'Sri Lanka will not remove military camps or reduce troops' says army chief

BY INDIKA GAMAGE-24 JULY 2015

Sri Lanka military chief confirmed that it will not remove any military camps or reduce troops. “None of the military camps will be removed from where they are situated. We have fortified those camps,” said Army Commander Chrisanthe de Silva.

Following an official visit to chief Buddhist prelates on Friday (24), Lieutenant General De Silva told journalists in Kandy that soldiers have been stationed from the north to the south of the country in a manner to ‘reinforce national security’. “We will not reduce any of those troops,” he said.

“This is definite, this is clear”, the army commander added.

High military to civilian ratio

Five out of the seven regional military commands in Sri Lanka are situated in the two pre-dominantly Tamil speaking provinces. Four of them are in the north while one is situated in the east. Two additional regional commands were established in 2012 and 2013 to oversee the remaining seven Sinhala dominated provinces where approximately 77% of the country’s total population is living.

In March 2014, the International Crisis Group revealed that out of 450,000 total military personnel, 'almost two-thirds of troops were stationed in the north'  and 'yields a density of one army member for every 8.7 civilians'.

Following the end of military operations in 2009, Tamils as well as international rights groups including the UN have repeatedly called for the demilitarisation of the north - east region.

Comments on President Sirisena’s special 

statement

By Neville Ladduwahetty-July 23, 2015

President Sirisena

President Sirisena in his special statement on July 14, 2015, said: "… my sole interest in the next election result would not be about which party will receive majority votes out of 225 coming to Parliament, but about making sure the agenda that I promised to the people on January 8th will be taken forward with the support of the parliament. All my decisions have been made with regard to making sure that goal is achieved".

The President should realise that without the support of Parliament the system does not work under provisions for separation of powers. This dependence is an inherent feature of the Executive Presidential system. In such a system the Executive powers are exercised by the President and the Legislative powers are exercised by Parliament. Therefore, the President has to depend on the support of Parliament to achieve his goals.

This support is assured when the government in power is from the same political party as the President. When the government in power is politically different to that of the President, passing legislation requires the support of the Opposition. Such a situation is compounded when the government in power in addition to being politically different to that of the President, is also numerically small (e.g. UNP) and a numerically large party that is politically affiliated with the President (UPFA) is in the opposition. Under these circumstances, no legislation could be passed without the support of the opposition. This was the situation in Sri Lanka before Parliament was dissolved.

PRE-ELECTION BACKGROUND

Since Mr. Sirisena was elected President with the support of the UNP the expectation was that the bulk of the UPFA would join the President in forming a UNP/UPFA Government. Such a government would have been possible if 47 UNP members joined up with the rump of the 142 members of the UPFA. Since the majority of such a coalition was with the UPFA the post of Prime Minister should have been from the UPFA since such a person would enjoy the confidence of Parliament as called for in the Constitution. Under such a set up the President would have been assured of the Parliamentary support needed for him to pass legislation relevant to his agenda.

However, a UNP/UPFA Government with a Prime Minister from the UPFA did not materialize because of a pre-election agreement between the President and the UNP that obligated the President to appoint Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister. This resulted in a minority government made up of 47 from the UNP and a few UPFA supporters of President Sirisena while the majority of the UPFA formed the opposition in Parliament. Under the circumstances, it would not have been possible for President Sirisena to pass the 19th Amendment and the Budget without the support of the UPFA in the opposition.

President Sirisena’s stated reason for dissolving Parliament was as follows:

"When the government was about to sink, with the no confidence motion on the Prime Minister, I dissolved the Parliament. The underlying hope of the no confidence motion on the Prime Minister, if it was brought forward to the Parliament, was for someone from the UPFA National List to resign and give that position to Mahinda Rajapaksa. When Mahinda Rajapaksa was able to come to Parliament, the plan was to defeat Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe through a no confidence motion and for the Rajapaksa faction to form their own government. I made sure that doesn’t happen."

The President’s reasoning is seriously flawed because former President Rajapaksa could not have entered Parliament through the National List since his name was not on the 2010 Nationalist List with the Department of Elections. Therefore, under no circumstances could the former President have been a member of the last Parliament.

Had the President not dissolved Parliament the No Confidence motion would in all likelihood have been passed. The President could then have continued with a UPFA government without former President Rajapaksa and fulfilled his promises to the People. The fact that the President opted to dissolve Parliament was most likely to prevent embarrassment to the UNP. This must mean that his obligations to the UNP override his commitments to the people. The irony however is that by dissolving Parliament he has created an opportunity for former President Rajapaksa to contest the forthcoming election and participate in active politics in 2015 without having to wait until 2016, when Parliament completes its full term.

RUN-UP to the ELECTION

Article 5 of the 19th Amendment states: "It shall be the duty of the President to - on the advice of the Election Commissioner to ensure the creation of proper conditions for the conduct of free and fair elections and referenda".

Whether President Sirisena was influenced by Article 5 or not he has declared that he would "… remain in a neutral position during the upcoming election". However, as leader of the SLFP and also of the UPFA, President Sirisena would be expected to actively participate to secure the best outcome for the UPFA at the upcoming election. Such participation would clash with the constitutional need for neutrality. Under these conflicting circumstances, constitutional provision must necessarily take precedence over Party obligations.

Since President Sirisena cannot divest his constitutional obligations his only option is to divest his responsibilities and functions as the leader of the SLFP and UPFA. This means President Sirisena should not be associated with any activities of the UPFA Executive Committee or make statements that could be interpreted as being partial to any party/coalition contesting the election. By divesting his responsibilities as leader of the SLFP and the UPFA in order to remain neutral, he would be making a virtue of a constitutional necessity.

POST ELECTION

President Sirisena also stated that "… I do not wish to give Mahinda Rajapaksa the position of Prime Minister". What needs to be appreciated is that the system works when the post of Prime Minister is assigned to one from the largest party/coalition which in this instance was the UPFA since they had a 142 member majority. Such a majority enables legislation to be passed without depending on the support of the opposition. On the other hand, a Prime Minister from a minority coalition such as the UNP would have to depend on the UPFA majority in the Opposition to pass any legislation; as demonstrated with the 19th Amendment and the Budget. In addition, the process of selection of a Prime Minister should not be the personal choice of the leader of a political party. Instead, it should be according to the provisions laid out in that party’s Constitution. In the case of the UPFA it should be the 72 member Executive Committee that should ultimately decide who would be the Prime Minister, and who should be nominated to contest the forthcoming election. This is an elementary aspect of democratic practice.

The concepts outlined above explain the logic of the Constitutional provision that the Prime Minister should be one that enjoys the confidence of Parliament. In this regard it should be noted that appointing Mr. Ranil Wickramasinghe as Prime Minister was a violation of the Constitution because he was the head of a minority government that relied on the opposition to get any legislation passed due to the fact that he did not enjoy the confidence of Parliament. Therefore, even if the views of President Sirisena are taken into consideration as leader of the UPFA, the person selected to be Prime Minister has to satisfy the Constitutions of the UPFA and Sri Lanka. Under these circumstances, the President’s statement that he does "not wish to give Mahinda Rajapaksa the position of Prime Minister" should be treated as a non-binding wish.

CONCLUSION

President Sirisena could have accomplished his goals if he formed a UPFA government with a UPFA Prime Minister and a Cabinet of Ministers. Forming such a government was not possible because of his pre-election agreement with the UNP. This agreement required him to appoint Mr. Ranil Wickramasinghe as Prime Minister. In the absence of the rump of the UPFA joining the 47 UNP members in Parliament the government that was formed could not pass any legislation on its own accord. Consequently, the President Sirisena had to prevail on the UPFA in the opposition to pass the 19th Amendment and the Budget and proclaim both as major achievements.

The UPFA saw its role as a mere rubber stamp to authenticate actions of a UNP led minority government. The unacceptability of this situation coupled with the Central Bank Bond scam compelled the UPFA to initiate a No-Confidence motion against Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasinghe. The President had two options. One was to appoint a UPFA government and keep his promises to the People and the other was to dissolve Parliament to prevent embarrassment to the UNP and its leadership. By opting for the latter he disclosed where his priorities were. It certainly was not to keep his promises to the people despite his repeated claims to that effect.

President Sirisena has declared that he would take a neutral position as far as the forthcoming election was concerned. Such neutrality should prevent him from actively participating in election related activities despite being the leader of the SLFP and the UPFA. Furthermore, the need to stay neutral is a constitutional requirement. Therefore, since the constitutional duties should override party obligations, the President should resign from his position as leader of the SLFP and the UPFA. Not to do so and continue to participate in the Executive Committee activities of both parties such as nominations etc., clearly violates the neutrality required of a President in the Constitution.

At times identifying your boss is tricky

2015-07-24
An open letter to the General Secretary of the SLFP 
Dear Anura,

An open letter to the General Secretary of the SLFP Dear Anura, I am sure you may be thinking of the reasons behind this open letter. Since we are friends, I should have mentioned these points to you in person. But I decided otherwise as this attempt would be more beneficial to you, than a one-on-one tête-à-tête. 

 You have become a key figure within contemporary politics in Sri Lanka – especially with your appointment as the general secretary of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party. Both you and your colleague Susil Premajayantha became centre figures of heated political debates in providing nominations to former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. In fact both of you became the most powerful and most sought after duo in a tough political battle. This letter, is not intended at changing your political allegiances but to share some thoughts probably for your own benefit. 


 My memory goes back to the early 90s of the Chandrika regime. Visumpaya which was Prof. G. L. Peiris’ then official residence was the meeting place for many budding MPs, especially in the evenings along with some ‘energy drinks.’Though he was a former university vice chancellor and a well-known academic, Prof. Peiris was also a budding politician having entered Parliament through the national list. He used to entertain young parliamentarians like Dilan Perera, Nalanda Ellawala, Dullas Alahapperuma and Anura Yapa at Visumpaya with thick political talks.  

But I have no strong memories of a close association with you until you became the media minister. There you gained visibility and came up the political ladder with a ‘comparatively acceptable’ reputation. 

 You, as the media minister, faced the hardest period in maintaining media freedom [in this country]. It was challenging for both you and us as media practitioners.Many journalists were attacked, abducted, intimidated and even assassinated – and to many of us, you were the first point of contact in government. At least you were a patient listener, but you would personally tell us how helpless you were – as much as we were. I remember your advices to me when I was facing safety issues during a time many of us maintained a link with you when we were in exile.  

Then there were moves to revive the defunct Press Council. As I touched on in one of my previous columns, I think you were successful in shelving the ideas of the ‘top’ at least during your tenure as the media minister.  

Even during such challenging times, you managed to maintain a reasonable rapport with the media. In short, you were not branded as a ‘joker’ or a ‘liar’ which are ‘reputations’ many media ministers or media spokespersons gain. 

There were some corruption allegations against you as well from the JVP and other political platforms – mainly on the issue of controversial ‘Sil Redi’ distribution during the presidential polls as well as misusing funds of the Petroleum Corporation for election work. But I leave that for you to clear through your own means. 

 Most importantly you always managed to win the trust of the party leadership. Thus, you were entrusted with many crucial responsibilities by successive leaders, predominantly by ex-President Rajapaksa and you delivered well. The cardinal event that comes to my mind was the impeachment of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranaike which you implemented  as per the wishes of your leader. Whether good or bad on policy, you played the cards well and led the Parliamentary Select Committee to bring results as desired by the political leadership. And then you, along with some others like Pavithradevi Wanniarachchi were gifted with lucrative ministerial portfolios. 

 Now this was the  the turning point in your political career. When Maithreipala Sirisena defected from SLFP last December, you were the obvious Rajapaksa choice to the post of general secretary.  Moreover, when President Maithri replaced Mahinda as the party leader he decided to continue with you as the SLFP general secretary.  

What did that mean? He trusted you; but did you trust him?  

I think I know your answer. But that could be your personal one, not the official one. I think you have mixed up the two. 

 In the contemporary political history of Sri Lanka, anyone who disobeyed party leadership has not been successful. Look at Lalith, Gamini and the DUNF – Rajaliya Party; what happened to them? Ranil who stood by his leader [though he belonged to JR camp] during tough times of impeachment was successful. See what happened to those who revolted against Ranil. Were they successful? Look at Chandrika who went against her own mother and the party and formed new political forces. But she had to return to the main party platform to be successful. Anura Banadaraike was also a good example. 

 I am not claiming that you are becoming anti-SLFP. But I think you clearly need to identify your boss and be loyal to him – not to others. Individual loyalty is a personal matter, but party loyalty is an institutional issue. Your loyalty is still with the former leadership who may not have a future within the party ranks in the future. The role of the general secretary is to strengthen the party and its leadership. It seems that the SLFP is now being dictated to, not by its own seniors but entirely by outsiders like Dinesh Gunawardene, Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Wimal Weerawansa, Gammanpila et al. I am concerned whether you have become a cat’s-paw of these outside elements with ulterior motives. I know you have become a victim of circumstances with immense pressure from various quarters, but you are the best judge  especially when safe guarding your own party.  

More than that of the UNP, the SLFP’s post of general secretary has always been a challenging and a risky one. Only a few were successful, I guess. And today is the most challenging period of the SLFP with a serious split within its own ranks. Your performance will be decisive in determining its future. If there is a split between the party leader and its general secretary, then the situation is serious, as far as the party is concerned.The leader should not go to court against a decision of his own general secretary. It is not a healthy state of affairs.  

Some food for thought my friend!

Live ammunition found in Cadet’s gun before President arrives at prize giving

July 24, 2015

Police have initiated an investigation after live ammunition was recovered from a weapon of a cadet at the Gampaha Bandaranayake Vidyalaya today right before President Maithripala Sirisena was scheduled to be the Chief Guest at the school’s prize giving.

The police media unit stated that the live bullet was discovered during the routine security check up carried out by the Presidential Security Division(PSD) before the President graced the occasion.

Police have launched a thorough investigation as to how the live ammunition ended up in the ceremonial weapon that the cadet was handling.

Despite the incident President Sirisena graced the occasion and was welcomed by the students and school fraternity. 

Keep The Promise, Protect Internet Freedom In Sri Lanka: Worldwide Free Expression Orgs Urge Mangala

July 24, 2015

Eight international organisations fighting for freedom of expression from Asia, the Americas and Europe wrote to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Telecommunications, Mangala Samaraweera last night to urge the minister to keep his promise and protect freedom of expression on the internet in Sri Lanka.

Mangala

Back in February Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera rang the editor of  Colombo Telegraph to apologise for the covert and illegal ‘throttling’ of Colombo Telegraph website on the internet. Apparently, somebody in authority had decided to ignore the direct order of President Maithripala Sirisena to cease the blocking of the website. Minister Samaraweera promised to hold a full investigation into who was responsible and to make a public statement; but to date there’s been no progress.

We publish below the letter sent by ARTICLE 19, Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), English PEN, Index on Censorship, Media Legal Defence Initiative (MLDI) and Vivarta in full;

International appeal

Minister of Foreign Affairs and Telecommunications,

Hon. Mangala Samaraweera

Telecommunication & Information Technology Division,

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

79/1 5th Lane,

Colombo 00300

July 23, 2015

Sri Lanka

Dear Sir

As supporters and defenders of freedom of expression rights, we request you, as Minister of Foreign Affairs and Telecommunications, to fulfil your promise to investigate the recent illegal blocking of online access to the Colombo Telegraph.                               Read More

Gota blows hot and cold - Mirihana white van saga

By Zahrah Imtiaz-2015-07-24

Former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa yesterday said he was only quoting the government when he said the white van found in Mirihana belonged to the LTTE.
"I am only quoting the official statement of the government. How else would I know?  And I live in that area, they should be more careful," said Rajapaksa.

On Monday (20) night three soldiers, one of whom had a pistol, were arrested by the Mirihana Police while travelling in a white van.
Minister Home Affairs, Joseph Michael Perera on Wednesday (22) stated that the white van in question was one of the many unregistered LTTE vans. The Army however denied this statement and said it was a vehicle registered under the army for the personal use of Major General Prasanna de Silva.

The former Defence Secretary had also stressed that this incident showed that there was a clear threat to his life. However when it was pointed out that the van belonged to the Army, Rajpaksa said, "If that is what they are saying, then it is fine", he said.
He added, "They have to be more cautious with what they do and it should not happen again. I live in that road and we were naturally suspicious when such a van was apprehended. They should not be using former LTTE vans either".

When asked if he was using this incident for political gain, he said, "I am not a politician. Somebody has made this mistake and they should rectify it and close the issue."
Gotabaya Rajapaksa said he was startled by the 'white van' discovery because he believed that his life was still under threat from the, "LTTE, Muslim extremists and drug dealers."

Rajapaksa ‘Horapalanaya’ - Job Destruction 

and Increased Unemployment

24 July 2015

While crown prince “Night Race” Namal raced his Lamborghini around Colombo and Sajin Vaas sipped Rs. 26,000 cognac shots, ordinary Sri Lankan people were suffering from job loss and unemployment. Despite claims of development and historically low unemployment rates by the Rajapaksa regime, a closer look at the statistics tells a different story.

In the month of June last year, at the Group of 77+China Summit in Bolivia, Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa claimed that unemployment in Sri Lanka had come down to around 4.1% as a result of his “Mahinda Chinthana”. Former ‘Economic Development’ Minister Basil Rajapaksa, said that Sri Lanka had recorded its lowest ever unemployment rate in 2014. However, when comparing 2013  and 2014 figures, a significant rise in job loss and unemployment can be seen. In the Colombo district, job loss between 2013 and 2014 is approximately 12,000. This however pales in comparison to the massive job loss in the Kalutara, Anuradhapura, Kegalle and Puttalam districts as well as Hambantota district, home of the Rajapaksas.

Election posters inside cab with fake army plates, 2 arrested

July 24, 2015

 Police today arrested two persons and seized a vehicle with two difference number plates, including an army number plate, along with a stack of more than 4,500 election posters of a UPFA candidate in Kebithigollewa. 

A group of police officers on routine patrol discovered the posters, of a former Deputy Minister contesting from the Anuradhapura District, upon searching the white cab at around 2.00am this morning. 

Police officer inspecting the vehicle uncovered that a license plate registered under the name of a resident of Paragaswenwewa in Anuradhapura had been fixed on top of an army license plate. 

Police suspect that the army number plates have been forged.

The two arrested suspects as a 37-year-old resident of Kahatagasdigiliya and a 44-year-old from Medawachchiya.

Kebithigollewa Police are conducting further investigations. 

Meanwhile the Army Headquarters confirmed that this vehicle does not belong to the Army and has not carried any members of the Army inside.

Sri Lanka to harness wasted rainwater for crops, power

BY AMANTHA PERERA- Thu Jul 23, 2015

MEDAWACHCHIYA, Sri Lanka (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Sri Lanka plans to store and use a billion cubic metres of rainwater per year, which would otherwise drain into the sea, in an ambitious effort to boost irrigation and power production.

The new water management system is being built in the country's dry zone, which covers its northern and eastern areas.

Home to at least a third of Sri Lanka's population of 20 million, the mainly agricultural zone has been hit hard by climate shifts over the past decade, and is suffering severe water shortages.

Experts say the project could harness enough water to fill two of the country's largest reservoirs, Victoria and Randenigala.

The $675 million project, funded by the government and donors, begins this month and is due to be completed by December 2024.

One of the island nation's largest water-related infrastructure projects in recent years, it envisages the construction of two new reservoirs and 260 km of new and upgraded canals linking existing reservoirs. 

The aim is to help the dry zone better manage its water supply for power generation and farming.

"Rain patterns have been changing and the dry zone is getting less water now," said S Shanmugasivanathan, a senior official with the Department of Irrigation. "We need to optimise water usage."

Mean annual rainfall across Sri Lanka is 2,000 mm, of which the dry zone gets half or less. Most of the farming done there relies on irrigation, using small water tanks that are filled from the region's larger reservoirs.

“With rain patterns now coming in short and intense bursts, we are faced with frequent incidents of floods interspersed with drought," Shanmugasivanathan said.

"During floods we have no option but to release the water, because there is no infrastructure in place to retain it," he added.

The new project would put to use some of the rain and floodwater that is now wasted.

WATER TO COMBAT POVERTY

The plan to build new water retention infrastructure in the dry zone has been on the drawing board since the 1970s in the form of the Mahaweli Development Programme, which covered the country's central hills and some of the north.

The idea was to use the waters of the Mahaweli River, the longest in the country, to increase power generation capacity by about 260 MW and provide irrigation water to an additional 325,000 acres of land.

But parts of the project were stalled by the civil war that ravaged Tamil-dominated northern and eastern Sri Lanka for a quarter of a century until 2009.

The new water management project is based on a modified and upgraded version of the original Mahaweli scheme, according to government officials and the Asian Development Bank (ADB), which is providing $453 million in funding.

The ADB estimates that 70 percent of the dry zone's population depend on agriculture. The impact of weather extremes on farming in the region means average income there is 10 percent lower than in the rest of the country, it calculates.

The hope is that the new project will help pull local people out of poverty, ADB officials say.

“The dry zone communities have historically remained among the poorest on the island and changing climate patterns will further impact monsoon rains and possibly worsen droughts," said Lance Gore, a water resources specialist with the ADB in Manila.

"By providing more water, the project will enhance the earning capacity of people dependent on agriculture," he said.

It also aims to supply safe drinking water to 350,000 people.

Farmers in the dry zone are mostly in favour of the project, because even in years of above-average rainfall they have endured water shortages as reservoirs empty too quickly.

“It happened to me in 2011 and again in 2013," said Punchi Banda Herath, 55, a farmer in Medawachchiya, North Central Province, about 230 km from Colombo.

"There were floods earlier in the year, but by the time I went to do the planting towards the end of the year there was no water left. The small reservoirs in this region can't hold that much water when it rains, and run dry very fast when drought sets in," he explained.

Experts agree the new project could help ease the impact of drought in the dry zone, but say it is only part of the solution.

To end water scarcity in the region for good, farmers must learn to adapt their water usage and employ new techniques for conserving the precious resource, they say.

“We cannot build an unlimited number of reservoirs or canals - there is a limit to the amount of water we can provide," said irrigation official Shanmugasivanathan. "What is important right now is to pay attention to water management."

(Reporting by Amantha Perera; editing by Megan Rowling)

Sri Lankan Muslims and alleged IS connection

The entire world knows who created Taliban and Jihadi groups in Afghanistan. When Afghanistan Jihadi groups fought with Russia, They are not labelled as terrorists by USA but supported, helped and trained. Yet, when these Jihadi groups went against USA interest. They become enemies.

by Rifai

( July 24, 2015, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) It is reported that karate teacher called Abu Shuraih Sailani from Sri Lanka has been recently killed in Syria fighting for IS. If this report is true this should send shock waves among Sri Lankan Muslim community. Muslim community should take precautionary steps that no more Muslim become of victim of indoctrination to this radical ideology. In this virtual world of globalization and internet communication, it would be very much a daunting task to monitor each and every person in any community. So, it would be pointless to blame any parent or community for this kind of radicalization. Even it would be pointless to blame any group for the action of individual. Unfortunately,   some politicians and groups have been trying to get some political gains out this man’s personal self-destruction or suicidal path. We, Sri Lankan Muslim community fully condemn his action. We assume that he went to Syria on his own choice even without approval of his family members. It is his personal view and his personal choice.

It would be utterly wrong to generalise this man’s choice and brand the entire Sri Lankan Muslim community as supporters of IS. Muslim community in Sri Lanka is nothing to do with IS or with this man’s fighting for IS. It would be wrong to argue that Muslim community is linked or connected to any similar groups. We should categorically tell the world that Sri Lankan Muslim community is a unique community and Muslim people of Sri Lanka are indigenous Sri Lankan community. We have our own Sri Lankan Muslim cultural and religious identity. We do not have any connection with any international radical or extremist groups in the world. This case is an isolated incident. Muslim community in Sri Lanka will never and ever operate against the integrity of this nation. They never have been a security threat for this nation. Today some groups are trying to inflate this one man’s plight into a national problem. It has been claimed that Al-Qaeda, Taliban and IS have been a national security threat for Sri Lanka. This inflated and exaggerated claim has no any solid substantiated evidence. We do not have any terrorist training camps in Sri Lanka among Muslim community.   We do not have any IS or terrorist groups’ connection among Sri Lankan community. You cannot generalise this isolated incident of this nature to brand entire Sri Lankan Muslim community with terrorism.

It has been customary tradition of some politicians to make some political gains out of some miseries, unfortunate incidents or wrong doings of some radicals as in case of IS. Not only in Sri Lanka all over the world, politicians have habits of exaggerating and inflating some incidents to make political gains or divert attention of people from main burning issues and problems. George Monbiot freelance journalist has written a critical article about David Cameron’s political rhetoric. I think that his critical analysis resembles the political rhetoric of our politicians in Sri Lanka. George Monbiot argues that by inflating Islamic extremism, David Cameron has lost sight of what really threatens us (UK guardian 21-07-2015). I will make some parallels and comparisons between him and some of our politicians. Politicians are politicians whether they live in the UK or in Sri Lanka. Sometime they do not substantiate their arguments with evidence or facts rather they try to maximise some political gains out of some incidents. G. Monbiot argues that “The Taliban, al-Qaida, Saddam Hussein, Isis, Islamic extremism: none of these were, or are, existential threats to the life of this country. But all are inflated until they appear to be so, invested with almost supernatural power by prime ministers hoping to be cast in bronze. This inflation, as we discovered in Iraq, has consequences……. Yes, Islamic extremism is real. Yes, it creates genuine problems and presents genuine threats. But to claim it as the struggle of our generation suggests a total collapse of perspective. In terms of mortal risks to people in this nation, it might rank among the top 50, but that’s probably stretching it. Diet, smoking, alcohol, loneliness, the slow collapse of the NHS, child poverty, air pollution, traffic accidents, lack of exercise, even the wrong kind of bedroom slippers are likely to kill far more people in this country than Islamist terrorists will manage”.

To divert peoples’ attention from crucial burning issues, sometimes politicians highlight lesser important issues. In the UK as George Monbiot pointed there are so many crucial important issues to debate and find solutions and yet, politicians will portray IS thereat as number one security threat. In the same vein, the former defence secretary in Sri Lanka has argued that the IS is a security threat to Sri Lanka. This is nothing but a political rhetoric to mislead people and get more votes for his political party.

The origin and rapid development of ISIS or IS has been puzzling many academics and intellectuals. There have been many conspiracy theories about the origin of this this group. It is reported that this was initially created by Saudi and some Gulf countries to counter Shia militia groups. IS group went against Saudi and its allies and it begun to establish its own caliphate according its narratives of Islamic caliphate. This was one theory. ISIS or IS cannot emerge out of blue Sky rather there must be some backing for its abrupt arrival. Where did they get weapons and money to maintain this war machine for more than three years now? Who support them? It is very much similar to Indian government’s role in the origin and development of LTTE. Initially India supported and nurtured LTTE but when LTTE went against Indian government’s interest, India went for all-out war against LTTE.

The entire world knows who created Taliban and Jihadi groups in Afghanistan. When Afghanistan Jihadi groups fought with Russia, They are not labelled as terrorists by USA but supported, helped and trained. Yet, when these Jihadi groups went against USA interest. They become enemies. According to some theories, ISIS is a product of some third party. It could be Israel or Saudi or USA. Consider how IS overthrow Iraq army and occupied a large part of Iraq and Syria without any third party support. Where did they get weapons and manpower to occupy so quickly two countries?   Who supported them? These are some puzzling questions.

In Middle East so many proxy wars take place between Israel, Saudi, and Iran and so on groups. Shia and Sunni proxy wars take place in each part of Muslim world. USA and its allies play war games with these groups. USA wants to flush out radicals from Muslim world, it may be al-Qaida or Taliban and IS. Without knowing these dirty tricks, Muslim youths are trapped in this geopolitical and religious wars. Emotionally charged, religiously misguided and misinformed Muslim youths from all part of Muslim world are trapped in this dirty ideological war. This man from Sri Lanka is not exceptional to this dirty trap.

There is no place for terror in Islam. This man may have been a victim of wrong indoctrination and brain wash. We are condemning this man actions with strongest words. No more Sri Lankan Muslim should become victim of this group. It is duty of Muslim leaders, clerics and academic to educate Muslim community in Sri Lanka about the danger of this group.

Some journalists and politicians have tried to exaggerate and inflate this issue. They try to depict the entire Muslim world with the name of IS as if the entire world approves the dirty works of IS. More than 99% percentage of Muslims disapprove what IS dose in the name of Islam today. Of course, it is pathetic to see that today mass killings and genocide take place in Muslim world right now today. Yet, it is not Muslim world that sets examples for mass killings and genocides rather a cursory examination into recent history of wars in recent time reveals some shocking statistics.

Tell me who killed most human beings in history? Is it Muslims or is it Christians? Who Bombed Japan killing thousands in one day in WW11? Who killed 6 million in WW1? Who killed Millions in WW11? Who killed millions in colonization of third world? Who killed millions in Spanish wars? Who killed millions in salve trades of African people? Who killed millions In Roman Empire wars? It is all so called white people. Now, of course, some Muslim fanatics do these killings. More than one million innocent Iraqis are killed in name of war on terror. Thousands of innocent people are killed in Pakistan and Afghanistan in the name of war on terror. America and its allies have killed thousands disproportionately in search of terrorists. In our debate about war on terror we have forgotten to know disproportionate rates of killings by both sides. While we condemn IS and its barbarism, we should equally condemn indiscriminate killings of innocent people by American allies in the name of war on terror. We should be objective in our analysis of events and facts. Justice is unconditional. There is no one justice for third world and another one for developed world. There is no one justice for American people and another one for poor Iraqis.

Two dead, seven hurt in Louisiana cinema shooting

FRIDAY 24 JULY 2015
Two people have died and seven have been injured after a gunman opened fire at a cinema in the US state of Louisiana.

The 58-year-old "lone white male" opened fire about 20 minutes into a screening of the film Train Wreck at the Grand Theatre in Lafayette, before shooting himself dead.

It came just hours after US President Barack Obama said one of his biggest frustrations was the failure to pass "common-sense gun safety laws" in the United States.

Lafayette Police Chief Jim Craft said officers and emergency workers were called to the cinema around 7.30pm.

In total 10 people were shot and eight were taken to hospital, three were crucially injured. Mr Craft said that one person who underwent surgery was "not doing well".

Eye-witness Tanya Clark told a local television station that she initially thought it was a prank but then saw a woman covered in blood and ran out of the cinema.

Authorities said they know the shooter's identity and that he had a criminal history, but they are not releasing his name during the early stage of the investigation.

'Furious and sad'

An area around a car which belonged to the gunman was evacuated after a suspicious item was spotted inside. Around 100 people are thought to have been in and around the cinema at the time of the shooting.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal said: "As governor, as a father and as a husband, whenever we hear about these senseless acts of violence it makes us both furious and sad at the same time."

In an interview hours before the shooting, President Obama said the one area where he has been most frustrated with his presidency is not clamping-down on gun laws.

"The United States of America is the one advanced nation on Earth in which we do not have sufficient common-sense gun safety laws, even in the face of repeated mass killings," he told the BBC.

The Louisiana shooting comes three years after a gunman opened fire at a movie theatre in Aurora, Colorado, during a screening of the Batman film The Dark Knight Rises, killing 12 people and wounding 70 others.