Frederica Jansz and the ‘white flag’ drama
Posted on October 6th, 2010

by Mario Perera, Kadawata

The issue of the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”while flagƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ needs more probing, since it is being reduced to simplistic proportions. Now where did this story originate? Who used this term? And, most important of all, who gave it international publicity, which supposedly woke up Ban Ki-Moon from his sleep and made him indulge in his now famous antics in our regard? To whom did the story serve most? The source was foreign. When the end of the LTTE was well-nigh and foreign powers were getting jittery about the fate of the top ranking terrorists, some foreign personality called up our defence establishment, and wanted to know how they could surrender. A top man of ours replied that it might be too late, but advised the terrorist cadres concerned to come out with a white flag and give themselves up to the army.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Where was SF when this happened? He was not in the country. So, he had no first hand knowledge of this, and whatever he heard on the subject was purely and simply ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”hearsayƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢.

Now Frederica Jansz enters the scene. She interviews SF on the topic of his life in the army and as a presidential candidate, matters in his first hand awareness. Then she throws or slips in a question ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”outside the subjectƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ because it is NOT within SFƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s direct purview. Assuming that SF said what FJ attributes to him, the answer is pure hearsay, an ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”obiter dictumƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢, an aside. Now what does she do? She consults Basil R, who says that nothing of the sort happened. What was the need to consult BR? WasnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t the interview for the newspaper? Unless of course she was acting for the top? This leaves the door wide open to speculation. Now, if BR was briefed on the interview, then it is safely assumable that the rest of the establishment knew the story. SFƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s answer is made out to be a disaster for the country. It woke up Bank Ki-Moon, didnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t it?

Now comes the million dollar question. If BR knew (and no doubt the others with him) of the supposed remark of SF and the deluge of fire and brimstone it would heap on the country, then why the dickens was FJ allowed to publish it? The pithy Sinhalese saying was probably unknown to FJ, but not to BR (and others): whatever the sayer sayeth; the doer is duty bound to do it with personal responsibility. The press has often reported of cases where other journalists were persecuted for saying much less. But here, FJ not only continues to sway around with hair-dos and mod styles and all, but also becomes the trump card of the establishment to corner and cage SF.

Now about FJ: she is known as a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”sensationalist journalistƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢. She broke into the limelight as such and continues the way she knows. In this role, much like ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”Billy the KidƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢, she shoots first and reflects (if she does so), after. Once however like the traditional ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”kottoruwaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ she pecked the wrong bark, was hauled up before the Supreme Court and was obliged to tender a public apology in open court to her ladyship whom she had offended. Not knowing where to draw the line when it comes to being critical of the judges of the Supreme Court is unpardonable for such a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”top rankingƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ journalist, and reveals an imprudent, ignorant and naƒÆ’†’ƒ”š‚¯ve mind. Now it is such a volatile person who is pitted against a battle-scarred warrior, who bears his patchwork of stripes and stars on his chest.

The final question; who is then the traitor? The man who, at the most uttered a piece of hearsay information? The woman who gave it all the publicity, for the benefit of international vultures and perhaps to her advantage? Or, the establishment who knew it all the while, and let it be published much against the security norms of that time?

The establishment had all to gain from it. The presidential race, it was reported was to be neck to neck. Now here was a story that was detrimental to the country but not for the clique at the top. Laying it at SFƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s door would add so much more clout! To make a parody of what J.F.Kennedy said, the slogan is; think not what you can do for the country but what the country can do for you!

Playing on the supposed dramatic consequence of the statement attributed to SF is an exaggeration. The diaspora was saying it all the time and bearing heavily on BKMoon, ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”¹…”SillyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢band and others to press home that point. It had to happen at some stage, and that is why it did happen.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Mario Perera,

Kadawata

3 Responses to “Frederica Jansz and the ‘white flag’ drama”

  1. herman Says:

    Mario Perera, your views are forthcoming and refreshing. However, Is it not the responsibility of any good journalist to either check with the authorities or with another independent source for verification of any story before printing the news? In this case, she checked with BR and if I remembered correctly she did state so in her article at that time.
    Can I collect the million dollars from you, if I were to answer your question? My opinion is FJ is just a pawn in this game and BR had checked-mate SF!

  2. Kamal Says:

    Questions to be asked are

    1. What qualification or training has Ms FJ has in journalism? A Proper journalist would research before publishing, especially a matter with such national and international implications.

    2. Should such persons be let loose to poison a nation in such a turbulent time in the name of journalism?

    3. Why Mr Fonseka did not take any action of the irregularity, if he heard about the white flags, after the war was over? Why did he keep silent till he came to politics?

    4 have they conspired to compromise the nation?

  3. sena Says:

    It seems Ms. Janz is a shrewd journalist rather than a well meaning one. She must have realized SF must be emotional due to his clashes with the government (even without such disquite SF is known to be unguarded in his comments (so are many SL politicians). So during a “promotional” ineterview she sliped in this question with perceived innocence. SF for his lack of judgement fell for the trap. Now she has used this incidence to her advantage generating lot of negative and damaging publicity to Sri Lanka and the government (which I think she does not mind). Also journalistic ethics require her to refrain from using her work with clients in legal matters which she seems to have no problem with.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2024 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress