Obama does a Mahinda Rajapaksa on Osama under a silent Moon
Posted on May 7th, 2011

H. L. D. Mahindapala

 In a finger-biting drama of forty minutes President Obama watched his elite SEALS execute his shoot-to-kill order, without giving Osama bin Laden “”…” the number one enemy of America “”…” a chance to hit back or face charges, whatever his crimes may be. It was a spectacular and vote-winning military operation that will ensure his second term as president. In short, he did a Mahinda Rajapaksa. He even buried Osama in the sea exactly the way that Mahinda Rajapaksa buried Velupillai Prabhakaran. There is, however, a difference: Prabhakaran was armed to the teeth surrounded by his bodyguards but Osama was unarmed living in his house with his wives and children. So will there be an inquiry into the assassination of an unarmed man?

 President Obama has no problems with the UN or the Security Council. The Security Council, in fact, has endorsed the killing of Osama without giving him a fair chance to defend himself against his killers or a trial. Nor will President Obama or his mates in the NATO will face charges for being a part of the joint air strikes that killed innocent children and grandchildren of Mohammed Gaddafi in his compound.

 The EU leaders who sponsored the resolution at the UNHRC against Sri Lanka for violating human rights were falling over each other to congratulate Obama for getting Osama “”…” no questions asked. They are also jubilant that NATO planes have targeted Gaddafi’s house and killed his children and grandchildren “”…” no questions asked. That is covered up and even justified as a legitimate part of overthrowing dictators and restoring the rights of the people to elect their leaders. But that legitimacy of removing a fascist dictator in Sri Lanka and restoring democracy for the Tamil people to elect their leaders is not given to Sri Lanka.

 The air-strikes of both America and EU have hit civilians and even the rebels. Will Ban Ki-Moon appoint another panel of experts (APEs) to inquire into it? On the contrary, he has joined the Western leaders saying he was “relieved” with the killing of Osama and added that “justice has been done”. But he is not “relieved”, nor does he hail it as an act of “doing justice” when Sri Lanka targeted the “world’s deadliest terrorist” (FBI) who was also labeled as “the latest Pol Pot of Asia” by James Burns of the New York Times. Why?

 Both Presidents adopted the same methodology to deal with terrorism and achieved the same goals. Both Sri Lanka and the West did what had to be done after failing to negotiate with an implacable and intransigent enemy. But President Obama gets the Nobel Peace prize for his shoot-to-kill success and President Mahinda Rajapakse is given the APES for winning the longest running war in Asia and eliminating the world’s deadliest terrorist. Both presidents became the agents for fulfilling the Biblical dictum: those who live by the sword will die by the sword. But the Churches offer thanksgivings for Obama’s killings and condemn Mahinda Rajapakse for achieving the same results through the same means. It seems that killing, like kissing, goes by favour.

 If the air-strikes of the West’s killings of civilians and children “”…” irrespective of the numbers “”…” are praiseworthy why isn’t the same commendation applicable to Sri Lanka, if it did happen in Sri Lanka? Of course, the argument could be raised saying that Obama’s squad killed only Osama and two others. But how many civilians would have been spared by Obama if Osama was shielded by a human buffer of 300,000 Muslims? Would he not have targeted Osama, perhaps with instructions to keep collateral damage to 300,000 Muslims at the minimum? Or would he let Osama escape to save the civilians? Obama also said that this war is not against the Muslims. Nor was Mahinda’s war against the Tamils. Both fought a common enemy: terrorists. Both presidents did what they had to do: save their people from terror and both presidents mirrored each other. If one deserves praise why isn’t praise due to the other?.

 Besides, when Mahinda Rajapakse won the war he and the nation were condemned for celebrating the victory. They were told that eating a piece of kiributh was immoral. It was first condemned as “triumphalism” by “Paki” Saravanamuttu and his catchers in the NGO circuit, In fact, one pseudo-intellectual, Izzeth Hussain, said that Mahinda Rajapakse should have poured sand over his head like Muhammed II when he conquered Constantinople in 1453 instead of kissing the tarmac at the airport in gratitude and praise of the victory. “Paki”and Jehan (Pacha) Perera deplored the spontaneous celebrations on the streets. Will this duo condemn the natural outpourings of the American people who were celebrating exuberantly, mostly in New York, Washington, Boston and opposite the White House? Will Moon’s APEs who were critical of the Sri Lankan “triumphalism” “”…” an accusation copied directly from the terminology of the local NGO mudalali “Paki” Saravanamuttu — pass the same strictures on the Americans, saying that this triumph will open the path for the West to ride rough shod over the Muslim minorities in Europe and America?

 In summary, why should Sri Lanka be put on the dock for doing exactly what President Obama, President Sarkozy and Prime Minister David Cameron do to their enemies who threaten their sovereignty, peace, law and order in their countries? Why should they raise the issue of human rights and international humanitarian law against Sri Lanka when they violate it blatantly for their political ends without any compunction?

 I am not against human rights. Nor do I condemn human rights, as defined and practiced now, by the international community as a Western product, and the Easterners should be allowed to apply their oriental standards according to their cultural norms. No. I am all for human rights as long as it is applied evenly, uniformly and universally without exception. I protest vehemently when the big powers use human rights to intervene in the domestic affairs of smaller nations who are faced with similar, if not worst, enemies destroying their peace, law and order. They have the same right as President Obama, President Sarkozy and David Cameron to target their enemies of peace, law and order, even if it means violating international law and human rights. What quantum of human rights was applied by the SEALS when they shot unarmed Osama at pointblank range? How did international law operate when Obama’s helicopters dashed across the Pakistani borders below radar level without the permission of the sovereign state of Pakistan? Will the prime ministers and presidents of NATO be put on trial for killing the children and grand children of Gaddafi?

 Human rights are not served by chanting selectively and mechanically the mantras of human rights because you have power to ignore the ICJ or are hired to pose as champions of human rights by foreign states to suit their political agenda. There are times when the greater cause of human rights is served by violating human rights. In fact, under certain circumstances, observing human rights can be detrimental to the larger issues of human rights. Perhaps, the best example of serving the greater cause of human rights was demonstrated in Sri Lanka when the forces fired at the Tiger targets and breached their defences to let the Tamil people “”…” roughly 300,000 in all “”…” break loose from the vicious grip of the worst fascist terrorist that walked the earth. On any principle of proportionality or morality, the saving of 300,000 should be considered as the higher morality and principle and not the fictitious figures concocted by those who had never counted the bodies on the ground.

 When the London bus bombing killed 52 civilians on 7/7 of 2005 the reaction against the home-grown Muslim terrorists was to crush them instantly. The then Prime Minister, Tony Blair openly declared that “the rules must change” and passed draconian laws in Parliament. President Bush passed the Patriots Act after 9 /11. These are instinctive and predictable responses caused by violent extremists who operate outside the democratic framework and the states have a right to crush them “”…” particularly if they are intransigent and ruthless terrorists, committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. Pundits in NGOs like “Paki” and Jehan”Pacha” Perera pontificated that by going all out to crush the violence of terrorists with similar counter-terrorist tactics the states descend to the same level of their brutal enemies. It sounds fine in theory. But in reality these inane political pieties have never served the communities facing the horrors of terrorist violence or wars. Their moral postures have no pragmatic value for peace, or law and order “”…” the only environment within which human rights can thrive. Their public postures serves only their interests of raking in money from their equally hypocritical funding agents abroad.

 The history of the 33-year-old Vadukoddai War demonstrates without a doubt that their political pieties, formulas, analyses, theses (some of which were peer reviewed for doctoral awards) never worked for peace or the protection of civilians victims. The negotiated settlements they hailed “”…”mainly because they came from their funding masters abroad “”…” failed even before they could withdraw the dollars from their bank accounts. “Pacha” Perera went as far as awarding a prize to “Paki” for advocating a “negotiated settlement”. Neither “Paki” nor “Pacha” Perera achieved anything for peace. Not a thing. Their contributions have been to manufacture excuses for prolonging the war by insisting on “negotiated settlements” which had never worked when the Indians brought the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement or the international community brought the Cease Fire Agreement. How can any rational being make an award for a “negotiated settlement” when nothing in that name succeeded? This is like awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama when he was running wars right across the globe. Our local NGO wallahs have been producing these “pacha” programmes essentially to hoodwink the public and their donors that they are doing a great service to peace.

 Their attempts to bring about a negotiated settlement were no better than A. T. Ariyaratne, one of the leading NGO Mudalalis, running peace marches from Moratuwa to Panadura and videoing them to convince the foreign donors that he deserve a bigger share of the dollars funneled to NGOs competing for the dwindling dollars in the aid programmes abroad. He never ran a peace march in the north which was the theatre of the war. But he posed as the hero who ran marches to convince the peaceful people between Moratuwa and Panadura that the war should be stopped in the north. Incidentally, Ariyaratne too was there for “Pacha” Perera’s award charade, along with former President Chandrika Kumaratunga. These are shows put up to impress the public that the miserable failures are the real heroes of peace and not the forces who fought in land, air and sea without ever seeing the inside of the American Ambassadors’ residence where the NGO stooges are entertained lavishly for services rendered to the West.

 These NGOs pundits have been the most despicable moralists who lived off the suffering and the blood of our people. Certainly, their sham theatrics helped to sustain their expensive life-style, build mansion for their children, travel first class in airlines, smoke the most expensive cigarettes without bringing any relief to the victims of the war waged by the most privileged Jaffna Tamil leadership crying “discrimination” against them, even when they were holding the highest position in the judiciary, executive, legislature and the private sector.

 The NGO have to stoke the fires of divisive politics for their future survival. . “Pacha” Perera came out of a meeting with the Patricia A. Butenis claiming that they discussed, along with the TNA MPs, ways and means of using the APE’s report for unity and harmony. The very composition of the tea party “”…” NGOs and TNA “”…” indicates clearly that a gathering of the leading defenders of Prabhakaran (“Paki” was full of praise for the military capabilities of his secret hero, Prabhakaran) who are still committed to a bogus “negotiated settlement” cannot lead to a new era of peace and amity among communities. They gathered to explore possibilities of putting pressure on the Sri Lankan government by using the anti-Sri Lankan report to get more than what they have already got.

 The NGO/TNA lobby, like the Tamil expatriates, is acting on the premise that the APEs’ report has given them a new lease of life to demand their pound of flesh. India, who was a significant invitee to the soiree held at the American Ambassadress’s residence, has already told the TNA to demand more “”…” more than what they gave in the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement.. The very nature of these anti-Sri Lankan participants indicate that they are determined to use the APE’s report as the next step to promote their political agenda. It is also a prelude to the coming Robert O’Blake. They didn’t get together to share some tea and sympathy for Sri Lanka. After her tea party Patricia A. Butenis is now armed fully to brief Blake with the next move. They have their own political agenda. This meeting was to publicly strengthen the hands of he NGOs and the TNA to go ahead with their divisive politics.

 The test of their meeting will be in their statements and actions that are yet to unfold. “Pacha” Perera will be exposed in the next phase. Right now he is acting as the spin doctor to cover up the hidden agenda of the anti-Sri Lankan forces that met at the American tea party. They will use the APE’s report to get more “”…” more than even what was given in the 13th Amendment.

 It is also significant that Sri Lanka asked Blake to convey its congratulations to President Obama for targeting the most wanted terrorist leader. Blake naturally beamed like a Chesire cat.

 It is a pity that the Sri Lankan government missed a great opportunity at this meeting. While congratulating Blake he should have been asked why President Obama gets the Nobel Peace Prize and why the West keep sending APEs to Mahinda Rajapakse.

6 Responses to “Obama does a Mahinda Rajapaksa on Osama under a silent Moon”

  1. shaz Says:

    It is all true. Please people of Sri Lanka do not believe all peoleof Britain believe the government line. There are many people who know the truth and love Sri Lanka and have respect for your people and your government. x

  2. ranjit Says:

    Mahinda you always write very interesting topics which we greatly appreciate. I hope President and the Government Ministers read these kind of letters to get a good knowledge what ordinary inteligent people think of the situation in Sri Lanka our homeland. All those names you have mentioned in your article are traitors to the Motherland and people of our land have rejected them long time ago. Those traitors have to beg on the streets if not for green bucks they are getting from their masters for giving false information of their own Motherland. Thse individuals are worst than stray dogs on the pavement. So dont worry their day will come. Every day they cannot have parties.

    Let’s pray for our land.Truth will prevail and we need to be strong and vigilant. This coming Buddha Jayanthi celebrations will usher a new hope for our beautiful land and bring peace to all our peoples.

  3. Naram Says:

    Another excellent analysis.

    Though Sri Lankans are wiser today, noone should think that Peace wallah sector has given up.

  4. Gangdhi Says:

    Do not forget it was India who trained and armed the Tamil terrorist in late seventies and early eighties in Palestine refugee camps and in Tamil Nadu, India.

    I am sure most of the work in the Hon. UNSG Ban Ki Moon appointed panel was done by Ms Yasmin Sooka. Yasmin Sooka is a Person of Indian Origin from South Africa. She did most of the work in the Truth and Recocilliation Commission on Human Rights Violations (1996) in South Africa.

    There appears to be other Indians and PIOs behind the report. The Chief Advisor to UNSG is Wijay Nambiar and he was a former Indian Minister. Nwam Pillai another PIO from South Africa supported as soon as the report was issued.

    We all know about HR violations by the WEST we live in. Does anyone know within the last five weeks more than sixty civillians were butchered by the Indian Armed Forces in Kashmir.

    It looks like Indians are the Western HR wallahs when it comes to HR in the region and they have not spared the Ceylonese.

  5. Gangdhi Says:

    By the way Nawam Pillai is a high ranking UN officer.

  6. Gangdhi Says:

    Do not blame the West as a whole. It is the Socialist left in the West that leads the attack on the People of Ceylon (Sri Lanka). Obama is a Democrat and not a Republican. David Miliband and Solheim are Socialists. Channel 4 is run by Socialists.

    What you need in Ceylon is all people other than those who support the Tamil terrorist should unite (“congress” to use a word from the Indian sub continent). For this All Singhalese should unite putting aside their political differences. As soon as they unite others will follow and there will be peace and prosperity.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2020 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress