In Sri Lanka: Who are the Racists?
Posted on April 9th, 2013

Shenali Waduge

Mass media have a power far more than Governments to tilt public opinion to their line of thinking using a plethora of modes at both international and local levels with a dangerous ability to make mountains out of molehills. The scope of their manipulation is phenomenal and profit driven. Humans are sensitive to emotional blackmail and fall victim to either mind conditioning or the human weakness of money and power. Media stands guilty of portraying situations in worse scenarios for its own gains and is largely accountable for creating tense situations in a country. Sri Lanka is currently facing a combination of these onslaughts. Media can create “victims” and then engage in efforts to slander the target, a combined effort with external forces. Balanced content is nil. Sanity is what is required to sieve the lies from the truth. The current issue is the projection of Sinhalese Buddhists or Buddhist Sinhalese as “racists” “”…” let us see how fair or truthful this is.

When news media control what we see, hear, think, learn and know “”…” it is a dangerous situation. “You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can’t criticize Israel”¦” Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache,. This is because 6 Jewish companies control 96% of the world’s media.

The situation in Sri Lanka

There is a proud history that the Sinhela race should not feel shy about which secularism and liberals cannot simply write off, undermine, laugh at or legislatively remove simply because it does not conform to their ideology. Nevertheless, the growing tension is that an increasing lobby is galvanizing the theory that the majority is discriminating the minorities. A lot of effort is been given to shape this theory into acceptance.

Historical evidence cannot be ignored. The prehistoric settlement in Sri Lanka is proved in the discovery of the oldest human found in Pathirajawela in deep South of Sri Lanka who had lived 20,000 years before the Neanderthal inhabited earth. Pathirajawela also exposed a flake and stone tool industry belonging to 125,000 to 75,000 BCE. The 2nd oldest human was found in Bundala again in the deep South. The 3rd oldest Lankan human was found in Fa-Hien the largest natural cave in South Asia known as Pahiyangala which can accommodate over 3000 humans. From 123,000 BCE it was in 546 BC that the Sivu-Hela (Simhala which became Sinhela) tribes of Yaksha, Naga, Deva and Raksha tribes lived. This was the origins of the civilization of the hela people (Sinhela) far before the arrival of King Vijaya in 543BC. http://www.srilankaheritages.com/oldest-human.html

Sri Lanka’s history is chronicled from 5th century BC led by Sinhalese Buddhist kings. There were invasions and incursions of Cholas and Pandyas but these were defeated. Elara (235 BC “”…” 161 BC) ruled in Anuradhapura more or less as a Sinhalese kingdom. There is no Tamil archeological evidence to prove that a long standing Tamil civilization existed in Sri Lanka.

The Muslims in Sri Lanka have different origins. A vast majority of them have their origins in South India which explains why they spoke and still speak Tamil. Muslims that settled in Sri Lanka never had a linguistic connection to Arabs and began settling in Sri Lanka only after the 10th century.

The Dutch brought the Vellalas from South India for tobacco cultivation in the 1700s while the British brought the Indian Tamils as plantation workers in 1800s because the Sinhalese refused to work as coolies in tea plantations that were originally land belonging to the Kandyan peasantry but grabbed from them under the draconian Waste Land Ordinance which was enacted in 1840. Under this law all lands for which there was no proof of ownership or possession were regarded as waste land or Crown land. Vast acreage was thus grabbed by the British Colonial Govt. without taking into consideration the customary ownership rights of the Kandyan people. This bred dissatisfaction among the Kandyan people which was the major cause for the 1848 rebellion.

Of late, the media has become a platform to denigrate the Sinhalese and ridicule Buddhism. As an example a pro-Christian website run by exiled local journalists paid from foreign funds publishes everything that serves this objective. Its article headings over the past few weeks clearly show their bias: “Bhikku brigade”, “Buddhist Taliban”, “Attack on Muslims”, “Extremists BBS Majoritarian virus”, “Hamuruduwane Booruwane”, “Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism”, “bigotry of SinhalaBuddhism”, “haunted by the Mahawansa”, “¦ the labels that Sinhalese Buddhists have been tagged with that media enthusiastically promotes are many. It is a gross violation of ethics of Journalism.

Before writing off the Sinhalese Buddhists and believing every word that transpires over the media it is necessary to engage in a content analysis of all the English language newspapers in this country. It is evident that the main feature writers are more or less the same in all the newspapers and saying the same things over and over again and media gives only space for them and it is their views that monopolize what people are made to read and form their opinion upon. There is no room or opportunity extended for alternate views.

The objective is always to make the readers believe that the Sinhalese Buddhists are the cause of all the ills, the source of all the trouble and disharmony between races and religions, and that their numbers in the country (70%) prevent adequate space to minorities from exercising their rights. This is realistically far from the truth.   

Who are the real minorities?

On a broadsheet the minorities statistically in religious terms are Hindus, Islam, Christians while ethnically the minorities will be the Tamils, Muslims and Burghers. Yet, in reality when we take the capital Colombo it is these minority ethnic groups and the minority religions that rule “”…” they control much of the commercial sector, they have a monopoly over the wholesale trade, they hold prime immovable property in greater Colombo and form the greater composition of elite in terms of the monetary power they hold. It is for these primary reasons that politicians end up gravitating towards them, for power and money are fatal attractions. It is through these influences that a lot of unwarranted and irregularities have taken place often bypassing customary laws.

What have the minorities not been given in Sri Lanka? Do Buddhists have these privileges in other nations as minorities themselves? Do Muslims not have 3 public holidays, do Christians not have 2 public holidays plus 52 Sundays for Sabbath?  While Hindus have 3 public holidays. Places of worship for all religions abound in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka issues stamps in honor of all the faiths every year “”…” which is unique and sets Sri Lanka apart from all the countries in the world. Not a single Muslim or Christian country has issued a stamp in honor of Buddha.

Are the minorities not given recognition in the national flag? Is it not on account of the unmonitored freedoms that we are faced with a situation of conversions to the Abrahamic religions and unnumbered groups of faith healers all over the island spreading the “Word”?

Let’s be candid. The ever vociferous Christian promoters of “freedom of religion” slogans cry “freedom” so long as they can inflict their religious beliefs on others. Sri Lanka has not forgotten the work of Catholic Action and the secret societies that continue to prevail when India’s own media is owned by various Church bodies there is little surprise at how media is slowly getting India to self-Balkanize India.

The truth is that the role of Sinhalese Buddhists are confined to only bringing politicians to power and these politicians end up deserting the voters that voted them to power. That is the sad reality.

Buddhists have reacted to these rapidly developing scenarios that they have identified as similar to those brewing in other parts of the world. These potential threats to Buddhists and Buddhism in Sri Lanka have been clearly articulated but media has purposely blocked giving publicity to the fears and warnings of future trouble expressed by the Buddhists.  

§  In a population of under 50,000 why should 42 mosques emerge in Kattankudy alone? Is this fair and justifiable? The visible rise in the proliferation of mosques is said to be 5000 throughout the island where the Muslim population is just 1.6million.

§  Should there not be a moratorium on establishing any more mosques?

§  Is it wrong for people to object to use of loudspeakers at Mosques that purposely project outward causing noise pollution beginning early in the morning at 4.30 a.m. disturbing the sleep of non “”…” Muslims in the neighbourhood  who are forced to listen to the sounds of Islam against their will? Especially when the Government has given a radio channel for people to listen to azan “”…” no media gives space to opinion calling for the enforcement of the Supreme Court interim order given in 2007 which clearly hold that use of loudspeakers is not a fundamental right but the right to silence is! Instead anyone bringing this argument is labeled an anti-Muslim. How correct is this?

§  When halal method of animal slaughter is banned in other nations and Muslims do not object why is it that in Sri Lanka media jumps to say that any opposition to the barbaric killing through slitting of throats and allowing an innocent and defenseless animal bleed to death slowly, is violation of religious cum human rights?

§  Is the advocacy for rights of animals no longer accepted in a country that for over a period of two millennium protected animals from man’s inhumanity under the benign rule of Buddhist Kings?

Should people coming from Abrahamic religious backgrounds be allowed to have the last word on how this country should preserve and protect animals and see to their welfare through appropriate legislative reform?

Is it wrong for Buddhists to object to animal sacrifice when the founder of the religion Gauthama the Buddha vehemently condemned it as an evil practice and Sinhalese Buddhist Kings prohibited Animal Sacrifice in their Kingdoms following Buddhist injunctions against such practice until the fall of the Kandyan Kingdom in 1815?

Is it wrong for Buddhists of Sri Lanka to object to a takaran shed developing into a Muslim Shrine in Anurdhapura that Buddhists consider their most sacred city when it is right for the Pope and the Catholic Church to claim the Vatican as the Holy City for Catholics, and Mecca as the Holy Land for Muslims where non-Muslims are prohibited from entering? Has the media ever balanced this side of the argument?

When it was clear that the halal certificate and logo on every consumer item being purchased was something illegal and extortion was taking place why has this aspect not got media attention except to convey the impression that the Sinhalese were objecting to Muslims and creating an anti-Muslim story to sell the world ?. Why did the media not speculate as to the sudden demand for halal labels when purchase of foods and items without halal certificates/logos had taken place for centuries “”…” moreover with GMOs which are legally not to be tested before release to market what is the guaranteed that foods we eat have not been crossed with pigs? So much of food-modification is taking place around us all to the profit of the food industry.

When nations are banning burqa’s and niqabs and citing the reasons of unnecessary segregation disuniting people why is it when similar sentiments are expressed in Sri Lanka the media goes to town to again project the notion of anti-Muslim.

When evidence is given of the disregard and disrespect for Buddhist cultural heritage why does that not get media attention? When Sinhalese object to Muslim encroachment of traditional Sinhala Buddhist temple land and demolition of historic sites and archeological remains why does the media project it as anti-Muslim and encourage articles that tow that line of thinking only?

There are enough of sensible arguments and articles available by people who have handled both sides of the issue in order for people to realize the need to balance things and more importantly for people to realize that incursions of the present nature are that which is creating the divides. Should the media not be highlighting the incursions and encourage people to not overstep their boundaries?

In a majority Buddhist country why has no English media dedicated an editorial to the plight of the Bangladeshi Buddhists, the anti-Buddhist happenings in Maldives, or Myanmar who are trying to protect their Buddhist nation from Islamic fundamentalists who have been smuggled via Bangladesh over the years?

Do all these liberals and Human Rights proponents and the minorities simply want the Sinhalese Buddhists to silently watch the take over of a nation that they have defended over centuries? Can they not understand that it is the Abrahamic religious “take over” that the Buddhists fear?

Are the Buddhists only good enough to be sacrificed by the LTTE so that all others can live safely? Was it not 99.9% of the Sinhalese Buddhist soldiers that died in defending the nation and is it not why the people do not want a similar instance where another lot of Sinhala Buddhists may end up in graves?

Given that 74% Sinhalese Buddhists are difficult to annihilate we realize the foreign driven multipronged efforts to break up the foundations of Buddhist nationalism being the last line of defense. This is what Myanmar is currently facing in a fierce competition between the two major Abrahamic faiths for world domination through control of the world’s people and territories.

Do people seriously think that the Sinhalese Buddhists would create situations where it is they who will end up dying?

In reality is it not the Sinhalese Buddhists who are in real terms in the minority? As against 77million Tamils “”…” 72million Tamils who live in Tamil Nadu alone the world has only 14.8million Sinhalese (of which less than 300,000 are Sinhalese Christians). Efforts must be made to protect the Sinhalese Buddhists as an indigenous species on account of the language and the ethnicity of the Sinhalese being spoken only in Sri Lanka.        

Religious Freedoms worldwide

Studies show that in a Muslim-majority nation there is a high level of government restrictions. Ironically, in these very Muslim nations Muslims themselves are often the victims of religious intolerance. It’s a battle over what type of Shariah law should be enacted, or who holds the reins of power in government “”…” as Islam and its practice rests on the leaders that call the shots.

Afghanistan – an Islamic Republic”¦.The sacred religion of Islam shall be the religion of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan”¦.No law shall contravene the tenets and provisions of the holy religion of Islam in Afghanistan

Argentina –  Article 2 of the Constitution of Argentina reads: “The Federal Government supports the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion.” Article 14 guarantees all the inhabitants of the Nation the right “to profess freely their religion.”

Canada – In most parts of Canada there is a Catholic education system alongside the secular “public” education system. They all run on Catholic principles and include religious activities and instruction as a matter of course. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is entrenched in the Constitution, states in the preamble that Canada “is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.”

Denmark – Section 4 in the Constitution of Denmark: “The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the Established Church of Denmark, and, as such, it shall be supported by the State.”

Finland – National churches of Finland, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland and the Finnish Orthodox Church have a status protected by law. The special legal position of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland is also codified in the constitution of Finland.

Malaysia – Islam is the official state religion and the Constitution of Malaysia provides for limited freedom of religion, notably placing control upon the ‘propagation’ of religion other than Islam to Muslims

Saudi Arabia – Islamic theocratic monarchy in which Islam is the official religion; the law requires that all Saudi citizens be Muslims

Turkey – 99.0% of the Turkish population is Muslim of whom a majority belong to the Sunni branch of Islam. The constitution explicitly states that they cannot become involved in the political process (by forming a religious party. No party can claim that it represents a form of religious belief. Turkey, like France, prohibits by law the wearing of religious headcover and theo-political symbolic garments for both genders in government buildings, schools, and universities.

United Kingdom (UK) – provisions of the Act of Settlement 1701 which ensures that no Catholic shall ever be the monarch of the United Kingdom, nor shall they be married to one. Religious education is mandated in state schools based on a syllabus reflecting the country’s Christian traditions. Britain is a predominantly Christian country with two established, the Church of England (COE), the mother church of the Anglican Communion and state church in England and the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. The Church of Scotland is Presbyterian while the Church of England is Anglican (Episcopalian). The former is a national church guaranteed by law to be separate from the state, while the latter is a state-established church and any major changes to doctrine, liturgy, or structure must have parliamentary approval.

Maldives “”…” the supposed paradise for over 60,000 tourists annually are given arrival cards giving lists of prohibited items (materials contrary to Islam). Saudi Arabia and Maldives both 100% Muslim nations. The 2008 constitution adopted states “non-Muslim may not become a citizen of the Maldives”. In Maldives too the Wahhabi Islamic pattern is increasing. Women in the early 1990s did not wear the black burqa and men with long beards “”…” but that is now seen increasing. Many say that these attire changes come with an exchange of remunerations both cash and kind!

Iran’s constitution recognizes 4 religions whose status is formally protected “”…” Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

In Egypt, a 2006 judgement by the Supreme Administrative Council demarcated recognized religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism) and other religious beliefs “”…” other religious affiliations were prohibited which means they including Bahai’s are denied rights of citizenship in their country “”…” they cannot obtain ID cards, birth certificates, death certificates, marriage or divorce certificates, passports, they cannot be employed, educated, treated in public hospitals or vote!!!

As far as religious freedoms go when it is forbidden for Muslims to convert from Islam to another religion Islam encourages conversions of non-Muslims to Islam. When the Vatican speaks of freedom of religion, equality of faiths “”…” the Vatican will not consider ever putting a non-Catholic structure inside the Vatican City “”…” where is the logic?

Let’s look at the laws in some of these countries.   

In France and Belgium students in state schools and government workers cannot wear “conspicuous religious symbols” “”…” forbids Islamic headscarf, Sikh turban, large Christian crosses, Jewish yarmulke. Both countries ban people from publicly wearing full-face veils. France also forbids people from wearing any headgear in official identity document photos. The body covering burqa and face-covering niqabs in public was banned unanimously in France in April 2011 claiming 6.5million Muslims were not integrating into French society “”…” the fine is ƒÆ’‚¢”…¡¬150 ($215). Those that force others to cover their faces will be subject to a fine of ƒÆ’‚¢”…¡¬30,000 ($43,000) and a year in jail. Human Rights Watch claims that the burqa and niqab do not constitute a religious practices sanctioned or prescribed by Islam but is only a cultural practice. The new law was introduced because French voters are becoming worried that the Muslim minority is building a parallel society in France which was why France claims multiculturalism is a failure.

Switzerland, Netherlands and other EU states are debating similar prohibitions.

In some Swiss and German states Islamic dress restrictions exist for teachers.

The restrictions that are rising across the world and especially Europe are due to 2 main reasons : historical and demographic. Western Europe has a history of monolithic state religion and secularism was included as a mere monoculture. No one can deny that Norway treats their official churches as vestigial organs and they would not give that same place to any other religion whatever demands are made. The other factor that the world is now beginning to take serious note of is the rise in the Muslim population which go hand in hand with Islam and visible rise in their anti-secular behaviors and actions drawing rise in public sentiments forcing Western European parliamentarians to review the prevailing situation.  

What goes without saying and as the European Court of Human Rights has rightly declared is that religious freedom is a right but not an absolute one. Where an individual’s religious observance impinges on the rights of others some restrictions have to be made. In Sri Lanka our Media refuse to highlight this aspect.

In summary, a very interesting comment on a website by a Tamil Christian (using the name Lorenzo) is being shared to convey the above in very simple terms.

Being a Tamil Christian, I believe Sri Lanka is a SINHALA BUDDHIST country.  

Let’s play a game.

1.     Show me where is Tamil Hindu country?

Tamil Nadu. Good.

2.     Show me a English Anglican country?

England. Good.

3.     Show me a Hindi Hindu country?

India. Good.

4.     Show me an Islamic Arabic country?  

Saudi. Good.

5.     Now show me the Sinhala Buddhist country?

????

It is now called Sri Lanka. Correct name Sinhela.

Did God Jesus Christ visit Sri Lanka? NO.
Did Prophet Mohammad visit Sri Lanka? NO.
Did Krishna visit Sri Lanka? NO. (Rama did visit Sri Lanka but to destroy it.)

Did Buddha visit Sri Lanka? Oh! Yes!

So it is a Buddhist country. Sri Lanka is the ONLY country Buddha visited BY CHOICE. He was in Nepal/India so he had no choice there. But the moment he got a choice, where did he visit? Sri Lanka

So this is why Sri Lanka is the Sinhala Buddhist country.

But some foolish Sinhala Buddhists have out of GENEROSITY given up their claims. So all the cats and dogs have started to claim it as theirs.

If you still don’t believe it let me explain from the Bible – Wise King Solomon.

Once upon a time there was a very wise king by the name Solomon  

He was the king, army commander, the judge and the jury and the parliament. Somewhat like MR.

One day 2 women came to him claiming ONE baby as theirs. 2 mothers, 1 baby!

King asked, “Yako, whose son is this?”
MINE! Screamed both women.

Then the king asked, “$%^#*@(, whose son is this?”
MINE! Screamed both women.

hmmmm”¦thought the wise king. He ordered a soldier to cut the baby into half and give each half to each woman. Then ONE woman came to the baby’s rescue and stopped the king. She begged to spare the baby.

So the king found the OWNER of the baby!

And he hacked the other FAKE woman to death.

When Norway, UK, India, USA, UNHRC, LTTE, PLOTE, IPKF, Tamil MODA-RATES, etc. tried to CUT SL into halves, who came forward to defend it?

Muslims? NO.
Tamils? NO.
Europeans? NO.

(Well VERY few of them DID come forward UNDER the leadership of real owners).

Sinhalese. YES. Like the REAL mother of that baby, Sinhalese came forward to defend their baby “”…” Sri Lanka

That establishes who the REAL OWNER of Sri Lanka is.

(I know we are not as wise as King Solomon, but we are enough intelligent to get it, aren’t we?)

 

Shenali Waduge

14 Responses to “In Sri Lanka: Who are the Racists?”

  1. Lorenzo Says:

    Thanks Shenali.

    There is an AWAKENING of Sinhala Buddhists of SL. Very good. They must not SHY AWAY by labels, name calling and other third grade tactics of real racists.

    During the war they labeled SL nationalists “WAR MONGERS” but not the LTTE!! But did we care? No.

  2. Sunil Vijayapala Says:

    the ‘sri lankans’ who feel left out can get into a boat and come to australia to be sent back, (as i write this 66 asylum seekers from sri lanka have landed in christmass island) – as the very people who attacked us on world stage have realised now that there is ‘no problem’ for minorities in sri lanka, but only ‘aspirations’ sri lanka or heladeepa is the country built by hela people(indigenous) and sinha people from india. no son of a b…… can claim our country as their own. they can certainly live with us as they did for thousands of years, without claiming a single inch of our motherland. the wahhabi expansionism need to be stooped immediately – all illegal settlement e.g. precincts of muhudu maha vihara in pottuvil must be cleared immediately of wahaabis and the land given back to rightful owners the buddhist monks who are struggling for a livelihood.

  3. Ananda-USA Says:

    We have always said that a Tamil Dominated Northern Provincial Council was the FIRST STEP to an independent Tamils-only Eelam.

    Well, here is the PROOF: TNA says a Provincial Council under the 13th Amendment IS NOT ENOUGH for them! Nothing will EVER BE ENOUGH!

    Are we still supposed to PARLEY with UNREPENTANT SEPARATISTS, or should we SCRAP the 13th Amendment, draw up the drawbridges and PREPARE TO DEFEND the Integrity of the Motherland?

    There is NO OTHER CHOICE!

    ………………..
    Sri Lanka Tamil leaders demand an interim self-government

    ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.

    Apr 10, Colombo: The Tamil people in Sri Lanka can find solutions to their grievances only through an interim self-government, Tamil political leaders have told the visiting Indian joint parliamentary delegation.

    Demanding an interim administration, Tamil representatives who met the Indian MPs in Jaffna had told the Indian delegation that the Provincial Council system under the 13th Amendment to the Constitution are inadequate to solve their problems, BBC Sinhala Service reported.

    Quoting the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) MP E. Sarawanabawan, the BBC said that all Tamil MPs belonged to several parties and the religious and civil society leaders asked the delegation for an interim self-government.

    “We all said we wanted an interim self-government,” the MP was quoted as saying.

    The TNA MP has said that the Indian parliamentary delegation did not respond to their request.

    A five-member joint parliamentary delegation comprising delegates from all Indian political parties arrived in Sri Lanka Monday night for a for a five-day tour from April 8-12. The visit, organized by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), is aimed at enhancing the relationship between the two countries.

    The delegation comprises Saugata Roy (Trinamool Congress), Sandeep Dikshit (Congress), Anurag Thakur (BJP), Dhananjay Singh (BSP), and Prakash Javadekar (BJP) accompanied by two FICCI representatives.

  4. Ananda-USA Says:

    India has NEVER ACTED RESPONSIBLY with regard to Sri Lanka.

    First, it implanted terrorism, training, delivering, funding and supporting them.

    Second, India violated Sri Lanka’s sovereignty dropping food and supplies to the Tamil terrorists on the verge of defeat.

    Third, India military invaded Sri Lanka under the guise of “Peacekeeping” to protect its separatist clients, partition Sri Lanka and carve out an independent state for them.

    Fourth, India threatened Sri Lanka with permanent occupation and forced the 13th Amendment to the Constitution on Sri Lanka,

    Fifth, when India realized the Pan-Tamil agenda threatened its own integrity, it turned on its surrogates, and backed out of Sri Lanka when it could not cope with the Tamil rebels it had heavily armed, leaving Sri Lanka to cope with a much bigger terrorist problem.

    Sixth, when Sri Lanka was struggling against the well armed LTTE, it refused the Government of Sri Lanka arms to defend itself, and even prevented Sri Lanka from acquiring Chinese 3D radar systems to protect its air space.

    Seventh, after Sri Lanka Defence Forces finally eradicated the LTTE in May 2009, India re-launched its efforts to create a captive Tamil constituency in Sri Lanka, collaborating with Western Powers, and Tamils in India, Sri Lanka and the Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora to DEMONIZE & LABEL Sri Lanka as guilty of war crimes.

    All of this is designed to REIPOSE Indian CONTROL over Sri Lanka, and forestall its RAPID POST-WAR DEVELOPMENT.

    INDIA is NO FRIEND of Sri Lanka …. during the last 30 years, and NOW!

    Sri Lanka should SCRAP the 13th Amendment, limit Indian involvement in Sri Lanka’s economy, trade, politics, and defense.

    GOSL: Get Sri Lanka out of India’s DEADLY EMBRACE NOW ….before it is TOO LATE!

    ………………….
    Gotabhaya reminds former Indian UN rep of his role in Colombo during 80s

    By Shamindra Ferdinando
    April 10, 2013, 9:16 am

    Had the then Indian government acted with responsibility, Sri Lanka wouldn’t have experienced a 30-year war, Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa said yesterday.

    People of all communities would have been still suffering horrors of war, if not for the eradication of terrorism in May 2009, following a three-year combined security forces campaign, the Defence Secretary said, noting that India could never absolve itself of the responsibility for creating terrorism here, though some of those directly involved in subverting Sri Lanka were blaming the Rajapaksa administration for the plight of Tamil speaking people here.

    He was responding to former Indian Permanent Representative to the United Nations Hardeep Singh Puri.

    Puri had been directly involved in the Indian operation against the then JRJ government in the run-up to the July 1987 Indo-Lanka Accord, Rajapaksa said, alleging that he was one of those aware of the Indian operations here.

    The Defence Secretary said that both Hardeep S. Puri and his wife, Lakshmi had been attached to India’s mission in Colombo during the tenure of J. N. Dixit as India’s High Commissioner here.

    Puri had now called for an investigation into what he called specific allegations of war crimes during the last 100 days of military operations. Those demanding accountability on Sri Lanka’s part for alleged atrocities committed during the last 100 days of the conflict were silent on the origin of terrorism here, the Defence Secretary said.

    Rajapaksa said that Puri should realize that the Indian intervention here had caused a major regional crisis, when Indian trained Sri Lankan terrorists raided the Maldives in early November 1988. The international community should consider a comprehensive investigation into the issue beginning with the Indian intervention, he added. India’s former Permanent Representative could help the investigation by revealing what was going on at that time.

    The defence Secretary pointed out that Dixit, in his memoirs published during his tenure as the Foreign Secretary, had acknowledged that arming Sri Lankan Tamil youth was one of the two major policy blunders of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

    Commenting on Puri’s allegation that he (Rajapaksa) wanted to do away with the provincial council system and criticism on recent attacks on Muslims in Colombo, the Defence Secretary said that the Indian official couldn’t be unaware of what the Norwegian mass killer Anders Breivik had said before he slaughtered 70 men, women and children. Breivik declared that he wanted the drive out Muslims out of Europe the way northern Sri Lanka was cleansed of Muslims during 1990. The Norwegian was referring to massacres carried out by the LTTE during President Premadasa’s administration.

    The Defence Secretary said that those critical of the Sri Lankan government should peruse former Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal’s recent piece to India Today.

    The LTTE had used children as cannon fodder and Prabhakaran had forced the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) to recognize the LTTE as the sole representative of Tamil speaking people. The TNA couldn’t even finalize its candidates’ list for parliamentary polls without Prabhakaran’s approval, the Defence Secretary said, alleging some interested parties were reluctant to acknowledge the fact that Sri Lanka was a much better place today without the LTTE.

  5. SA Kumar Says:

    We have always said that a Tamil Dominated Northern Provincial Council was the FIRST STEP to an independent Tamils-only Eelam.- No Wrong , it is Second step ( first step is 13A) ! our first Saiva Thamil Eela Priminiter will be elected on September 2013 ( SL Govt call him CM of NP)
    FYI, Third step at Kachchatheevu ! Modaya can you stop ? No

  6. Eusense Says:

    Shenali, You are trying to take Sri Lanka down a slippery slope. Talk about the future and innovative ideas to make SL a better place for all. Faith related conflicts kills more people than any other entity. Don’t look at the past where countries have designated religions. They are historical and were for the sake of political advantage from the majority groups. Sex, drugs, rape and other violent crimes are rampant in these countries which are against the teachings of these “protected” religions. All these shows no one cares about these designations. You should encourage and write about Buddhism and all other religions keeping away from politics. What Buddhism lacks compared to Christianity is a social support system which makes most followers vulnerable to conversions, specially in SL as a developing country. Financial support, help in education, marriage counselling, crisis management are areas Buddhism needs to venture into. Buddhist monks should keep away from politics and play a major role in developing a support system for their congregation. Forcing governments to pass laws against other religions and laws supportive of Buddhism is not the answer here.

  7. Senevirath Says:

    Eusense talking nonsense

    to talk about the future we have to know about the past — the history.

    18 years back Suriya gunasekara and gallage Punyawardena took the second in command of british highcommission to sl archives and showed him all the documents how they destroyed sinhala civilisation. That officer couldnot argue with our people but just said””THAT IS HISTORY”‘ and went away.

    still they do the same thing. so we need a way to get rid of them. WE HAVE TO TEACH OUR PEOPLE WHAT WAS AND WHAT IS HAPPENING.
    HAVE MUSLIMS STOPED KILING OTHERS.? HAS INDIA STOPPED HARASSING LANKA? IF THEY CONTINUE WE TOO HAVE TO CONTINUE OUR LESSONS PREACHING AND TEACHING ETC

  8. Senevirath Says:

    GOTHABHAYA U ARE GREAT

    MAY TRIPPLE GEM BLESS U “”deergha yusha weva””

  9. Rakhinetha Says:

    Shenali – What you wrote about Sri Lanka could well have applied to Myanmar and other Buddhist nations. Misinformation and degeneration in the western media about the people and Buddhist monks are plentiful. As I commented on an article by Dr. Daya Hewapathirane “MYANMAR’S DILEMMA: THE MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS”; it is time for predominantly Buddhist nations to form an international organization such as ORGANIZATION OF BUDDHIST NATIONS (OBN) not only to counter the threat from Muslim fundamentalism and other forms of terrorism but also to have a united voice in world affairs. The leaders of these nations must understand and act on this or we may suffer the fate on Afghanistan, Maldives…

  10. Lorenzo Says:

    Agree with Senevirath.

    “to talk about the future we have to know about the past — the history.”

    The problem is Saudis and Endians DON’T have a past in SL beyond 1700. So they don’t understand how important it is.

  11. Lorenzo Says:

    Fantastic news.

    “Bodu Bala Sena is all set to go international, Executive Committee Member Dilantha Vithanage said today.

    “There is a high demand from abroad for our organisation. It has become essential to extend our organisation and our contribution internationally so as to raise awareness among the international community about our mission,” he said. “We see this as a great opportunity to clear any doubts about the work we do.””

    – dailymirror

    Now we are at the mercy of inefficient dip-low-mats. Al last someone has realized it is better to light a candle than blame the darkness.

    ALL patriotic SL groups like WASP, SPUR, SLUNA, etc. should amalgamate with BBS.

    BBS should also link with other world Buddhist groups AND anti-Jihad groups. Millions of possibilities.

    BBS is ROCKET POWERED. May all the BBS people live long and prosper.

    I see a BEAUTIFUL parallel with Anagarika Dharmapala. Way to go.

  12. Sunil Vijayapala Says:

    all buddhist countries should not only form an organisation but should extend that to defence, militarywise. any buddhist country under attack, should immediately get the support of other buddhist countries and come to their rescue.

    ******** one downside of this delayed publication of comments is that there is no proper flow and response to comments. comments are as important as the article. well the editor is in a dilemma where some irresponsible people do attack persons rather than be critics on comments. so he has no alternative but to go through each comment to check whether the comments are abusive to others and sometimes to him ***************

  13. aloy Says:

    SV,
    I do not think religious sentiments workwhen it comes to state affair. Why did Thailand help tigers at at our hour of need?. They wanted us to go down fighting?. I think jeolousy overides every thing.

  14. Nalliah Thayabharan Says:

    All life ultimately must obey the laws of nature. In nature, life is not “fair.” The laws of natural selection and survival of the fittest make it so. Each kind competes with other kinds to perpetuate its own. Nature is neatly constructed with niches for each member of the plant and animal kingdoms. A niche equates to the manner by which an individual plant or animal earns its survival. For example, a rabbit’s niche is being a rabbit; an elephant’s niche is being an elephant. Both rabbits and elephants survive by being rabbits and elephants, respectively. Neither can consciously change its niche. If another animal enters the realm of either and begins to compete for the niches already filled by the rabbits or elephants, there is an imbalance. In nature, the imbalance invariably resolves in favor of the competitor that has the most effective breeding strategy.

    Humans, however, have the purely human capability to consciously change niches. We can create new niches and, if a new niche proves not to be viable, we can select or create another. We appear to be unique in having that ability. The ability to modify niches does not mean that there is no conflict between humans that choose to occupy the same niches. It merely means that there is a relief valve available that other animals do not have. In fact, one of the main causes of conflict between humans of various races, religions, or other characteristics that can be viewed as setting one group of humans apart from another, is the competition for niches. When one “kind” of humans feels that a competing kind is threatening its niches, the result is often violent conflict. The conflict is violent because we among all animals can recognize the end result of other kinds taking over our niches. We have the ability to resist rather than submit to the eventuality of the results of superior breeding habits. In history, such violence normally has not manifested itself until the stress on the kind being threatened becomes intolerable.

    Another characteristic that sets humans apart from the remainder of the animal kingdom is the ability to change our social institutions by conscious choice. As we become more affluent, we recognize “inequities” among various member groups of our societies and invariably feel an urge to correct the inequities. Affluence gives us the luxury of being able to “feel” how things should be and many people have created niches from which they make a living by trading on such feelings. We tend to want to make life fair for everyone and define fair as equal. We strive to eliminate inequities among all members of our societies. If we are successful as a society, we believe we have found the way, whether religious, economic, or governmental, that must be adopted by all others. In the interest of improving the lots of other less enlightened societies, we attempt to export our way to others, without considering that the others may feel the same about their “way.” The compelling desire for fairness ultimately becomes a major element in the destruction of the society because it attempts to countermand natural law. It eventually causes an increase in the pressure on the niches of one kind or another until the pressure becomes intolerable and rebellion occurs. Throughout human history that rebellion has always been violent and there is no reason to expect that the future will be different.

    Why is this inevitably so? It is because the concept of fair as equal goes against natural law. No matter how much we will it to be so, strong conscious desire and superior intellect cannot modify the laws of nature. As we realize that our conscious desire to modify natural law and to implement voluntary behavioral changes is not working, we refuse to recognize that we are facing an immutable law and turn to legislation in the mistaken belief that we can modify natural law by enacting man’s law. This is patently absurd, but our egos (another unique human characteristic) trick us into believing that it can be so. Ultimately, however, the instinct to obey natural law will win over conscious desire to change it. When that instinct surfaces, we define it as a manifestation of hate. The focus of the hate is generally on those less privileged groups that we have consciously identified and chosen to make equal, but which would not naturally be considered so. The hate arises because of the pressure, real or imagined, the chosen group creates for the other.

    What we define as hate is merely the natural urge of members of one “kind” to perpetuate their kind, be it race, religion, language or some other group identity factor. Humans tend to group by kinds and within a kind there will be many common characteristics. Perpetuation of a kind must necessarily create a state of unfairness between kinds competing for the same niches. One kind tends to tolerate another as long as members of the other kind do not seriously threaten the niches that the majority of the kind views as belonging to it. The natural preference of a kind for its own is the root of what may be called “differentism.” Differentism is the overarching “ism” to which belong racism, sexism, etc. These “isms” are natural and cannot long be suppressed. Suppression of reaction to natural law creates a tension that increases in proportion to the length and force of the suppression. We witness this every day in the conflicts among the peoples of the world.

    Attempts to artificially contain natural law meddle with the course of evolution and must be avoided. We would not even consider legislating against foxes preying on rabbits or against animals employing their territorial prerogatives. However, we believe that as humans we are above nature and can use our intellect to countermand natural law. We cannot. History has proved it so. History will continue to prove it so. We tend to confound our intellect with learned concepts that we want to believe are valid because we are taught that they are. However, if the concepts countermand natural law, they are doomed to fail.

    As we are enticed to make laws of man to countermand laws of nature, there may be a period of almost universal acceptance of the need for such laws. That is because, when initially enacted, the laws are invariably used to protect minority factions and have very little effect on the majority population. In addition, the laws are invariably tailored to make the majority “feel good.” The net effect, however, is to artificially increase the relative power of minority factions and thus the faction’s influence. In the beginning, we tend to feel good that we have taken steps to improve the degree of fairness afforded the less fortunate. That feeling will prevail until minority factions and their artificially high levels of relative power begin to impact on the real or perceived power of other factions. At some point, there will be increasing resistance to the imbalance and an increasingly adverse reaction. Ultimately it will be the majority middle class, which is invariably ignored in the meting out of special favors that will feel discriminated against.

    When the pressure on those factions that are not profiting from the awarding of special consideration, or which may even be suffering from such consideration, becomes sufficient, there will be rebellion against the artificial measures. Depending on the nature and extent of the artificial force applied, return to the rule of natural law will be more or less violent. That is the root cause of the strife we see in the Balkans, in Africa, and elsewhere in the world. Societies and governments have meddled with natural law and suppressed the natural desire of factions to perpetuate their kind. The rebellions that are being suppressed cannot long be held back for the people will eventually return to the rule of nature. Suppression, once active rebellion has commenced, can only be restored by force and can only be effective as long as sufficient force is maintained. Once the force is removed or relaxed, conflict will return. We continue to witness that time after time in our suppression efforts and marvel at the fact that some people just can’t seem to live together peacefully. We fail to realize that no kind can be expected to willingly give up what it believes to be its rightful niches and doom its kind to extinction. The embrace and active furtherance of multiculturalism is creating a situation that is no different than has been created by countermanding natural law.

    Have you ever lost something that was really, really important to you? When something of great value is lost we don’t mind spending time and energy to find it. The question is when do we give up hope for that which is lost to be found. Like a lost marriage, a lost job, a child leaves home and wants nothing to do with you or even when a close friend moves away. It’s in moments like these that we can easily depress ourselves as we consider what we lost rather than encourage our self with what we have left. It’s in the battlefield of our mind that we find reasons to be sad and mad at the same time. We feel that life is unfair, why me, and we would be absolutely correct in our feelings. If fairness was the way things should be, then world problems would end today. War is not fair, world hunger is not fair, disease and destruction is not fair. This world is not based on fair or unfair, we can have total joy one minute and then face deep sorrow the next. The height of our love for someone can become the depth of our sorrow when that person we love is no longer in our life.

    You may have lost some things in 2012 and now here you are into 2013. Where is your focus going to be? Will it be on what you have lost which will give you another year like last year or are you going to focus on what you have left and be thankful? You can’t change your past but your past has the power to destroy your future. Your mind has the power to magnify a negative event and turn you into a negative person.

    Life can be divided up into two main domains: the natural world and the artificial world. The natural world consists of all the natural thinks, such as streams, rocks, planets, animals, humans and so on. The artificial world is the domain of what we humans create and includes our social and political structures, including the economy.

    The natural world is clearly not fair in the sense that natural processes do not consistently bring about what people (and animals) actually deserve. The just and unjust are killed in earthquakes, the wise and the fools perish of cancer, the good drown as readily as the bad, the kind are consumed in fire as swiftly as the cruel. As far as the evidence indicates, justice and fairness are lacking in the purely natural world. We are not merely creatures of the natural world who must live in a world not of our making. We are also the creators of the artificial world-that of society, politics, economics and so on. While this domain is obviously shaped by the natural world, it is a human construct and it is within our collective power. As such, whether our institutions are fair or not seems to be a matter of choice. Since we create and sustain them, it would seem to follow that we can change unfair aspects to be more fair.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2018 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress