Tuesday, August 07, 2007

to hrw and brad adams; brown skin does not mean barbarian murderers

(this highly misleading cover photo of hrw report is amply indicative of the sloppy standards of its writers and content.)

if you want to convict sri lankans and their armed forces of murder, do a proper investigation and come up with evidence. human rights watch's latest report is, starting from the misleading photo in the cover, short on real evidence and long on unsubstantiated allegations. same allegations were repeated today to media by its director brad adams.

it seems that to mr adams and hrw any barbaric allegation against a brown skinned person is equivalent to a conviction. they seem to think that unlike with white skinned 'civilized' beings brown skinned people are guilty until proven innocent. on that premise they convict large number of sri lankans of horrendous crimes based on ...nothing.

for instance not a single credible evidence for armed forces involvement in abductions is in the report. anonymous allegations are the best they can do. in addition to that, mere newspaper reports referring to more anonymous allegations, opposition mudslinging, snippets from terrorist propaganda, and pity inducing photos; that is all. it seems that is enough to convict thousands in sri lankans armed force of atrocities. read it(pdf 2.13mb). it is an example of racist prejudices of self appointed "do gooders" like brad adams (a hypocritical human leftover from 'missionary' past)

brown skinned man with gun = murderer
it seems these racist cannot stand the sight of brown skinned people successfully fighting to protect their basic human rights against terrorists, as sri lankan armed forces are doing. on the other hand they did nothing to counter the violation of our human rights by terrorists when we did not fight

and no doubt local ngo peaceniks like paikiasothy saravanamuttu, jehan perera, jayadeva uyangoda, sunila abeysekera, sunanda deshapriya, and their ilk (and their underlings like sanjana hattotuwa the censor) who make their living (literally see the donors to their ngos) by licking white assholes will find the report sweet to their tongues. to them as long as their masters excrete the disgusting rewards, sri lankans' right to justice and proper procedure has never been important. that is why they have long parroted the ltte terrorist propaganda

sri lankans should stand up and fight against violation of their basic human rights by such foreign racists and their local ass lickers, in the same way as they are presently fighting against violation of their rights by ltte terrorists.

ps
i believe that we should specifically expose and name anyone who is connected to such racist reports in the same way we expose journalists doing similar things (1,2,3,). this may explain one reason why we should do that. people responsible for this sloppy racist report; brad adams, charu lata hogg, fred abraham, james ross, ian gorvin, andrea cottom, fitzroy hepkins, andrea holley, grace choi.

29 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good one. Where have you been?

Anonymous said...

Here comes Mr. Lanka Libertarian the Sinhala Racist who covers the GOSL ass and licks it.

Man, you are one of the most brain washed bloggers around.

indi said...

Do you have any factual objections to the report, or do you just want to personally attack these people as racist?

Knee-jerk xenophobia and demonization of foreigners is a pretty lazy argument.

Jack Point said...

eh? What's wrong with the cover photo?

sittingnut said...

anon at 8/07/2007 5:22 am
thanks
was busy as usual . was in sl for the most part :-)

anon at 8/07/2007 8:28 am
sinhala racist ? based on what ? quote a single racist statement i have said anywhere. unlike, say indi in his blog, i have never done that :-)
as i say quote

indi
point is there isn't any facts in the the report to justify its claims
for instance point out any solid evidence in the report that justifies its claim that sl armed forces were involved in abductions.cite the page if you can :-) do please

if ppl convict without evidence that is sloppy and violates basic rules of justice .ever heard of hrw convicting whole white skinned armies of mass murder without evidence ?

the underlying premise in this report as i said in the post here is that a brown skinned man with a gun is a murderer, even unsubstantiated allegations are enough to convict him and should be considered as guilty until proved innocent. that kind of double standard is racist

if you want to say otherwise point out the any solid evidence and cite the page

(though given indi's laziness with regard to facts i seriously doubt he has the patience or the capability to read the report so anyone else is free to do that as well )

jack point
ha ha
well that is subjective thing . if you think that photo does not unfairly treat the police standing there say so. they have done nothing to hurt that woman.

indi said...

So, you respond to allegations of personal attacks with ... personal attacks. It has its own logic I guess.

I've looked through the report. Everything is cited and there are numerous eye-witness accounts and interviews. It's certainly a mostly qualitative document, but it certainly has more credibility than your angry screeds against bogeyman 'racist foreigners'

sittingnut said...

indi:
numerous eye witness accounts and interviews, where ? as i said please cite the pages where they give credible evidence for armed forces involvement in abductions. :-) why can't you do that? why can't you just write the numbers (surely you know how to write numbers?)

you assert it is credible but cannot even give the page even after a specific request . what does that make you? a lazy ass licker who accepts without questioning ( and perhaps even without reading)? i certainly have nothing but contempt for ppl who do that and i will express it. best way to counter that and prove me wrong is to come up with the evidence. :-)

i gave my reasons why i consider the report's authors are racists; authors are convicting thousands in sl armed forces without a shred of evidence, allegations seems to be enough to convict them, and they are considered guilty until proved innocent. in other words authors seem to be writing under the premise that a brown skinned man with a gun is barbarian murderer; and that basic standards of justice and proper procedure do not apply to them. that is racist.

i ask again please cite the pages where they give credible evidence against sl armed forces that justify their judgments so clearly set out in the first page. (as i said this challenge is open to anyone who has actually read the report. pl cite page where there is credible evidence for armed forces involvement in the abductions ).

as for personnel attacks, everything i have said about you can be backed up.if you disagree with anything please point it out so that i can quote the facts as to why i said that :-)

this is a free country and unlike your friends at groundviews blog nobody is going to censor you in this blog. so feel free to cite the evidence. in the same way if you can't and you seem to accept racists' allegations without questioning or evidence, others ( including myself ) are free to express their contempt.for you :-)

indi said...

So, you're point is that HRW is racist against brown people. Fine. From that assumption, it follows that these white people don't like 'brown' people.

However, this report is talking about rights of Tamils and Muslims who are... wait for it ... brown.

Where is the racism here, exactly? If you play the race card too much people might actually call your bluff.

sittingnut said...

indi:
so i take it you accept the contention that report contain no credible evidence for the involvement of armed forces for the abductions? bc in spite of repeated requests and in spite of your own claims of having read the report you still cannot cite the pages where these are contained.

then you bring out one of the most silly arguments i have ever seen .

human rights should be universal, not limited to any race - brown,muslin tamil or sinhalese. as far as i see they are claiming to talk about violation of rights of all sri lankans not limiting themselves to particular races as you seem to think. most sri lankans are brown skinned

anyway what betrays their racist instinct is not what they claim to do, it is their callous application of different standard of justice to brown skinned sri lankans (as i said in the post) even while talking about the rights violations here. anyone can claim they are talking about rights violations but it is what they do that will prove it .even prabahakaran says he is fighting for tamil rights, and love tamils, but that does not prove he is doing that, he is actually violating them on mass scale.

you as always only look at what they claim to do, and not at what they actually do . authors here clearly apply a different guilty-until-proven-innocent, brown-man-with-gun-is-a-murderer standard of justice to sri lankans. that is racist.

as i say it is still open for you to cite the pages where they provide the credible evidence for their claims in the report and prove me wrong :-) facts are always better than silly half ( or not even half) baked silly arguments like the one in your last comment.


unlike you or the authors of this report, i never ask ppl to believe me bc i say so, i point out what ppl have actually done with evidence; in this case application of different standard of justice by the authors to sri lankans. because of that in order prove me wrong it is not enough to attack me as you are doing, you have to prove that authors have not done the racist acts described. so pl cite the pages with evidence

manbag said...

Oi both the antagonists and protagonists in this ongoing civil war belong to the same asiatic race. The Jaffna tamils LTTE or otherwise may I remind you are not purple or white. Your insinuation that this is racism is most flawed and more humourous than the gravitous role your blog proports to project. Calling it genocide would be more honest ! - How about making a scanned pdf of the document available on your blog so we can objectivly check your outspoken comments ?

Anonymous said...

After reading your post and comments I downloaded the report and read specific sections using the table of contents. Didn't read the whole thing. Page 50 - 54 has what you have asked for. It's all over the rest of the report as well.

The report has implicated the LTTE in it as well.

So I don't know what you're all worked up about.

Link for report: http://hrw.org/reports/2007/srilanka0807/srilanka0807web.pdf

sittingnut said...

manbag:
"both the antagonists and protagonists in this ongoing civil war belong to the same asiatic race."
so does that make it correct for hrw ppl to apply different standards of justice to sri lankans ? do tell.

you are right that ltte members are not white ( did i say so ? read the post first ). again i ask does color of ltte members make it right that different standard of justice is applied to sri lankans by hrw?

standards of justice and human rights are supposed to be universal. if someone applies a different standard of justice to sri lankan bc they are sri lankans they are racist . that exactly what authors of this report do .

fact that you did not read the post or the report and have no idea what you are talking about is even more obvious from the fact that you missed link to the pdf and your request to have it scanned and posted here.
you can download it and read,nobody is preventing you. then you are free to be humarous, otherwise we too have to laugh at your ignorance :-D

anon 8/10/2007 1:18 pm:
you seem to have missed point as well ( your superficial reading can be gaged by the fact that you too seem to have missed link to full pdf ( with photos) included in the above post, and felt the need to repost link)

i asked that readers( since indi is obviously incapable )to cite pages where there are credible evidence for military involvement in abductions etc.? so that hrw can be cleared of racist injustice to sl military

you point to pages 50 - 54 . let us go through them

1/ page 50...
"the military “disappeared” two men, ages 25 and 23, in front of their wives on December 8, 2006".
i read it through several times and all i can find is anonymous allegations from alleged relatives of those men. even there in both cases men were initially cleared by the miliatary after a large scale search opertaion . and only allegedly abducted immediately after that. does that make sense to you ? do explain
don't you find anything strange in the number plates of the vehicles? hrw does not find them strange but place a lot of emphasize on them.may they should have asked the military as to whether there were any such strangely numbered vehicles in military service ? strange indeed that they did not.
in fact there is no indication that authors even inquired from military whether there is any truth in this. all they say is that when others inquired military denied there was any such incident involving them .no name of military officers who denied this are given either.
you find all that credible and enough to convict whole camps of abductions? well you are free to deny basic human rights to military if you so prefer.

2/page 52
then there is the father jim brown's case . now he and companion( also missing) was allegedly last seen at a navy check point . who saw him there? may i know? what exactly did witnesss(?) see? was he seen passing through the check point ? if so why is navy suspected ? i don't see any reason to suspect navy from the details given. pl explain why you even think that there is a case against the navy bc rev father went through a check point. pl do.

3/page 53
"the wife of a 21-year-old Tamil man said she saw the police take her husband on August 23, 2006."
again anonymous testimony. he was applying for a visa. it is known fact that ppl falsely claim to have been abducted in order to claim asylum later, as was found in investigations of such cases by human rights commission. why was this not even considered? do you know?
and then there is this strange statement "two men in civilian clothes subsequently came to the lodge and told the wife that her husband would be released in one week," ?!!
you find such statements acceptable and credible testimony ? as i said if you prefer you can trample on basic rights of the sri lankan military

4/page 54
"Professor Sivasubramaniam Raveendranath, 56, vice chancellor at Eastern University"
here it doesn't even give even anonymous testimony as to why hrw think military is involved .

that is all ? if you find more do post and do go in to details as to why you find those one sided unverifiable anonymous testimonies credible? pl do :-)
--

"The report has implicated the LTTE in it as well."
are you saying that just bc it finds fault with ltte (is that news to you?) they are allowed to trample on basic standard of justice, which all ppl have a right to, including brown skinned sri lankans? do give clear answer

you seems have very erroneous ideas about what is meant by justice or human rights.

Anonymous said...

Pardon me for not noticing your tiny link. (you have so many of them in your posts) Hence the link was given again. My apologies.

What do you consider as credible evidence?

Is it a written statement that is recorded with the police, which I'm sure is there when the guilty party are the forces and the police!! :-)

sittingnut said...

anon
i am sure you have an excuse for missing the size of the file etc also in the post.
facts is you did not read it carefully hence your superficiality.same was apparent from your comment about ltte being implicated.
-
i pointed out problems with so called evidence in the pages you cited, going in o details .i see that you avoid answering the very specific questions i raised. why do you run away like that :-)

what i consider credible? evidence that can be verified. can you verify anon evidence or hearsay ? do answer.

is that kind of evidence enough to convict ppl of crimes to you, as it seems to be for racist authors of this report? do you consider that justice ? i answered your questions, do answer mine. don't run away like a slave doing his racist masters' dirty work . :-)

if you can, give me details as to where i or anyone else can confirm the so called evidence in the report ( which the authors should have done in the first place )to make them credible. and do answer the specific questions i raised as well. please do. :-)

if some other report was published with same kind of anon evidence saying that same abductions were done by ltte, or you yourself( pr your master) will you believe that ? will you believe anything said to you without questioning? it seems you do. :-) if you don't, do explain with details, how you differentiate same sort of unverifiable evidence from each other? that will be entertaining to read i am sure :-).(maybe bc your master tells you which to believe perhaps :-) )
-

what i want ( along with most ppl in general ), is that same standards of justice be applied to all people, if you don't want that and approve author's racist double standard of justice when it comes to sri lankans, that is your choice .
there are people who become slaves of their own free choice. if you a sri lankan and freely accept the double standard in that report, you seem to be one.

Anonymous said...

Do you think these people (who gave evidence) want to dissapear much like their relative or loved ones? If their names, addresses etc are published in reports like this what do you think will happen to their lives? Aren't they at risk of being harmed?

The forces and the police are the ones responsible for law and order in the country. If someone else has commited a crime they will investigate. But if the criminals are their own (forces and police or parties supported by them), what makes you think they will investigate? Where do the victims of such a crime go to? Who can they talk to about what has happened to them?

They are confined to being anonymous. Because speaking out will only get them into trouble.

I suppose even if they had published their names it wouldn't have sufficed for you. You probably would have wanted documentary proof from the Department of Registration of Persons as to whether such a person exists. So narrow is your scope of thinking.

It's clear that you understand little of the fear in which families that live in both LTTE and govt controlled areas and even some living in Colombo live in.

I personally know people who have faced such situations. Else I wouldn't have commented on this post in this way. And I care about these people so I'm not going to write their names for you on your self proclaimed libertarian blog.

I think the HRW has treated the SL government on par with other sovereign states in the world. True, they are strangely silent about what America and co. are doing to people in Afghanistan and Iraq. But that's a different story. That does not cover up for the wrongs of our govt.

I would like to know from you how you expect these anonymous people to give out their names without running the risk of harm coming to them.

As the keepers of the law in this country, condemning the forces and the police is the last thing I would want to do. But if they have commited crimes and they can use their power to supress evidence and investigations, then I'll be last one to stand aside and say that the keepers of our country's defence haven't done anything wrong because the evidence supplied is insufficient to convict them.

And by the way my master is my conscience... I'm not sure whether you possess one.

Razzak said...

The point is that Human Rights Watch has a history of showing grave bias against the democratically elected governments of Asian nations without providing appropriate evidence. And this is something they simply would not dream of doing to similarly elected but more pigment challenged counterparts in other areas of the world.

As sittingnut has pointed out, this entire report is a grossly inaccurate and unsubstantiated.

This document simply would not hold up in a court of law in any country that has a half-way decent legal system.

sittingnut said...

anon at 8/12/2007 9:25 am
you still refuse to answer basic questions i raised about different standards of justice as well as specific questions regarding the evidence in the pages you cited. why run away?:-)

"Do you think these people (who gave evidence) want to dissapear much like their relative or loved ones? If their names, addresses etc are published in reports like this what do you think will happen to their lives? ...They are confined to being anonymous. Because speaking out will only get them into trouble."

:-) what kind silly circular argument is that ? alleged abductions based on alleged evidence that cannot be verified bc of alleged speculative abductions? lol .
i ask again is that enough to convict ppl of murder? you run away from the question .

if evidence is not allowed to be revealed to scrutiny in this report then report had no business convicting ppl either. that is why i said this report falls short of universally applicable standard of justice. and as i said you seem to have a muddled idea about human rights and justice.

"I suppose even if they had published their names it wouldn't have sufficed for you. You probably would have wanted documentary proof from the Department of Registration of Persons as to whether such a person exists. So narrow is your scope of thinking."
from above statements it is clear that you yourself understand the weakness of your previous argument. so you accuse me of things i have never said. typical. when you have run out of valid arguments, you attack ghosts .
i was very specific about the non verifiability of evidence you cited . you on the other hand is arguing with imaginary arguments i never made.

"It's clear that you understand little of the fear in which families that live in both LTTE and govt controlled areas and even some living in Colombo live in."
more speculations about me in order run way from your untenable position :-) whether there is fear or not is not the question discussed here. you can comment on that ( and learn what i believe about that) in appropriate threads in the blog. (btw you have no special qualification or right to speak about that as you seem to imply you have , that i also don't have )

here the question is whether hrw was, as i said, racist, when it applied different standard of justice to sri lankans. if they do not have verifiable evidence (you have more or less admitted there aren't) they had no business convicting ppl . double standards to sri lankans = racist .

"I personally know people who have faced such situations. Else I wouldn't have commented on this post in this way. And I care about these people so I'm not going to write their names for you on your self proclaimed libertarian blog."
one thing i have learned here is that ppl who live in delusions and believe in conspiracy theories alway resort to unverifiable personal anecdotes when they are asked to produce evidence.
that may do for delusional individuals like you, but justice requires more. if you have any idea about what is meant by justice you will understand that . but i doubt you do

"But if they have commited crimes and they can use their power to supress evidence and investigations, then I'll be last one to stand aside and say that the keepers of our country's defence haven't done anything wrong because the evidence supplied is insufficient to convict them."
you have no credible evidence whatsoever but you will convict innocent ppl. if you do that you will be committing a crime comparable to the one you are accusing others committing . ppl who convict innocent ppl are criminals so you have basically admitted to be one.

contemptible willing criminals like you don't have a right to judge others, thankfully

"And by the way my master is my conscience... I'm not sure whether you possess one."
a contemptible individual like you who is willing to violate basic human rights and who prejudges innocent ppl without a shred of evidence, do not have a conscience to speak of . so it is no surprise that you cannot judge whether i have one either.

razzak:
tanks for the comment.
appreciate it :-)

Anonymous said...

Response to SCOPP Secretary General


Dear Mr. Wijesinha,

I write with reference to your recent letter to Mr Samarasinghe, Minister for Disaster Management and Human Rights. At the risk of wasting my time in dealing with someone whose insidious agenda cannot be changed by facts or reason, let me hope that you are in fact concerned with the wellbeing of all citizens of Sri Lanka rather than selective manipulation of truth.

I would like to remind you that ACF did not shoot any of its employees. The responsibility for their deaths lie solely at those pulling the triggers and, more importantly, those under whose command the perpetrators of this crime acted.

In your letter, you demand answers to, inter alia:

“why as many as 17 were sent in when, according to my information from another NGO worker, this was unprecedented”

The use of unsubstantiated information like this, relying on information for one single anonymous worker from an NGO is, as previously pointed out by Sri Lankan authorities, yourself included, unacceptable, and only proves that your agenda is to tarnish ACF . It would be beneficial to your credibility if you in the future refrained from using uncorroborated data when making frivolous accusations. It would be even better if you totally refrained from making frivolous accusations.

You also query:

“why they were not withdrawn (as for instance ICRC workers were) when, as reported by the University Teachers for Human Rights, some of them begged to be rescued”

and

“why they were advised to stay in their headquarters despite repeated efforts by government officials and religious leaders to get them to move to a safer location”

My assumption is that they were not withdrawn for two reasons – one: there was no safe way to extract them from the situation as the armed forces of the Government of Sri Lanka was blocking any attempts to reach them, and two: that no right-thinking individual could have imagined that such an unprecedented and brutal act of savagery could take place in a civilized and democratic country.

“why ACF representatives are quoted (by the New York Times) as claiming that the government prevented them from going in to the rescue, when the ACF official position has been that indeed they had decided the workers would be safe if they stayed in their compound wearing ACF t-shirts”

As the armed forces of Sri Lanka prevented ACF from evacuating these workers in the manner deemed safe, the second best option at the time was to rely on the perceived respect for International Humanitarian Law and the unwillingness to commit war crimes among the combatants. ACF, as other NGOs operating in Sri Lanka, have now no doubt learnt their lesson and it is unlikely that any NGO in Sri Lanka will rely on this often repeated but seldom manifested respect in the future.

“why ACF, contrary to the request of the Sri Lankan ambassador in Paris, invited the former Head of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission, ”

Again an assumption from my part, but possibly ACF felt that the Sri Lankan Ambassadors request amounted to external interference in the internal affairs of ACF? In these days, as you might be aware, one has to be careful about ones sovereignty.

“why despite the perceived urgency, ACF failed to reach the compound as soon as possible, so that it was left to another agency to discover the bodies”

I think it would be best to ask the armed forces of the government of Sri Lanka this, as they hindered access to the site for all agencies (SLMM, ACF, ICRC) except for the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies.

“why the compensation paid to the families of such workers is nugatory, given the danger to which ACF, by its irresponsibility, had exposed them, and from which it had failed to take appropriate action to rescue them as outlined above.”

I understand that the compensation paid is many, many times the compensation paid by the perpetrators of this war crime, and certainly less than the Government of Sri Lanka has paid for the failure to protect its’ citizens.

You also state: “There is no doubt that such negligence, if addressed in a European Court of Law, would have resulted in the award of massive damages to the grieved families, rather than the puny amounts that I gather from NGO sources have been awarded.”

May I add to this statement that there is no doubt that an incident such as this, if addressed by the law enforcement authorities in a civilized society, would not have remained unsolved for over a year, and that the perpetrators and those responsible for controlling them would have been incarcerated by now.

Finally, you state: “I believe the Sri Lankan government has an obligation to the victims and their families and we should insist on their behalf that ACF follow international norms in this regard.”

Sir, I agree. The Sri Lankan government had an obligation to the victims and it failed them the first time by letting undisciplined thugs murder these men and women. It failed them a second time by ensuring that the investigation into their deaths was made in a most ineffective way. You do not seem to take seriously these obligations. Your lapse in this regard only substantiates my suspicion that you began this exercise with a particular agenda, which is sadly that of those in Sri Lanka that are not interested in justice.

Interventions such as your only assist those who are trying to blacken the country’s name in the commercial world while also calling for UN monitoring. Unfortunately this campaign is pushed also by various foreign former convenience store managers and others who have found in Sri Lanka employment at a level they could not dream of in their own countries.

Finally, I would like to draw your attention on the following statement attributed to you:

“What they should also be interested in is the manner in which the Sri Lankan armed forces conducted themselves throughout the operation in the east. There were hardly any civilians [sic] casualties, as is borne out by the reports of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission.”

It is saddening that a senior official of the Government of Sri Lanka considers that in excess of 100 innocent civilians dying as ‘hardly any civilian casualties’, but I guess it is rather telling of the care You have for your fellow citizens.

Thank you.

Anonymous said...

Sittingnut, you are truly a nut.

Of course you won't find sourced testimonies with names and all in a public report. In Sri Lanka, if you testify against the armed forces, you end up dead or at least severely intimidated and harassed.

And this whole racist guilty until proven innocent bullshit that you go on about - how about the government of Sri Lanka ensuring proper investigations - without intimidating witnesses - into these allegations? Oh, fotget it, that won't happen.

If Sri Lanka was a civilised democracy as they keep claiming then your forces wouldn't be free to rape, loot and murder with impunity. If Sri Lanka wasn't ruled by the military (stop protesting - which big decision recently have the ministry of Defence NOT been consulted on) then maybe those foreigners would stop accusing Sri Lanka of being a failed state.

If you want to look decent, you have to act decent.

Anonymous said...

I'm the first 'anonymous' who you have been arguing with. (Previous 2 comments aren't mine).

You claimed that I haven't answered your question on double standards. But I have. I have said that the HRW has indeed upheld double standards when it comes to issues involving more developed nations. This does not however justify our govt's actions and poor conduct.

You are the one running away from the quetions. I asked you a very simple one. - "How do you expect people who are victimized by the supposed keepers of the law to give evidence out in the open without inviting danger to themselves".

Ok...so as you simply cannot accept that govt forces and police are not involved in these activities - (now pat on the head and put a soother in baby sittingnut's mouth) lets say "IF" (a huge IF for your pleasure) someone was victimized by the govt troops or the police, and they are instructed keep their mouth shut or else... What do you expect these people to do? Do you expect them to come out into the open and tell the world their grievences?

That is the simple question I asked you.

This report is not meant to take the govt to court. It is meant to let the world know what is happening. The legal implications of what the govt has done will come back to them a looooong time from now, when those affected by their actions is no longer under the thumb of the govt.

The govt should correct itself and investigate into any wrong doings by forces if they are innocent of these crimes. However the govt resorts to attacking people who point these things out instead of taking collective measures to put itself right.

And you who resort to calling me a contemptible individual and a delusional one at that should first look inside yourself and howmuch you've supported all the evils of this govt. You've justified their every move, even the evictions. You're by far the more contemptible and delusional one.

You've hidden behind the convenient argument of the lack of evidence when your masters have safely hidden the evidence away. Your arguments simply hide behind the pathetic statement - "where's the evidence".

And if standing up for what is right tantomounts in your pathetic eyes to admitting to be a criminal, so be it.

And by the way what are the other Asian govt's that the HRW has issued biased reports against?

And one last thing. I too think the picture on the HRW report is not accurate. Instead of two policemen it should have been a policeman and a LTTE cadre, with pictures of their two grandmasters Mahinda and Prabha above them.

For conveience of identifying me among the anons you can call me 'Marlon'.

sittingnut said...

anon at 8/14/2007 1:21 pm
errr... this is not scopp why don't you send your unsigned letter with its silly and absurd claims to the right place. typical of you to get confused :-)

anon at 8/14/2007 1:29 pm
are you the same one as the one who posted a wrong letter here. utterly confused aren't you ? :-)

the way you avoid and run from the main question is not surprising given your untenable position.

question is whether hrw applied different standards of justice to sri lankans due to racist reason when they convicted without credible evidence?

you run so fast as only slaves can.

"Of course you won't find sourced testimonies with names and all in a public report. In Sri Lanka, if you testify against the armed forces, you end up dead or at least severely intimidated and harassed."
really? it seems you have already convicted without evidence .
in any case as pointed out before if the evidence cannot be published in the report, it had no business convicting sri lankans . that is violations of human rights and standard of justice ( but you seems to have no idea what they mean )

"And this whole racist guilty until proven innocent bullshit that you go on about"
so it is bullshit ? basic standard of justice is bullshit to you ?
as i said "contemptible willing criminals like you don't have a right to judge others, thankfully"

"how about the government of Sri Lanka ensuring proper investigations - without intimidating witnesses - into these allegations?"
well they are doing that . if you have proof they are not doing that please come out with them. haven't several criminal gangs who adducted ppl including former military ppl arrested ? and isn't government fighting at great cost the biggest criminal of all the ltte to bring its leaders to justice as gosl is duty bound to do? do you support that ?

"If Sri Lanka was a civilised democracy as they keep claiming then your forces wouldn't be free to rape, loot and murder with impunity."
well they don't. if you have proof of all that beyond terrorist propaganda do come out with them. otherwise you are just another terrorist apologist slandering troops .

"If Sri Lanka wasn't ruled by the military (stop protesting ..."
at last the mask comes out !
where do you think you are? that you think you can suppress dissenting opinion and protests ? in your terrorist master big pussy's hole ?
its is precisely bc we are living in a democracy that we can and will protest racists like you. we will continue to expose hrw's and their ilk's racism with names. you may not like it but we will continue to expose violations of human rights and application of different standards of justice.
you too are free to go on with your racist ranting if you want, but we will expose the empty allegations, slander's, terrorist parroting, and racisms therein.
slaves like you cannot stop free ppl


"If you want to look decent, you have to act decent."
too bad that a slave like you you don't know what is meant by decency or human rights or justice, and contine to violate them even in your comments.

sittingnut said...

marlon/anon at 8/14/2007 7:14 pm
there is not much difference between you and the other two anons.

you too have not answered the main question in spite of your claims to have done so.

You claimed that I haven't answered your question on double standards. But I have. I have said that the HRW has indeed upheld double standards when it comes to issues involving more developed nations.
? frankly what are you saying ? be more clear. what do you mean by saying hrw has "upheld" double standards? do you accept that they have not upheld justice ? do you accept they were being racist when fell short of universal standard and violated human rights in convicting sri lankans without evidence? be clear don't hide.

This does not however justify our govt's actions and poor conduct.
again what you are saying is not clear. what are the "govt's actions and poor conduct"? are you criticizing government's economic policy for instance ? :-)


You are the one running away from the quetions. I asked you a very simple one. - "How do you expect people who are victimized by the supposed keepers of the law to give evidence out in the open without inviting danger to themselves".....What do you expect these people to do? Do you expect them to come out into the open and tell the world their grievences?

yes, in the same way they do in all democratic countries. and ppl who judge should do exactly the same thing they do in other countries. any other method (such as convicting ppl without credible evidence ) is racist. that was the whole point . so i have already answered the question.

i or you or anyone else don't have a right to prejudge if you do you are acting like a criminal yourself. but you don't seem to understand that .

This report is not meant to take the govt to court. It is meant to let the world know what is happening. The legal implications of what the govt has done will come back to them a looooong time from now, when those affected by their actions is no longer under the thumb of the govt.
more prejudgments! why i am i not surprised? after all you are defending a report full of racist prejudgments. dream on like a racist if you want. but at least read the report and what it says before writing

The govt should correct itself and investigate into any wrong doings by forces if they are innocent of these crimes.
the universal standard of justice says "innocent till proven guilty" . only racist like you forget that . if you have credible evidence do advance them so that investigations can be carried out . in fact some criminals have been arrested a fact that does not get much mention in the hrw's racist report . you cannot have the cake and eat it at the same time. sorry :-)

However the govt resorts to attacking people who point these things out instead of taking collective measures to put itself right.
racists and ppl who violate basic human rights should be exposed with evidence. and if some ppl do that by reports they should be exposed ( attacked as you say) and their errors pointed out. why do you think they shouldn't be . bc they have white skin? :-)

And you who resort to calling me a contemptible individual and a delusional one at that should first look inside yourself and howmuch you've supported all the evils of this govt. You've justified their every move, even the evictions. You're by far the more contemptible and delusional one.
lol
i called( and call) you a contemptible delusional slave bc you defend racist standard of justice applied by hrw. you have more or less admitted they apply double standards and violated human rights but you still defend them. and rather unoriginally fling the accusations back at me for exposing the racism

i think readers can judge whether exposing racism with evidence ( as i did ) or defending racism and human right violations ( as you did ) is contemptible. what do you think :-)

as for positions i have taken in other threads you can comment on (or even misrepresent) them in those without running from the issue here. i will be happy to defend my positions in appropriate thread. :-)

You've hidden behind the convenient argument of the lack of evidence when your masters have safely hidden the evidence away. Your arguments simply hide behind the pathetic statement - "where's the evidence".
i will never give up standing up to defend universal standard of justice while you live in delusional conspiracy theories.
may be you obey masters and under their orders forget what is meant bu justice. but most ppl don't and they can understand what is meant by justice and why evidence is important.
so yes we will ask again and again from racist criminals like you " where is the evidence ?"

And if standing up for what is right tantomounts in your pathetic eyes to admitting to be a criminal, so be it.
so far only thing you have stood up for here is racism of hrw . and in process you have trampled on human rights and justice of srii lankans .such ppl are criminal even when you don't admit to it :-)

And by the way what are the other Asian govt's that the HRW has issued biased reports against?
why? do you need more than this ? :-)

And one last thing. I too think the picture on the HRW report is not accurate. Instead of two policemen it should have been a policeman and a LTTE cadre, with pictures of their two grandmasters Mahinda and Prabha above them.
lol what can i say! yes do a photoshop and send them so that they can use that in their next racist report. that is the sort of evidence that contemptible criminals like you love in order make their pathetic delusional racist prejudices believable. and only a racist semi terrorist apologist will find nothing wrong in equating or comparing legitimate armed forces of a democracy free of any convictions with a convicted terrorist mass murderer and his henchmen.you have lost your sense of right and wrong to that extent it seems.

--
it is unbelievable but unfortunately true that these kind of pathetic individuals still exist who will go all out to defend their racist white masters and in the process trample basic human rights and standard of justice. all the more reason that we should confront, name, and shame them and their masters wherever possible, as i said in the main post

Anonymous said...

Yours is one heck of an argument - "A democratically elected govt can do whatever they please without being questioned." This is the universal standard??? :) This is what you are implying...

What I said regarding the HRW's double standards - here I have agreed with you on the fact that they stay away from accusing more powerful nations such as US, UK etc and seem to focus their energies on countries like ours. This is bias on their part, but it does not make what they have said regarding our regime false or inaccurate. Our country is served well by such people who look into malpractices of those that rule, regardless of what the bias of their individual bias' may be. Their racist. So what? That does not allow our govt to do as it pleases...


What I meant by the govt's actions and poor conduct... (looks like u need your soother again)... Well ya the govt's economic policy is a disaster? but that's a different issue. I was referring to the incidents pointed out in the HRW report.

First contemptible, then delusional, now a slave, who knows what's next on the list? :) I notice that you insult everyone who criticises your views. Good for you. You better call me something else before you spit out your soother and poop in you diapers again.

You have appreciated Razzack's comment. So I just asked you what the other Asian countries that he was talking about are? Since you appreciated his comment I'm sure you would know.

And hope ur able along with your govt to uncover the conspiracy theory that you think the rest of the world is planning against Sri Lanka :) ... And you call me delusional... :)

Marlon

sittingnut said...

marlon/anon at 8/15/2007 9:04 pm

Yours is one heck of an argument - "A democratically elected govt can do whatever they please without being questioned." This is the universal standard??? :)
lol
can you please explain where you go that quotation ? it seems in your hurry to run away from the main question you imagine all sorts of things . the universal standard of justice, as i have repeatedly pointed out to you, says among other things, that ppl are "innocent until proven guilty". question you are running away from is whether hrw by convicting sri lankan of murder without a shred of evidence thus falling short of universal standard, and applying different standard of justice were being racist?
you may run but i will continue to ask it as long as you don't give an answer .

it does not make what they have said regarding our regime false or inaccurate.

when some thing cannot be backed by evidence it is just an allegation. and when such allegations are presented as convictions for murder as this report does, that trampling human rights and justice. only a criminal like you will defend that.

as i have asked from the first, point out the credible evidence with which they back their slanders.

and you are yet to answer the very specific questions i raised regarding the evidence in the pages you cited perhaps even without reading

Our country is served well by such people who look into malpractices of those that rule, regardless of what the bias of their individual bias' may be. Their racist. So what? That does not allow our govt to do as it pleases....

no country is served by tolerating racists. only a racist will think that . racist should be confronted and exposed .

of course government is not allowed to do as it pleases. it is limited by the law and constitution . if it violates the law prove it with evidence ( as is done in all democracies ), not racist slanders without evidence.

I was referring to the incidents pointed out in the HRW report.

if so, point out credible evidence for them. if you can't your argument is not going anywhere. without evidence hrw report is product of racist ranting

First contemptible, then delusional, now a slave, who knows what's next on the list? :) I notice that you insult everyone who criticises your views. Good for you. You better call me something else before you spit out your soother and poop in you diapers again.

typical

i gave reasons for all my description of you . i will state them again,
you are a criminal bc you don't hesitate to trample on basic rights and deny justice to sri lankans and prejudge them without evidence.

you are delusional bc you seem to believe in conspiracy theories about abductions and suppression of evidence without anything based on reality.

you are a slave bc you defend racist foreigners even though you have not even valid arguments to justify that( a person who has lost all ability to think or act independently is a slave )

i always give my reason when i say such things so if you have a problem about my description about any other person do ask while point ing out where i gave the said description. i would be happy to give my reasons for any description i gave :-)

you are a delusional criminal slave . ppl reading your comments here will know whether the reasons i gave were correct :-)

You have appreciated Razzack's comment. So I just asked you what the other Asian countries that he was talking about are? Since you appreciated his comment I'm sure you would know.

it seems you don't know what is meant by "appreciated",in addition to not knowing what is meant by human rights and justice

i will leave it to him to decide whether to enlighten you if he wants to ( though given your inability to recognize the blatant racism in this report, i will doubt whether he will want to waste his time with a delusional person like you ) :-)

And hope ur able along with your govt to uncover the conspiracy theory that you think the rest of the world is planning against Sri Lanka

lol this takes the cake :-)

which conspiracy theory is that ? is rest of the world planning something ? where did i say that ? and what do you mean "your government" ? :-)

it seems you have made few more typical mistakes due to your prejudices.

rest of the world is not planning any conspiracy. i don't think so and have never said so :-) .

all i said here was that some specific ppl and hrw are being racist when they wrote this report.

i criticize government when it deserves as you would have seen if you read past posts in this blog.

so yes i do call a person like you who makes such silly mistakes without anything in reality to back them, delusional :-)

you cannot run from reality in the blog :-)

Tariq said...

Just a question for you S'nut...

How do you substantiate an eye witness account?

...or let me put it this way..

Hypothetically let's say the SL army abducted a man in front of his family. There's no factual evidence other than eye witness accounts, would this evidence be inadmissable since it is unsubstantiated?

sittingnut said...

tariq:
"How do you substantiate an eye witness account?"
in the same way it is done in any judicial or investigative process. how does investigators and courts substantiate eyewitness accounts of any crime anywhere in the world where standards of justice are maintained? same methods should be applicable here.
and anon accounts at face value with no unbiased cross examination of witnesses clearly do not meet that standard.

to convict ppl based on such accounts just bc accused are sri lankans as is done in this report is racist . don't you think so ?

Anonymous said...

"Innocent until proven guilty". - The universal standard of justice!

Unfortunately in today's context in Sri Lanka, applying this concept would only mean that the violence, abductions, killings and dissappearances would continue for a long time to come. Since those in power can keep the evidence under wraps and ensure that they white wash themselves and sing out their "Innocent until proven guilty" slogan.

It seems like you are one of their singers... Which makes you a worse slave than anyone else (a person who has lost all ability to think or act independently is a slave).

The govt can hide behind the guise of preventing terrorism and do whatever they please and fatten themselves off the war and the death and sufferring of innocent people. Perhaps they throw you some scraps off their table which makes you sing so loud and free.

And regarding the appreciation of Razzack's comment...let me see... Is it that you only appreciate comments that agree with your view point regardless of whether factual evidence is provided or not? It seems so.

Well that makes you an 'A' grade hypocrite doesn't it?:)

Anyway you sing on shamelessly SittingNut... I hope ur blog is around for the next ten years, so that you'll have to eat your words and wallow in your puke.

Marlon

Angel said...

That's a horrible choice for a cover photo... They should be more sensitive as this just invites presumptions that the SLA hurts little old ladies. Thanks for the link to HRW report... going through it and the comments page as well... heavy reading, but I try.

Anonymous said...

See http://lankarising.blogspot.com/ and get enlightened and come out of Ealam myth !!