Thursday, January 10, 2008

sunanda deshapriya and fmm win ltte contract

after nth assassination attempt on minister douglas devananda failed last month, ltte terrorist pussies were mightily pissed. so they called for fresh bids for the contract to assassinate his character. ltte cannot stand democratic tamil leaders and wants to eliminate them in anyway they can.

only people and organizations that have unquestioningly accepted the racist and anti-democratic ltte claim to be tamils' sole representative were eligible.

accordingly several peacenik ngos submitted bids.

big pussy after going through them decided in favor of sunanda deshapriya's free media movement (fmm). reasons are known only to the murderous megalomaniac but believed to be two fold, according a soon to be roasted underling of the coward.

1/
fmm was dirt cheap as usual. they would do any dirty work for terrorists for almost nothing. after all clueless ifj or reporters without borders pays the fmm bills.

in contrast peaceniks jehan perera and kumar rupasinghe, wanted lots (in cash too). (rupasinghe’s bid included an anti devananda speech by peacenk thug mervin silva, similar to the one he delivered in rupasinghe's peacenik rally last year). unfortunately ltte is rather hard up these days, what with all the crackdowns on terrorist fund raising and the ban on tro. so they did not win, but will attack mr devananda as token goodwill gestures to ltte this time, hoping for better luck next time.

meanwhile even though sunila abeysekera was believed to have put in an even cheaper bid than fmm, pussies were wary of accepting it. they wanted original attacks on devananda not plagiarisms (taken from their own propaganda fronts dbs jeyaraj or tamilnet) that ms abeysekera is known for.

other peaceniks like nimalka fernando, jayadeva uyangoda, jeevan thiagarajaha were also believed to have submitted bids but details are not known.

2/
second reason for fmm's success is the extras included in the bid. sunanda deshapriya promised free (and unchallenged) publicity to attacks against devananda through sanjana hattotuwa's groundviews and vikalpa blogs and support of center for policy alternatives of paikiasothy saravanamuttu. they put in exaggerated visitor numbers for those blogs. a new blog (since gone live) for free media movement was also promised for the purpose.

imo pussies should not have given weight to this. after all sanjana hattotuwa would do anything for terrorists for free, out of sheer love, (as long as he get paid by some naive foreigners who believe is ict4peace or some such otherworldly crap)

anyway fmm won.

rumors ( spread probably by disappointed bidders) to the effect that sunanda deshapriya bribed some prominent pussies known for their "love" of children (prabhakaran after all cannot live without children to do his every bidding ) with some orphan children, to get the contract are probably false. but then we never know.

now you know why there is a sudden increase in media attacks against minister douglas devananda of epdp.



21 comments:

Jaya said...

I don't think some people will appreciate your post but keep it up.

Take care.

Yaaro said...

I have to disagree on one thing here. Douglas Devanenda is NO saint. Just like the LTTE, he is full of shit too. There are several tamils who've suffered at the hands of this man in the 80s and 90s and now recently (being one of the masterminds behind SOME of the abductions).

sittingnut said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
sittingnut said...

great to see two ppl i like with first comments :-)

jaya:
thanks.
as you know i don't care what 'some people' think.
tc

yaaro:
hello! :-)
i forget the exact train of thought or reason , but you came to my mind yesterday before writing this post (no, you have nothing to do with the content! something separate ) and lo and behold here you are!

where have you been?
why not restart your blog? i don't agree with you on some things but liked your blog immensely.
-

point taken "Douglas Devanenda is NO saint".
in fact i don't think there are any saints but i do think there are 'devils'

and before thinking him a devil i would give him the benefit of the doubt.
when you are at the receiving end of multiple assassination attempts ( real ones, not like unsubstantiated allegations made against him ) from ltte terrorists you deserve that at least.

ppl who do certain illegal things during a war will be held accountable ( as long as there are real evidence) eventually some day ( look at argentina or chile ) as long as the legitimate democracy comes out on top in the end. that is not perfect but inevitable and even just. quite the contrary if the other side wins.

so support those who support democracy, freedom, and justice. appeasing terrorists will not do that, defeating terrorists will do that

Ajith said...

Loved this write up sitting nut!

Anonymous said...

Defeating terrorism is what every one of us probably other than terrorists themselves want to achieve. We are different in the way we think that it could be achieved. Some people feel that venom has to be met with venom, while others feel that only compassion is the answer.

Terrorism that comes as a reaction for unresolved grievances could only be defeated by addressing the grievances; that is expressing compassion.

A community that have been deprived of deciding their own destiny and is subjected to harassments instead, as a response, in the hands of outside force is likely to respond violently, especially when all of their attempts to avoid such harassments fail.

You can subjugate a community by force only for a short time, especially in the current world context.

Some people understand it by intelligence others will learn it the hard way.

There is no room for name calling and slandering in the realm of intelligence. However very few can enter that. Others learn things in the outside world in the hardway.

You and I only can opt what is the best way to understand and learn. Choice is with us.

sittingnut said...

"Terrorism that comes as a reaction for unresolved grievances "
no!
that is a fundamental falsehood propagated by terrorist sympathizers and peaceniks and that falsehood underlies anon at 1/14/2008 12:13 pm comment

as i wrote recently on another blog that statement is similar to saying that stealing results from poverty. don't brand all poor people with theft and all tamils ( not to mention other minority communities in sri lanka and elsewhere who have suffered grievances) who have never supported terrorism with terrorism

grievances of various kinds ( not just ethnicity based) do exist and should be addressed but they should not be used to justify terror.

nothing justifies terrorism, grievances, poverty , discrimination, '83 .. nothing.

if anon disagrees please reply

tiger terrorist pussies are not fighting for Tamils (or as mr anon here says for a "community") nor do they have the support of tamils. to say so is racist no different any other racist.. it is also parroting of terrorist propaganda and supporting of their claim to be representative of tamils without a shred of justification

when persons like racist anon here and the peaceniks mentioned in the post spout such racist statements and parrot terrorist propaganda they deserve contempt (and even name calling - much worse than what i call them here )

sittingnut said...

ajith :
thanks :-)

Josh said...

Hey anonymous, the african american minority were used as slaves for like 200 fucking years and got their civil rights only 50 years ago (they had to stand up on buses so that white people could sit), yet did they don suicide suits and blast themselves to bits? put bombs on trains, buses and planes? Tamils claim they are a fucking smart people akin to the Jews (excuse me while I gag here) but it looks to me as if their leaders are the dumbest fucks on planet earth.

The Benevolent Dictator said...

Snut/Josh,

If I may, let me clarify what Anon's statement into how I see it. Terrorism is not justified in any circumstances. That I think we all agree except for those who support terrorists. However, we live in a world that follows the realist school of thought so we need to call it as we see it and not as we want to see it. The fact remains that the LTTE emerged due to a combination of factors relating to education, employement, language and one or two other issues on which successive govts gave the Tamils a raw deal purely to win elections. That is a fact no matter how unpalatable it may seem. What is also true is that the LTTE has long ago metamorphosised into a criminal-terrorist organisation that represses the very people it claims to protect. So inorder to resolve this issue, while defeating or weakening the LTTE militarily is necessary, it is also equally necessary to address those issues that led to the situation that was conducive to the emergence of the LTTE and other similar militant outfits.

Now the two of you or Roger (whoever he is) can now call me a peacenik or other such ridiculous names and you may feel better for it, but you're not really debating the issue, which I presume is one of the many reasons why you, Sittingnut, blogs.

Also, Sittingnut, your character assassination of those who disagree with your 'black and white' view of the world is getting ridiculous. DBS Jeyaraj, an LTTE sympathiser? You've got to be joking! Do you read his articles? The guy hates the LTTE and they have reciprocal warm feelings towards him evidenced by him getting a severe beating in Toronto a few years back from an LTTE gang. Of course he doesn't love the govt like you do, given its inherent incompetencies, but by labeling people like that you're just displaying your inability to accept differing viewpoints.

Saman said...

Justifying terrorism is one thing and finding the cause for terrorism is another. The latter action is necessary if we really want to eliminate it. However many people try to equate the two. Why they do it, I cannot understand.

LTTE love the extremists of the other camp (that is why they opted Mahinda to Ranil).

Extremists of the south would like to push the moderators also to the LTTE camp.

Both want to escalate violence;

Both extremists want to avoid serious dialog but happy to play to the emotions of their own side; against the other.

Both are blood seekers; they love death and despair.

They have no regard for human rights.

They don't like NGOs. They don't like international mediation to the crisis but appeal to International help when they themselves are in trouble. They love international pressure when the pressure is enforced on the other side.

They both like to terrorize people to meet their ends.

LTTE is scared that a solution will come from the south where they will be pressured by the international forces and their own community to accept it.

Extremists of the South are scared that even LTTE might agree to an extension of the 13 amendment and they keep on pressing the govt not to even consider such a devolution.

They like other side terrorizing their own community so that they could sell the violence to the international community.

Unless one looks at this process objectively he/she will miss many perspectives of the issue. But people who are emotionally attached cannot do that.

When you are in the procession you will not see it.

I humbly call upon all those in the discussion to come out of their dens and see the problem as it is.

Both sides are

Hard Knock Life said...

"DBS Jeyaraj, an LTTE sympathiser? You've got to be joking! Do you read his articles? The guy hates the LTTE and they have reciprocal warm feelings towards him evidenced by him getting a severe beating in Toronto a few years back from an LTTE gang."

What a fucking load of bullshit and you know it. The man is pro-LTTE. He calls the LTTE a "liberation movement." He is against the LTTE being eliminated and wants it to continue. He might be critical of SOME aspects of the LTTE but he is certainly an LTTE sympathiser. His writings clearly show that.

You also forgot to add in TAMIL POLITICIANS into your little mix of those who caused this conflict. That Malaysia-born asshole Chelvanayakam was gasbagging about separatism long before Sri Lanka was even granted independence by the Brtis. Of course, Tamils like you are quite happy to gloss over that fact in your rage to blame the Sinhalese.

Funny that while the Tamils were dominating everything in the apartheid colonial state they didn't give two hoots about the rights of the majority. Then as independence came along the Jaffna Tamil leaders started getting into a panic - they would no longer be able to carry on the apartheid state and the Sinhalese would actually get their rights and with one man one vote, the Tamils would be outnumbered. Then came the Tamil screaming and whining and demands to reduce a 70% majority to 50% and increase 12% minority to 50% -- apparently that is the Tamil idea of "being fair"

Go figure!

sittingnut said...

the benevolent dictator :
you comment again shows your complete disregard for written word.and confused thinking, so i will have to ask you to read and to be clear repeatedly below

if you read before writing (for best results click on word peacenik in post), you will see that i have a clear definition of a peacenik - people who advocate peace at any cost ( including at the cost of freedom, justice democracy, and human rights ). are you one? if not don't brand yourself.

anyway

you say tamils got a raw deal - i agree ( i also say lot of people not just tamils in north and east provinces. in fact some, such as indian tamils and poor people everywhere got it worse, do you agree? )
you say we have to address the tamil grievances - i agree ( read first before commenting please - i have dealt with this before in previous posts as well so do read first )
grievances could be used few criminals to justify their actions. but that does not excuse the criminality - do you agree?
you say terrorism has to be defeated - i said so too

-
you say you want to see things as they really are. so do ( start by reading to see what is written before commenting :-) )

a fact you you may want to 'see'-
ltte in its present form is not compatible with freedom, justice democracy, and human rights. and its actions are unjustifiable in any way
as i have said before while i don't see anybody as "white" i do see ltte as "black " don't you ?
do express yourself clearly on this point
is that what you see as my "black and white' view " ? if so do say it clearly.
(anon above justified ltte actions do you- anon's self appointed interpreter?) be clear.

-
now for some things i have expressed so that your absurdly confused thinking can be made clear

gosl if it is the government of sri lanka is duty bound to defeat ltte.
quite apart from that moral imperative gosl must defeat ltte to be credible and viable from pragmatic point of view as well.
in that moral and pragmatic quest it should be able to use violence is that same way that it is able to use violence against other criminals.
do you agree ?

all grievances should be dealt with democratically as with other people's grievances.
do you agree?

of course (again as i have said before ) democracy will not find solutions to every grievance. democratic process will only arrive at compromises and they will not fully satisfy all interest groups. this is reality, in all democracies but it is the best that can be had. if you are realist you have to deal with that

failure to get satisfied does that excuse any interest group ( or criminals pretending to represent that group ) resorting to violence. do you agree? be clear

democratic governments should defeat violence. not to do so is against democracy , justice , freedom and human rights do you agree ? be clear.
tolerating violent criminal group like ltte is not conducive to functioning and viability of any government from realist point views as well. do you agree? be clear


after all that do you still say "you're not really debating the issue" really ? what issue have i not dealt with ? be clear.

--
DBS Jeyaraj, an LTTE sympathiser? You've got to be joking! Do you read his articles?
no i am not joking when i call him a ltte "propaganda front". ( not a "sympathiser" - you mistake due to you inability pay attention)

it was rich, you who is unable to read even this post or comments asking me whether i read dbs jeyaraj . if you click on some of the links above you will know i read his articles attentively ( otherwise how did i find that sunila abeysekera plagiarized from him word to word ? a fact that escaped lot of others until i pointed that out.

hose links would have also informed you that i have dealt with your points about jeyraj before

anyway yes, i do call him a ltte "propaganda front" . he is fed ltte propaganda and he parrots them i know precisely because i read him unlike you it seems. for example, read his articles on military operations in the east last year for his unquestioning dependence on terrorist propaganda, which turned out to be flat false)

he is used as a terrorist propaganda front and should be treated as such ( fact that he was assaulted by ltte goons does not make this fact false) . his position is rather similar to tna mps ( again as i said before), they may not like ltte or terrorism but they are doing terrorists' work at present.

by labeling people like that you're just displaying your inability to accept differing viewpoints.
i label people after careful consideration and in accordance with the facts
if you have any other objections about another of my labels as i wrote them ( not your mistaken ones ) do come with facts. not your incomplete knowledge and denial.

after your comment it is clear you cannot deal with reality ( about ltte terrorism, or about what people menationed have done). so you live in denial, in the process not acknowledging facts (even comically going to the extent of misreading or not reading what i have written, as in your comment above )

if you want to face reality, when and if you reply, do read carefully and do answer the questions i raised clearly. may be that will get you out of cocoon made of denial :-)

sittingnut said...

josh:
your point about justifiability of terrorism put forth by ltte and their sympathizers, is valid.
-
but ltte's claim to be leaders of tamils is not valid. don't equate them

sittingnut said...

saman:
your are not at all clear in some fundamental points. if you want a debate on issues be clear.

when we examine your statements we see that you assume and prejudge too many things without justification. hopefully you would answer some of my questions and clarify your position

Justifying terrorism is one thing and finding the cause for terrorism is another.
agreed.
however alleged causes can be used ( and has been used ) to justify and propagate terrorism. given that context you have to be more clear on what causes terrorism and on what grounds . you aren't doing so here.

do you agree with me that nothing justifies terrorism? hopefully you will be more explicit on that.

-
given that tamils do not support terrorists and that many groups ( ethnic or otherwise) in sri lanka or elsewhere who have grievances have not resorted to terrorism, attempt to say that tamil grievances,discrimination, '83, etc caused terrorism is in fact a justification of terrorism

do you agree? if not, on what grounds?

--
you say,
LTTE love the extremists of the other camp (that is why they opted Mahinda to Ranil).
on what grounds do you say mahinda is an extremist comparable to ltte, on "the other camp" ? do explain :-)

Extremists of the south would like to push the moderators also to the LTTE camp.
again what do you mean by being "Extremists of the south"; advocating fighting terrorists ? opposing ltte ? opposing peace with ltte? what ? do be more explicit. being clear with that may help you to understand your own prejudices and sympathies .

same with "moderates" ? who do you mean by that word? what is their position? . is it moderate to advocate handing over millions to ltte terrorist oppression for peace ? will that result in peace in any case?
do be explicit .why don't you ? :-)

imo people who advocate peace with murderous ltte and want to appease them, are no different from terrorists. why do you not agree? be explicit .

--

Both want to escalate violence;
violence is bad almost all agree.
but do you not agree that terrorism has to be defeated and given the history of ltte, violence has to be used for that purpose? is that being extreme in your opinion? do you think defeating ltte terrorism to be "extreme" ?
is it "moderate" and not callous for you to look the other way while innocents are deliberately killed by terrorists?
be clear.
-

you then make lot of statements with word " they". who do you mean? what exactly is wrong with their actions ? what do you recommend instead ? why do you call them "extremist"? is opposing terrorists and proven terrorist sympathizers "extreme" and comparable to terrorism in your opinion? why? why do you think opposing criminals is "blood seeking" and letting murderous criminals go unpunished is not ? do answer :-)

why can't you be more explicit? are you afraid of your capability to defend your own statements? or are you afraid of betraying your hidden prejudices if you become more explicit ? :-)

-
to clarify matters let get to the basics.

i will get to the fundamental points you avoid ,

do you agree that existence of ltte is not compatible with human rights , justice , freedom , and democracy ?

do you agree that peace with ltte in its present form is immoral and unrealistic ?

do you agree that gosl is duty bound to defeat terrorists?

do you agree that realistically violence has to be used for that purpose?

do you agree that by advocating peace with ltte in its present form peaceniks are betraying principles of human rights , justice , freedom , and democracy ? and are being immoral and unrealistic?


what do you say? be clear.
if you do not agree (as can be gathered from your comment) why not give your reasons instead of accusing unnamed "them" for all sorts things which you don't even seem to understand :-)

--

Unless one looks at this process objectively he/she will miss many perspectives of the issue. But people who are emotionally attached cannot do that.
yes do look at it objectively and please reply to my questions objectively with reasons .

in fact to go by your comment you are the one who seems to be emotionally attached to your unfounded prejudices.

so in your reply be objective and explain objectively how you view ltte and possible solution instead of being muddled headed as you showed yourself in your comment

I humbly call upon all those in the discussion to come out of their dens and see the problem as it is.
as a first step, explain how you see it clearly and objectively yourself please :-) don't forget to answer the fundamental questions i asked :-)

sittingnut said...

hard knock life:
be cool
no need to grow overboard to make the points you are making .

-
also don't make assumptions about people
stick to facts and their own words, that is enough to make them look like the prejudiced muddled fools they are

The Benevolent Dictator said...

Hard Knock Life,

I disagree about DBS. If you look at his writings from the aarrow prism of 'anyone who says anything complementary about LTTE must be an LTTE supporter' then you obviously would be inclined to think that way. However, the conflict in SL is not that simplistic. He's a Tamil and whilst I certainly question the accuracy of his writings and his sources, he writes from a Tamil perspective that may not always be palatable to you.

Also, I'm not trying to gloss over the role of the Tamil leaders in this conflict. In fact my personal view is that the Tamil leaders should have been more pragmatic and realised that the majority community should be assuaged due to the divide and conquer policies of the British. They should have followed the Malaysian Tamils (funny that Chelva is Malaysian isn't it!) and made concessions that allowed the Sinhalese to feel comfortable without trying to maintain the artificial status quo created by the British. That's my view.

However, I always though the separatism was declared at the Vaddukoddai Reesolution of May 1976. Let me know where you read about Chelva's previous statements to this effect as I'd be interested to know.

Snut - there's really no point me engaging you in a debate because it would contain solely of you repeating ad naseum your 'peacenik' spiel and bringing in references from old blog posts of yours in an attempt to prove me wrong. However, you're correct when you say that other communities do have grievances in the NE. The muslims kicked out by the LTTE for example would be one. I still don't agree with you on DBS because, as I mentioned earlier, you still look at things through a narrow prism. What I meant by your 'black and white' view is that you tend to take the simplistic view that only people who believe in your viewpoint wholeheartedly are 'patriots' and all others are disgusting LTTE sympathisers. Now don't quote an obscure post of yours to deny that!

Cheers

sittingnut said...

the benevolent dictator :
you run away because you don't have a point to stand on . lol

don't live a life of denial of reality . examine your own petty prejudices and holes in your own arguments, and read what is written before making absurd comments and then running away (as you now try to do ) when reality is pointed out
-
btw you did not read my posts where i have repeatedly pointed out what i mean by word "peacenik". this includes most of my political posts, click on tag "peacenik" above. that will get you the posts i have written with that theme since blogger implemented tag feature - see for yourself .
your reference to "obscure posts" is another of your silly denials of facts

why the hell do you engage in such easily refuted absurd denials of verifiable facts? really stupid!
-

What I meant by your 'black and white' view is that you tend to take the simplistic view that only people who believe in your viewpoint wholeheartedly are 'patriots' and all others are disgusting LTTE sympathisers.
:-) more denial of facts and running away
where have i ever even used the word "patriots"? care to point out ? you can use the search engines if you want, since you cannot even read
i have never based my arguments for defeat of terrorists on patriotism, but on democracy, human rights, freedom, justice and legitimacy
as i said you imagine things about me out of your petty and silly prejudices.

--
as i said all along peaceniks are people who think peace is worth any cost , including cost of democracy , justice , freedom, and human rights - (yes i usually write all that in those posts you did nod read) . are you one? if not don't brand yourself .

people mentioned in my post above are peaceniks. and all of them fall within that definition, as i have pointed out in previous posts dealing with them. read them before making silly comments with insufficient knowledge.

---

dbs jeyaraj is a terrorist propaganda front . as i said in previous comment, his own articles based on propaganda fed to him by terrorist prove that.. if you don't agree, give reasons, ( if you have reasons). or if you disagree bc of your silly prejudices about me you are free to say you disagree and not give reasons ( you can also run away ) :-)

--
anyway before running away why don't you answer the questions i posed to you. :-) why be afraid to examine your prejudices before accusing me looking through a narrow prism? why can't you answer them ?

be open to reality and about your own thoughts and prejudices. be honest yourself . as they say best thing you can do is to know yourself. ( esp before accusing others.)


here are the questions your are running away from in a compact form.

lot of people not just tamils in north and east provinces. have grievances. in fact some, such as indian tamils and poor people everywhere have it worse, do you agree?

grievances could be used by few criminals to justify their actions. but that does not excuse the criminality - do you agree?

all grievances should be dealt with democratically. do you agree?

failure to get satisfied by democratic process does that excuse any interest group ( or criminals pretending to represent that group ) resorting to violence. do you agree?

ltte in its present form is not compatible with freedom, justice democracy, and human rights. and its actions are unjustifiable in any way. do you agree?

as such government of sri lanka is duty bound to defeat ltte.
quite apart from that moral imperative gosl must defeat ltte to be credible and viable from pragmatic point of view as well. do you agree?

in that moral and pragmatic quest it should be able to use violence is that same way that it is able to use violence against other criminals.
do you agree ?


if you disagree, be clear and give reasons if you have any.
or are you just muddled headed? and inserted your comment here just to express unfounded and irrational prejudices you have on your head? if so you can forgo the reasons if you so prefer :-)
or you can run away. lol

Morquendi said...

oh stinging nuts you're still at this. when are you going to find yourself a girlfriend and get a life? a real one i mean.

the rest of us have moved on from these petty online arguments.

arguing online is like running in the special olympics. even if you win you're still retarded.

you win the gold medal man. every time.

sittingnut said...

morquendi
i see that you are as stupid and unoriginal as ever.


the rest of us have moved on from these petty online arguments.
arguing online is like running in the special olympics. even if you win you're still retarded.

i see that you are still repeating the cliched tag you picked up from somebody ( family trait ?) at nittewa . how many times have you repeated that?
and why do you repeat and still post comments, if you believe that ? ( insecurity? failure to understand what you are saying? low iq? etc etc ) :-)

if this is special olympics by posting comments and giving me the victory you are becoming the loser even in special olympics

LOL

Anonymous said...

Like wow man. You OWNED Morquendi! LMAO! ROFL!

Some sweet shit there dude. Like you used logic and all.

Major.

Show those puzzy peaceniks who the GOLD boss is. when persons like racist old me here and the peaceniks mentioned in the post spout such racist statements and parrot terrorist propaganda they deserve contempt (and even name calling - much worse than what i call them here ).

Fucking hell. Well said dude. Like so totally libertarian!

You go girl!