i will highlight some basic questions that must be addressed by anyone who genuinely wants an 'independent international inquiry' into alleged war crimes committed in sri lanka.
all those who fail to address these issues betray their bad faith when they say they want justice and truth to prevail in order to reconcile the nation. many have already revealed bad faith (esp. when they commented on so called un panel/darusman report).
questions-
why only sri lanka is subjected to such an inquiry? are we the only ones that supposedly committed war crimes while fighting against terrorists? to take an example among many, what about the west in iraq, afghanistan, and pakistan? how does one advocate such a double standard inquiry when justice demands one standard for all? bc west is powerful and we, who are not, must obey? bc we, as 'inferiors' (racially or otherwise), must not demand equal treatment?
why is there an attempt (as with so called un/darusman panel) to focus only on suffering and wrongs of a section of sri lankans at one point of time, instead of all? why this separation of victims? is that justice? was sufferings of rest of us (few nauseating proofs here and here) inferior? how? can such arbitrary differentiations lead to reconciliation?
why now, after we defeated terrorists? why the focus only on last days of tamil tiger terrorists? why was our suffering from terrorists not inquired into for 30+ years? why many many crimes against humanity committed by terrorists not worthy of inquiry then? why did self styled humanitarians and human right advocates do nothing then? why same ppl who push for an international inquiry now, pushed us to appease the murderers then? why didn't same ppl and countries help us defeat the terrorists with least human loss, instead of opposing any attempt to defeat terrorists and end their crimes and our suffering? why no inquiry into terrorists collecting funds in west with help of some western politicians?
are some of the things we are accused of really 'war crimes'? are they not accidents, 'collateral damage', use of human shields by terrorists, etc., etc., common in any attempt to defeat terrorists? why these distinctions made for west's defense elsewhere, but in our case all these are 'crimes'? are we not right to suspect that, in western eyes, our main 'war crime' was our disregard for their pressure not to defeat terrorists (hence arbitrary focus of requested 'international' inquiry and illegitimate un/darusman panel, only on events after we disregarded west's call not to defeat ltte)? how is that justice?
shouldn't there be substantiated evidence before accusations are made? shouldn't those accused have a right to examine at first hand, and question (and cross question) the allegations and those who who make them, before such allegations are judged 'credible'? isn't prejudging this, as so called un/darusman panel did, an injustice?
didn't western funded ngos (like human rights watch, amnesty international, and international crisis group,) making the allegations, fail to appear, produce evidence, and face questions, before a legally constituted sri lankan inquiry when requested? wasn't their subsequent demand for an inquiry with 'international standards' that do not exist anywhere else (see above), rather than normal legal standards accepted by all (including sri lankan inquiry) a call for injustice and special treatment (betraying their colonial mindset)?
must be addressed
these are the questions that must be addressed by those who call for an 'independent inquiry with international standards' if they have any pretensions to intellectual honesty and integrity. it is impossible to claim such an inquiry, is independent, maintains legal standards, serves justice and truth, and leads to reconciliation, without answering these questions.
so far almost all those who have called for an 'international' inquiry have failed to address these issues. this is especially noticeable in articles, internet postings, and media interviews, etc., these ppl gave after the publication of so called un panel/darusman report. by not addressing them they betray their bad faith and disregard for justice and equality.
we, sri lankans, should not be afraid to assert ourselves and demand (aggressively if need be) that ppl who call for an 'international' inquiry must address these issues, bc it is we who are being slandered and denied justice and equality. in some cases we would be (and have been) accused for rudeness and subjected to censorship when we demand our basic rights by raising these issues. that is the usual mode of all such oppressors.
by demanding justice and equality, and exposing hypocrisy of those who fail to address these questions, we will overcome.
we should not hesitate to confront with these questions those sri lankans dependent on western funds (esp in ngos) who join with their paymasters in calling for an 'international' inquiry. failure to address or even recognize these issues, by this sort of willing slaves, deserve open contempt. let them go crying to their masters with our spit on their faces.
sidesteps
those who try to sidestep these questions by saying 'we should not be afraid of an inquiry if we have nothing to hide', or 'we should inquire into our actions regardless of whether west will inquire in to theirs in iraq etc.' are missing the point. we, sri lankans, should in fact inquire into our actions in sri lanka under sri lankan law. we should criticize any undue delay or shortcoming in such a sri lankan inquiry.
however shortcomings or not, nothing can justify our submitting to an unjust and unequal inquiry approved and forced upon us by west. anyone honestly addressing the questions above will realize that any 'international' inquiry constituted at present will be unjust, will treat us unfairly, and serve only western interests.
my twitter - http://twitter.com/sittingnut
this blog's twitter - http://twitter.com/llibertarian
all those who fail to address these issues betray their bad faith when they say they want justice and truth to prevail in order to reconcile the nation. many have already revealed bad faith (esp. when they commented on so called un panel/darusman report).
questions-
why only sri lanka is subjected to such an inquiry? are we the only ones that supposedly committed war crimes while fighting against terrorists? to take an example among many, what about the west in iraq, afghanistan, and pakistan? how does one advocate such a double standard inquiry when justice demands one standard for all? bc west is powerful and we, who are not, must obey? bc we, as 'inferiors' (racially or otherwise), must not demand equal treatment?
why is there an attempt (as with so called un/darusman panel) to focus only on suffering and wrongs of a section of sri lankans at one point of time, instead of all? why this separation of victims? is that justice? was sufferings of rest of us (few nauseating proofs here and here) inferior? how? can such arbitrary differentiations lead to reconciliation?
why now, after we defeated terrorists? why the focus only on last days of tamil tiger terrorists? why was our suffering from terrorists not inquired into for 30+ years? why many many crimes against humanity committed by terrorists not worthy of inquiry then? why did self styled humanitarians and human right advocates do nothing then? why same ppl who push for an international inquiry now, pushed us to appease the murderers then? why didn't same ppl and countries help us defeat the terrorists with least human loss, instead of opposing any attempt to defeat terrorists and end their crimes and our suffering? why no inquiry into terrorists collecting funds in west with help of some western politicians?
are some of the things we are accused of really 'war crimes'? are they not accidents, 'collateral damage', use of human shields by terrorists, etc., etc., common in any attempt to defeat terrorists? why these distinctions made for west's defense elsewhere, but in our case all these are 'crimes'? are we not right to suspect that, in western eyes, our main 'war crime' was our disregard for their pressure not to defeat terrorists (hence arbitrary focus of requested 'international' inquiry and illegitimate un/darusman panel, only on events after we disregarded west's call not to defeat ltte)? how is that justice?
shouldn't there be substantiated evidence before accusations are made? shouldn't those accused have a right to examine at first hand, and question (and cross question) the allegations and those who who make them, before such allegations are judged 'credible'? isn't prejudging this, as so called un/darusman panel did, an injustice?
didn't western funded ngos (like human rights watch, amnesty international, and international crisis group,) making the allegations, fail to appear, produce evidence, and face questions, before a legally constituted sri lankan inquiry when requested? wasn't their subsequent demand for an inquiry with 'international standards' that do not exist anywhere else (see above), rather than normal legal standards accepted by all (including sri lankan inquiry) a call for injustice and special treatment (betraying their colonial mindset)?
must be addressed
these are the questions that must be addressed by those who call for an 'independent inquiry with international standards' if they have any pretensions to intellectual honesty and integrity. it is impossible to claim such an inquiry, is independent, maintains legal standards, serves justice and truth, and leads to reconciliation, without answering these questions.
so far almost all those who have called for an 'international' inquiry have failed to address these issues. this is especially noticeable in articles, internet postings, and media interviews, etc., these ppl gave after the publication of so called un panel/darusman report. by not addressing them they betray their bad faith and disregard for justice and equality.
we, sri lankans, should not be afraid to assert ourselves and demand (aggressively if need be) that ppl who call for an 'international' inquiry must address these issues, bc it is we who are being slandered and denied justice and equality. in some cases we would be (and have been) accused for rudeness and subjected to censorship when we demand our basic rights by raising these issues. that is the usual mode of all such oppressors.
by demanding justice and equality, and exposing hypocrisy of those who fail to address these questions, we will overcome.
෴
sri lankans who failwe should not hesitate to confront with these questions those sri lankans dependent on western funds (esp in ngos) who join with their paymasters in calling for an 'international' inquiry. failure to address or even recognize these issues, by this sort of willing slaves, deserve open contempt. let them go crying to their masters with our spit on their faces.
sidesteps
those who try to sidestep these questions by saying 'we should not be afraid of an inquiry if we have nothing to hide', or 'we should inquire into our actions regardless of whether west will inquire in to theirs in iraq etc.' are missing the point. we, sri lankans, should in fact inquire into our actions in sri lanka under sri lankan law. we should criticize any undue delay or shortcoming in such a sri lankan inquiry.
however shortcomings or not, nothing can justify our submitting to an unjust and unequal inquiry approved and forced upon us by west. anyone honestly addressing the questions above will realize that any 'international' inquiry constituted at present will be unjust, will treat us unfairly, and serve only western interests.
my twitter - http://twitter.com/sittingnut
this blog's twitter - http://twitter.com/llibertarian
