Nirmanusan Balasundaram
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”- Edmund Burke
Elections and the Engineers of Mass Atrocities
Sri Lanka, a country currently under international scrutiny for its violation of international humanitarian law and human rights law during the final phase of the war in Mullivaaikaal in the country’s north, is preparing for its seventh presidential election scheduled to be held on 8 January 2015.
Three consecutive resolutions concerning wartime mass atrocities and accountability in Sri Lanka were adopted respectively in March 2012, March 2013 and March 2014 at the UN Human Rights Council. In addition, two high-level detailed reports on war time atrocities and UN action in Sri Lanka have been published by the UN. These international steps have helped highlight the mass atrocities committed in Sri Lanka and the importance of addressing accountability and bringing perpetrators of these crimes to international justice.
Incumbent President Mahinda Rajapaksa, since coming to power in November 2005, has been the Minister of Defence and Commander in Chief of the armed forces, and is at the top of the chain of command responsible for mass atrocities committed by the country’s armed forces. Currently, he is contesting for his third term of presidency.
Maithripala Sirisena, once in the same party as Rajapaksa has been acting Minister of Defence during the peak of the offensive military operations. He has held this position at least five times throughout the armed conflict between the Sri Lankan government armed forces and Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). In November 2014, he defected from the government to contest against President Rajapaksa under the banner of being a common opposition candidate. Having played a key role in the chain of command, not only is he also responsible for crimes committed by the armed forces, but he has and continues to be a frontline campaigner against international justice mechanisms.
During the last presidential election in January 2010 the main challenger to President Rajapaksa had been former Army Commander General Sarath Fonseka, the man in charge of the Sri Lankan army throughout the last phase of the war. While he had lost the presidential contest in 2010 he has re-emerged to pledge his support to the January 2015 presidential election common opposition candidate. Their camaraderie extends back to the war with the common opposition candidate having stated in an interview, “I was the Minister in Charge of Defence during the last two weeks of the war in which most of the leaders of the LTTE were killed with General Fonseka at the helm of the Army.”
War victory and the execution of the last phase of the war seems to dominate the campaigns and propaganda of both main candidates in Sri Lanka’s presidential election, whether it be for the presidential election of 2010 or that of 2015. Each candidate has repeatedly self-proclaimed themselves as the ‘war hero’ in order to attract Sinhala Buddhist voters, grasping at the ‘war victory’ card which often plays a crucial role in the Sinhala voters’ mindset.
As for the ethnic Tamil voters, neither leading candidate are war heroes of any form, but rather perpetrators responsible for the death of thousands of Tamil civilians. The UN Panel of Experts (PoE) report published in April 2011 indicated that “there could have as many as 40,000 civilian deaths”. The report further elaborated, “Only a proper investigation can lead to the identification of all of the victims and to the formulation of an accurate figure for the total number of civilian deaths.” The UN internal review panel report published in November 2012 estimated that over 70,000 Tamil people were unaccounted for. The Bishop of Mannar Rayappu Joseph, after analysis of census statistics, came to the estimation that over 146,679 Tamil people in the Vanni were unaccounted for.
However, in Sri Lanka, the overwhelming majority of the Sinhala voters and the two main presidential candidates themselves, both of whom hold responsibilities in the chain of command in relation to mass atrocities, have not yet accepted the systematic killings of Tamil civilians.
Ironically though, expecting a close contest, both leading candidates are competing to get Tamil votes. President Rajapaksa visited Mullaiththeevu district, the very location where mass atrocities were committed during the final stages of the war, and campaigned asking the Tamil people to forget the past and vote for him. In an election rally in Jaffna he stated that “a known devil is better than an unknown angel.” Both leading candidates even visited Bishop Rayappu Joseph to get his ‘blessing’.
The Chain of Command and ICC
Incumbent President Rajapaksa is currently facing possible western isolation due to his brutality and his governance style of the country, which seems to be bordering towards dictatorship. His strategy has been to use western pressure on Sri Lanka to maintain democracy and accountability as a tool in order to gain votes from the Sinhala masses.
Throughout the election campaign he has continued to present himself as a victim of ‘international conspiracy’ and ‘international forces’ wanting to take him and Sri Lanka’s armed forces to the International Criminal Court (ICC). It should be noted that Sri Lanka is not a signatory to the Rome Statute. However, Sri Lanka’s Minister of External Affairs has stated that based on recent experience, Sri Lanka can still be vulnerable to ICC jurisdiction.
The President in his address at the first election rally said that the Hague had enquired about the chain of command of the Sri Lankan armed forces and that it was a strong indication that some sections of the “international community” were trying to prosecute the heads of the Sri Lankan military establishments. He also added that the “Sri Lankan government will not bow down for foreign interventions in the matter of the war victory.”
His speeches and campaigns have largely focused on claims of international conspiracies and war crimes charges against the Sri Lankan armed forces, and his determination to resist them.
In parallel, Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), an extremist Buddhist party and a key body backing the common opposition candidate expressed that both they and the common opposition candidate have agreed to oppose efforts to prosecute military authorities. General Secretary of JHU said, “We will not give room for international war crimes probe. Whether it is the President, the Defence Secretary (Gotabaya Rajapaksa), the then Service Commanders – Sarath Fonseka and Karannagoda or the likes of Shavindra Silva and Presanna Silva, we will not allow any of these people to be tried before the International Criminal Court (ICC).”
The election manifesto of the common opposition presidential candidate asserts that, “I will allow no international power to ill-treat or touch a single citizen of this country on account of the campaign to defeat terrorism”. He has also said, “I will not allow President Rajapaksa, his family or any member of our armed forces to be taken before any international war crimes tribunal.”
It is important to note that common opposition candidate Maithripala Sirisena, himself an alleged perpetrator of mass atrocities, could face justice in the future regardless of current international climate which may seem supportive of him today. In fact, the very day he was sworn in as the Minister of Defence, over 1700 Tamil civilians were reported to have been killed and 3000 injured by Sri Lankan government shelling within the space of 48 hours. Thousands more were killed in the days that followed. The infamous white flag incident too took place, while Sirisena was serving as the Minister of Defence.
In order to repel calls for an international investigation into wartime mass atrocities, Maithripala Sirisena stated that he will launch a domestic war crimes inquiry if he wins in the forthcoming election. An important question arises as to how an alleged perpetrator could establish a credible investigation mechanism and what form of justice the victims and survivors could expect from it. Infact, incumbent President Rajapaksa has to date already appointed a few domestic mechanisms with the inclusion of eminent international legal experts to handle the international pressure. However, these were not received well and instead were rather widely discredited by international actors who were already well aware of President Rajapaksa’s intention and strategy behind these initiatives. For the survivors and victims of these crimes, the Rajapaksa regime symbolises tyranny and mass atrocities. They have appalling and unforgettable experiences of mass atrocities and broken promises not only of the current regime, but also of each successive previous regime, leading them to have no faith in any domestic justice mechanism.
Lack of confidence in a domestic mechanism is not only from that of a survivor’s perspective. David Scheffer, the first U.S. ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues (1997-2001) wrote, “If the tribunals’ work had been left to domestic courts, particularly in devastated societies, there simply would not have been any justice at all.”[1]
A gruelling battle is taking place in Sri Lanka between both leading presidential candidates despite certain factors which keep them united, such as ‘war victory’, denial of mass atrocities and rejection of an international investigation into such atrocities. Disturbingly all leading figures in the presidential debate are in competition with each other for self-proclamation and self-promotion in terms of credibility for the war victory, and complete denial of responsibility or acknowledgement of mass atrocities during the war. Sri Lanka’s history underlines consecutive governments have had a deliberate policy of destruction and degradation of the Tamil nation, very similar to the trend observed in Bosnia by United States Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power when she was covering the Bosnian war as a journalist.[2]
Challenge to International Conscience and Justice
Hence, regardless of which leading candidate is to win Sri Lanka’s seventh presidential election, victims and survivors of mass atrocities will find it difficult to expect justice or a genuine and credible domestic mechanism into these heinous crimes. Considering Sri Lanka’s political dynamics, the culture of impunity in Sri Lanka will remain unchanged regardless of the outcome of the election. The colour may change but the cage will remain the same.
Therefore it is vital that a sustainable independent international investigation mechanism into mass atrocities be designed to deliver justice for the victims and survivors. On 3-6 December 2014 the International Nuremberg Principles Academy and the Wayamo Foundation hosted a two-day conference titled “Preventing Genocide and Other Atrocity Crimes: Challenges in Today’s World” and concurrent four-day journalism workshop.
During the conference, Adama Dieng, the Special Adviser to the UN Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide said that the, “UN Secretary-General had courage to accept UN failure in SriLanka”. Following the event, he also said that the killing of thousands of Tamils “under our eyes” during the end of the armed conflict in 2009, was a “failure of the international community”. Speaking at the same conference, Margit Hellwig-Botte, Head of Division (Conceptual Issues and R2P), UN Department, Federal Foreign Office, Germany said, “Never again triggered again due to UN failure in Sri Lanka” in 2009. In September 2014, the US had said that several lives could have been saved had the global community acted earlier and more appropriately to situations in some troubled nations such as Sri Lanka.
After execution of mass atrocities and their failure to stop it, international actors have accepted their failure. Time has arrived for course correction, and Sri Lanka’s forthcoming presidential election will be the litmus test for it, and a challenge to international conscience. Will international actors bring perpetrators of mass atrocity crimes in Sri Lanka to international justice and prove “Never Again” to be more than just a slogan?
[1] David Scheffer, All The Missing Souls: A Personal History of the War Crimes Tribunals, Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford, 2012.
[2] Samantha Power, A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide, Harper Perennial, London 2007
Menan / January 6, 2015
Nirmanusan Balasundaram,
This is about what?
By the way, is it a short story or an article?
/
Hilarious / January 6, 2015
A novel..for bedtime reading to little tigers
/
Off the Cuff / January 7, 2015
Dear Mr Nirmanusan Balasundaram,
Reading through your article I found your ignorance of the Presidential Election campaign in SL equal or worse than your ignorance of the War that eradicated Terrorism in SL. A war that wiped out more than one generation of young Tamils in the North who were forced to take a gun and forfeit their childhood and education to a megalomaniac called Prabahkaran.
Judging from your picture you are a young Tamil and judging from your penmanship an educated but brainwashed Tamil whose childhood was spent abroad.
Quote “War victory and the execution of the last phase of the war seems to dominate the campaigns and propaganda of both main candidates in Sri Lanka’s Presidential election,” unquote
The cornerstone of Maithripala Sirisena’s (MS) campaign is Corruption, Rule of Law and good governance.
While Mahinda Rajapaksa (MR) campaigned on the war victory because he had no answer to the MS campaign. The quoted statement from you proves your ignorance of the issues you attempt to discuss.
You seem to be unaware that the Tamil National Alliance which was the mouthpiece of Prabahkaran in the SL Parliament and currently the Provincial govt of the Northern Province, elected to office by an overwhelming majority of Northern Tamils is backing MS and has asked the Tamils to vote for MS. Is the main Tamil Political party backing a war criminal? Search your soul and provide an answer.
Talking of War Criminals, it is indeed strange that Ms Adele Balasingham who recruited, trained and personally garlanded the Baby Brigade with a Cyanide necklace (numerous pics and films available on the Internet etc)and who was instrumental in the destruction of several generations of Tamils has escaped your Radar. She is living in the UK with the blessings of the UK govt and is within easy reach of USA and the ICC. Any explanation as to why the ball has not started rolling for a known war criminal living under the nose of the ICC, UK and USA?
You seems to have forgotten that it was not just the Tamil civilians of the North that got killed. Non combatants of all ethnicities in the rest of the country got massacred in their thousands. Those who financed the war are also culpable of mass murder but you are silent about the Mother who bore thousands of Child soldiers and the Financiers of the war living all over the world.
You have brought up the UN’s POE report. Let’s examine it.
237. Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions: Credible allegations point to a violation of Common Article 3’s ban on the taking of hostages insofar as they forced thousands of civilians, often under threat of death, to remain in areas under their control during the last stages of the war and enforced this control by killing persons who attempted to leave that area. (With respect to the credible allegations of the LTTE’s refusal to allow civilians to leave the combat zone, the Panel believes that these actions did not, in law, amount to the use of human shields insofar as it did not find credible evidence of the LTTE deliberately moving civilians towards military targets to protect the latter from attacks as is required by the customary definition of that war crime (Rule 97, ICRC Study)
Civilians moved to the NFZ
Military targets moved to the NFZ along with civilians to become immune from attacks.
Is that a Human Shield?
No says Darusman.
ICC contradicts Darusman and say it is a war crime.
Perhaps Darusman and co did not understand the word “PRESENCE”. But since you have a good command of English you would realize what that word means within the ICC statute that I reproduce below.
The ICC Statute says “(xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations;”
Darusman has jettisoned the ICC Rule (the Law making body) and tries to take refuge behind the ICRC (the Red Cross) that has no standing in law.
In its judgment in the Blaškić case in 2004, the ICTY Appeals Chamber stated in relation to human shields:
652. The Appeals Chamber notes that Article 23 of Geneva Convention III provides as follows:
No prisoner of war may at any time be sent to, or detained in areas where he may be exposed to the fire of the combat zone, nor may his presence be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.
It also considers that Article 28 of Geneva Convention IV provides that “[t]he presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.”
Article 83 of the same Convention provides that the “Detaining Power” “shall not set up places of internment in areas particularly exposed to the dangers of war.” Furthermore, Article 51 of Additional Protocol I, relating to the protection of the civilian population in international armed conflicts, provides as follows:
[T]he presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
The report pursuant to paragraph 5 of UN Security Council resolution 837 (1993) on the investigation into the 5 June 1993 attack on UN forces in Somalia noted:
No principle is more central to the humanitarian law of war than the obligation to respect the distinction between combatants and non-combatants.
That principle is violated and criminal responsibility thereby incurred when organizations deliberately target civilians or when they use civilians as shields or otherwise demonstrate a wanton indifference to the protection of non-combatants.
The report went on to say that central principles such as this one were clearly a part of contemporary customary international law and were applicable as soon as “political ends are sought through military means”
Mr. Marzuki Darusman, Ms Yasmin Sooka and Steven R. Ratner, the UN’s Panel of Experts (POE) has exonerated the LTTE of the very serious war crime of using Human Shields!
Here is another example from the POE report.
The Panel refers to the FIRST channel 4 video as “Authenticated footage” (item 148)
Who authenticated it?
Dr. Daniel Spitz and Mr.Grant Fredericks
Forensic Pathologist and medical doctor, Daniel Spitz is a perjurer who has lied to US courts.
He FAILED to find the Bullet or the entrance wound of a Banker Killed EXECUTION STYLE with a bullet to the Head.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3Oy76_nICc&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpL56wS_qZo
Mr. Fredericks, who has testified as an ‘expert witness’ in numerous cases was in the spotlight in Canada when he appeared as a witness for four policemen who tried to cover up their involvement in the death of an immigrant at the Vancouver airport in October 2007.
Here is an extract from the commissions report
quote … He has no special expertise in determining steps from shoulder movements — without the verification referred to above,Mr. Fredericks’ opinion of three distinct steps forward is based entirely on his repetitive viewing of the three-second segment of the Pritchard video and his interpretation of Mr. Dziekanski’s changing shoulder movements. I am not persuaded that his expertise as a forensic video analyst extends to this type of human body movement. In the absence of such expertise, his opinion deserves no greater weight than the opinion of any other careful observer. unquote
Now the question arises how the CH4 video gets AUTHENTICATED with evidence from charlatans and Liars?
This circus started with UN’s Philippe Alston and culminated with the POE report.
It is this disgusting POE report that is used as a base for War Crimes charges.
Obviously some people are prepared to sell their souls for Lucre.
Kind Regards,
OTC
/
Leonvet / January 6, 2015
Thank you Balasunderam for well researched article on the war crimes committed by these two bastards now going to Tamil areas asking for their votes. In the presidential elections the Tamils have no choice but to vote for the lesser of the two,evil morons. Voting for MS does not mean the Tamils have forgotten the crimes committed by the successive
Sinhala Govts. Recently Douglas Devananda had admitted that cluster bombs were used in the war. This is a war crime and I am certain that investigators appointed by the Human Rights Commissioner would have heard this admission.
Thus the Report that will be published in March is an important document as far as the Tamils are concerned.
/
Menan / January 6, 2015
Leonvet alias Nirmanusan Balasundaram
Leonvet comment is so obvious.
/
MANIVANNAN / January 6, 2015
Good article!
My proposal for Tamils in order to save democracy for Sinhalese and to end family franchise for them ! Please vote but for Tamils justice both should be voted in the same ballot paper as both are War criminal under their leadership our kith and kin were killed with out mercy. Both deserve a vote in one ballot paper MYthree swan ! Mahinda beatle leaf! make crosses against both of them !
That is what this election reserve !
If you do not want to vote for both of them you have got some work to do ! Read the manifesto’s other presidential candidates ! who says to supports the right of Tamils for for him it does not matter who ever he is he is better than these two MS and MR! Even if he win or not We can rest in our mind that we did the right action. This peace of mind will protect US!
Tommarrow internatioal community will ask Tamils why did they vote for MS if you say he is also a War Criminal ! We can confidentially say we did not vote for either of them and voted for the one who respected Tamils right ! On the other hand we voted for both the criminals in the same vote paper treating them equally!
/
Good Tamil / January 7, 2015
The ground reality as far as Tamils are concerned with respect to voting is as follows:
(1) Vote for MR is a vote having a weight of more than 1 for him
(2) An abstention or a spoiled vote is a vote for MR, indirectly.
(3) A vote for MS is a vote for MS.
Under these circumstances I wonder how to vote for Tamil Justice.
/
Dr Dayan Jayatilleka / January 6, 2015
What a silly chap. If MR is re-elected there won’t be any submission to so-called international justice, while if MS is elected it will be very risky to do so, and if his PM does go ahead, the backlash will be all-encompassing– making the late ’80s a picnic.
/
Anpu / January 6, 2015
You bloody liar. How can you call him silly? he has written an article with facts. You ZERO.
/
Off the Cuff / January 6, 2015
Dear Dayan,
The post below was addressed to you. I hope you will respond to it there.
https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/dayan-jayatillekas-arguments-for-supporting-mahinda-false-premises-and-faulty-logic/comment-page-1/#comment-1740832
Kind Regards,
OTC
/
Anpu / January 6, 2015
Thanks Nirma. Excellent article.
/
Anpu / January 6, 2015
Chennai academic names 18 SL war criminals, indicts 1 Indian
An expert on Sri Lankan affairs, RAMU Manivannan is Professor and Chair at the Department of Politics and Public Administration, School of Politics and International Studies, University of Madras.
Ramu Manivannan’s recently released book, ‘Sri Lanka: Hiding the Elephant,’ has named 18 top Sri Lankan nationals including President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, former commander of Sri Lankan army Sarath Fonseka, and External Affairs Minister G L Peiris as ‘War Criminals,’ and indicted two UN officials for their role during the last stages of the Sri Lankan civil war that concluded with the Mullaitheevu massacre of Tamils in May 2009.
Manivannan’s book is a comprehensive narrative on the genocidal war in Sri Lanka
One of the indicted UN officials is an Indian, Vijay Nambiar. The book states: “Vijay Nambiar, the CHIEF OF STAFF for the U Nfrom 2007 to 2012, was a key official in shaping UN’s Sri Lanka policy. He is widely accused of complicity in the ‘Whiteflag’ incident where several surrendees were executed by the Sri Lankan military after being given assurances of safety by international actors.”
Manivannan’s 976-page book, a comprehensive narrative on the genocidal war in Sri Lanka, has reproduced vital documents including the two important UN reports – Report of the Secretary General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka, and Report of the Secretary General’s Internal Review Panel on United Nations Action in Sri Lanka –the reports of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, International Crisis Group and the Tamil National Alliance.
An expert on Sri Lankan affairs, Manivannan is Professor and Chair at the Department of Politics and Public Administration, School of Politics and International Studies, University of Madras.
In the book, the author has made a solid case to back his argument that what happened in Sri Lanka was indeed genocide against the Tamils.
As Manivannan states: “In recognition of the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Sri Lankan government and its authorities, we need to ask whether there is a unique case or a distinct crime here. The answer is, ‘YES!’
“The genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka has taken place over a period of time involving several steps and strategies, and this includes continuous dismantling and destruction of the essential foundations of human life of the Tamils in Sri Lanka.
“To be precise, the Sri Lankan government has employed the ‘doctrine of double effect’, the brutal military resolution of the ethnic conflict combined with the long term strategy of ethnic cleansing.
“This ‘doctrine of double effect’ has been the most unmistakable exhibition of the genocidal intent of the State and its Sinhala nationalism. The genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka has taken place over a period of time involving several premeditated steps and concealed strategies. This includes organized attack and destruction of essential foundations of human life common to all civilized human societies.”
Interestingly, the book reveals that Gotabaya Rajapaksa was a student of the very same University that has now named him as a war criminal.
According to the book, Gotabaya obtained his Masters Degree in Defence Studies from the University of Madras in 1983, after his Staff Course at the Defence Services Staff College, Wellington, India.
Manivannan states in the Preface: “We feel sad to record that Gotabaya Rajapaksa also walked through this distinguished University. He is now considered by the international society as a war criminal who deserves to be tried through an international mechanism among others accused of similar or more grave charges. We pray, without prejudice, that he meets his justice one day.”
Manivannan has published the book from his personal funds. They have printed 500 copies of the book, which is now available for sale.
The book is priced at Rs.2500 (inclusive of postal charges within India).
– See more at: http://www.theweekendleader.com/Headlines/2206/chennai-academic-names-18-sl-war-criminals,-indicts-1-indian-.html#sthash.SJvNkIWJ.dpuf
/
Off the Cuff / January 6, 2015
Dear Anpu,
What does this good Prof Ramu Manivannan, of the Department of Politics and Public Administration, School of Politics and International Studies, University of Madras say about the IPKF war in SL?
Any named war criminals?
Can you list them for information please?
Kind Regards,
OTC
/
Anpu / January 6, 2015
Dear OTC,
Well come back. Hope you are well.
I do not know what the prof say about IPKF. Perhaps you could (a) contact him and find out or (b) do an internet search.
Some of these links might help you to find the information you are looking for.
(1)
Intervention in Sri Lanka: The IPKF Experience Retold Major General Harkirat Singh (Retd.) http://tamilnation.co/books/Eelam/singh.htm
(2)
HOSPITAL MASSACRE BY INDIAN ARMY ON DEEPAVALI DAY, OCTOBER 1987 http://tamilnation.co/indictment/indict047.htm
(3)
INDIA & the Struggle for Tamil Eelam India’s Vietnam: the IPKF in Sri Lanka http://tamilnation.co/intframe/india/000323indias_vietnam.htm
Regards
Anpu
/
Off the Cuff / January 6, 2015
Dear Anpu,
Wish you Health, Wealth and Happiness in 2015.
I am well thank you but had a very busy travel schedule for the past few months.
Your comment contains excerpts from the book and I find it strange that you are unaware of whether the good prof who writes about war crimes and a purported Tamil genocide has written about the IPKF atrocities (genocide?) in Sri Lanka.
The IPKF committed many war crimes in Sri Lanka’s North including the destruction of Sri Lanka’s Tamil Chief Justices family.
To me such a glaring omission smacks of impartiality and seems to be driven by hatred and revenge. Such an omission by an academic is unforgivable.
Thank you for the links.
Kind Regards,
OTC
/
Anpu / January 6, 2015
Dear OTC,
Are you writing this just for the sake of writing?
“Your comment contains excerpts from the book and I find it strange that you are unaware of whether the good prof who writes about war crimes and a purported Tamil genocide has written about the IPKF atrocities (genocide?) in Sri Lanka.”
(1) This is what I did – copy from an article (I did not copy from the book).
(2) Provided the link for the article.
OTC – Should I know everything what the Prof writes?
PLEASE do not reply for this comment.
Thanks
Anpu
/
Off the Cuff / January 7, 2015
Dear Anpu,
I am sorry that you feel offended but when you reproduce articles that denigrate the entire Sri Lankan Population you should be more careful and more critical in your assessment.
You reproduced the ENTIRE article from an Indian paper. Though you said more here and provided a link there was nothing else there.
Now why did you do that?
Were you impressed by the Prof’s credentials?
Was he mirroring your own thoughts?
Or do you see the Tamils of SL being subject to a Genocide as the Prof says?
I cannot give an answer for the first two questions but I can categorically say that there is no genocide of Tamils in SL. The fact that around 2/3 of the SL Tamil population has chosen to live amongst the Sinhalese is proof of that. As a SL Tamil you know that.
You should have realised that the book was all about spreading racial hatred and was not an academic exercise when it is silent about the Indian Rape and Pillage of SL Tamils in the North.
Kind Regards
OTC
/
vis8 / January 9, 2015
What hallucinating bull shit : CT is full of pretending, hallucinating would-be “journallists” trying desperately to rekindle eelam.
[Edited out] is the home for a gazillion tamils and is the real eelam home. Eelam WILL NEVER BE ESTABLISHED IN SRI LANKA.
/