulations.

Sunday, 24 March 2013

Sri Lanka singled out for a US resolution against it, on lies , conjectures, suppositions, and imaginations.

UNO is becoming an irrelevant outdated  institution changing the original concept of  a world forum to avoid  aggression against a country by another  allowing them to meet amoung equals to settle disputed issues through healthy discussion, so that a simple political dispute will not lead  into a word war. 

The UNO the forum of Member States decided on contested issues that may have political consequences, in committees and then put them to the General Assembly for a vote.  It was therefore at the end the Member States who together as equals  who decided on a disputed issue.  No committee could on its own take a  decision without referring it to the General Assemble through its Executive Committee.

The UNO did not take any decision unilaterally on internal matters of a Sovereign Member State. Now the situation of the  UNO is being changed the more powerful Member State taking decisive decisions out side the UNO, and its Security council in Separate Committees and Commissions, without their decisions endorsed by the UN General Assembly.

UN Human Rights Council  has become a second UNO taking decisions  concerning  internal matters of a Member State with the representatives of only 47 Members States from a total of 194 UN Member Sates. 

The resolution against Sri Lanka  had been sponsored by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navineetham Pillay as it has been said in its introduction to the Council by the Permanent Delegate for USA Ms.Eileen Denahoe “The resolution relied upon the detailed report of the High Commissioner Navi Pillay….”

For the purpose of the resolution the UNHRC Navineetham Pillay had resorted to questionable documents and evidence, such as the report  of the Panel appointed by the Secretary General of the UNO Ban Ki Moon which was only to advice him on the back ground to the elimination of terrorists in Sri Lanka.  At the beginning it remained an unpublished “personal” document  to the Secretary General.

The Panel itself had failed to be completely convinced of its own findings and handled laboriously  the doubtful material, “The panel found that even two years after the end of the civil war there were no accurate, reliable figures for the number of civilian deaths during the final months of the civil war.This was caused by lack of accurate figures for the number of civilians and Tamil Tigers in the conflict area, and the number of who emerged from the conflict area; and the burial of dead bodies without deaths being registered.

A UN document estimated that 7,721 civilians were killed between August 2008 and 13 May 2009. The panel found that this figure was probably too low because it only included deaths recorded by UN observers whereas many deaths may not have been observed, and because the figures only go up to 13 May 2009 whereas the number of deaths would have increased sharply after this date to the intensifying of shelling. Many civilians were left where they died, their deaths never registered and their bodies never brought to hospital or buried. The panel concluded that the number of civilian deaths "could easily be several times" than in the UN document.”

This is the report on which the USA  found it “noble” to present a resolution against Sri Lanka .
That was not all, the UN HRCouncil in Geneva  was turned into a big circus during the 22nd Session.  It allowed persons who have no connection to the UNSystem to provide  evidently false documents blatantly accusing Sri Lanka. They presented fake documents, photos and films produced by the infamous UK Channel  4- which  when there is no acceptable evidence does not hesitate to collect old photos and copy extracts from video to fit them into a video footage and present it as “true” evidence of atrocities committed by the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka.   The “gullible” and vengeance seekers jumped at them and granted permission for their  display during the sessions of the UN HRCouncil.

A photo of the presumed 12 year old son of the terrorist leader with marks on the body which looked like bullet marks without any sign of blood around the wounds, was    publicised  to coincide with the 22 session of the UNHRCouncil .  If it was a real photo of  an atrocity committed by the Sri Lanka 

Armed Forces, why was it produced just during the 22nd Session of the UNHRCouncil ?  Why was it not produced before at the 19 session of the UNHRCouncil for instances ?
Then of course there were the NGOs and the Human rights Watch allowed to speak on the resolution.  Is this the normal  procedure UNO should follow in its forums to settle complaints against a Country and settle disputes according to its Charter ?

The US Resolution was a big farce, firstly because USA is  with bloodied hands of violation of human rights every where in the world  it had intervened to make political settlements. Secondly, the resolution it passed, with which it now  threatens Sri Lanka to implement it under threat of sanctions against Sri Lanka is not acceptable, as it was not passed with an overall majority of the delegates at the 22nd Session of the UNHR Council.

There were only 25 out of 47 votes in favour of the US Resolution.  Of the 25 States  Austria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Spain, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Moldova, Romania, and Switzerland are all US allies of the EU its “yes men”. 

They do not go further than the face value of a USA’s hasty decisions, as it was when America declared war against Iraq for having “Weapons of Mass Destruction”, which they never found  but instead, killed millions of men, women and children and left Iraq ruined without even fresh water to drink. And now the poor Iraqis are left to live in utter misery.  USA has finished with Iraq and will not come back to reconstruct Iraq which they demolished into rubble.

The others who voted for the resolution of USA had their own reasons. India  for instance is still to be accused for its violation of human rights and atrocities committed against the population in Kashmir, and its continuing violation of  the human rights of the Dalits. Accusing Sri Lanka  and voting for the US resolution is to protect itself from a US resolution against its “black » deeds in Kashmir, more than giving into rabble rousers in the South.

Libya has a government setup by France , and America. Therefore Libya’s allegiance is for them as their puppet government.  Korea had been with America as a result of its division after World War II, and North became a Communist State.  South Korea has still not found an independent voice. Argentina , Brazil, Chile,  Costa Rica, Peru, and Guatemala, in South America are dependent on USA. Sierra Leone, Benin and Ivory Coast are  West African countries maintaining relations with America.  They are all those who backed the American resolution against Sri Lanka.

Japan abstained from voting, perhaps Japan is psychologically in fear of a another Nagasaki  and Hiroshima.  Therefore it would not go directly against the country that did the greatest damage to its people and the country.  But Japan nevertheless disapproved the US resolution against Sri Lanka without being a party to it and remained uncommitted. 

So was Malaysia with a 7 percent of an Indian population speaking Tamil is seeking to keep the Tamil voice silent by abstaining to support the US Resolution without directly voting for it or against it. On the other hand Angola, Botswana, Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Burkina Faso also found its voice to show their disagreement with the US resolution by abstaining to vote.

But the Independent generous,  fearless states willing to stand up against injustice and hypocrisy : Congo, Ecuador, Indonesia, Maldives ,Mauritania, Pakistan , Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Philippines,  Thailand, Uganda, and Venezuela said  “No” to the most disruptive, inelegant US resolution against Sri Lanka, which once again confirms US State Departments deplorable attitude of disdain for the developing countries. 

In this we see India breaking away from its Asian Colleagues to stand with the to-day’s aggressor of developing Nations.  The Middle Eastern States have not failed to stand by us.  Even Uganda and Congo from Africa  supported us.  That really shows that the USA which now comes out with its usual threats of sanctions is not supported by free thinking  people of the world. 

It is a pity America wants to stand as the “Goliath” trying to dictate terms to the world which will surely finish by finding a “David” to challenge its might. Sri  Lanka can do with out  America.  When America got just, 25 votes to its most reactionary resolution, while  22 countries either by voting NO  by abstaining, or by not being present showed their disregard to America which tries to show it is clean when it is splattered with the blood of innocents all over.

America cannot be triumphant with having passed its resolution against Sri Lanka only with THREE votes more than those who said No, abstained from voting, or ignored the resolution all together.

Thursday, 21 March 2013

The Back Ground to US Resolution against Sri Lanka.

It is a sad day for those who love Sri Lanka, and those progressive people who watch Sri Lanka’s evolution as a great country which has risen from ashes so to say to become the envy of some and a beacon of hope for others.

American State Department, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry or even President Barack Obama -they are really of no use to us the people of Sri Lanka.  They care little for the people,  be they Tamil, Sinhala or Muslim, their main interest  in Sri Lanka is to what extent they can make use of the Sri Lanka- the country in their plan of a political strategy.
The resolution USA got passed in the UNHRCouncil today is a display of its utter  hypocrisy.  USA has really nothing special that allows them to move  a resolution against Sri Lanka.  USA State Department therefore turned to Navaneetham Pillay the most controversial Commissioner of the UN Human Rights Council.  Most of the US Resolution against Sri Lanka contains Navaneetham Pillay’s earlier antagonist demands against Sri Lanka.

There is no secret that Navaneetham Pillay- a South African Tamil is backed by the anti-Sri Lanka Pro terrorist Tamil Diaspora, and she wants vengeance from Sri Lanka government  for the elimination of Tamils as much as the pro-terrorists Tamils of the Diaspora.

There is no point asking her to come to Sri Lanka, as any one  like her coming with a prejudiced mind against Sri Lanka will change nothing.  She had apparently sent a delegation  to make an evolution of Sri Lanka’s progress since the defeat of terrorism.  But that delegation had not been able to contribute anything  constructive for Navi Pillay to change her mind about Sri Lanka.  Instead of the findings of the delegation she had delved into the  report of the  Darusman Panel to include its findings in to the resolution prepared by the US State Department.

Who had the “big” idea of taking only the last phase of the Sri Lanka’s military operations against the terrorists for a probe into the killing of civilians  and call for accountability, leaving out the previous 27 years of continuous massacres, assassinations, bomb blasts , and killing by  human suicide bombs of the terrorists ?

These were all pre-planned , USA and its allies never expected  Sri Lanka Armed Forces to win in military operations  against the terrorists. They wanted terrorists “safe and sound” to form a separate Eelam State. 

They saw to it by first suggesting to Sri Lanka that the only solution against terrorism is a political solution, then they arranged  with Netherland as a mediator several rounds of peace negotiations with the representatives of the  Government,  and the terrorist. The Mediators with the support of the then Secretary of Defence Austin Fernanado  raised the status of the  terrorists to a Armed Force  with the representatives of the terrorists given military insignias such as Colonels, Captains  and Commissars. Political Wing Leaders, Sea Tiger Commanders etc.

The stage was thus set for the emergence of the terrorists into an Armed Force of a future Tamil Eelam State.  Unfortunately for the Western manipulators, the terrorist Talaivar  Prabhakaran was not ready for peace negotiations, as he wanted an  unconditional formation of an Eelam State.  Therefore, he deliberately  broke off the peace negotiations in order to wrench off forcibly  a territory for an Eelam State.

Then the West through Netherland as a Mediator drew up the CFA setting up terrorist controlled areas and government areas.  The terrorists used this “ CFA Plan” to develop  its military force, stock arms and ammunition , set up factories to make bombs, submarines, protective earth mounds, set up road blocks and train a platoon of Black Tigers specialising in suicide human bombs. 

The CFA barred the Sri Lanka armed forces from firing at the terrorists, on the other hand the terrorists set up claymore bombs, trained grenade lobbers, and snipers and carried out  massacres, bomb blasts, and assassinations and  took refuge in the terrorist controlled areas into which the police or the Sri Lanka Armed Forces could not enter in search of the miscreants.

But the terrorists sure of their superior military power provoked the Armed Forces which did not have even modern  guns to resists the terrorists.  It was in such a provocation that the terrorists closed the Sluice gates of Mavil Aru depriving about 60000 farmers of water and  making 2000 hectares of land uncultivable.  It was then that the Government deployed its Armed Forces to open the Sluice gates.  The terrorists attacked the Armed forces cutting their access to the gates.  The Armed Forces retaliated and that was the beginning of the determined military operations by the Sri Lanka Armed Forces to end terrorism which finally came to an end in May, 2009.

During the course of that strategic military operations the West kept on  harping on a political solution, hoping the Sri Lanka Armed Forces  will be defeated by the superior terrorist forces.  When they saw that at last the Sri Lanka Armed Forces had adopted appropriate military strategies, and saw that the defeat of  terrorism was imminent the West sent emissaries to Sri Lanka.   

David Miliband and Bernard Kouchner the Foreign Ministers of UK and France  met the President of Sri Lanka  and demanded him to agree to a Cease Fire.  The President and the Armed Forces  refused to  a cease fire at that stage,  and even refused an entry visa to the Swedish foreign Minister Carl Bildt.

An extract from a relevant report:  “ Sri Lanka- The New Great Game” in The Diplomat Blog  read, “….

As the conflict drew to a close in the first half of 2009, there were a spate of diplomatic incidents that reflected growing tensions between Sri Lanka and the West. Sri Lanka rejected Britain’s appointment of Des Browne as Special Envoy to Sri Lanka and declined entry to Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt. In addition, a joint visit in April 2009 by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner to secure a ceasefire led to a further souring of relations. Meanwhile, in April 2009, Sri Lanka’s application for a US$1.9 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund met with US resistance. ‘We have raised questions about the IMF loan at this time. We think it is not an appropriate time to consider that until there is a resolution of the conflict,’ said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the time……”(

Sri Lanka stood steadfast not  giving in to any “great power” and won the war eliminating the terrorists for good.  But antagonised the USA and the West in the attempt and its final victory over terrorism was not felicitated to by the USA and the West.

The USA and the West have still not given up their “plot” to  annex Sri Lanka in their plan for a USA political Strategy in the Indian Ocean against China, into which it has roped in India.  USA and the West still refuse to condemn the terrorists. They avoid being drawn into “condemn” the terrorists and call for an accountability for the disasters it caused  from those who contributed to terrorism in Sri Lanka such as the Terrorist Front Organisations of the Tamil Diaspora, and the Associations such as the Global Tamil Forum, Tamils for Justice and the Tamil National Alliance, so on.  That is the very reason why they have restricted their focus on the last phase of the military operations against Terrorism by the Sri Lanka Armed forces, to avoid  accusing the terrorists and call accountability from those who represent the terrorists now,  on available factual evidence against them.

This is the back ground to the US Resolution against Sri Lanka passed at the 22nd Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva to-day the 21 March, 2013.  In which not only India but also Japan had stabbed Sri Lanka in the back, despite presenting them with two elephants. !!!.

Wednesday, 20 March 2013

Karunanidhi assisted in the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi and his close connection with Sri Lanka terrorists.

Milap Chand Jain handed over his  report on Rajiv Gandhi’s Assassination  to the Indian Home Minister Indrajit Gupta.  It consisted of 17 volumes eight of which were the report and the nine of annexes.  It was an explosive report and no one was willing to handle it.  Jain said about his report , “ I am fully satisfied with my interim report  and what it contains.  Each one of my conclusions and observations  is based on documents on record with the commission.

Rajiv Gandhi just before he was assassinated
The report had singled out Karunanidhi’s DMK for its severest indictment. It holds Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.Karunanidhi and his DMK  responsible for abetting  Rajiv Gandhi’s murder.  He further pointed out DMK as an ally of the LTTE, whose cadre killed Rajiv Gandhi. 

Jain has further asserted that the Congress Government at the Centre and M.G.Ramachandran’s AIADMK State Government were responsible for the initial impetus to Tamil Militancy.  But Jain holds  the DMK of Karunanidhi guilty of encouraging  and assisting the LTTE even after the  Indo-Sri Lankan accord of 1987.  Jain report continues:

“Under the changed scenario, the LTTE made a strategic shift in their political alignments,” says the report. “They sent personal emissaries to Karunanidhi  seeking his active support in their battle against the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF).

These overtures of the LTTE towards the DMK started a chain of events which led to LTTE’s survival and growth in Tamil Nadu even after the attitude of the Government of India had changed towards the LTTE after the hostilities between the IPKF and LTTE in Sri Lanka.’’

The Jain report states that the LTTE “was getting its supplies, including arms, ammunition, explosives, fuel and other essential items for its war against the IPKF from Tamil Nadu. That too with the support of the Tamil Nadu government and the connivance of the law enforcement authorities”.

The report emphasises the political antagonism between the DMK  government in the state and the Rajiv Gandhi government at the Centre.  Karunanidhi took over as chief minister in January 1989 after his  party's decisive victory over the Congress and the AIADMK.

Karunanidhi assisted in the  assassination of  Rajiv Gandhi . He was closely connection with  Sri Lanka terrorists.

According  to the report, 1989 signified "the perpetuation of the general  political trend of indulging the Tamil militants on Indian soil and  tolerance of their wide-ranging criminal and anti-national activities  ... LTTE activities of arms smuggling, abduction of Indian citizens  and officials and intimidation of the law enforcement machinery were  tolerated". Citing the brutal murder of EPRLF leader K. Padmanabha,  along with 15 others in Madras on June 19, 1990, Jain has resurrected  memories of "the impunity with which the LTTE could operate in India".

The commission has quoted two reports of the Intelligence Bureau (IB)  that speak of Karunanidhi not being averse to the elimination of EPRLF  leaders by LTTE hit squads. These reports, filed on June 28, 1990  (nine days after Padmanabha's murder) referred to "the chief minister  informing Natesan (an LTTE activist) to provide advance information  regarding LTTE movements and also sought details of locations of LTTE  hideouts to direct the police to keep away from such places".

The Intelligence Burea also recorded the "opinion expressed by the chief minister regarding  Padmanabha being a betrayer". Another report quoted by Jain claims the  "chief minister (Karunanidhi) also told Natesan that killing of Padmanabha was a  necessity and so also of Vardaraja Perumal and that Natesan should  ensure that he (Karunanidhi) was taken into confidence before such  acts are committed".

Padmanabha's killing is important  because it was the same hit squad that was later deployed to eliminate  Rajiv.

If that isn't enough to damage Karunanidhi, the commission has quoted  other documents and various statements given to it by former LTTE  activists. For example, Kasi Anandan, a senior member of the 10-member  central committee of the LTTE's political wing, admitted in his  deposition on September 11, 1996, that "the LTTE had very friendly  relations with Karunanidhi. In the days of Karunanidhi as CM, movement  of LTTE was more free. Local administration was also friendly in Tamil  Nadu". Anandan even disclosed that the "LTTE was able to communicate  from Jaffna to Tamil Nadu when the V.P. Singh government was at the  Centre and the Karunanidhi government in Tamil Nadu."

Jain has recorded vivid details of the LTTE's free access to  Karunanidhi and key state government officials. Anandan revealed that  he, along with another LTTE leaders, used to meet Karunanidhi in  strict privacy: "I have met Karunanidhi several times alone and once  or twice with Natesan." Neither the Tamil Nadu government nor the  Centre had any clue as to what transpired in these meetings.

The entire state (TamilNadu)  machinery was, in one way or the other, involved in supporting the  LTTE at that time. Evidently, the police was not given a free hand to  deal with the LTTE. 
Indeed, the Jain Commission report has raised doubts over the DMK's  committment to the Centrally-sponsored action plan for handling the  LTTE. It has alleged that even coded messages between the Centre and  the state government were promptly relayed to the LTTE leaders in  Jaffna. 

"There is evidence to show that, during this period, some of  the most vital wireless messages were passed between the LTTE  operatives based in Tamil Nadu and Jaffna. These messages, which were  decoded later, are directly related to the assassination of Rajiv  Gandhi.''

Various intelligence reports in July 1990, recorded by Jain, also  suggested that LTTE functionary Kiruban had approached Gopalaswamy and  the Chief Minister(Karunanidhi) of Tamil Nadu for providing more landing points to  bring in injured Tigers from across the Palk Straits. As Jain records,  "The chief minister (Karunanidhi) reportedly suggested a point from Mallipattinam,  preferably in the coastal areas of Thondi, as the possible choice for  the purpose. Thus, it appears, changes in landing points along the  coast were always effected in consultation with DMK leaders."

The commission has also referred to some reports that indicated  Karunanidhi was personally instrumental in ensuring things went  smoothly for the LTTE. At one stage, when the Tigers were hit by a  paucity of funds, Karunanidhi is reported to have suggested floating  an organisation called "The Relief Association for Sri Lankan Tamils"  to facilitate the diversion of Government funds. LTTE activists  Anandan and Natesan were mooted as office-bearers.

Karunanidhi's reckless style alarmed even his political allies. Mufti  Mohammed Sayeed, home minister in V.P. Singh's regime, cautioned  Karunanidhi about the worsening situation in the state. Giving details  of the LTTE's growing presence in Tamil Nadu, Mufti reprimanded the  chief minister (Karunanidhi) for the DMK's perceived closeness to the LTTE.

The evidence against the Karunanidhi Government appears to be quite  damning, particularly since the commission has been rather dismissive  of the DMK's protestations of innocence. Deposing before the  commission on January 17 this year, Karunanidhi asserted: "I had  supported the LTTE along with other parties, but after the murder of  Padmanabha, I withdrew my support." Jain is, however, disinclined to  accept this denial: "It cannot be found that after June 19, 1990, the  DMK government in Tamil Nadu gave no support to the LTTE."

In fact, Jain has praised MGR, who once paid Rs 5 crore to the LTTE,  for dealing with V.Prabhakaran, the LTTE supremo, decisively. The  report says: "An affirmation of the policy of the government of India  is seen in a severe reprimand to V. Prabhakaran by MGR, the then chief  minister of Tamil Nadu, after the SAARC meeting when Prabhakaran was  told by him that he should carry out his struggle from his own country  if he was not willing to play by our rules."

According to a senior Congress functionary, "It will be totally  unethical to support the DMK's participation in the Government if the  interim report holds it responsible for causing our leader's death."

Jain's findings  may prove as devastating as the bomb that went off in Sriperumbudur  six years ago. But the judge is unfazed by the implications of his  findings. "I have done my job to the best of my ability," he says,"  even under adverse circumstances and non-cooperation. Now, it is for  the Government to do whatever it wants to do."

Tuesday, 19 March 2013

50 people died in car bombs in Baghdad on the 10th Anniversary of USA campaign against Iraq-while USA placed before UNHRC a resolution against Sri Lanka.

It was significant and symbolic of America’s continued aggression towards developing Nations of the world, that on the very day the USA Delegation  at the UNHRC Council in Geneva presented its resolution against Sri Lanka, a series of Car Bombs in Shia area in Bagdad  killed 50 Iraqi civilians as the reminder of the 10th anniversary of the  US led Campaign against Iraq.   

It is also significant that American State Department’s retrograde attitude  manifests to champion the dead terrorists and causing unhappiness to a people  beginning to make their lives anew after suffering under terrorism for 30 years, on the day the new Pope Francis is being installed  in his papal function to bring peace to the world.

President Barack Obama  sought the vote of the people on his famous campaign slogans of “yes we can” and “hope and change”, but his State Department did not hear his words  its ears remaining  turned to the past  hears only the  voices of Eisenhower, Edgar Hoover, Foster Dulles, Bush and the rest of the hard core  Republicans.  

President Barack Obama is only a passing phenomenon, in an American State Department that does not accommodate new thinking of progress  and peace in the world, and emancipation of the under priviledged. Those are for the US State Department words of Socialism which it does not want to accept in the great American tradition  of the past that was ever ready to kill and destroy any one that proposed progressive  ideas with the slightest trace of Socialism, as it happened  in Guatemala, Iran, Congo, Cuba, Chile and so on.

The progressive voices like that of Ranking Member Faleomavaega, are for American State Department unimportant distractions. The philosophy behind his plea on behalf of Sri Lanka is difficult for the bureaucrats of the US Sate Department to understand.

Even a simple American citizen Amy Poirier who had witnessed for herself the progressive undertakings  of the Government of  the President Mahinda Rajapakse after elimination of terrorists , was  of  high praise to Sri Lanka and demanded the President and the State Secretary to withdraw the resolutions against Sri Lanka it was proposing to place before the  UNHRCouncil in Geneva. 

Amy Poirier showed the greatness to which an ordinary American citizen could  rise while  the USState Departments is in a political morass despite the words for “hope and change “ the President Barrack Obama so well articulated  “ yes we can” through out his election campaign.

What does America want to prove to the world in passing a resolution against Sri Lanka, which, though not accepted by  the US State Department, has after having rid itself of the greatest menace to the country’s unity and progress , began a social, economic and cultural revolution hitherto unknown to Sri Lanka, in the waves of which Sri Lanka blossoming forth into a new era of prosperity with looming signs of  Communal Unity in the wake of a relentless effort of reconciliation ?

Take the US resolution  against Sri Lanka ,which begins by “Welcoming and acknowledging the progress made by the Government of Sri Lanka in rebuilding infrastructure, demining, resettling the majority of internally displaced persons, and noting nonetheless that considerable work lies ahead in the areas of justice,reconciliation and resumption of livelihoods, and stressing the importance of the full participation of local populations, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in these efforts,
Taking note of the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission of Sri Lanka and its findings and recommendations, and acknowledging its possible contribution to the process of national reconciliation in Sri Lanka,”

In the above extract, “considerable work lies ahead in the areas of justice, reconciliation and resumption of livelihoods, and stressing the importance of the full participation of local populations, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in these efforts, “  

This is monstrously absurd, as  justice of Sri Lanka is a matter of Sri Lanka and our justice is  commendable and it is not America which is going to point out about correction of  laws, where as Americas laws are  very much to be desired.

The following extract speaks for itself:
“Almost everything about the American system is wrong. Grand juries are a rubber stamp for the prosecutors; assets are routinely frozen or seized in ex parte actions on the basis of false government affidavits, so targets don't have the resources to pay avaricious American counsel and are thrust into the hands of public defenders, who are usually just Judas goats for the prosecutors. The prosecutors poison the jury pool with a media lynching at the start; bail is often outrageously high, and prosecutions and ancillary proceedings from the SEC, IRS, etc., drag on for a whole decade, all contrary to the Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments. The plea bargain system, for which prosecutors would be disbarred in most other serious countries, enables prosecutors to threaten everyone around the target with indictment if they don't miraculously recall, under careful government coaching, inculpatory evidence. Prosecutors win 95 per cent of their cases, 90 per cent of those without a trial, and people who exercise their constitutionally guaranteed right to go to trial receive more than three times the sentence they receive if they cop a plea, as a penalty for exercising their rights.”
“The civil courts are the bread and butter of the vast medieval legal guild. Over 70 per cent of American cases would be inadmissible in Canada or Britain as frivolous or vexatious litigation, and the routine American practice of marketing contingent fees is just a tawdry racket.” (
So much for American Justice.
Then lets take another extract, some of what is stated are hilariously absurd such as , “ considerable work lies ahead in………..reconciliation and resumption of livelihoods, and stressing the importance of the full participation of local populations, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in these efforts, “

Sri Lanka has just come out of a period of suffering under terrorism,.  The terrorism lasted 30 years .  It is only four years after terrorism and of course considerable work lies ahead before it comes to what Sri Lanka expects it to be, and  we need not have a  US Resolution for us to say so. 

But as far as USA very developed and much richer than poor Sri Lanka has not  according to a  “ Field Hearing in New Orleans on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita: Outstanding Need, Slow Progress  Hearing before Homeland Security Committee”,  it is stated ,”….little more than year and a half since Hurricane Katrina and the unfinished work before us is still immense……you find that some of the  basic services that people expect  in a civilised society-shelter, public safety, health care, are still not there for too many people in the city. (Senator Lieberman)

With regard to reconciliation and resumption of livelihood, I give an extract from an article: “Truth and Reconciliation Commission in America”, by Clay Jenkinson.

“Against these seemingly impossible odds, with the weight of the world's most powerful and acquisitive people saying, "assimilate or get out of my way," American Indians have somehow survived. The resilience of Indians in the face of disease, defeat, pauperization, and racism is one of the greatest examples of the triumph of the human spirit over adversity. Indian culture is still enormously stressed as the 21st century begins, but it is hanging on and starting to recover…………… I believe we cannot move forward, we cannot heal the land, and we cannot heal the peoples who share the land, white and Indian alike, until we engage in what is going to be a very long, very hard, very painful, and very unsettling conversation. Indeed, I believe that we need to create in America something like the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions that sprang up in South Africa in 1995, as that troubled country moved from centuries of Apartheid towards majority rule. I don't see it happening anytime soon, and I can imagine how profoundly most white Americans would resist that idea. But we need to do it and we will all be better once we get down on the mat and wrestle with the past and present with our souls open.”

This is only a few instances of America telling others what to do when it has not done to its own people any of what they dictates others to do.  That is the absurdity of the US resolution against Sri Lanka.

 Then continuing on that first  paragraph on which the rest of the resolution is based, it is stated:

 “and stressing the importance of the full participation of local populations, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in these efforts, “

Sri Lanka has always included all those who are concerned with, in its development programmes.  Each political party has its election manifesto according to which the party that comes into power and forms a Government organises its programs of development organises different aspects of governance.   It need not have foreign NGOs or foreign surveying missions to carry out its own political manifesto.

Therefore, without the US Resolution against Sri Lanka having got to stress the importance of full participation of local population, Sri Lanka Government consisting of educated and intelligent people have no lessons to learnt from USA or any other Agency how to Govern a country having done that since its independence, and Exceptionally well after elimination of the terrorists, what ever accusation USA and its allies make about the last phase of the war against terrorism.

US Resolution against Sri Lanka stresses the “minority participation”.  Is there in America a Minority participation ? Apparently not as American Indians remain apart.  It is only recently the Black Americans had been allowed to participate in certain matters.  It is only with President Barack Obama’s remarkable intrusion into “high” politics that we see more Black American participation  in American State affairs.  But for that matter  America is not without racial prejudices.

That makes US Resolution against Sri Lanka just bunkum !!!

“The election of Barack Obama failed to usher in a post-racial US, with a new poll showing that 51 percent of Americans hold explicitly anti-black views. That figure is up from 48 percent in 2008, the year America elected its first black president.
­Those expressing implicit anti-black attitudes also spiked from 49 percent to 56 percent over the same four-year period, the Associated Press found in a poll released Saturday.
Racial prejudice against blacks cut clearly across America’s left-right political divide, despite perceptions to the contrary. While 79 percent of Republicans willingly expressed racial prejudice when answering questions measuring explicit racism (as opposed to 32 percent among Democrats), the implicit racism test showed that a majority of Republicans (64 percent) and Democrats (55 percent) held implicit anti-black feelings.”