i was going to write a post denouncing a proposed censorship of military news, and suggest ways to get and publish such news without getting imprisoned when i heard the welcome news that after all there won't be a censorship. so i will keep this short and keep that draft in case some idiot decides to impose a censorship for real.
as i have pointed out before, so far there isn't any state censorship in sri lanka, as anyone who actually examines a sri lankan newsstand will know. all points of view (including that of terrorist pussies) are amply represented. both substantiated and unsubstantiated allegations and mud throwings are allowed free reign. this should continue unhampered. to put this freedom in perspective; you wouldn't find any other country allowing enemy terrorist statements to be published in full in national newspapers and electronic broadcast media. ever seen full speeches of osama bin laden in new york times? or bbc? but we see unedited full speeches and interviews of big pussy and rest of his thugs. that is a good thing imo. sri lankan public can judge intelligently .
when it comes to freedom of expression only real compliant that can be made against the current administration is the temporary blocking of tamilnet. btw it is now freely accessible.
all other incidents usually cited by terrorist parrots like so called free media movement ( in fact nothing more than another pro terrorist peacenik ngo) when examined in detail do not stand up as censorship (not counting censorship imposed by local cultural/pc standards which can be found in every country; we ban fashion tv and on-air sex on radio, united states censor certain words and 'wardrobe malfunctions' etc.) . for instance in the recent case about abc radio network, abc clearly was irresponsible to report a false news story about an ltte attack. and if the remedy of canceling their license was too strong (as i personally think it is), abc has recourse to normal law. let the courts decide what the equitable remedy is in such cases. that is not censorship that is justice.
as for terrorist parroting peaceniks (who btw are not shy to censor any opposing views in places they control) let them cry themselves hoarse in the local media, as they have a perfect right to do, about an imaginary censorship. (however ppl who point out their hypocrisy and subservience to terrorists also have a similar right.)
as i have pointed out before, so far there isn't any state censorship in sri lanka, as anyone who actually examines a sri lankan newsstand will know. all points of view (including that of terrorist pussies) are amply represented. both substantiated and unsubstantiated allegations and mud throwings are allowed free reign. this should continue unhampered. to put this freedom in perspective; you wouldn't find any other country allowing enemy terrorist statements to be published in full in national newspapers and electronic broadcast media. ever seen full speeches of osama bin laden in new york times? or bbc? but we see unedited full speeches and interviews of big pussy and rest of his thugs. that is a good thing imo. sri lankan public can judge intelligently .
when it comes to freedom of expression only real compliant that can be made against the current administration is the temporary blocking of tamilnet. btw it is now freely accessible.
all other incidents usually cited by terrorist parrots like so called free media movement ( in fact nothing more than another pro terrorist peacenik ngo) when examined in detail do not stand up as censorship (not counting censorship imposed by local cultural/pc standards which can be found in every country; we ban fashion tv and on-air sex on radio, united states censor certain words and 'wardrobe malfunctions' etc.) . for instance in the recent case about abc radio network, abc clearly was irresponsible to report a false news story about an ltte attack. and if the remedy of canceling their license was too strong (as i personally think it is), abc has recourse to normal law. let the courts decide what the equitable remedy is in such cases. that is not censorship that is justice.
as for terrorist parroting peaceniks (who btw are not shy to censor any opposing views in places they control) let them cry themselves hoarse in the local media, as they have a perfect right to do, about an imaginary censorship. (however ppl who point out their hypocrisy and subservience to terrorists also have a similar right.)
෴
3 comments:
I have to disagree. I think we should have some kind of censorship on war reporting. Some of the articles I have seen endanger the lives of our Forces and pass intelligence to LTTE. Other countries have restrictions. Even America.
There needs to be responsible journalism.
Then there's the need for the military to be able to enforce confidentiality in its ranks. There is absolutely no reason for the military not to be able to accomplish that, when the private sector employers such as the banks in Sri Lanka have maintained secrecy and customer confidentiality for decades while employing thousands of civillians.
Let's quit the bullshit and call it what it is. Information leaks are management failure. Find the leak, find the responsible, punish them in a way that would establsh the lesson for eternity.
what r u so vorried bout?
SL is a democrashy. We have a constitution and courts and stuff. As you've pointed out in the past, we hve da rul of law. even if they try they will not be able to bring the shenshor ship. 5 shtar democracy is at work.
Post a Comment