President Sirisena only has poison to serve the nation
Posted on July 19th, 2015
The protagonists of the Yahapalana deception appear like a bunch of bungling comedy actors except for the danger they pose to the future of Sri Lanka. If the breathtakingly doltish display of the care-taker education minister (Wilbewa “toiya”) Akila Viraj Kariyawasam to bring Napoleon Bonaparte – who had been dead for nearly 100 years – to the World War 1 arena is anything to go by, the country is clearly going to the dogs.
If the Wilbewe Toiya instils fears about the future of the country, his leader, the chief back-stabber Maithripala Sirisena proves that he is a classic example of a pathetic man without any charisma, discernible leadership or management skills or any other worthwhile traits – other than the record of selling his services to the cabal of local and foreign conspirators who secured power on January 8, on behalf of anti-national forces.
Performance over the last six months has showed that the only qualification Sirisena seems to have had for the job of president was his preparedness to backstab his leader without any moral compunction. His non-existent decision making ability as the chief executive of the country is a true national embarrassment. And then, his performance as the nominal leader of the majority political party has been more than disgraceful.
Looking at the moronic personality and the inept on-the-job performance of President Sirisena reminds Winston Churchill’s acerbic slights of other British political leaders: He is on record famously remarking that the three-time Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin – whom the bellicose Churchill hated with gusto for his alleged “crime” of trying to appease Hitler – “I wish Stanley Baldwin no ill, but it would have been much better if he had never lived”. And of Clement Atlee, “A modest man, who has much to be modest about”.
The reasoning given by Sirisena in his disgraceful “special statement” of 14 July for his many demeanours, shows beyond doubt that he is a fitting candidate for the unflattering descriptions of Churchill, unfairly directed at a couple of decent British politicians.
First thing to note is that Sirisena’s14 July “statement” did not materialise from the ether! Orders came from London where Chandrika “the venom pot” was taking instructions on next steps from MI6, following the SLFP’s decision to nominate Mahinda Rajapakse for the August 17 election. Sirisena, who seems to be able to do not much else than dancing to the tunes of his “puppet Madam” simply delivered what he was asked to.
The nub of what Sirisena said was that he will continue to stand against former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. There were hardly any surprises in the cowardly statement, made after full signing up of Rajapakse’s nomination. But the man has form. He has backstabbed, lied, and tried to distort or obfuscate the truth before.
Judging by the malicious breach of trust he committed on Rajapakse in joining the international conspiracy, the man is clearly capable of anything. Signing Rajapakse’s nomination papers and then announcing he is against the nomination is typical of the immoral, back bone-less behaviour he has made himself famous for!
Sirisena also made the election results prediction that Rajapaksa will be defeated “again” as he was defeated on January 8. He has demonstrated that he has not been exposed to the true nature of the so called January 8 “victory” cobbled together by assembling all desperate groups from Ranil Wickremesinghe and Rajitha Senaratne to the various Islamist rabble.
Nor does he seem to have counted the electoral level results for the SLFP and the UNP following the so-called victory. Most importantly, he seems to be disregarding the abysmal six-month record of the Yahapalana fraud and the impact it has made on the national morale, the economy and peoples’ lives in general. Obviously, Sirisena’s announcement of his “neutral stand” at the upcoming pols is a stance enforced by his inability to face the people again.
Sirisena’s explanation of the reasons behind his agreeing to give nominations to the former President shows the man’s duplicitous nature: he said that he had repeatedly refused demands by UPFA leaders to grant nominations to Rajapakse, but was “forced” ultimately because he wanted to retain the party leadership in order to be able to reward those who supported his treacherous common candidature.
Next, revealing his unextinguished jealousy and hatred of Rajapakse he declared his illegal, dictatorial wish, following the elections, to form a government “with the victorious political parties”; His determination not to appoint Rajapaksa PM appears to be based on a blatant disregard for the constitution as he displayed in removing the chief justice and in appointing Ranil Wickremesinghe prime minister. Being the sneaky character he is, a wink towards foul-mouthed “turn coats” like S. B. Dissanayake was clearly visible in his reference to “other senior politicians” who can be appointed PM.
Immediately after the infamous statement however, UPFA General Secretary Susil Premajayantha insisted that in accordance with the Parliamentary Elections Act of 1981, only a person named in the original National List submitted to the Elections Secretariat along with nominations for the last parliamentary election or an unsuccessful candidate at the same election could be appointed PM. The former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva also clarified the legal position relating to the PM at the Anuradhapura meeting.
Sirisena showed that he has his own devious interpretation of what is “fit for a President”: his peculiar morals apparently prevented him from breaking ranks with the UPFA because the Rajapaksa group would have contested from another party and entered Parliament anyway. So he seems to believe that he received a mandate on January 8 to keep Rajapakse out of parliament and out of politics!
Next he made his obviously murky moral backdrop even murkier by justifying not taking disciplinary action against party members supporting Rajapakse: his explanation was that he needed to protect the 47 member Ranil Wickremesinghe “government”. A disturbing display indeed – by someone purporting to be a national leader – of a moral landscape sans any principles or decisive action.
Sirisena also revealed the blatant falsity of his earlier denials of any meetings with Mahinda Rajapakse by disclosing that he had met the former President for talks in three occasions.
All in all, there are some positives: Sirisena who seems to have a penchant for using ghoulish similes (like crabs in boiling pots, rebirth as crows and dogs) by comparing his disastrous short rule with a minority government to the journey of the Titanic.
This was probably the only truth he uttered in the entire statement. May Sirisena and his band of unpatriotic rogues face the same fate as the Titanic – in the name of the nation and its people.