Mahinda Rajapaksa Is A Sinhalese Extremist – Lee Kuan Yew

[hit&run]

Nanking for the Chinese is a grim reminder of one of the issues of the 100 years of National Shame for the Chinese and it only helps in igniting passions.

Since Tamils are dirt poor people with zero capabilities and support; under oppression of racist Sinhalas they do not have right to oppose such humiliation or even endorse their genocide worth anyone's attention like Chinese are/will milk Nanking. Forked tongue Chinese are out to support Sri Lanka but ignoring genocide of Tamils for reasons we all know but wouldn't miss a chance to abuse Japanese.

 

[amoy]

what insensitivity? @hit&run @Ray dont try to mix up different things! the war Chinese fought against Japanese was btwn two countries. the civil war in which Sri Lanka cracked down on terrorist LTTE was within their sovereignty. those Tamils are SL citizens!

Sent from my 5910 using Tapatalk 2

 

[saradiel1]

It is universal that anyone who is connected gets a better chance at the hustings and political appointments.

In Singapore, the Prime Minister is elected not by the citizens but rather by the members of the ruling political party. The ruling party has a greater number of Chinese.

Why be selective and mention only Jeyeratnam? Workers Paerty Chairman Wong Hong Toy too was indicted for falsifying the Worker Party accounts. Of course, acquittal came later.

And anyway, political vendetta is nothing new in Asian politics.

Sri Lanka is not practising so brazenly, as per your understanding of Singapore's political matrix, the political style you ascribe to Singapore. But it is doing things in a more sinister way to ensure that the Tamils do not get equal opportunities. Sri Lanka is addressing the root so that no Tamil grows of stature. I am sure you are aware of the discriminatory ways how equal opportunities are denied to Tamils.

Of course it is universal and it is the same in SL. Those who are in the camp of the ones who hold power are well off and would have access to reaching heights. And that shouldn't be the right way. In the upper echelons of power in SL too what matters most is who is connected to whom and not his racial identity. MR is a fellow who practice this very well.

He will go extra miles to help a friend who is in his camp regardless of his ethnicity. If u check the man's history that is quite clear. Not only, he it is the same for many of the politicians in SL just like in any third world country infested with corruption and nepotism.

My point was the reason many Tamils reached high in Lee's government is that many were and are Lee's yes men. In the same manner there are Tamils that hold high positions in MR's gov, there were Tamils in JR, Premadasa, CBK and even SWRD's gov.

The same way MR is dynastical, oppressive, controls judiciary Lee also does that in a much more subtle diplomatic but a cruel way.

There was no any motive in picking up Jeyaratnam, it just came to my mind when thought about how Lee oppressed opposition.

And there is another point that is forgotten or rather deliberately missed by the Tamil ethnic Lee worshippers when comparing SG and SL. That is the Tamils in SL and Tamils in SG cannot be compared. What can be compared is Tamils in SL and Malays in SG. Because only these two contexts are similar.

1. Tamils held a majority in SL which is close to TN border. (which is another large Tamil ground)
2. Malays held a majority in SG in the similar manner. So Lee brought various laws and policies to bring down this strategic position that Malays had as it would harm the national interests in SG. Even now none of the minorities can form a majority in any part of SG. But SL didn't do that. Had SL done that an LTTE type rebellion would have never happened.

What is the point of giving high level jobs in ones government while undermining their power as a race?

The number of Malays having high positions in SG has dwindled with years. What SL didn't do to SL Tamils have been done by Lee in a rather rude manner to the Malays in SG.
Lee would never mind keeping Tamils in high positions as long as they serve him.


There were discriminatory policies in SL towards Tamils but now almost all of such discriminatory policies are abandoned. The most highlighted 1956 Sinhala Only act (the real name of it was Swabhasha Act) made Sinhala the only official language in SL. That was corrected later and Tamil is an official language in SL now.

The other policy that made waves was University Standardization brought by Sirimavo. B. That was to give more chances to rural village students and obviously it was discriminatory and after two years gov scrapped it and replaced the system with a District Quota system, of which Tamils in districts like Vavuniya, Mulativu were the highest gainers.

Sirimavo B was not an enlightened leader just like most SL leaders and she has brought economic and other policies that have been disastrous to the ppl. The ones who suffered most under these policies were the Sinhala.

For example she brought the Land laws during her time which limited the number of acres a man can own. After that law was enacted it became that the maximum number of acres of land a single person can own is 50 acres which resulted in many wealthy sinhala land owners to give their own lands to the gov. The ones who were affected by the law was Sinhalese, which made a negative effect on the Estate sector where Sinhala ppl had domination.

Also the closed economy system that SB practiced that time, gave the Jaffna Onion growers a chance to be rich while the rest of the country found it hard to find three meals a day.

So it is not black and white and there are a lot of grey areas in between.

If SL is practicing policies to root out Tamils how can Tamils live in Colombo and go to good Tamil language schools (funded by gov) and do good jobs and good businesses? How can 30% of the Colombo city is Tamil?

There were discriminatory policies but many are defunct now. It doesn't mean everything is perfect, still we have a lot to do. Yet it is far from your screwed and ignorant view.

 

[saradiel1]

You may not ask Heinz Gud, but then I cannot reproduce all the issues for every Sri Lankan posters the same, as and when the surface on the scene!

I don't see Lankans here that much and also if u stick to a certain view of a certain country in a rather derogatory manner you should be able to defend your point at any time. You ppl aren't lazy right?

 

[saradiel1]

Now, can it be told as to why a man called Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike, born a Christian but converted to Buddhism when he joined politics?

Could it be because overflowing religiosity of the country has always influenced the shape of politics and governance of Sri Lanka?

SWRD was born a christian and I know that u neednt to take the pain of writing his full name it just makes ur response longer and more boring. SL was never a religious country the religious fever is something recent especially created by the politicians.

No it doesnt meant the country was religious in a sense but it was SWRD whipped up the religious sentiments in order to get into power. Also there is no mention abt him getting converted openly or not even records of his conversion. Both buddhist and non buddhist politicians associate clerics of all religions. As the dominant religion is Buddhism it gets more highlight.

Buddhism was trampled upon by the British and it was a good tool to use as it was soon after the independence.

 

[saradiel1]

This is demonstrated by how any presidential candidate with significant chances of winning the election conducts his/her campaign. Receiving the 'blessings' of Maha Sanga and other religious prelates is a must. They also spend a lot of time participating in the religious ceremonies of various faiths and then those sessions are given a wide publicity in media. Even after winning, constant appeasement of prelates of every religion with clear favoritism to Buddhists is the norm. Much of the broadcast time in government run media is spent on showing the president offering flowers, participating in pririth chanting ceremonies, Bodhi Puja etc. This has been the case ever since presidential system was introduced to Sri Lanka in 1979. Pledge to protect Buddhism from unnamed enemies is a usual election promise. Lip service to other religions is also made in the sides. All this appears pretty normal to Sri Lankans in Sri Lanka who have not seen anything different for the last many years.

Seriously where do u pick that garbage? Nowhere in SL meeting prelates and getting their blessings a MUST.

But politicians do that as a PR initiative. Got it? In the after math of the last presidential election, prelates resisted and criticized MR's move to punish SF. but did MR give heed to it? No instead he indicated them that they need to shut up. And they did it and the Buddhists in the country did not care for two hoots.

In 2002/3, two Buddhist monks were assaulted by two gov ministers (both are catholic) inside the Parliament. Because they were against the gov at that time. Did a single Buddhist came to street against it? NO, MR did not care. Because they were criticizing MR that time.

Can a country with such religiosity be like that? If Buddhist monks had such power to dictate terms and if they commanded power among the Buddhists, would the politicians who assaulted them be free? Believe me when i say, u have NO idea what SL is though u seemed to shout out aloud a lot.

And yes there is NO clause in SL constitution that prevent a non buddhist from becoming the president. There were many non buddhist candidates in last presidential elections. How could that happen if there were any such clause.

 

[saradiel1]

By Kadirgamar, you mean Lakshman Kadirgamar, the Tamil Christian politician?

May I remind you that following the victory of the United People's Freedom Alliance in the 2 April 2004 Sri Lankan legislative elections, he was mentioned as a possible candidate for Prime Minister of Sri Lanka, but on 6 April President Kumaratunga appointed Mahinda Rajapaksa to the post.

What do u try to achieve by emphasizing his Christian part? Does that make him any less of a Tamil? If u know the politics in SL, you will learn that it was MR who wanted the premiership for himself and with his underhand dealings he got it, becasue he wanted to be the next presidential candidate. This happened after JVP too campaighned for Kadirgamar. And how come SL has Kadirgamar as a foreign minister if the gov were reluctant to appoint Tamils in high positions?

Actually there were many high profile Tamils in JRs, and even Premadasa's gov.

 

[Ray]

what insensitivity? @hit&run @Ray dont try to mix up different things! the war Chinese fought against Japanese was btwn two countries. the civil war in which Sri Lanka cracked down on terrorist LTTE was within their sovereignty. those Tamils are SL citizens!

Sent from my 5910 using Tapatalk 2

War, conflict, violence within and without being encased for posterity only opens up old wounds!

 

[saradiel1]

And you blame Lee of Singapore for being racial!

Of course he took every policy decision to undermine the power of Malays in SG and prevent them forming a majority in any part of SG. I dont blame Lee, I just say he can't point to MR cos he is worse.

You find Sri Lanka having a Tamil Christian Foreign Minister some great example of Sri Lankan giving equal opportunities? You must be joking!

No it is an example that Tamils could have high positions in SL if they belong to the right camp. And that the things are not black and white as some propagandists want to make ppl believe.

While to decry Singapore as racist. Here is what the Singapore Govt has achieved on equal opportunities:

As I told u before the most suitable comparison can be made between Tamils in Sl and Malays in SG and not between Tamils in SL or Tamils in SG.
And I guess u have nothing to say about Lee's strict demography regulation laws.
And I never said Tamils didnt go to high positions in SG, what I said was it was more due to Tamils being in the right camp of the right man than Lee being minority rights conscious. So u can save ur wikipedia posting and come up with a real argument. Atleast begin by counter arguing the points I raised in my previous comments.

Not only in India even in SL people from minority has held and keep on holding good positions in the government. India can talk abt minority representation to SL the day India elects a Muslim Prie Minister.

 

[saradiel1]

It has nothing to with religion!

Those who say that Sonia Gandhi can be Prime Minister are obviously unaware of, or are unwilling to acknowledge, the vulnerability of certain 'citizens' like her under the Citizenship Act. India cannot possibly be comfortable with a Prime Minister whose citizenship is conditional, whose citizenship can be challenged and even withdrawn under certain circumstances. More, a citizen whose status becomes dependent on the vagaries of Italy's citizenship and naturalisation laws!

Sonia Gandhi has been a serious contender for prime ministership since 1999. Should she ever realise her dreams, it could have grave repercussions for our republic and our political system. In my view, Sonia is ineligible for any high office for the simple reason that her citizenship is conditional and subject to cancellation if she were to violate the stipulations laid down in the Citizenship Act, 1955.

Further, unlike natural-born Indians (citizens by birth) who are citizens of the first class, Sonia occupies a much lower rung in the hierarchy of citizens that exists under this law. The main points of difference are as follows:

Under this law, a person who is born in India and either of whose parents is a citizen of India, is a citizen of India by birth. A person born outside India and either of whose parents is a citizen of India at the time of his birth, is a citizen of India by descent.

Citizens by birth become citizens of India with the first breath of life and retain it, if they so desire, till their last breath. They do not 'apply' for citizenship. Nor do they have to file an affidavit swearing allegiance to the Constitution of India or take an oath in this regard before an Oath Commissioner. Their allegiance to the Indian Constitution is taken for granted. Finally, no force on earth can deprive them of their Indian citizenship. Even if a citizen by birth is found guilty of treason, he cannot be deprived of his citizenship.

He can be jailed for life or hanged but his citizenship cannot be tinkered with. That is why citizens by birth are citizens of the first class. Since citizenship is a fundamental qualification for holding public office in any country, citizens by birth are eminently suited for high constitutional offices.

Foreigners who marry citizens of India and are ordinarily resident in India can apply for Indian citizenship under Section 5 of this Act. If granted citizenship, and this is subject to 'conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed', they are known as citizens by registration.

Other foreigners who make India their home and seek Indian citizenship become naturalized citizens if their applications are accepted. Under Section 6 of the Act, where an application is made in a prescribed manner by such a foreigner, the Central Government can grant the certificate of naturalisation, if it is satisfied that the applicant is qualified as per the provisions outlined in the Third Schedule to the Act. The Third Schedule lays down several qualifications for naturalisation of a foreigner like Sonia Gandhi and under this Act, it is on the incumbent Central Government to ensure the following..


a. that the applicant is not a subject or citizen of any country where citizens of India are prevented by law or practice of that country from becoming subjects or citizens of that country by naturalisation;


b. that if he is a citizen of any country, he has renounced the citizenship of that country in accordance with the law therein in force in that behalf and has notified such renunciation to the Central Government;

c.that he is of good character

d. that he has adequate knowledge of a language specified in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution.

Finally, the clincher. The Citizenship Act outlines the circumstances in which both citizens by registration and citizens by naturalisation can be deprived of their citizenship.

Section 10 of the Act says citizenship can be withdrawn if the government is satisfied that:


a. the registration or certificate of naturalisation was obtained by means of fraud, false representation or the concealment of any material fact ; or


b. the citizen has shown himself by act or speech to be disloyal or disaffected towards the Constitution of India as by law established; or


c. the citizen has, during any war in which India may be engaged unlawfully traded or communicated with an enemy or been engaged in, or associated with, any business that was to his knowledge carried on in such manner as to assist an enemy in that war; or


d. the citizen has, within five years after registration or naturalisation, been sentenced in any country to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years; or


e. the citizen has been ordinarily resident out of India for a continuous period of seven years.

More at:

Issue of Foreign Origin | Sonia Under Scrutiny - By A.Surya Prakash

So u mean Sonia Ghandhi didn't know anything abt that until she gets the nomination. And become a candidate hard to believe. The crux of the matter is people are doubtful about a person holding a high position who is from not clear Indian background or naturalised indian. Anyway was there any Catholic Prie minister?
There are a disproportionate number of Catholic sinhala ministers in SL elected by ppl of SL. Even MR's sons were baptized in the church and many in SL know MR is a staunch Hindu. But NONE in SL care.
Talking about SL society and its religousity you are walking in unfamiliar waters Ray. Stick to what u are good at, SL society is not your field of expertise.

 

[saradiel1]

@ saradiel1

Have you picked tea of been to a tea garden?

My uncle owns several tea estates, we normally use labour to pick tea leaves and we too have tried it. No, it still doesn't require imaginative skills to pluck tea leaves.
Being simply being a human is enough to pick leaves
I can't even think how u can even try to (failing) defend such a silly argument.... imaginative to pluck tea leaves...my a**

@ saradiel1

One can trot out any old excuse to justify obliteration of the fact that Lankanese are plumb lazy!

Listen old hag, it is Lankan get ur social science right! And none needs to bring out excuses for being lazy cos it is no crime.
Our people however lazy they are built a civilization, one of the oldest hydraulic civilizations, cultivated thousands of acres and made SL the granary of East, they needn't neighboring slaves to pick leaves. Also they can afford to be lazy in their own country and that is their decision. None other has to split their remaining hair on that.

@ saradiel1If the Sri Lankanese were that proud a set of people, then how come they parted with the land for British tea planters?

I just cant understand I am wasting my time to answer such a stupid question.

U do realize that the Brits were ILLEGALLY and FORCIBLY ruling SL. Displacing people was not that difficult. After 1848 uprising, Sinhala youth in some kandy villages above the age of 15 were massacred whether they were connected to the uprising or not. Whole set of villages were displaced. They ruled the Kandy with iron rule. That is how they were made to part with their land.
And yes they are a proud ppl who defended their sovereignty for 2500+ years and gave a good thrashing to the colonial powers. They have earned the right to be PROUD.

It is amazing how a person blaming Lankans for racism practice such disgusting level of racism in a forum. There is a saying people who live in window houses shouldn't undress in open.

 

[saradiel1]

Which man?

An old hag

 

[Tolaha]

@saradiel1: Tamils in SL cannot be compared with Malays in SG, as easily as you suggest. Chinese/Indians/etc were being discriminated in Malaysia and it is the only country that I'm aware of, that asked a portion of its territory to secede (that is SG). There was no such threat for Sinhalese in India/TN for the SL government to try to reduce Tamilian power. The actions of the Sinhalese in SL are more similar to that of Malays in Malaysia. That is, get a whole country to oneself but still worried about the minorities being too powerful.

Having said, thanks for your posts, you do bring out far better arguments for Sinhalese than the ones I had heard so far.

Added later: Just noticed that your arguments have gone downhill already. :dafuq:

 

[saradiel1]

If you think my comment was not worth a good answer even in that case in your place I would have not bet my ass like you did. Go back and read your comment, that was seriously gay.

Instead of asking me to re read, why dont u read what I typed. I was talking abt Ray.......tube light?

 

[saradiel1]

@saradiel1

May I remind you that this forum is not a mobile or a cell phone that you have to used SMS syntax.

Write in full is the rule out here.

i write full sentences, it is words like 'you' that I replace with u. I'll stop that. Between tackle the point instead of how it is represented.

 

[saradiel1]

War Tourism in Sri Lanka | International Political Forum

Since the end of its civil war in 2009, Sri Lanka has been criticised for its handling of thousands of Tamils displaced during the conflict and has faced a barrage of war crimes accusations. Now the government has laid out plans for promoting tourism at the expense of those who suffered most.

Deep in the jungle of the northern Mullaitivu district of Northern Sri Lanka, is the former LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) operations hub, now a ghost town. Visitors are offered a guided tour of the hub which comprises of a 3 story underground bunker, a firing range, a film hall, a semi-underground garage and a funeral parlour for fallen comrades. The package also includes a tour of the shipyard where the tigers held the decaying remains of a Jordanian cargo ship, Farah III.

Although these guides provide a rare glance into the inner workings of the LTTE, the majority of tourists are missing the "bigger picture". What is glaringly absent are the details of the suffering faced by the Tamils who lived in fear of the LTTE and the aftermath of 30 years of civil war that has destroyed the social and economic infrastructure of the region. Instead the visitors, mainly Sinhalese seem intent on seeing war relics rather than truly comprehend the devastation that took place here.

""¦most signs are in Sinhala only, little English and no Tamil. To many this seems to say to the Tamils, this isn't really your country. One of the damaging attitudes that they would say triggered the war decades ago." The BBC writes.

Since the end of the war, the military has taken an active role in the economy of the North and East by posting various checkpoints to control transportation, annexing civilian land and establishing High Security Zone restrictions. Schools have been shut down too, endangering children's education. Furthermore, fishing restrictions have been placed on fishermen. It has been reported that over 200 families have been displaced in several towns in Mannar district.

Beaches in Trincomalee and Batticola are being commandeered by the government who are forcing the people off the land and denying them access to the beaches, seriously jeopardizing their futures in order to build resorts, villas and hotels. It seems that in its rush to improve tourist numbers, it has begun appropriating Tamil areas and landmarks.

The Mannar peninsula, which consists of MannarTown, and several smaller townships, including Talaimannar and Pesalai, were LTTE strongholds and caught in the middle of the civil war for at least three decades. The Navy runs a lucrative boat service for tourists to Mannar, preventing the Local Government officials or local businessmen from engaging in such activities.

There has also been active promotion of Sri Lanka at various international travel fairs. The Sri Lanka Tourism Promotion Bureau (SLTPB) under the guidance of the Ministry of Economic Development recently participated in an international travel fair in Chengdu, Western China. These have been part of the government's efforts to promote Sri Lanka's tourism industry. The Tourism Board plans to take part in another 6 international travel fairs in China alone. Along with the respective Sri Lankan embassies, the SLTPB has held successful tourism campaigns in India, Russia and Kazakhstan.

On 5th September 2011, the Ministry of Economic Development launched the Tourism Development Strategy which will last from 2011 to 2016. The objective of the new strategy is to achieve a target number of 2.5 million tourists by 2016. The World Bank got behind Sri Lanka in its initiative to revamp its image to bolster tourist numbers. However, there are no clear or definite figures of how of this money has been allocated towards building hotels and towards housing the displaced.

This increased tourism has led to repercussions for the environment and this in turn affects the locals and their livelihoods. The issue of poor environmental management, referring to the establishment of camp sites within the country's nature reserves has been raised despite this not being permitted under the Flora & Fauna Act. Furthermore the Sri Lankan government has accused NGOs of attempting to limit Sri Lanka's growth, under the façade of concerns over developments in the name of tourism. There is serious failure to address the plight of the locals or even acknowledge the suffering of the thousands who still remain displaced or are missing.

Many have criticized the Sri Lankan government of portioning significant amounts of investment and money from tourism to its defence budget. Sri Lanka continues to expand its already vast military in order to maintain order and control over Tamil territories. Despite accusations by the international community of war crimes, this has not deterred tourists from the West and India from making Sri Lanka their holiday destination.

This article was written by Gaanashree Wood and was originally published on World Outline.

the point and the relevance of the article to this discussion?

 

[hit&run]

the point and the relevance of the article to this discussion?

Only an extremist regime having a leader in question (by this thread) can be that insenstive.

 

[saradiel1]

Remembering wars is good things but wars are remembered by building war memorials and here we are talking about civil war fought against natives and such tourism is used to humiliate Tamils to boost ego of Shinhalas.

SL is the country of SLns. There are nt natives among SLns. Dont talk abt things u have no idea about. And this discussion wont help the discussion here, but instead distract it.

 

[saradiel1]

In a way, it is correct.

However, there is the danger of reigniting sectarian passions that can have dangerous ramifications.

If you notice the Sri Lankese posters when they speak of the Tamils, you can perceive their distaste for the Sri Lankanese Tamil.
Visiting areas where the so called 'war' was fought will add to the embitterment on both sides.

Yet, from the historian's point of view, the visit would be worth its weight in gold!

Let me know of such posters, I havent seen such here.

Also if you're worried about the "reigniting sectarian passions", then stop the people in TN from doing that and the very racism displayed by TNs towards Sinhalese (like in this forum).

 

[hit&run]

SL is the country of SLns. There are nt natives among SLns. Dont talk abt things u have no idea about. And this discussion wont help the discussion here, but instead distract it.

I was expecting this answer from you.. Tamils are as natives as any loud mouth Sinhalal is to Sri Lanka. What made you think that I do not know on what I am talking about. Trust me the discussion is on the right track and is going to bring the racist bigot of you out. We have done this before with another Sinhala.