Ira de Silva London, Ontario

John McKay MP, Scarborough-Guildwood
Liberal Party
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario.

Dear Mr. McKay,

I read a report in the National Post of October 26,2009 which reads – “in the House of Commons on Friday, Liberal MP John McKay says Tamils are seeking refuge in Canada because of the injustices they experience each and every day from their government merely because they are Tamil”. As a member of the Canadian parliament you are entitled to try to get more Tamils into Canada because it is Liberal party policy. However, you are not entitled to make unsubstantiated, false statements about the Government of Sri Lanka as and when it suits you to pander to LTTE supporters in your riding.

Are you making these false accusations because it is the policy of the Liberal Party to bring in more Sri Lankan Tamils even if, as indicated by news reports, these illegals started their journey from India, paid $45,000 each to get to Canada, (they could not have earned that money in Sri Lanka so it is possible that it is part of the millions the LTTE front organizations collected in Canada to fund terrorism in Sri Lanka), came on a LTTE vessel which indicates that they have connections to the LTTE , that they also have connections to supporters of the LTTE in Canada, many of whom are in the Toronto area and are offering them further financial help as well as legal counsel so that they can dupe Canadian Immigration officials and, most frightening of all, that they could be Tamil Tiger fighters (ex-terrorists). Unlike the leaders of the LTTE supporters in Toronto, the Tamil leaders in Australia have made a statement ” former Tamil Tiger fighters are definitely among the influx of boat people to arrive on our shores”. (The Australian, October 26,2009 – see below).

I suppose your part in this grand scheme is to provide political support to these illegals. Since you are so concerned about the Sri Lankan Tamil population why do you not state in parliament that you want all these Sri Lankan Tamils who are experiencing unspecified injustices in Sri Lanka to be brought to Canada so that Canadians can look forward to thousands, even millions of Sri Lankan Tamils living off the Canadian taxpayer, demonstrating on the streets which also cost taxpayers several hundred thousand dollars for security, committing acts of lawlessness such as closing highways, creating mountains of garbage on the streets of Ottawa the clean up of which was also billed to the taxpayer, while you and other Liberals from Toronto were supporting them outside parliament and in Parliament were insulting the Government and people of Sri Lanka. If you are sincere in your concern, the next time you make a statement regarding Sri Lanka in parliament, please ask that Canada either send ships or pay for ships to go to Sri Lanka so that Tamils can make a comfortable journey to Canada, that you give an assurance that they will get a warm welcome from the Liberal Members of Parliament who hope they will vote for them. I am confident that the New Democratic Party, particularly Jack Layton and Olivia Chow of Toronto will support you as well as get other NDP members to join you in the race to welcome them. You will be supported by the Government of Sri Lanka that has said they will not stop any Sri Lankan who wants to leave the country. It would be what is called a win-win solution.The non-Tamil population of the GTA and the rest of the country will be happy to indicate to you what they think about your generosity at their expense at the next election.

Yours truly,

Ira de Silva

London, Ontario

Ira de Silva London, Canada

The Letters Editor
Ottawa Citizen
Ottawa, Ontario.

 Dear Sir:

 Re: Canada’s Refugee Challenge

 The challenge to Canada’s self-image from what you call a “ship full of desperate migrants” is not it’s dedication to compassion, tolerance and justice but a challenge to Canada’s lax immigration laws and system of justice. The message it has sent to the Tamils via the statements of the members of the opposition parties, both in and out of parliament, is that anyone is welcome into Canada regardless of whether they are terrorists, murderers, convicted criminals or those seeking better economic opportunities and just using the system. The word has gone out that Canada is a place to where anyone can arrive, say the magic word “refugee” and gain admittance, be paid to stay here with lawyers provided by the state to argue their bogus claims and then allow them to take frequent trips to Sri Lanka for personal reasons. This is not an image of “compassion and tolerance” but of weakness and ignorance. You state “the last thing Canada wants to do is earn a reputation as the destination of choice for human smugglers”. The problem is that Canada has already got this reputation and comments such as those expressed in your editorial reinforce this opinion. To human smugglers it is an invitation, not a deterrent.

 These “desperate migrants” it is said have paid around $45,000 for their passage, a large amount of money in Sri Lanka and even in Canada. Ordinary Sri Lankans do not have that amount of money so the question is who paid for their passage, when and why. They could be some of the ten thousand LTTE fighters who are in Sri Lanka after the elimination of the hierarchy of the LTTE. It is necessary to point out that it was only the leadership of the LTTE that was eliminated in May. The terrorists in their thousands are still alive and well in Sri Lanka and trying to get out before they are identified from within and outside the camps for the displaced. Further, there is a news report today that this ship originated in India. If correct, why should these Tamils come here from India? The homeland of Tamils is Tamil Nadu, India where they should be quite happy amongst their brethren unless they are LTTE fighters. If not, they are economic refugees taking advantage of Canada’s lax immigration policies.

 The fact that the Canadian Tamil Congress is front and centre to aid them to get into Canada raises the possibility that the millions of dollars held by the front organizations of the LTTE are now being used to smuggle people all over the world. The policies of the Liberal and New Democrat politicians have been to bring in as many Tamils as possible to inflate their vote banks. The LTTE front organizations and the opposition parties in parliament would be only too happy to have 76 more to demonstrate on the streets all paid for by the Canadian tax payer and fully supported by the media who like to think that they are showing compassion and tolerance rather than ignorance and weakness and ask the question “does it matter how they got here”. For ordinary Canadians who were subjected to the lawlessness of the Tamils in Canada just a few months ago by demonstrations to support a terrorist organization in Sri Lanka, which cost tax payers thousands of dollars that could have been spent to help Canadians at a time of economic downturn, it does matter.

 Yours truly,

 Ira de Silva

Ira de Silva London,Canada

Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:52:33 -0400

The Editor
The Star
Toronto, Ontario

Dear Sir:
Re: Editorial – Close the Camps

 These so-called refugees are reported to have paid $45,000 to human smugglers to bring them to Canada. Those in the camps do not have that kind of money, they are mostly farmers etc. If these Tamils are from the camps they must have been provided with this money. The question is who gave it to them and why. The possible answer is that it has been provided by the LTTE front organizations overseas who have millions of dollars collected to support the Tamil terrorists in Sri Lanka and who are now using this money to get their fighters out of the camps before they are identified as the murderers who terrorised the population.

 The answer is not to close the camps but to speed up the identification of the LTTE terrorists who are in the camps. As for a return to normalcy, it has been only five months since the LTTE hierarchy was eliminated. Thousands of LTTE cadres are still in Sri Lanka because it was only the leadership that was eliminated in May so this exodus is probably to escape detection. These are not genuine refugees and should not be treated as such – they have a lot of money, have come to Canada because of lax immigration laws and the support they get from the front organizations of the LTTE in Canada whose leaders have rushed to Vancouver to be on hand to assist their entry into Canada.

 It is ironic that Sri Lanka should be pressured to hasten resettlement while the UN states that the landmines have to be cleared, habitation as well as the means for the displaced people to rebuild their lives has to be provided BEFORE they leave the camps. Even in Bosnia long after the war waged by the west, they are still clearing land mines. However to clear the many thousands of landmines buried by the LTTE the west wants Sri Lanka to do it in four months. Would these people be able to live “normal lives” if they are sent into minefields? Maybe the west considers that to face the possibility of been blown to bits is better than being in camps where they are safe, fed, and where children go to school etc. These same critics forget that before coming to the camps these people were forced from their homes by the LTTE and lived in bunkers with the LTTE for nearly two years.

 It is those who have money, who are economic refugees that come to Canada from Sri Lanka. It is a repeat of the episode twenty years ago on the east coast when so-called refugees dressed in the latest designer clothes arrived and were later found to have lied to enter Canada. In the case of these Tamils, the LTTE front organizations would be only too happy to have 76 more to demonstrate on the streets all paid for by the Canadian tax payer and fully supported by The Star.

 Yours truly,

 Ira de Silva
London,Canada

Ira de Silva London, Canada

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:30:21 -0400

Mr. Robert Blake
Assistant Secretary of State, South & Central Asia
State Department
Washington,D.C.
U.S.A
 
Dear Sir:
 
I am writing to you again because of the latest statement by Mrs. Hillary Clinton at the U.N. in which she accused  Sri Lanka of using  rape as a “tool of war”. It is possible to question if Mrs. Clinton has any knowledge of what took place in Sri Lanka much less have any details and that she is merely basing her wild, inaccurate statements on what officials in the State Department are providing her with. Her statement was positive – not the usual diplomatic double speak such as ”alleged” rape. This is not the first occasion that a U.S. Secretary of State has made false statements to the U.N. based on information provided by staff.  As you have been the ambassador to Sri Lanka the question is whether you provided her with this false information or was it someone else? If it was someone else, having been the ambassador to Sri Lanka and now responsible for Asia, why did you not correct this lie or were you unaware of what the statement was? As I indicated to you in my last correspondence I stated that you are giving the impression that you are pro-LTTE, which you denied. Given this latest falsehood, would you not agree that there is reason for Sri Lankans to believe that you are pro-LTTE?
 
Mrs. Clinton’s statement was followed by the current ambassador in Sri Lanka stating “during the 26-year long war in Sri Lanka, there were allegations of rape and sexual violence, just as in other conflicts. Secretary Clinton’s statement was to raise awareness of such brutality, not to implicate specific perpetrators”. I would like to point out to you that during the “26-year long war”, even the LTTE propaganda carried out on Tamil.net never accused Sri Lanka of using “rape as a tool of war”. Where do you think Ms. Butenis gets her information from? It seems that she too is making false statements on a whim because  both statements by her and Mrs. Clinton can not be substantiated.
 
Another statement  issued by the State Department as a clarification through its ambassador-at-Large for global women’s issues Melanne Verveer absolved Sri Lanka’s Rajapaksa administration of using rape as a tool of war saying that “it had no recent evidence of women being raped while in Sri Lankan government custody.” It is a fact that nowhere in Mrs. Clintons statement did she mention dates leaving the impression that it had taken place throughout the conflict. I do not need to point out to you that there is ample evidence of women being raped while in U.S. custody. Does that mean that the U.S. is using “rape as a tool of war”?

Both the statements by Ms. Butenis and Melanne Verveer were attempting to explain the statement by Ms. Clinton only proving that there was no basis for her statement at the U.N. Then Philip J. Crowley, assistant secretary for public affairs muddies the water further when in response to a question regarding Mrs. Clinton’s remarks on Sri Lanka he speaks of her visit to Africa and states that “in these conflict areas, you know, the most vulnerable of our population are the ones that bear, you know, the brunt of the impact of these conflicts”. If it is a general statement on “conflict areas” why make a positive statement on Sri Lanka? Further, he displays his ignorance when he says ‘significant levels of rape documented (he thinks, he says) through 2002 or 2003 in various reports, including State Department reports as well as Amnesty International reports’. He does not seem to be aware that in this period there was NO war. There was a dubious “ceasefire agreement” dictated to Norway by the LTTE and foisted on Sri Lanka by the west whereby the LTTE were able to re-arm, re-group and extend their tentacles throughout the island assisted by the Norwegians while the armed forces of Sri Lanka were confined to their barracks.   
 

 
Yours truly,
 
Ira de Silva
London, Canada

Yours truly,
 
Ira de Silva
London, Canada

 
Having falsely accused Sri Lanka of using rape as a tool of war it appears that the State Department is changing it’s statement every time it is asked about the accusation. My question to you is where did secretary Clinton receive the report that the Sri Lankan armed forces used rape as a tool of war?  The Genocide Task Force Report of  December 2008 cautioned the State Department that when diplomatic and intelligence reporting from the embassies overseas is inadequate the people in Washington make statements and judgements from dubious information and assessments but given that you were the ambassador to Sri Lanka until a few months ago and are now Assistant Secretary responsible for Asia, did you not have any input or were you responsible for the information on which this statement was based?
 
When I last wrote to you it was after you issued a statement on Sri Lanka. I indicated that in my view U.S. policy appears to be one of vindictiveness towards Sri Lanka because it did not submit to dictates by the U.S. and other western countries to stop the war when Prabhakaran was surrounded. This current statement from Mrs. Clinton confirms that vindictiveness and this time the State Department has gone so far as to lie in it’s effort to vilify the Government of Sri Lanka. I trust that this was not the outcome of your interaction with the Tamil diaspora in the U.S. who are the same American Tamil diaspora that funded LTTE terrorism in Sri Lanka, lobbied successive U.S. governments to achieve their goal of dividing Sri Lanka and contacted Mrs. Clinton to save Prabhakaran in May this year. They must have informed you that they have not given up their goal of dividing Sri Lanka and have set up a group in exile to spend the millions they have at their disposal to achieve their goal.  They are American citizens promoting the division of another country by violence, extensive lobbying and funding politicians in the west to “buy” their support against the people and government of Sri Lanka. Given the continued efforts of the Tamil diaspora in the U.S. to continue the LTTE aim of dividing Sri Lanka, can you explain why you believe that these Tamils outside Sri Lanka who have and continue to support the division of Sri Lanka by any means available to them should be given a role in the future of Sri Lanka? Should your interaction with them not be to wean them away from the goal of dividing Sri Lanka if one is to believe that the U.S. believes what it preaches to the world about being against terrorism and for democracy?

As for your continued statements on devolution and the future of Sri Lanka, it is for the people of Sri Lanka to decide whether they want devolution and what form of government they want. The U.S. is supposedly a country that believes in democracy, not dictatorship or bullying (the “ugly American syndrome”) when it comes to dealing with other countries. Non-LTTE Sri Lankans have clearly indicated that they do not want LTTE terrorism paid for by the Tamil diaspora, that they want the government to rid the country of terrorism and provide a stable environment in which they can live without fear and try to rebuild the country. It is no secret that thousands of LTTE trained murderers are among the people in the camps and it seems that what the U.S. and other western countries are attempting to do is to pressure Sri Lanka to release these terrorists into the general public so that they can re-group and re-arm and perhaps in an underhand way achieve what they wanted in May this year, namely safe passage for LTTE terrorists. If the U.S. is unwilling to release those they are holding in prisons because they think they are possible terrorists, why is the U.S. wanting known terrorists to be released?
 
If the U.S. has any real commitment to democracy in the world, it should help Sri Lanka stabilise rather then make unsubstantiated accusations and attempt to dictate and bully Sri Lanka even by lying.  It appears that what is happening now with your responsibility for Asia is a pro LTTE Tamil diaspora influencing U.S. policy and the State Department being a vindictive bully even if it has to make up lies to achieve that goal. 

Ira de Silva London, Canada

Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 21:25:32 -0400

The Editor
National Post
Toronto, Canada
 
Dear Sir:
 
Re: Sri Lanka’s Abuse of Press Freedom – Sept.1,2009
 
J.S. Tissanayagam, a Tamil reporter has received a 20 year sentence after his trial because he was found to have violated Sri Lanka’s laws, specifically the Prevention of Terrorism Act. As all your readers are aware, Sri Lanka has been suffering from Tamil Tiger (LTTE) terrorism for thirty years which is why there is such a law as the Prevention of Terrorism Act. It is no different to similar acts in the U.K. and other countries.
 
If Tissainayagam paid any attention to the laws of the country, he would have known that his actions and blatantly false publications would be subject to the laws of Sri Lanka. He has been tried and found guilty in Sri Lanka based on the laws of Sri Lanka. It does not matter about laws in other countries, although all countries faced with terrorism have such laws in place and some of them are more stringent than Sri Lanka’s laws. He was indicted, had the freedom to choose lawyers to defend him and he also has the right of appeal.
 
If there was “fabrication” it was on the part of the LTTE and Tissainayagam who as you say ”criticised wartime tactics employed by the  Sri Lankan leaders including the alleged withholding of food, medicine and other essential items from Tamil areas as a way to strike back at the Tigers”. It can be proved that this was false as there is evidence that it was the Sri Lankan government (people) that provided the food, medicine, essential items FREE to the Tamil people during the entire period of the war and that the LTTE took all this and re-distributed it as they saw fit. It is a fact  (pictorial evidence) that they had so much dry rations that it was used to line their bunkers. Also, administration and education for all in the areas temporarily controlled by the LTTE was paid for by the government.
 
Is it the attitude of the so-called “world press” that journalists are above the laws of the country they reside in? Is it one law for journalists and another for the rest of the public? Where in the world is this the law?  
 
As for the U.S. president highlighting Tissainayagam’s case, it is a matter of presidential opinion. The U.S. president forgets that some of the prisoners being held in Guantanamo Bay, whose criminalities have still to be proven, have being jailed for many more years than Tissainayagam’s trial has taken – he was arrested in March 2008. Tissainayagam flaunted the law in Sri Lanka and is paying the price. Let the U.S. also deal with those they are holding as “terrorists” before they sit in judgement on any other country.
 
Yours truly,
 
Ira de Silva

London, Canada

Ira de Silva London, Canada

Chief Executive
Channel 4
P.O.Box 1058
Belfast
BT 1 9DU
 
Dear Sir:
 
Re Channel 4 News Broadcast – Is this Evidence of Sri Lankan War Crimes?
 
I refer you to the video that is now being broadcast throughout the world. The very fact the question is asked “is this evidence” implies that there was some doubt as to whether this was valid. Your foreign affairs correspondent Jonathan Miller narrates on the alleged incident which is supposed to have taken place in January 2009. There are several questions that come to mind about this particular broadcast by Channel 4. Perhaps you would be able to provide the answers:
 
1. As your news service is reported to be “respected”, did you make any attempt to verify the authenticity of the video? I note that your organization has attempted to clear itself by stating that it is not sure of the authenticity.
 
2. To even an amateur it could be argued that the video is suspect – the man is still  shown sitting even after he has been shot. I wonder what the cameraman was doing when the other eight were being shot – was he talking on the phone? If this was an impromptu video is it not strange that no one’s face is identifiable? 
 
3. The people lying around supposedly dead are not identified, neither is the man who is shot or the supposed soldier. There is no date, place or time.The only claim to this shooting being done by a Sri Lankan soldier is that the man with the gun is wearing a uniform of a Sri Lankan soldier. Did it never occur to you that anyone can wear a uniform? It has been well documented that in Sri Lanka the LTTE has on many occasions carried out bombings having gained entry by wearing soldiers uniforms.
 
4. The other “proof” that the killing was done by a Sri Lankan soldier are the few words in the background in Sinhala. Do you believe that the LTTE are so stupid that they would not have been able to learn to speak a couple of words in Sinhala? Just so you know, there are numerous reports of hard core LTTE speaking fluently in Sinhala. One example is the suicide bomber who attempted to kill the army commander! Did it not occur to your Jonathan Miller that the video could have been dubbed? Is he just very gullible, not a good journalist or so biased in favour of the LTTE that he has lost the ability to make an independent judgement?
 
5. Over the years, the LTTE have fabricated many stories and videos and have removed them from websites only when they were proved to be fabrications. Since the British media has covered news reports of the LTTE in Sri Lanka, and has shown a clear bias against Sri Lanka, it strengthens the view that this video has been unearthed and broadcast in the continuance of that biased propaganda. The BBC has “doctored” images too as when they showed photos of children in Afghanistan and passed them off as Sri Lankan and only pulled them when challenged and proven wrong.
 
6. It is said that the video was shot in January 2009. Did you not find it surprising that it has only surfaced now and not when the British government and media were hell-bent on trying to stop the war, were making “demands” on Sri Lanka to permit the LTTE hierarchy to leave, and issuing various threats of war crimes investigations? Strangely the British wanted to rescue the LTTE while at the same time killing thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan claiming that it was their duty to rid the world of terrorists!
 
7. The LTTE Prabhakaran leader’s close confidant and aide code named “Gokulan” has stated that Prabhakaran had ordered that civilians trying to leave to the Sri Lankan army controlled areas were to be killed and that he had several such incidents videoed and photographed to be sent to the international media claiming it had been done by the Sri Lankan forces. Was this video one of those?
 
Given the above, if your organization has an iota of responsibility for what is broadcast, was any attempt made to get independent verification that the video was not “staged”, that the words spoken were not dubbed (they sound as if they were).
 
As stated by a commentator, what has to be established immediately is whether the video is fake. The responsibility lies with your organization to prove that this was not deliberate mischief, that you had checked the bona-fides of the organisation that provided you with the video and had reasonable evidence to believe that it was not a put-together fake. I trust that in the interests of responsible journalism you will get a forensic analysis done to PROVE it is not a fake. If it is proven that it is a fake I hope immediate legal action will be taken against your news organization and a complaint filed before the British Press Council.
 
I look forward to any comments you have on this subject.
 
Yours truly,
 
Ira de Silva
London, Canada 

Ira de Silva London, Canada

Mr. Robert Blake
Assistant Secretary of State, South & Central Asia
State Department
Washington,D.C.
U.S.A.

 Dear Sir:
 
I have written to you in the past when as Ambassador in Sri Lanka you were doing what you could to help the Tamil Tiger terrorists (LTTE), projecting an attitude that your mandate was to ”instruct” the government of Sri Lanka in their dealings with the terrorist LTTE. It was not to benefit Sri Lanka but for the benefit of the LTTE. Right up to the elimination of the hierarchy of the LTTE in May you did your utmost to provide the LTTE hierarchy with an avenue of escape so they could live to fight another day. Your statement on August 11th indicates that you are continuing your efforts to help the LTTE.
 
Since the elimination of the LTTE hierarchy on May 19th, U.S. policy appears to be one of vindictiveness towards Sri Lanka because it did not submit to U.S. dictates. This  attitude was illustrated when the U.S. moved to deny the IMF loan to Sri Lanka,  Mrs. Hilary Clinton claiming that it was not an appropriate time for the loan. In addition to being miffed because Sri Lanka did not succumb to intimidation by the U.S. and other western countries trying to stop the war against the terrorist LTTE, it had been reported that the Obama administration had received funding from the Tamil diaspora. During the last presidential election there was even a campaign called Tamils for Obama comprised of LTTE supporters. Perhaps that was another factor in the current administration’s anti-Sri Lanka, pro LTTE stance. I refer you to the latest interview of M. Thirunavakarasu, a close advisor and confidant of the LTTE leader who was with him in Sri Lanka till May 16,2009 and is now living in TamilNadu, India in which he claims that Prabhakaran was confident that the U.S. would rescue him as he had contacts to Mrs. Hillary Clinton presumably via the American Tamil diaspora.  (Copied below is the question and his answer at his interview). It is this same American Tamil diaspora that funded LTTE terrorism in Sri Lanka and lobbied successive U.S. governments to achieve their goal of dividing Sri Lanka, that contacted Mrs. Hillary Clinton to save Prabhakaran that you are now meeting with to supposedly recommend that the Government of Sri Lanka engage with them on the future of Sri Lanka. Their goal is to divide Sri Lanka. Having suffered thousands of deaths, massive destruction because of them and knowing that they have not changed their goal, what makes you believe that the people and government of Sri Lanka should “engage” with them? Currently their “concerns and perspectives” are to continue to promote the LTTE agenda in Sri Lanka as they have done for the past twenty-five years. Since they are American citizens should not your engagement with them be to wean them away from supporting terrorism rather than provide them with the means to achieve their goal of dividing Sri Lanka?
 
Are your continued meetings with the U.S. supporters of Tamil terrorism because you are unaware of the following -
 
The LTTE supporters of the Tamil diaspora are attempting to re-group and continue their objective of dividing Sri Lanka?
 
The LTTE leader in the U.S. is a key leader in the post Prabhakaran administration of the LTTE?
 
When the current leader of the LTTE Pathmanathan (KP) was arrested and brought to Sri Lanka, the leader of the LTTE in New York issued a statement calling on the so-called international community (the same community, led by Norway and the U.S., that worked  feverishly to rescue Prabhakaran) to censure Sri Lanka.
 
Given the continued efforts of the Tamil diaspora in the U.S. to continue the LTTE aim of dividing Sri Lanka, can you explain why you believe that these Tamils outside Sri Lanka who have and continue to support the division of Sri Lanka by any means available to them should be given a role in the future of Sri Lanka?
 
If the official policy of the U.S. government is that it is against terrorism in the world, why is it that the Tamil terrorists in Sri Lanka are the exception? 
 
Why are there meetings with the  American Tamil diaspora supportive of the LTTE and why are they consulted on U.S. policy on Sri Lanka but not the non-LTTE Sri Lankan expatriates in the U.S who far outnumber them?  Do you not believe in equal representation before making decisions? 
 
I am copying the future U.S. ambassador to Sri Lanka Ms. Patricia Butenis as she was involved in these discussions with LTTE supporters in the U.S. so she is aware of the situation and does not attempt to carry on as she did in Bangladesh where, according to press reports, she never had a reputation of being diplomatic and was giving lectures and directives in “bold language” on how Bangladeshis should run their country. She hopes that in Sri Lanka she will speak diplomatically although she is not sure. I trust that you will ensure that she is given a course in diplomacy before she makes uncalled for statements in Sri Lanka or attempts to “run” the country as a client state of the U.S.
 
Yours truly,
 
Ira de Silva
London, Canada

 
M. Thirunavakarasu – Former advisor to LTTE  
 

Ira de Silva London, Ontario, Canada

To National Post
Toronto, Ontario.

Re: Tamil tragedy Continues – July 17,2009

 I am writing in response to an article by Roy Ratnavale titled “The Tamil Tragedy Continues” published on July 17, 2009. It is a litany of half truths and fabricated statistics that are the hallmark of Tamil Tiger terrorist propaganda. I will comment on some of the most questionable statements to illustrate the false information that is flooding the international media in the wake of the deaths of the Tamil Tiger terrorist leaders in May.

 What he calls the “so-called humanitarian rescue” of civilians undertaken by the Sri Lankan armed forces was in actual fact a humanitarian rescue because the Tamil civilians being held hostage by the LTTE, on the sliver of land behind earth walls over twelve feet high, were those who had been driven from their homes during the past two years by none other than the LTTE. It is no secret that the LTTE used the civilians to build these walls, kept them captive as a human shield and shot them when they tried to escape. Therefore it was a humanitarian rescue.

What is noteworthy is that throughout this period, there were no complaints from the Tamil diaspora about the LTTE doing this to their “family and friends”. The Tamils overseas continued to collect money and fund the LTTE in their terrorist war with callous disregard of the civilians who were under the control of the LTTE. There was never a word of criticism about the complete disregard by the LTTE of humanitarian values even when it was of Tamils who were supposedly their family members. There was no call to the LTTE, who they supported and funded, to release their family so that they could go back to their homes. However, when the LTTE were cornered and using these Tamil civilians as forced labour, conscripting children as young as ten years and using them as cannon fodder, depriving the civilians of the food and medicines provided free by the government, (throughout the thirty years of conflict it was the Sri Lankan taxpayer that fed the Tamil civilians and the LTTE terrorists as well as provided medicines, education and administrative services etc.), there were demonstrations all over the world and the cries heard on the streets of Toronto, Ottawa and elsewhere in the western world were that the Tamils overseas were concerned about their relatives and friends who were among the civilians trapped in the fighting. There were demands on western governments by the Tamil diaspora to call for a ceasefire, immediate negotiations with the LTTE by the government of Sri Lanka as well as to enable the LTTE hierarchy to evacuate to another country. The governments of western countries, where the Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora were demonstrating, obliged their Tamil constituents with these “demands” in the hope of support at the next elections. Articles such as this must be to keep their pressure on western politicians to criticize Sri Lanka and make a different set of “demands” on the government of Sri Lanka.

 As for the 20,000 Tamil civilians who were “massacred” in the conflict zone, that is another canard put out by the LTTE and carried by media sympathetic to the LTTE. Civilian deaths published in the international media were mostly derived from the propaganda arm of the LTTE which claimed the UN as their source. When the UN issued a disclaimer to a published report it was not published by the LTTE nor the media because they were not interested in reporting the truth, were biased in favour of the LTTE and were intent on vilifying the Sri Lankan government. The first report of 20,000 civilian deaths in the final days came from the UK Times. The “source” was supposedly the UN. However, Sir John Holmes, the UN Humanitarian Affairs Chief rejected the report stating that “this figure had no status as far as we are concerned”. Even the previous figures of 7000 civilian casualties from February to April 2009, which were supposed to be from the UN, were rejected by him in his interview with Al Jazeera on May 30th when he stated that “these figures have been based on unverified and unofficial estimates and hence not published by the UN”. These persistent falsehoods are repeated by LTTE propagandists because that has been their method of propaganda over the last thirty years hoping that constant repetition will make them a “fact”. The international media has being manipulated successfully in this manner over the last twenty-six years by the LTTE. The correspondents who write these lies are either incapable of ascertaining the facts, have just a nodding acquaintance with truth, are being paid to publish these lies or are sympathetic to the LTTE terrorist cause. One of the correspondents of the UK Times, Mary Calvin even claimed to have contacted Norwegian and UN officials in the last days of the conflict to arrange for surrender of members of the LTTE. That is how close these British correspondents were to the LTTE.

 The other canard is that 1400 people are believed to be dying every week which also originated from the UK. This was supposed to be taking place in the main centre where there are 45,000 displaced persons. At the rate of 1400 per week there should be no one left after a period of 30 weeks. The World Health Organization representative in Sri Lanka, Dr. Mehta issued a statement on July 17th which states that the numbers stated in some media are “exaggerated”. He states that contrary to the statements of deaths speculated in some sections of the media, the actual figures of deaths due to the diarrhoea disorder in some relief villages and camps accommodating the displaced were well within the accepted standards and that a clarification has been issued. Needless to say, LTTE propagandists choose to ignore the WHO. Dr. Mehta also stated that he had visited the camps over five times during the past three months and that during each visit, had found the situation to be “rapidly improving”. He commended the Government of Sri Lanka in this regard and stated that the government should be given “full credit”. As in the case of the bogus numbers of deaths, these false statements are made by LTTE sympathisers without any basis in fact. It is also necessary to point out that when these civilians broke away from the LTTE they were malnourished and sick because although it was the Sri Lankan government that provided food and medicines even to the LTTE, the civilians were deprived of this free food by none other than the LTTE who had so much food that they used bags of rice, lentils etc. to fortify their bunkers.

 Regarding the statement “some girls and women have become pregnant due to rape” it is not clear who is raping these girls and women but has been included for “effect”. It stands to reason that with people living in close proximity in family groups any attempt at rape would be quickly stopped and exposed. The people in the camps are all Tamil families and unless rape is a part of the culture acquired after their subjugation by the LTTE, which it is not, then this too is false.

 As for illegal chemical weapons, it was not the army but the LTTE that were producing chemical weapons and there is pictorial evidence of their factories, stocks of chemicals including gas masks etc. that were found in the areas temporarily controlled by the LTTE. Interestingly the “consultants” to the LTTE in this regard were foreigners possibly INGO personnel. As for the statement that “according to reliable sources, the Tamil people are being disenfranchised and victimized by the Sri Lanka authorities”, again it was the LTTE that disenfranchised and victimized those Tamils they controlled because they did not believe in elections and did not permit them to vote. At the last presidential election there was a report that the LTTE cut off the hand of a person who voted. That injustice has stopped by the elimination of the LTTE hierarchy in Sri Lanka. Local elections have been held in the east and are on track in the north of Sri Lanka too.

 Finally, regarding the “Tamil people must be allowed to live in peace and flourish in their homeland”, since all Tamils claim Tamil Nadu, India as their homeland and as there can be only one “homeland”, if Ratnavale has any complaints he should address them to the government of Tamil Nadu, India. I am unaware of what the government of Tamil Nadu is doing to deprive them of peace and stopping them from “flourishing”.

 Yours truly,

 Ira de Silva
London, Ontario, Canada

Ira de Silva  Ontario, Canada

Ms. Navanetham Pillay
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Geneva, Switzerland

Dear Madam,

I have written to you already regarding your vindictiveness towards Sri Lanka. As a Tamil from South Africa you probably feel that you can use your current position to continue to harrass Sri Lanka after the LTTE were defeated militarily. LTTE supporters all over the world are now waging a concerted propaganda war against Sri Lanka and reading your latest statement made on June 4, it appears that you are part of that LTTE effort. Given that the Tamils in South AFrica have provided the money to buy planes for the LTTE and supported the LTTE terrorists of Sri Lanka by demonstrations to save the terrorist leader, your continued efforts to indicte Sri Lanka appear to indicate that you have a personal grudge against Sri Lanka.

I hope you will heed the advice given to you by the Indian Ambassador to Geneva, Mr. G.
Achamkulangare who made the following statement on June 5,2009. “it will be prudent to adhere to the outcome of the special session and be sensitive to the concerns expressed already, rather than take a position on contested proposals or controversial issues and ideas, which did not find eventual acceptance in the outcome of the special session.” You did call for the special session and got it. Why can you not accept the decision of the members who made their views known and voted? He further stated, “it would be extremely unfortunate, if the inter-governmental decisions adopted by the human rights council, were to be ignored or set aside, and the High Commissioner and/or her office were to misinterpret them or willfully neglect them, or supersede them according to their convenience or in accordance with the agenda of some states, or unrepresentative or unaccountable organizations, or to pursue their own agenda”. Please do not dismiss his opinions as he represents your homeland India of which Tamil Nadu is an important state. It can therefore be argued that the majority of Tamils, millions of them in fact, disagree with you.

Your continued efforts against Sri Lanka at the behest of the colonial masters does not look good for you in that it may give the impression that you still have the colonial mindset and do what the colinial masters request – the countries who are backing you are Britain (no longer great), the EU, Ireland and France. As many have advised you, if you can set the guidelines, investigate the conduct of Britain, France, the U.S. and other members of the European Union as well as establish the penalties based on the results of those investigations and conclusions, then and only then, will there be a case for you to start investigations on Sri Lanka. As clearly stated by the Sri Lankan ambassador to Geneva on June 5,2009 if these countries set an example to Sri Lanka and submit their own conduct to so-called impartial or independent international inquiries of the sort that they have commended us, Sri Lanka would be ready to regard their suggestion with somewhat less contempt than it does at the moment.

Looking forward to not hearing from you again about investigations regarding Sri Lanka.

Yours truly,

Ira de Silva
Ontario, Canada

Ira de Silva London, Ontario, Canada

Ms. Navanetham Pillay
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Geneva, Switzerland

CC: UN Secretary General
Dear Madam:

I read a news report which states that even though the vote at the meeting in Geneva on May 27,2009 was in favour of no war crimes investigation against Sri Lanka as wanted by you, to the surprise of many you state that you will continue in your efforts to institute such an investigation even though your “home country” South Africa voted in favour of Sri Lanka. The report states that you “took the extraordinary step seeking to override the decision taken by the world body”.

This move on your part is indeed “extraordinary”. It exposes a vindictive mentality which is unbecoming of the post you now hold at the UN. The UN is supposed to act fairly, without prejudice and treat all member states the same whether large or small, rich or poor. It appears that you do not have that capacity when it comes to Sri Lanka and the question is why? Only you know why you have taken this decision but to the observer there are many possible reasons some of which are -

1. You are arrogant and believe that what you want you must get no matter the rules or the cost. You seek to dismiss the opinion of four billion people represented by the countries that voted in favour of Sri Lanka as opposed to the .5 billion who voted against Sri Lanka. Possibly you are also vindictive and want to punish Sri Lanka because you did not get your investigation.

2. You have a “colonial mindset” as do most of the countries who were supportive of the resolution which clearly manifested the east-west divide and the western countries trying to browbeat the rest of the world. You also probably feel that you have to do what the colonial masters want. You did not find it ironic that some of these same countries have committed war crimes of immense proportion and that they lied and deceived the UN to invade another sovereign country which was against international law. As stated by the Sri Lankan representative to the UN in Geneva – “these are the same countries that told the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. I would not buy a used car from these people let alone allegations of war crimes”. These same crimes are also taking place in Afghanistan. Why have you not used the same “authority” you are using against Sri Lanka to bring war crimes against these countries? If you had done so you would not only have the template for an investigation but also the penalties would have been established. As stated by the representative from Algeria at the meeting of the council it was regrettable that the work of the council was still distorted by double standards.

3. The South African Tamil community has continually supported the LTTE even providing the LTTE with planes to bomb the rest of Sri Lanka. Pictures of the South African Tamils demonstrating on the streets calling for a ceasefire so that the LTTE leadership could evacuate to a foreign country may have been what you supported but could not do much about. You did not really care for the thousands of Tamils that had been driven from their homes for the past eighteen months ending up on a narrow strip of land being used by the LTTE as a human shield. If you did you should have called on the LTTE to let these people go but you did not. Their “human rights” were not uppermost in your mind.

4. You issued reports of the number of deaths and injured using information that the UN officials in Sri Lanka and John Holmes of New York said were not accurate and verifiable. You preferred to believe what was reported by the propaganda arm of the LTTE on their website to condemn Sri Lanka. That you and other members of the UN who seem to feel that they should help a terrorist organization continue to use inflated numbers exposes your collective bias and reflects on the integrity of the UN. By copy of this letter to the Secretary General of the UN I ask why the UN is openly showing bias and discrimination.

5. Prior to May 18th other members of the UN such as Mr. John Holmes and Mr. Vijay Nambiar were making frantic phone calls to help Prabhakaran so you felt that you had to do your part particularly as South African Tamils were supportive of the LTTE.

6. When you heard that the LTTE had been defeated militarily you were greatly disappointed and saddened. The only way you could now show your support of the LTTE was to attempt to take revenge on Sri Lanka to avenge his death.

There are other possible reasons that I could set out but I believe that what I have stated already should give you an indication of how your call for an international investigation outside the Human Rights Council may be interpreted. Please note that imperialism/colonial mind set as practiced by those who brought this resolution against Sri Lanka is a concept that is outdated.

I will conclude with a comment from an international relations analyst on the outcome of the councils meeting on Sri Lanka – “to some, Sri Lanka’s victory at the United Nations Human Rights Council is an example of how, under a new world order, countries sick to death of the West’s double standards made a point. This was a rejection of humanitarian imperialism”. I trust you will take heed and not continue with your imperialism to please your imperial masters.

Yours truly,

Ira de Silva
London, Ontario, Canada