AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO THE AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC-ABC TVÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢S FOUR CORNERS PROGRAM ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ AT LEAST, 58 DECEPTIONS (SEE BELOW)
Posted on July 7th, 2011
CHANNEL 4/ABC TV MUST STOP THE TELECASAT IMMIDIATELY UNTIL AN IMPARTIAL INVESTIGATION IS HELD TO DETERMINE THE FILMÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢S AUTHENTICITY -MEDIA RELEASE SRI LANKA SUPPORT GROUP, CANBERRA
With this film, the Tamil Diaspora (LTTE affiliated) has again misled the world including the Australian public. After the ABC Four Corners, even the Sinhalese people living in Australia have murmured to the other Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“why did our Army commit such atrocitiesÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚. This shows the success of the Channel 4Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s deception.
We say that some scenes of the film had been shot with actors (and they are fine actors indeed). Most likely, some of the scenes have been shot outside of Sri Lanka. Since there have been write ups about this, we please ask those who have such evidence to provide them to us. We say that most scenes in the film have been stage managed, people were crying and wailing for the camera. They were not giving eye contact to the camera, because they cannot, as they were actors. It is being stated that some of the blood that was shown on the film was not blood but dye and/or paint.
The main message of the film was that Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“they targeted the hospitalsÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚ , Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“they raped Tamil womenÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚ and Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“they killed thousands of Tamil civiliansÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚; the Channel 4/ABC TV achieved this objective so well.
Many people have been parroted to say the same thing Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“the Army targeted the hospital, raped women, killed children and civilians.Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚ This itself shows that the whole film is a farce.
The film was successful in convincing the average Australian and the world that the Sri Lankan soldiers went to the North and committed most gruesome atrocities (war crimes) that no other recent Army had ever committed.
Channel 4/ABC TV had a duty to disclose the true facts, but they did not. This gives us the right to file legal action against them, and those who corroborated in producing such untruth. Currently we are seriously investigating this possibility (legal action).
We can highlight some of the following deceptions in the documentary; they may allow us to initiate legal action against the perpetrators of deception, including the ABC TV. We ask Channel 4/ABC TV to immediately accept that the film has serious flaws and it will be removed from telecast until an impartial investigation is held to determine its authenticity. Sri Lanka Support Group is willing to assist them in such investigation, if held impartially in an unbiased manner. Owing to the huge worldwide outcry about the authenticity of this documentary, Channel 4/ABC TV, being reputed media establishments, must adhere to this most fair and reasonable request. This is also the request of the Sri Lankan Government and the Sri Lankan people.
1. ABC TV failed to mention the source of the alleged mobile films, knowing very well that Sri Lanka is alleging that Tamil Tigers (LTTE) or their allies had produced doctored videos to produce the final documentary.
2. If Channel 4/ABC TV would not release the original mobile/video films/photos to Sri Lanka and fail to reveal their sources, how can Sri Lanka (or any independent body) conduct an impartial investigation about their authenticity? Channel 4/ABC TV have a duty to be transparent, when Sri Lanka is validly claiming that the tapes are unauthentic. Allegations made against Sri Lanka and its people are extremely serious.
3. The documentary used Sri Lankan Army footings to deliberately confuse the viewers to think that they were Channel 4 footings.
4. A figure of more than 40,000 civilian killings were stated, but, it was a mere guess by Mr Gordon Weiss. He had previously stated that only 7,000 were killed. The figure is ever escalating.
5. It was wrong for Mr Weiss to say that the Government removed the UN from the war zone. UNHCR operated within the war zone until the very end of the war.
6. Mr Weiss stated that the Government forces shelled the no-fire zone. How did he know this? (it is well known it was the LTTE that shelled from the no-fire zone at the fleeing civilians, so civilians died).
7. If 40,000 people died at the last stages of the war, given that Mr Weiss was the UN spokesperson in Sri Lanka at the time, Mr Weiss may be personally liable for not doing enough to protect those 40,000 people. The families of the dead people and the casualties (if any) may be able to sue UN in this regard.
8. The documentary failed to mention that Mr Weiss may have a vested interest in not stating the truth as before the end of the war he was asked to leave Sri Lanka by the Sri Lankan Government. Furthermore, he wants to sell his book, which severely criticises Sri Lanka.
9. Channel 4 failed to mention that they have had serious issues with the Sri Lankan Government in the past, and some of their journalists were asked to leave Sri Lanka. Later, it is reported that Channel 4 journalistsÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢ visa applications to Sri Lanka were refused.
10. ABC TV failed to mentioned that over the years there had been hundreds if not thousands of complaints made against it by Sri Lankans living in Australia about its biased reporting about Sri Lanka and Sinhalese people. ABC TV failed to mention that most of the complaints were never investigated and those that were investigated were later dismised.
11. Channel 4/ABC TV failed to mention that their main witness, Vani Kumar, is alleged to have operated in the UK under an LTTE frontÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚ Tamil Youth Organization (TYO) and she is alleged to have links with the LTTE. It is stated that she arrived in Sri Lanka in 2008 at the request of Castro (former head of the LTTE Foreign Division) and underwent military training. But the Channel 4/ABC TV portrayed her as an innocent, impartial expert of the war.
12. Channel 4/ABC TV tried to show that the Sri Lankan Government was fighting a war against the Tamil civilians and not the most brutal, barbaric terrorist group, the Tamil Tigers (LTTE).
13. It is the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) that slit open bellies of rural pregnant Sinhalese mothers, killed rural Sinhalese infants after grabbing them from feeding mothers and then smashing them down on the ground, killed Buddhist priests cold bloodedly (31 student monks on one occasion) and committed various other brutal and heinous crimes against the Sinhalese (and some Muslims) such as suicide bombings, rape, bus bombings, and the killing of thousands Sinhalese , Muslim and innocent Tamils by numerous other brutal ways. None of these were shown/stated in the documentary.
14. Channel 4/ABC TV continuously referred to the terrorist group as LTTE and not as Tamil Tigers. This was to avoid people realising that the LTTE is Tamil.
15. Channel 4/ABC TV wrongly stated that the Government herded the civilians to the no-fire zone. But, it was the LTTE that forced the people to go with them, as they were holding them as a human shield.
16. Channel 4/ABC TV stated it was an unequal war. But they failed to mention that the LTTE fought a conventional war with Sri Lanka using heavy artillery, they had a navy and an Air force. Furthermore, they had the added advantage of having suicide bombers.
17. Channel 4/ABC TV failed to state that the LTTE was responsible for the killing of at least 80,000 Sri Lankans.
18. Channel 4/ABC TV referred to Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‹Å“Darusman ReportÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢ as the UN report. This is wrong. This was not a report called for by the UN security Council or the UN Human Rights Council, but by Mr Ban Ki Moon in his personal capacity as the UN Secretary General.
19. In the film – some of the people who were outside of the UN gate were smiling and laughing. If they were persecuted people, how could they do so?
20. The bearded old Tamil old man in front of the UN gate states Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“they are at our throatÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚. Channel 4/ABC TV try to imply that his remarks were made about the Sri Lankan Government. But, how do we know? It could be that he was referring to the LTTE.
21. The truth Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ PTK hospital had no patients when the battle between the Army and the LTTE started. But, the documentary showed patients in the hospital, who we believe were Tamil actors.
22. Pathumathalan hospital Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ the dead bodies were carried by LTTE terrorists wearing their own uniforms. The average Australian viewer did not know this and thus were confused.
23. Nadesan and PuladivanÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s photos wearing ties were shown implying they were civilians, but they were guerilla fighters, so was Isipriya. It is alleged they all were fierce fighters at the last stages of the war, so during the confrontation the Sri Lankan forces may have killed them (not sure who actually killed them). There are prior photos depicting these two gentleman and Isipriya in LTTE uniforms. Of course, Channel 4 would not show them.
24. Channel 4 stated it was dead body of Isipriya. Was it actually her?
25. The face of the dead body does not resemble that of Isipriaya. May be another good job of photo editing.
26. It is alleged that the photo shown as of IsipriyaÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s body had been published sometime before in a pro LTTE website as that of Prabhakaran’s daughter. Now it is has become that of IsipriyaÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s. Tomorrow it could someone else.
27. The scores of dead bodies strewn on the ground were those of the Tamil terrorists ( Charles Anthony Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ PrabhakaranÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s sonÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s body was there too), but they were deceptively shown to the viewers to believe that they were civilians. These are not Channel 4 films but footage from the Sri Lankan military.
28. The Sri Lankan military was shown loading the dead LTTE terrorists into a truck, they were again deceptively shown for the viewers to believe them as civilians.
29. Kfir bombing of an LTTE target (Air force footage) was deceptively linked with the people in the trench to show it was an Air force attack on them. Those civilians had nothing to do with the Air force attack, we believe the attack was much before the last stages of the war. Again, Channel 4 added the civilian actors to intentionally dramatise the film, thereby bring discredit/disrepute to Sri Lanka.
30. People in the trench Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ in the last stages of the war people were confined to the no-fire zone. But, these people were still in their own houses!
31. People in the trench Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ they seem to be so preoccupied with the video being filmed. How can they talk about the video so many times if they were hiding in fear of their lives. The people were not lying on the trench but were standing (so that they could be well filmed). They have been taught to utter the exact words – Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“they are killing our childrenÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚ to obtain the international sympathy and worldwide attention.
32. If the Kfir jet actually attacked those civilians, then there must be evidence of such attack in the surrounding. But there was none.
33. It very much appears that the three young women who were crying were also somewhat laughing at the same time Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ this is because it is reasonable to believe they were actors, how can they laugh also or were they over-acting?
34. A photo appeared during the war (not shown on this Channel 4 video) showing a young woman laughing and taking a photo of some Tamil women Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‹Å“actorsÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢ running in fear of an alleged Air force shelling (smoke was seen in the distance). Later, it was proven that it was a stage managed act. It appears that one of the three women may have been this laughing woman who took the bogus photo.
35. Father states Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“each time I sees the boyÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s dying video Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚¦. Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“ Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ this is a lie. No father could watch such a video again and again, if his son actually died.
36. Video stated that the Pathumathalan administrator who was asking for people to donate blood died four days afterwards. The alleged dead body of him was shown Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ was it the same man; if yes, was that man in the film actually dead or acting dead?
37. Video stated that the Pathumathalan hospital was shelled on 12 May 2009 Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ Channel 4 must put out the meta data to prove this
38. Channel 4/ABC TV stated that another scene of the film was authentic because its meta data confirmed it to being made on 15 May 2009. Then Channel 4 must put them in the open for examination/investigation.
39. Patients lying in the open crying and wailing Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ all stage managed. There never were such open hospitals in Sri Lanka (without a building) even during even the war time. It is very much looked like people had been dressed with blood soaked bandages and blood soaked faces/bodies.
40. A woman says Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã…“all the women were raped, including herself and her daughterÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‚ Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ How can this happen in the last stages of the war when so many people were cramped into such a small area. Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã‹Å“all the womenÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢ means how many women?
41. The video alleged that the dead women (Channel 4 implied they were civilians) were raped. But, there was no evidence that they had been raped.
42. Colonel Ramesh – how can Channel 4 call him a Colonel, when the LTTE was not an accepted military. Ramesh was seen being questioned, then his dead body was shown. But there was no video of him being killed. Channel 4 did not explain about the missing link Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ the actual killing of Ramesh. Was Ramesh questioned much earlier than his actual death?
43. Dead terrorists in naked Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ this seems to be the normal practice in any brutal warfare. Once the enemy is killed (the LTTE guerillas) then it is normal to undress them to carry out a full body search (they could have worn suicide vests etc). The LTTE did the same to Sri Lankan Army. But, this fact was not disclosed to the viewer.
44. Most of the bodies resemble that of Europeans (whites), they are not of the typical Sri Lankan.
45. The scene of shooting people in their head at close range Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ the alleged Army Officer had long hair; the Sri Lankan Army did not allow its men to grow long hair.
46. It is stated that the footage that shows Sri Lankan soldiers killing the LTTE prisoners had been in the public domain before (the original video). It is alleged that Sinhala words were dubbed into this and shown that the atrocities were committed by the Sri Lankan Army. The Sinhalese voices do not correspond or relate in any way at all to the actions in the background.
47. In any case the victims in the alleged video resemble Europeans and not Sri Lankans (Tamils or Sinhalese).
48. Video alleged that 400,000 were living in the no-fire zone. This is wrong. After the war only 280,000 ended up in camps and this was the maximum number of civilians affected in the last stages of the war.
49. No-fire zone satellite images Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ they were from an Air force file, but shown as part of the Channel 4 video.
50. Loading dead bodies into a truck by the Army Ãƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“ the dead people were not Tamil civilians but Tamil terrorists. But the video never stated this, forcing people to think that they were civilians.
51. The film footage was so good they could not have been done by mobile phones. Even the UN expert, Grant Fredericks, stated that optical zooms had been used, by saying this he placidly admitted that the videos were doctored. This is because mobile cameras do not have optical zooms, maximum they have is digital zooms.
52. There are about 17 frames of videos that are inconsistent with the original video. This shows that the videos had been edited with sophisticated video software. Because of the video editing, it has more than one video layer and the audio is not synchronized.
53. It is alleged that in some scenes the people shown in Sri Lankan army uniforms are not members of the Sri Lankan armed forces but Tamil Tigers who had worn Sri Lankan Army uniforms (during the war they tortured and killed many Sri Lanka soldiers and they filmed these killings for propaganda to collect money from the Tamil Diaspora). It is these videos that they have produced to Channel 4, placing the blame on the Sri Lankan military.
54. It is alleged that Tamil actors have acted as the Sri Lankan army.
55. Most of the Army soldiers in the video resemble Tamils, not Sinhalese.
56. Most of the Army soldiers were speaking Sinhalese with a Tamil accent. In reality this cannot happen.
57. Gotabhaya is not Sri LankaÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s Defence Minister, he is only a public servant. This was not a mere exaggeration, but a deliberate attempt to bring in charges against Mr Rajapakse.
58. Mr Kerry OÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢Brien stated at the end of the program that the Sri Lankan High CommissionÃƒ¢Ã¢”š¬Ã¢”ž¢s statement was posted in their website. Up to Wednesday 5 July 2011, the statement had been placed inside in such a way it was very difficult for someone to find.
Sri Lanka Support Group, Canberra
email@example.com (Tel: 0435758833)