dagblog - Comments for "History Lesson"

The Economist calls Sri Lanka

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 21 May 2009 23:06:05 +0000

In reply to Genghis, Sri Lanka was the

The Economist calls Sri Lanka a "flawed democracy," but I agree that it is not a dictatorship. For a list of human rights violations by the government, just go to Amnesty International.

The laws were not "bordering" discrimination. The Sinhala Only Act forced Tamils out of the civil service, which is now overwhelming Sinhalese. Quotas blocked Tamils from attending university. And the attempt to make Buddhism the official religion was inflammatory. Discriminatory laws were on the books through the 70's. I agree that the laws are no longer discriminatory, however.

In general, I actually agree with you more than I disagree. The Tigers are despicable, among the worst terrorist organizations in the world. I don't think that Tamils should have independence. Separatism, in my view, always has nationalism at its core, and I despise nationalism. Sri Lanka has made many gestures towards compromise with the Tamils; so separation is not the only option. But that doesn't mean that the Sri Lanka government shouldn't be criticized.

I also agree that the media bends over backwards to blame both sides, when the Tigers have been much worse, but whatever it's failings, the MSM is still more trustworthy than propaganda from the LTTE or the Sri Lankan government and their ardent supporters.

Genghis, Sri Lanka was the

Anonymous — Thu, 21 May 2009 20:39:06 +0000

In reply to Thanks for the religious

Genghis,

Sri Lanka was the first country in the world to have a woman prime minister, it has since had 3 women as leaders of the country. The literacy rate is over 90%, meaning the majority can read and write. It is not the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The people -21 million- voted for this current government, it is a democracy. Not a dictatorship.

I would like you to do a little more fact checking whilst your at it.

Try and locate on discriminatory or repressive piece of legislature, policy or law that would suggest Tamils were 'oppressed' or 'repressed' by the government.

It's true in order to fight the Tigers and defend its cities from Tiger suicide bombers it took measure which could be considered racial profiling. The supreme court of Sri Lanka would intervene if anyone's fundamental rights were being breached, and it has , many times in the past.

The only laws bordering discrimination existed when the blacks were still at the back of the bus in the US in the 50's.

There is a reason the FBI considers the Tigers more dangerous than Al Qaeda, that is because the Tigers will put the Nazis to shame when it comes to propaganda. In order to be considered 'freedom fighters' it had to essentially create the impression of a divided Sri Lanka. Which is what it did for 20 years.

Everything you read in the mainstream media needs to be scrutinised. I know this very well because when war hit close to home, I could tell what was fact and what was not. For many people the wars are always fought in distant lands which they know nothing of. I am Sri Lankan Tamil living in Canada.

Any chance we can get

DF — Thu, 21 May 2009 18:12:06 +0000

In reply to Thanks for the religious

Any chance we can get Christopher Plummer for that?

If the Tamil separatists

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 21 May 2009 17:56:13 +0000

In reply to Read this: 'Peaceful

If the Tamil separatists exchange suicide for disrupting traffic in Canada, then I consider that to be a major improvement. Next time I have something to protest, look for me on a highway in Toronto as well.

Thanks for the religious

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 21 May 2009 17:51:40 +0000

In reply to Gosh..please brush on your

Thanks for the religious clarification. I had meant to factcheck that and forgot. It is now corrected. I have no disagreement with your criticism of the Tigers, but the Sri Lanka leaders are no saints either, and the Tamil minority have been repressed. That does not justify the Tigers' tactics, but your characterization makes it sound like a Mel Gibson movie already with the Tamils cast as villains.

Wait, so you're saying that

Larry Jankens — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:43:43 +0000

In reply to Gosh..please brush on your

Wait, so you're saying that there won't be a Mel Gibson movie about this? I'm no longer interested.

Read this: 'Peaceful

Robert — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:05:44 +0000

In reply to Gosh..please brush on your

Read this:

'Peaceful protests' now the weapon of choice for terrorist

Gosh..please brush on your

Anonymous — Thu, 21 May 2009 14:03:02 +0000

In reply to History Lesson

Gosh..please brush on your history..

Sri Lanka is a Buddhist country. Tamil Tigers are predominantly Hindu. They ethnically cleansed the north and east of Sri Lanka of Muslims and Buddhist to create a state which is purely Tamil only. A Racist state by all means.

In the 90's the Tigers shipped out their leaders and extended family of their leaders to countries like the UK. Your immigration system was weak and exploited by the Tigers. Now as the Tamil tigers are facing defeat, they protest a false genocide so your British press will jump on their 'noble humanitarian mission' and prevent Sri Lanka from essentially destroying a Terrorist organisation which the FBI claims is more dangerous than Al Qaeda.

http://www.fbi.gov/page2/jan08/tamil_tigers011008.html

"The separatists, led by Velupillai Prabhakaran, had been fighting a 26-year civil war to establish independence from the Hindu Sri Lankan majority for the Muslim Tamil minority."