Prof. S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole
President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga (CBK) has stated that there is no need for a war crimes probe and that the need is for a new constitution. I have respected Madam CBK over the years and supported her in many ways. However, in this she is wrong; absolutely wrong!
CBK heads the Office of National Unity and Reconciliation (ONUR). There can be neither unity nor reconciliation when there is no justice for those civilians who were butchered by both sides during the war for the simple reason of their being Tamil or refusing to remain as a human shield.
I have travelled much in the North East and there is really no doubt that massacres occurred. It was only this week that I visited a home run by the Sisters of Charity and heard of how the soldiers dumped 500 wounded persons on them and there had been wanton shelling from the army camp. I have had my secretary telling me how she was with her infant grandchild and gone to a place announced by the army to collect infant food, only to be shelled by the army. A driver spoke of bombs all round in a declared safe zone, and he could see little because it was a constant series of flashes. I can go on ad nauseam. Tamils know!
The Sinhalese people are in collective, selective amnesia denying that all this happened, while a few Sinhalese friends privately admit that these things really happened. Anyone who says there is no need for a truly independent, demonstrably fair war crimes probe is essentially saying that those who deliberately murdered Tamils have a free pass. I do not think that CBK has thought through her new position.
CBK argues that the need is for a new constitution not a war crimes probe. We really need both. We have the Thirteen Amendment. Of what good is it when it is not implemented fully? In a political situation where the state cheats and the Supreme Court and Presidential Commissions of Inquiry collaborate, anyone guilty of war crimes will root for a piece of paper in the form of a constitution that is never obeyed. It was only last week that I was in court in the North where the Police prosecutor was making a long statement against me in Sinhalese, despite the constitution/law requiring Tamil to be the language of the courts in the North and a Supreme Court judgement to that effect!
Madam Kumaratunga: please do not waver from the correct positions you have taken in the past. Stay the course you boldly took in 2000 and in rooting for change in 2015. Every crime needs to be punished as a deterrent. No probe means a free hunting season on Tamils. Your government cosponsored a resolution calling for foreign judges. Why the change now? If you persist in this, you will be giving proof to the claim of the separatists that the Sinhalese are always lying and that we Tamils must go our own way. Sensible people do not want that.
We want justice, not more words, empty promises and constitutions that are never taken seriously please. We want the rule of law, to return us to which this government was elected. Please do not tell us it is OK to kill Tamils and that the rule of law will be waived to let the killers escape.
Lankan / February 4, 2017
Condoning the killing of thousands of civilians as unavoidable colateral damage, whether it actually happened or not, is deplorable.
How can a country move on, if the war was concluded in this manner
and the perpetrators were not held accountable? Surely it would be against international conventions?
Jim Softy, Sach and K.A. Sumanasekara are prisoners of their own poisoned minds unfortunately. Hopefully they are not a reflection of the majority.
/
Sinhala_Man / February 5, 2017
I have no time to study all this, but, dear “Lankan”, let me assure you that many of us Sinhalese realise that we cannot for ever live in denial of the need to INVESTIGATE.
What really happened has to follow from proper investigation.
/
S.R.H. Hoole / February 5, 2017
Thank you, Sinhala_Man.
That is all we want. That is the only thing that will settle all doubts some may have about what really happened.
/
Mallaiyuran / February 5, 2017
Sinhala Man,
5.2 Million Sinhalese voted to Old King in 2015. That is the majority of the Sinhalese who voted for that EP election. Basically Sinhala Majority still with Old King, not with Yahapalanaya or you. At least that is what Yahapalanaya actions indicate.
West defined “War crime against Lanka army” is starting only after the peace pact. A general definition would cover Navali or even Chemani massacres. By this approach, CBK’s crimes would not fall within that period, but beyond Old King’s period. This leaves an image of an investigation on Sinhala Government rather than on Old King. That time, West preferred power change and wanted to use this to dethrone Old King. But afterthought, now west realizes the truth that Sinhala Politics create dictatorship, corruption, war crime, down roll on country’s economy and the rest of the bad effect only because of the grudge Mahavamsa is channeling towards Tamils. Further this is not leaving even the Sinhala Catholics out. The Sinhala Catholics (SRWD, JR, DS…..) feel proud of changing the religion and jumping into the Mahavamsa wagon against Tamils. The Tamil Catholics are not able to get along with Cardinal Malcolm as he remains as a “Religious Old King” in his own world.
It is not Yahapalanaya would be thinking that it is ok for Sinhalese to beat back the close of UNHRC’s “Foreign Layers and Judges” by a genuine Local investigation, but not even making the UNHRC to repeal the 30/1 by offering a constitutional status for Tamils. So tentatively (I may change my opinion), I would say, the Yahapalanaya has backed off on its negotiation of having a constitutional change implemented before the end of 2016 and ask for leniency or replacing of the 30/1 resolution in March 2017. So Lankawe is asking for Roll Back.
/
Mallaiyuran / February 5, 2017
Let’s see recent court cases in Lankawe. 12 out 12 Sinhala jury did not find Navy is guilty of murdering Raviraj. For example, in America, white police shoots perceived minority criminals and white jury let them go. This is more of some of the Whites think the minorities are criminals. But all Whites rejected King’s murder. Raviraj case is pure political like King’s. Every Sinhalese, without any doubt, knows Raviraj was not a criminal. The jury verdict in that case is seen as beyond any racism seen in other parts of the world.
News said Pillaiyan accepted that he supplied hitmen to murder a prominent figure by the order of Old King. No case was filed on his on that. But the case of his participation in Pararajasingham MP is going well. Defense official are protected in both of his cases. It is believed Old Royals ordered Premachandra’s murder. But Duminda, a non UNP politician was accused in that. Case went through and Duminda convicted. Old Royals ordered Lasantha’s, Eglinekoga’s, and Thajudeen’s murder. These murders were committed by the defense officials. Those cases are not able to come out.
If defense have committed murders, Yahapalanaya feels Sinhala Mass wants it or Sinhala Mass will accept it. While being accused of war crime, without any concern, 150,000 troops are deployed in North. Defense exits only to defend Lankawe against Tamils. So anything defense does is accepted as Dutugamunu – Mahavamsa Patriotism by Sinhala mass and Yahapalanaya.
After the war against Tamils, defense is elevated as “Angels” of Lankawe.
Under these circumstances, if any different opinion exist with anybody of the injustice committed to Tamils from 1948, either he/she isolated like Bahu of choked on throat to close their mouth.
Possibly that is why you write this under only in your Pseudonym.
/
sach / February 5, 2017
Punishing any culprits according to the Sri Lankan legal system is something I have supported from the beginning. But I have always rejected international investigations or the so called tribunal of the UN.
I have made myself clear.
There is no substantial evidence to raise a war crimes case against Sri Lanka. Individual acts of crimes are not war crimes. It is a totally different thing.
UN has acted against SL due to US and Norway biases and I see we need not betray our sovereign right as a nation to defend ourselves for this so called bias.
/
sach / February 5, 2017
Condoning the killing of thousands of civilians as unavoidable colateral damage, whether it actually happened or not, is deplorable.///
Listen much celebrated obama..he routinely did this
/
S.R.H. Hoole / February 5, 2017
Why Collective Decisions are not always good
When a bench of judges without a backbone conspire in a war crimes case to save the criminal, it is difficult to find fault and that is why outsiders are even more important. Sri Lankans in general have no backbone or principle to stand up to those above them, whether socially or at work.
My selection committee at Jaffna is a good example. There was no one who would refuse to sign off on an obviously wrong decision by the VC and Sivasegaram (see above).
In such group decisions, On paper the group decides so that the executive (the VC) cannot do anything illegal. But in Sri Lanka, the Executive can do anything illegal, and the group will obediently sign, and the decision cannot be easily challenged because many supposedly responsible people like the Dean and Head and others had no backbone to refuse. They are a terrible example to their students.
The lying continues. Before the Council is the issue of the VC untruthfully writing a memo to the Council and successfully obtaining a visiting professorship claiming that the person, a student of Sivasegaram’s at Peradeniya, had retired as a professor of mechanical engineering. Sivasegaram surely knew it to untrue. That person had been an unsuccessful assistant professor of civil engineering and then moved to industry from where he retired. Sivasegaram was present when the appointment was approved at the last meeting.
So you see why those in authority do not want independent people in Sri Lanka. Such independent people will not fall into the category that obeys and signs off on anything asked for by those in authority.
We need foreigners as judges from societies where people are brought up to have integrity.
/
Ayub Khan / February 6, 2017
KUMAR R
In the back page you have responded to my appeal. You may not agree but I wish to say my views frankly.
1. You unnecessarily assume or assess that the readers will be innocent victims of the big title holders. Such assumption is wrong as beyond your hate driven tirades, many readers who are non title holders maker valuable responses. Of the names listed Dayan gets the fair share.
2. I have read your comments and note your innermost hate driven agenda. From your comments, it is assumed you are paranoid and a gutless person and is an embodiment of hate.
This fixated situation does not help anyone.
First of all, you must disclose your proper identity to match the veracity of your attacks. Your attacking spirit demeans you when you make them from hiding.
Making comments is your speciality, then disclose who you are. Your grandiose attacks is starting to earn criticism from readers. Do not be cynical and hate driven. Come out your secrecy and be open about your identity.
/
S.R.H. Hoole / February 6, 2017
Somewhere above, one Smith says he is outraged that I have access to the munutes of the Jaffna Council and asks if Nesiah gave me access. It is outrageous to speak like this about a respected retired CCS officer and Ministry Secretary who knows the rules of administration far better than Smith or Sivasegaram.
The three points I wish t make are:
One, it does not matter who gave me access.
Two, it is obvious why this Smith is outraged. He wants all illegal things to be hidden. No one has that right to hide illegal activity.
Three, it is the age of the Right to Information Act. It recognizes that institutions like the Jaffna VC cannot hide behind confidentiality to hide the illegal things they do. If they can successfully take cover in confidentiality, we will never know as we do now that the VC, the Dean and Sivasegaram conned the Jaffna Council into giving an appointment as Visitng Professor to a person who was in industry for the past 30 years claiming that he had retired as a Professor of Mechanical Engineering. Does Smith want all this hidden? Will he say from which universitry this person, retired as Professor of Mechanical Engineering?
Note: I have deliberately enumerated one, two etc., because once at Peradeniya Sivasegaram wanted to derail a paper from me via the faculty board for Senate permission for a programme that Sivasegaram wanted stalled. He objected that enumerating one two three is bad English and would ruin the reputation of the Faculty. He said it had to be firstly, secondly, etc. He got the paper held up and sent to Thiru Kandiah (Prof. of English) for an opinion. Prof. Kandiah said there is nothing wrong in that. But by then we missed the Senate deadline!
That is the horrid person this Sivasegaram has beome. It shows in Smith’s objections to leaks that reveal illegal goings on.
The IEEE lauds whistle-blowing and encourages this of us IEEE members. The Late Mark fernando, J, in a chapter for my book on human rights, argued that such leaks and whistle blowing are the duty of every citizen.
/
Smith / February 6, 2017
Sorry that wasn’t clear. The outrage is about the whole saga of a member of Council not declaring interest and excusing themselves from taking part in an appointment with likely CoI.
The second part of my comment (to which “outrage” doesn’t apply to the same degree) is the question how minutes were given to a relative. I would have thought the right thing for Nesiah to do is to refer the matter higher up or resign from Council and then go public. Leaking minutes to you is not something I am happy about. Whistle blowing is something that happens much lower down the hierarchy. Nesiah IS a member of Council — the top-most body of governance of the University — and a much respected former civil servant! If we are to know his thoughts, I would prefer it to be direct from him, than through you — a party in the dispute– in these gossip columns.
Clear?
/
S.R.H. Hoole / February 6, 2017
Just like Sivasegaram you, Smith, jump to conclusions and then launch attacks based on those wrong assumptions.
On what basis do you say that Dr. Nesiah leaked the minutes to me?
Somebody leaked them to me exposing the lies that you and the VC tell the Council.
That person is to be congratulated.
/
Lone Wolf / February 7, 2017
Dr Jeevan Hoole,
“Somebody leaked them to me exposing the lies that you and the VC tell the Council.”
I am pretty sure that the minutes actually were never officially intended to be confidential.
Anyway the fact is that the minutes are now available and I hope that the minutes of the future meetings are circulated and discussed to make university administration transparent.
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
The comment re Chelvakumar has a false accusation about me.
Chelvakumar was in communication with the Faculty much earlier than I started to teach at Kilinochchi– which was an year before I was named for the Council.
The reason why moves to rush documents through the Engineering Faculty without adequate discussion got buckled had little to do with my objection to the phrasing.
This is not the place to go into details of Faculty proceedings. I can only assure anyone concerned that there were far more serious issues which, regrettably, I cannot divulge here.
/
Naren Pillai / February 6, 2017
Smith should be outraged that Prof. K. Chelvakumar is being gotten into the Kilinochchi Engineering faculty by the RS to the Council that he retired as a professor of menchanical engineering. The highest permanent academic position he had was as an assistant professor some 30 years ago.
However, Smith is not outraged by that. Instead Smith is outraged (bloody outraged he says) that the minutes were leaked.
It sounds to me that he is one of those into unlawful activities seeking the cover of confidentiality instead of seeking to be on the side of clen, transparent, , administration.
That outrages me. So I tell him, go to bloody hell man.
/
V M / February 6, 2017
There are a few serious issues that need attention here. I wish Professor Hoole would bring some clarity to his recent past comments.
1. When someone named 3 SL Tamil academics as having a higher doctorates, he accused one of them of being unethical and passing of an honorary doctorate as a Higher Doctorate. When asked to clarify on who the individual was, he ignored the matter. A serious allegation against an established academic needs some background confirmation.
2. The identity of Kumar R. Prof Hoole and his supporters are adamant that Kumar R is Prof. Sivasegaram despite continuous denials by both parties (assumed). If it is indeed true that Kumar R is not Sivasegaram, is it not a very serious smear and underhand attack on an academic?
3. He brushes off the Principal Research Fellow Rank as in line with a PostDoc. This is both disingenuous and a typically disgraceful attempt at a successful academic (my next post will include the Position of Principal Research Fellow as enunciated by Imperial College, London).
4. Leaks of confidential minutes and internal board meetings can not be equated to whistle blowing; especially in the context of what we are seeing. This is highly unethical and a breach of trust. The concerned individual can either be Public with his condemnation or push for administrative/legal action based on the wrongdoings; if not resign on principle. Selective leaks to friends and family is wrong.
5. Finally a man who no faith in the Judiciary when facing Douglas’s court case shows off his judgement victories in relation to Peradeniya. Irony at its best.
This is just based on the last few Articles/Posts. I am pretty sure the Indians have a sense of humour if they have honoured Prof. Hoole for ethics.
/
Ayub Khan / February 7, 2017
V M
I am quite happy with Prof Sivasegaram’s comment that he is not Kumar R.
Who is this Kumar R then? Sri Lanka government is yet to find the Grease Yakka of Goa Tajapakse and it is almost a non issue now.
Is Kumar R a Grease Yakka in these CT columns.
He writes well but he reflect un-mitigating hate towards academics. I do not accept his reasons. There is something beyond that.
He is a mystery man and his views too seems to be campaign of harassment towards certain persons on whatever issues they write. Their names and status plays a part in Kumar’s crusade against them.
/
Kumar R. / February 8, 2017
Ayub,
Holding peoples “feet to the fire” to take responsibility for their statements and action is neither a crusade no hate-mongering.
As for hate, sinful generalization and uncouth attacks, here is a partial list of persons/institutions that have been disparaged and vilified by Jeevan, only because of his inability to logically, legitimately, reasonably and objectively argue his case or defend his positions.
The Jaffna faculty
Commission set-up for his appointment
Peradeniya admin and faculty
All other DSc’s from Sri Lanka, excluding himself
The judiciary/court system of Sri Lanka
And, of course the village of Katubadda!
And, me – for pointing out one should have the decency not to “hit and run.” You ram into Katubadda, intentionally or mistakenly, you need to stop and take responsibility. It is cowardice, otherwise
Anyhow, two points:
First, I have provided a detailed response to every one of Jeevans baseless accusations, but CT in its own wisdom, or more likely due to pressure from some significant personnel, chose to compromise its journalistic independence, at the least.
Second, your childish “Sherlock-ish” attempts has been tried by many of the other follower’s and/or manifestations of Jeevan – and am sure you are better enlightened of the limit to your skills now! If you want to pretend for your own comfort that my comments are quite readily dismissed by the readers as baseless, perhaps your relentless internal aggravation and the resulting compulsion to identify me, by itself, should wake you up to reality!
/
V M / February 6, 2017
Principal Research Fellow (Imperial College, London)
Academic Staff Promotions
Appendix J
Principal Research Fellow (Level E)
The research profile of a candidate for appointment/ promotion to Principal Research Fellow must, as a minimum, be commensurate with those achieving appointment as a Chair/ promotion to Professor.
1. Principal Research Fellows will have made an outstanding contribution to research and scholarship, evidenced by an established international reputation in research. They provide academic leadership in a number of ways, including managing large-scale units and/or projects. They also have the ability to attract funding from major research programmes (directly or indirectly, according to the rules of the funding body). Supervision of other staff and students is the norm at this level.
As Principal Research Fellows undertake a complementary but different role to that of a Professor, they must, unquestionably, be international research leaders in their field.
2. For appointment/promotion to Principal Research Fellow, researchers must demonstrate:
• a significant research record which has international academic distinction and is recognised internationally;
• the ability to devise and direct large research projects;
• proven ability to inspire colleagues to develop their own research potential;
• the ability to attract significant funding from major research programmes (directly or indirectly, according to the rules of the funding body);
• evidence of successful supervision of research students.
Project management may include leading large multi-disciplinary teams and/or collaborating with groups in other higher education institutions and/or the public and private sector.
3. For promotion/appointment to Principal Research Fellow, reports will be sought from external referees in line with the promotion to Professor process.
/
S.R.H. Hoole / February 7, 2017
Here is what the biographical journal article on J.H. Whitelaw, FRS, says:
“[W]ith the return to Imperial of his former research student, Sivasegaram, as a postdoctoral fellow, a long-term effort was started that extended over some 15 years until his retirement, in which time they published a dozen journal articles.”
Twelve articles in 15 years? My graduate students do better on a per annum basis.
Perhaps Sivasegaram published his independent papers as Principal Research Fellow, I thought. So I searched the Web of Science journals. There are only 21 records for Sivasegaram. Seventeen of these are with Whitelaw. Did Sivasegaram ever have an intellectual life of his own to be described as a professor anywhere?
This record just does not fit the description of Principal Research Fellow (Imperial College, London) given by Sivasegaram in the name of V M. Under the shadow of his doctoral supervisor Whitelaw, my guess is that Whitelaw used his immense influence to give him this title as a parting gift.
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
VM
Thanks for the trouble.
The rules you are citing are more recent. But the status of the pos referred are the same.
There was no post of Principal Research Fellow in 1984.
There were Research Assistants (pgs), Research Associates (postdocs) and Research Fellows. Very few were appointed to that post then.
The designation of RF was changed to Principal Research Fellow after the Thatcher reforms.
Part of the procedure for appointment/promotion to PRF are new I think.
I was no rolling stone; and to me Peradeniya was THE University in the country. That was why I waited two years since leaving ICSTM to rejoin the permanent staff.
My involvement with ICSTM was deep too. I liked the place, especially MED, and chose to stay there (despite financially attractive offers) when I decided to leave the country for personal reasons.
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
Dear VM
Kindly announce who you are (or who you are not, which may be a long list) for the benefit of various paranoid individuals who identify anybody as Sivasegaram if he/she dares to contest the fallacies that some desperate people indulge in.
My curiosity is getting the better of me: You are not Kumar by any chance?
/
S.R.H. Hoole / February 7, 2017
This is great!
First a claim is made that being Principal Research Fellow at Imperial College means having the achievement of a professor and independent researcher.
Then I point out from the Web of Science ISI journal index that the actual journal article record for Sivasegaram is very thin and does not fit the description claimed by VM for Principal Research Fellow.
My own 8-months long M.Sc. dissertation under C.J. Carpenter at imperial College led to three Web of Science journal papers. Some new Assistant Professor job applicants I regularly see having similar records of 20 or so ISI articles. Nearly all who successfully come up for promotion to Associate Professor have better records than Sivasegaram. Are things so bad at Imperial College now, I wondered to myself as I consulted the Web of Science.
Immediately Sivasegarm says the requirements claimed for Principal Research Fellow by this VM are new. At least he has spared Imperial College this embarrassment. thank you.
Remember Svasegaram, VM, whoever is who: We were not born yesterday.
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
I am not in the habit of making false claims.
That is why I clarified once again that I was elevated to SRF not by promotion, but by change of designation: RF before 1991 was the same as SRF after 1991 and was a rare honour.
Good research is quality and not quantity, and ICSTM maintained its standards in matters of appointment.
Not even Whitelaw could make anyone Research Fellow at will, when I was made one.
Desperate minds clutch at straws.
/
S.R.H. Hoole / February 7, 2017
Sivasegaram,
Imperial college may not count papers but when it is only 12 over 15 years, it just will not pass even if the quality argument is used.
You say “I am not in the habit of making false claims.”
Yet you said that I had not done any undergrad teaching in electrical engineering at MSU when I had not said anything like that at my interview. You saw my 2013 electromagnetics book which I circulated and still said that.
You are the only member of the Jaffna Mechanical Engineering Teaching Staff with a PhD. You sat through the last Council meeting where it was claimed in writing by the VC that on K. Chelvakumar,your student, had retired as a professor of mechanical engineering and tou approved the appointment as part of the Council. Chelvakumar had even recently come to Jaffna as a visitor and had been dealing with you and you still did not know that he had been in industry for some 30 years before his retirement? I know Chelva and am pretty sure that he is not capable of this lie to get the appointment through Council.
Enough! You lie all you want and can deny that you lie. No one believes you any more. I am not responding to this thread any more.
/
Smith / February 7, 2017
“I am not responding to this thread any more.”
Finally, an excellent decision!
/
Sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
“Enough! You lie all you want and can deny that you lie. No one believes you any more. I am not responding to this thread any more.”
You can say it again, but more appropriately to yourself.
I will not respond to all your lies as there are things that I cannot divulge here.
/
Mehala / February 6, 2017
Prof. Sivasegaram
All your venom here is proof you should not be on Prof. Hoole’s selection committee. It is unworthy of any decent man. Obviously we know that VC Arasaratnam put you there deliberately to block Hoole. If Hoole comes all her crooked deeds will be pointed out. Nobody cares about the institution.
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
Kindly tell me where the venom is?
I only clarified a matter re my position at ICSTM.
There are matters I would rather not discuss in public fora without due authority.
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
An earlier response from Hoole:
All of us make mistakes and the better ones among us are willing to accept/concede corrections.
Thank you Prof. Peribanayagam.
(from https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/the-donoughmore-heritage-roll-back-on-equality-the-challenge-of-identity-politics/)
Pernipanayagam is a among the ‘better ones’ I concede.
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
Correction:
Pernipanayagam is among the ‘better ones’ I concede.
/
Anon / February 7, 2017
Pernipanayagam?
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
Anon
I based my comment on what someone said in
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/the-donoughmore-heritage-roll-back-on-equality-the-challenge-of-identity-politics/
Forgive me if I am wrong.
Like quite a few who comment here I too can be gullible.
A little diversion (but not a lot)– I just spotted this:
“In praise there is more obtrusiveness than in blame”– Friedrich Nietzsche.
I am no Nietzsche fan, but wondered what he had in mind.
/
S.R.H. Hoole / February 7, 2017
Sivasegaram needs to make lots of corrections. And then corrections to his corrections.
/
sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
It is far far better than adamantly sticking to one’s lies.
/
Caitlyn / February 7, 2017
We have strayed far off the topic. Each time Prof. Jeevan Hoole writes, fellows the comments are in very bad taste. No person studying Sri Lankan Tamil ECP rights can learn anything from the discussion. Why have all these fellows not written to express their own opinion of the million matters Tamils are facing if they dont’ want Prof. Hoole to focus attention on Tamil matters? I am not a Jaffna person, I need to hear from Tamils. I assume Prof. Hoole is from Jaffna based on his writings for a long time.
When Prof. Hoole’s voice is killed, it appears to the world that he is alone and all is well for the Tamil people of Sri Lanka. One swallow does not make a summer. His critics from the Tamil community must focus instead about the poor people in Jaffna, not kill the only voice speaking, especially with the UN deciding on Sri Lanka.
/
Sivasegaram / February 7, 2017
Caitlyn
I share your concern in a much broader sense.
Deflections start very early in very nearly every thread. People push their own agenda thereafter.
I am surprised that you missed a whole load of wild allegations and the author himself deviating to indulge in personal attacks.
I have always asked the CT to have stricter moderation especially when unfounded and malicious utterances are made. Unfortunately they are not heeded.
What anyone’s critic does is his/her business as long as comments remain pertinent, desirably polite, and not unwarranted.
/
Sinhala_Man / February 7, 2017
Caitlyn,
We are all citizens of one country, unless there is a North-South separation which I’m sure none of us wants.
And it would certainly help if two very intelligent Tamils stopped quarrelling over such petty things as these two do. Both are getting on in years, but neither is in his dotage. They write so well on many subjects, and there are many of us Sinhalese (I may be one of the few who WRITES frequently) who would like to SEE intelligent people from the “other side” addressing the many issues that we ought to.
The other famous pair of “identified fighting cocks” are the intolerable HLD Mahindapala and the more decent Izeth Hussain (who writes too many articles, perhaps).
I hope that the resolution just made by Prof. Sivasegaram is shared by Prof. Jeevan Hoole. I can’t help but add that elder brother Dr Rajan Hoole NEVER gets in to this sort of tangle.
Prof. Jeevan Hoole is still an active man, and he is on the Elections Commission; it would indeed be a pity if his voice is killed off. He has much to contribute to Sri Lanka.
/
SJ / February 8, 2017
Sinhala Man
Do not talk of two intelligent men quarreling. The problem is that as I explained a while earlier, one man is a prankster and the other a gullible i***t.
CT killing anybody’s voice? You must be joking!
The more provocative the comment the more welcome it is, as long as there are no swear words sometimes.
Who cares for the truth? Do not say “I”– for that will be a lie.
Have a sense of humor; have fun. Do not be upset by seemingly nasty remarks. It is cyber culture.
/
V M / February 8, 2017
I only reproduced the Imperial College website on Principal Research Fellows. A simple Google search will show that some Research Fellows are Distinguished Professors concurrently (at Imperial College). Hence, Prof Hoole is being disingenuous and unfair here. Number of Publications is totally irrelevant in the context of expertise/authority in the field (this is a different area I wish to address later).
Few issues to clear/clarify:
1. I do not know and have never met/seen Prof Sivasegaram. My comments are based purely on the CT exchanges.
2. Kumar R. is obviously unidentifiable. But based on his comments I can safely say he is not known to me.
3. I am not a stakeholder to Peradeniya/Jafna University. In fact I have never set foot there. The ATM machine adjoining Jaffna University yess,,, but not inside.
4. My only visits to Imperial College have been to meet kin (that too Charing Cross Hospital/Medical Faculty/Department). Hence no connection there as well.
5. Prof Hoole is behaving disgracefully here; smearing all without accountability. It is a shame that Colombo Telegraph does not have higher standards. God knows what the underlying reasons are.
6. Despite the diaspora/ltte campaign against Rajan Hoole my respect has only increased on reading his contributions. I really feel is someone of substance.
7. I respect and admire Navalar and Sir Ramanathan (despite their flaws) and have strong feelings on the Saivite/Hindu nature of our society. But if I am honest, if someone the calibre of George Shanthikumar or APS Selvadurai were to accept leadership positions in Jaffna Univeristy, there would be none happier than me.
8. I suggest people be more responsible and work towards higher goals. More than 40 engineering academics/professionals from abroad are working towards improving Jaffna Uni. Let us not get involved in personal ego battles.
9. Prof Sivasegaram has annoyed me immensely with his insulting comments on Hinduism/Saivism. But to each his own as long his judgement on professional/public matters is not impaired. In this particular matter I find no reason to doubt him.
/
SJ / February 8, 2017
[Edited out] Comments should not exceed 300 words.Please read our Comments Policy for further details.
/
SJ / February 8, 2017
VM
SJ speaking.
You can call me Sivasegaram’s alter ego— but not the real Sivasegaram —more like one of the two aspects of the lead character in Brecht’s “Good Person of Szechuwan”. Certainly not Jekyll & Hyde stuff.
I nurse a grudge against u-no-hoo for banishing me from CT for some stupid reason. He is wasting everybody’s time to expose that Hoole is attacking him maliciously. Now my turn to take over and get the picture clear.
Sivasegaram lost his sense of humour somewhere on the way, I fear: to survive CT one needs much of it. Those without deal in cruel insults and name calling or foolishly plead not guilty.
I have taken over: he is banned for now from crossing swords with Hoole as long as I am around. He denies running away— which is wise —but he takes Hoole and his less refined avatars seriously. He needs treatment.
You know that electronic media, like print media, are not places for seeking the truth but burying it— but more effectively. So waste not your breath thinking that you are establishing the truth.
Follow my example: Have fun, for Hoole is a man with a powerful sense of humor— not my kind —but it is there. Anyone who knows him well, like our mutual friend from down South, knows that.
To some he may seem somewhat like the well known German adventurer Hieronymus Karl Friedrich Freiherr von Münchhausen (Baron Munchhausan for short) or El ingenioso hidalgo don Quixote de la Mancha (Don Quixote for many) or even the more humble Pinocchio. But that is not fair (although you should know that this is not the place to play fair). It is his astounding sense of humor that everybody misses.
(More to follow)
/
Smith / February 8, 2017
“Anyone who knows him well, like our mutual friend from down South, knows that.”
Didn’t get it; is this someone a CT reader should know?
/
SJ / February 8, 2017
Smith
May be, may not be.
But being forever thankful for his sound advice, I will not risk subjecting him to unconventional forms of humor.
/