Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Tuesday, July 19, 2016

A 17-year-old Afghan asylum seeker is suspected of carrying out an ax attack on a German commuter train. The Islamic State has claimed that the young man was a “fighter” of the group. (Jason Aldag/The Washington Post)


 A teenage Afghan asylum seeker who police say carried out an ax attack on a German commuter train pledged allegiance to the Islamic State before he set out on his mission, fueling a roiling debate in Germany about whether a historic influx of migrants has imported conflict from the Middle East to the undulating hills of Bavaria.

The Islamic State released a video it said the teenager made before using an ax and knife to injure five people, leaving two of them with “acute, life-threatening wounds,” according to an investigator. In the video — recorded in what appeared to be the bedroom of his foster residence — he vowed to create so much destruction that he would wipe out memories of Thursday’s attack in Nice, France, which claimed 85 lives.

The revelation that the attacker, killed by police and identified by security officials only as “R.A.,” was an Afghan migrant who registered in Germany in June 2015 ignited fresh questions about whether Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open door last year to migrants had imperiled her nation’s security and overtaxed its ability to integrate them. Politicians and analysts said the attack was likely to further sour German citizens’ attitudes toward the newcomers in their midst.

“With an ax on a moving regional train. How often did this happen in the 20th century, and why not?” wrote Marcus Pretzell, a member of the Alternative for Germany party who is a lawmaker in the European Parliament, on Twitter. Pretzell has advocated using armed force to defend Germany’s border from asylum seekers.
Authorities say some of the victims were critically injured when a man attacked passengers on a train in Bavaria, but the motive for the attack is still unclear. (Reuters)

Analysts said that Monday’s attack may be a turning point in Germany’s discussion about migration, particularly since anger had already grown following sexual assaults on New Year’s Eve in Cologne on about 1,200 women. Those attacks were largely blamed on men of North African and Arab origin.

“The climate of the debate will change,” said Heinrich Oberreuter, a political scientist at the University of Passau. “The federal government will be forced to put the problem of internal security into the center of its refugee policy.”

Germans initially greeted asylum seekers with roses, clothing and sustenance during peak arrivals late last year. But a series of attacks and assaults linked to immigrants has changed attitudes and sent Merkel’s approval rating plummeting ahead of 2017 elections. Merkel and her allies have since sought to harden Europe’s borders, and they have acknowledged missteps in how they handled the influx of more than 2 million people, the largest since 1950.

The anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany party, meanwhile, has been surging at the polls.

There were few reassurances Tuesday from German leaders, who were left to deal with the consequences of the second Islamic State-linked attack in Europe in less than a week, following the Bastille Day truck attack in Nice. Even though the militant group claimed responsibility for both strikes, investigators have not yet found evidence that it directed either attack. 


“In principle, such acts can already be perpetrated every day in every place, more or less worldwide,” said Joachim Herrmann, interior minister for the state of Bavaria. “We are not safe.”

In a measure of the political sensitivity of the incident, he warned against “sweeping judgments” about refugees.

Merkel has acknowledged that militants used the migrant route last year to smuggle themselves into Europe, creating the biggest challenge yet to her 11-year rule. Refugee flows have since halted after a deal with Turkey to house more people there.

“Our structures were overwhelmed,” said the powerful ­center-left leader of the North Rhine-Westphalia region, Hannelore Kraft, who last year was far more welcoming toward asylum seekers. “That’s why I am glad that our borders are tight for the first time,” she told the WDR broadcaster in comments published hours before the train incident.

The attacker arrived in Germany last year as an unaccompanied minor and registered his asylum claim in March, authorities said Tuesday. He lived in a group home for underage asylum seekers in Bavaria starting in March before moving in with a foster family near Würzburg two weeks ago. 

Prosecutors said the teenager had just learned of a friend’s death in Afghanistan over the weekend. In a Pashto-language note found in his bedroom, he vowed to “take revenge on these infidels,” investigators said. Investigator Lothar Koehler said that the teenager posted a cryptic online message about the “enemies of Islam” hours before the attack.

When searching his house, investigators also found a notepad with a drawing of the Islamic State flag and what they believe to be a farewell note to his father. In the video, issued by the Islamic State’s Amaq news agency, a young man identifies himself as a “soldier of the caliphate” and threatens further attacks by the group “in every village, city and airport,” according to a translation by the SITE Intelligence Group, which tracks jihadist organizations.

“I lived among you and in your houses. . . . I will slaughter you in your houses and tear you apart,” he said, gesturing with a kitchen knife about three or four inches long.

An unnamed police official told the German DPA news agency that authorities believed that the man in the video was the attacker. German authorities said they found no evidence of direct communication between the militant group and the attacker.

The Islamic State said that the teen was a “fighter” for the group, the Amaq agency said. Islamic State leaders have called on followers to strike Western targets even without direct support or approval from the group’s formal structures. If an attacker pledges allegiance to the group before an attack, the Islamic State will typically claim the violence as its own.

Herrmann said acquaintances had not seen any outward indications of changes in behavior or views by the teen, suggesting that he may have “suddenly reoriented in a short period of time.” Acquaintances described a “calm” and “well-adjusted” young man who attended a mosque on religious holidays but showed no signs of extremism, Herrmann said.

Police could hear a male shouting “Allahu akbar” — Arabic for “God is great” — when a passenger on the train called them during the attack, investigators said.

On Monday around 9 p.m., the teenager boarded the commuter line that runs from Treuchtlingen to Würzburg in the southern German province of Bavaria. The train, carrying 20 to 30 passengers, had just pulled out of the station when the youth began his attack, wielding the ax to strike heavy blows to the heads of his victims, Herrmann said. 

Four people sustained injuries before the assailant fled from the train when someone pulled its emergency brake in the town of Heidingsfeld, a suburb of Würzburg. As he ran, he attacked a woman who was walking her dog, seriously injuring her. A specialized police unit that happened to be in the area found him on the bank of the Main River and fatally shot him. 

The people injured on the train were members of a family from Hong Kong, Herrmann said, and one of them remained in serious condition.

Birnbaum reported from Brussels.

Kashmir protests flare, three killed as army opens fire

A man shows his tooth to Indian policemen as he seeks permission to see a doctor after he was stopped during a curfew in Srinagar July 19, 2016.--Policemen stand next to a burning handcart set on fire by demonstrators during a protest in Srinagar against the recent killings in Kashmir, July 18, 2016.
A policeman runs during a protest in Srinagar against the recent killings in Kashmir, July 18, 2016.--A girl walks past a burning tyre set afire by protesters during a curfew in Srinagar July 18, 2016.

BY FAYAZ BUKHARI-Jul 19, 2016 

Soldiers fired on a stone-throwing crowd defying a curfew in the Kashmir region, killing three people, police said on Tuesday, as unrest sparked by the death of a separatist militant flared.

Authorities have imposed a curfew in Muslim-majority Kashmir for 11 days, blocked mobile phones and briefly ordered curbs on newspapers to stop people from gathering and to control the worst outbreak of violence there in six years.

Late on Monday, protesters blocked a road and threw stones at an army convoy.

"Some miscreants then tried to snatch weapons from the army and tried to set vehicles on fire," a police spokesman said on Tuesday.

The army opened fire after the protesters refused to heed warnings and two women were killed, the spokesman said.

A third person died in hospital on Tuesday, taking the death toll to 42 since protests erupted on July 9 over the killing of Burhan Wani, 22, a commander of the Hizbul Mujahideen militant group, the previous day.

About 3,500 people have been hurt, many with eye injuries caused by pellets Indian forces have been firing from a non-lethal weapon. The injuries have fuelled anger.

Kashmir is India's only Muslim-majority state and has been contentious since India and Muslim Pakistan were carved out of British-ruled India and declared independent in 1947.

Both sides rule the Himalayan region in part but claim it in full and India has long accused Pakistan of arming separatists battling Indian forces in its part of Kashmir. Pakistan denies that.

The young militant Wani represented a new generation of fighters in a region where alienation runs deep even though attacks have fallen dramatically since the revolt broke out in 1989.

Interior minister, Rajnath Singh, said he had ordered security forces to exercise restraint. He told parliament he would visit Kashmir soon and hold talks with people "whose pain is being felt by every Indian".

The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, which has advocated a tough stand on Kashmir, shares power with a regional party in Kashmir and has been criticised for failing to address grievances.

The publisher of Kashmir's largest-circulation newspaper said authorities had asked him to resume publication after police seized newspapers over the weekend and shut down cable television, saying it was necessary to stop people from fomenting trouble.

But Abdul Rashid Mukhdoomi, printer and publisher of Greater Kashmir, said he was meeting other publishers to decide whether to resume publication under the curfew.

Militants claiming to be "brothers close" to Al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent had called on social media for people in Kashmir to attack Indian forces, U.S. intelligence group SITE said on Monday.

(Writing by Sanjeev Miglani; Editing by Robert Birsel)

The Police Are Victimized By Their Training

POLICE_TRAINING_USA

by Paul Craig Roberts

( July 19, 2016. Washington DC, Sri Lanka Guardian) It is too early to know if the shooting of police in Dallas and Baton Rouge are the beginnings of acts of retribution against police for their wanton murders of citizens. The saying is that “what goes around, comes around.” If police murders of citizens have provoked retribution, police and those who train them need to be honest and recognize that they have brought it upon themselves.

Killings by police have gone on too long. The killings are too gratuitous, and the police have largely escaped accountability for actions that, if committed by private citizens, would result in life imprisonment or the death penalty.

There has been no accountability, because the police unions and the white community rush to the defense of the police. In rare instances when prosecutors bring charges, as in the case of Freddie Gray, the police are not convicted.

Presstitutes treat killings by police as acts of racism, and that is the way the public sees them. This infuriates black communities even more as the indifference of whites to the murders is regarded as racist acceptance of the murder of black people.

In actual fact, police kill more whites than blacks, and often black police are involved in the killings of blacks. For example, of the six police responsible for Freddie Gray’s death, three are black.

The different attitude between whites and blacks to killings by police is explained by the fact that whites assume that police seldom, if ever, behave inappropriately, whereas blacks have witnessed many killings by police and subsequent lack of concern by white communities other than concern that blacks will riot in protest. To blacks it looks like racism. To whites it looks like justice.

As I reported, killings and violent abuse of the public by the police can be explained by the change in their training. The police or many of them are being trained to react as a military occupying a hostile population. An occupying force is taught to protect itself, not the public.

This training works for the Israeli army occupying Palestine, but it does not work on the streets and in the homes of the United States. The Israeli methods have clearly failed for the American public and, if Dallas and Baton Rouge are the beginning stages of retribution, also for the police.

Iceland: the world's most feminist country

Iceland has just banned all strip clubs. Perhaps it's down to the lesbian prime minister, but this may just be the most female-friendly country on the planet
Iceland's Prime Minister Johanna Sigurdardottir
Johanna Sigurdardottir, prime minister of Iceland. Photograph: Bob Strong/REUTERS

-Thursday 25 March 2010

The following correction was printed in the Guardian's Corrections and clarifications column, Saturday 27 March 2010

Iceland's prime minister, Johanna Sigurdardottir, was wrongly credited with being the country's first female head of state. That honour goes to Vigdis Finnbogadottir, who served as president from 1980 to 1996

Iceland is fast becoming a world-leader in feminism. A country with a tiny population of 320,000, it is on the brink of achieving what many considered to be impossible: closing down its sex industry.

While activists in Britain battle on in an attempt to regulate lapdance clubs – the number of which has been growing at an alarming rate during the last decade – Iceland has passed a law that will result in every strip club in the country being shut down. And forget hiring a topless waitress in an attempt to get around the bar: the law, which was passed with no votes against and only two abstentions, will make it illegal for any business to profit from the nudity of its employees.

Even more impressive: the Nordic state is the first country in the world to ban stripping and lapdancing for feminist, rather than religious, reasons. Kolbrún Halldórsdóttir, the politician who first proposed the ban, firmly told the national press on Wednesday: "It is not acceptable that women or people in general are a product to be sold." When I asked her if she thinks Iceland has become the greatest feminist country in the world, she replied: "It is certainly up there. Mainly as a result of the feminist groups putting pressure on parliamentarians. These women work 24 hours a day, seven days a week with their campaigns and it eventually filters down to all of society."

The news is a real boost to feminists around the world, showing us that when an entire country unites behind an idea anything can happen. And it is bound to give a shot in the arm to the feminist campaign in the UK against an industry that is both a cause and a consequence of gaping inequality between men and women.

According to Icelandic police, 100 foreign women travel to the country annually to work in strip clubs. It is unclear whether the women are trafficked, but feminists say it is telling that as the stripping industry has grown, the number of Icelandic women wishing to work in it has not. Supporters of the bill say that some of the clubs are a front for prostitution – and that many of the women work there because of drug abuse and poverty rather than free choice. I have visited a strip club in Reykjavik and observed the women. None of them looked happy in their work.

So how has Iceland managed it? To start with, it has a strong women's movement and a high number of female politicans. Almost half the parliamentarians are female and it was ranked fourth out of 130 countries on the international gender gap index (behind Norway, Finland and Sweden). All four of these Scandinavian countries have, to some degree, criminalised the purchase of sex (legislation that the UK will adopt on 1 April). "Once you break past the glass ceiling and have more than one third of female politicians," says Halldórsdóttir, "something changes. Feminist energy seems to permeate everything."

Johanna Sigurðardottir is Iceland's first female and the world's first openly lesbian head of state. Guðrún Jónsdóttir of Stígamót, an organisation based in Reykjavik that campaigns against sexual violence, says she has enjoyed the support of Sigurðardottir for their campaigns against rape and domestic violence: 
"Johanna is a great feminist in that she challenges the men in her party and refuses to let them oppress her."

Then there is the fact that feminists in Iceland appear to be entirely united in opposition to prostitution, unlike the UK where heated debates rage over whether prostitution and lapdancing are empowering or degrading to women. There is also public support: the ban on commercial sexual activity is not only supported by feminists but also much of the population. A 2007 poll found that 82% of women and 57% of men support the criminalisation of paying for sex – either in brothels or lapdance clubs – and fewer than 10% of Icelanders were opposed.

Jónsdóttir says the ban could mean the death of the sex industry. "Last year we passed a law against the purchase of sex, recently introduced an action plan on trafficking of women, and now we have shut down the strip clubs. The Nordic countries are leading the way on women's equality, recognising women as equal citizens rather than commodities for sale."

Strip club owners are, not surprisingly, furious about the new law. One gave an interview to a local newspaper in which he likened Iceland's approach to that of a country such as Saudi Arabia, where it is not permitted to see any part of a woman's body in public. "I have reached the age where I'm not sure whether I want to bother with this hassle any more," he said.

Janice Raymond, a director of Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, hopes that all sex industry profiteers feel the same way, and believes the new law will pave the way for governments in other countries to follow suit. "What a victory, not only for the Icelanders but for everyone worldwide who repudiates the sexual exploitation of women," she says.

Jónsdóttir is confident that the law will create a change in attitudes towards women. "I guess the men of Iceland will just have to get used to the idea that women are not for sale."

Who Will Stop Venezuela’s Slow Self-Coup?


The U.S. is doing little to help defend democracy, which will please the Castros.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas, June 24.
Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas, June 24. PHOTO: REUTERS

By MARY ANASTASIA O’GRADY-July 17, 2016
Eleven newborn babies died recently due to a respiratory bacteria outbreak in the neonatal unit of a hospital in the city of Maturín in Venezuela’s Monagas state. According to press reports, in May the director of the “child protection system” at the Central Hospital of San Cristobál in Táchira state said that at least 70 sick babies had perished in 2016 because the hospital lacked supplies to care for them.

Dire food and medicine shortages, the collapse of the health care, sanitation and transportation infrastructure, and hyperinflation have all led to speculation that the Venezuelan government, headed by Nicolás Maduro, will soon fall. But the Cuban-backed regime is entering a new phase of self-preservation. Havana has no intention of losing its hold over its most valuable satellite.

The Venezuelan government’s most urgent task is to fend off demands for a presidential-recall referendum this year—though the right to hold it is guaranteed by the constitution. If President Maduro were to lose that vote, there would have to be an election within 30 days. The next Cuban-proxy candidate put forth for the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) would almost certainly lose.

If the referendum can be delayed until next year, then even if Mr. Maduro loses, his PSUV vice president would finish his term, which ends in 2019.

The opposition is pushing hard for the government to abide by the constitution and is seeking help from the international community. The Obama administration is instead supporting a “dialogue” between the government and the opposition, led by the former president of Spain, the Socialist Workers’ Party’s José Luís Rodríguez Zapatero. This delay tactic is designed to help the PSUV retain power while it finishes militarizing the government so it can rule indefinitely.

That process accelerated last week when Mr. Maduro put the defense minister, Gen. Vladimir Padrino López, in charge of all cabinet ministries. It means that Venezuela is now run by a quasi-military junta with the general sharing power with Mr. Maduro. Gen. Padrino will also head the newly created “Great Mission of Sovereign Supply,” which will manage the supply and distribution of food. The military also took over the country’s ports, which until now have been under civilian control.

Latin Americans call this kind of handover of power a “self-coup,” because it shifts authority from elected officials to outsiders who are not constitutionally in line to succeed the president.

It is unlikely that this was Mr. Maduro’s idea. Rather, having taken note of the president’s unpopularity, his Cuban handlers are making adjustments. Though the 53-year-old Gen. Padrino once trained with the U.S. military, he has found favor with the Castros. In February the general was named to head a new military-industrial mining, oil and gas company that will rival the state-owned oil company PdVSA.
Venezuela is also adjusting its socialist economic model, using a template the Castros borrowed from Russia’s Vladimir Putin. With the assistance of Mr. Obama, they are inviting in U.S. capital investment so they can consolidate power for the next generation.

Venezuela unwittingly displayed to the world the failure of the Bolivarian revolution’s economic plan on July 10 when it reopened the once-busy Venezuelan border crossing near the Colombian city of Cúcuta. It had been closed for almost a year. In a 12-hour period, an estimated 35,000 Venezuelans surged into Colombia to buy food and other necessities. There was similar surge this weekend with another temporary opening.

Farther north in the state of Zulia, my sources say, the chavista government has been permitting entrepreneurs to bring Colombian goods across the border duty-free and sell them in the formal economy at free-market prices since March. On June 27, Zulia’s secretary of the interior, Giovanny Villalobos, admitted to the Venezuelan news outlet La Verdad that this is happening. The aim, he said, is “to guarantee” the importation of food for the middle class, put an end to the black market and allow the government to help the truly needy.

It would be a mistake to read this as a surrender to democratic capitalism. Just as the Cuban police state is making careful use of American capitalists, Caracas is making use of the market for survival.

It wouldn’t be surprising to learn that the Obama administration is unwilling to back the restoration of Venezuelan democracy because that would put at risk its efforts to solidify the U.S.-Cuban friendship. If a new Venezuelan government were to stop financing Cuba—which it continues to do despite its own distress—the island would sink and Mr. Obama’s legacy “achievement” would likely sink with it.

An equal disincentive for Mr. Obama to help Venezuelan democrats is that, with Cuban mentoring, Caracas has built a weapons arsenal for its civilian militia. Rumors abound that a successful recall vote would trigger the distribution of those weapons and an ugly outbreak of violence on a grand scale. That may be unavoidable, but Mr. Obama no doubt would prefer to be out of the White House if it happens.
Write to O’Grady@wsj.com.

Frenchman detained in Indonesia for playing Pokemon Go on military base


Pokemon Go is displayed on a smartphone. Pic: AP.

19th July 2016

A FRENCHMAN is believed to be among the first of Pokemon Go players to land in hot water for playing the smartphone-based game in a high security area, leading to his arrest in Indonesia this morning.

Indonesian police said the man was detained after he entered a military base while playing the augmented reality game.

A spokesman for West Java police said Tuesday that Romain Pierre, 27, was caught at a checkpoint after initially running away when challenged by security guards at the military complex in Cirebon.


Col. Yusri Yunus, the police spokesman, said Pierre was released after a few hours because it became apparent “he unintentionally entered the complex as he was hunting Pokemon while jogging.”

Pokemon Go has not been officially released in Indonesia but is already popular.

Some officials have voiced worries that the game could pose a security threat.

The mobile game, which uses augmented reality to allow players to search for and ‘catch’ Pokémon, has taken the world by storm since its release last week.


So far, it has only been released in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Portugal.

Even though the Asian release is still up in the air, impatient fans have been downloading and installing an unofficial APK file, which may, however, make their mobile devices vulnerable to being hacked, and runs the risk of their phones being banned from playing the game once it is officially released.

Those who are willing to take the risk have been seen roaming the streets, with resourceful Indonesian players resorting to hiring ‘ojek’ (motorcycle taxi) services to hunt for Pokémon.

Knees, stretching and heel-striking: three running myths debunked

How to avoid injury, reduce muscle soreness and improve your fitness
 Loosening up: how important is it to stretch before running? Photograph: Artiga Photo/Getty Images
Going weak at the knees? The risk of arthritis is much lower than many assume. Photograph: Todor Tsvetkov/Getty Images---Best foot forward: but how should you land? Photograph: Yuri Arcurs/Getty Images

-Monday 18 July 2016

You’ll wreck your knees

You can see the logic. For every stride a runner takes, pounding the pavement, it is the poor old knees soaking up the impact, destroying that cartilage, bit by bit, until he or she is a dead cert for arthritis. Yet the evidence actually shows the reverse may be true.

study of nearly 75,000 runners and nearly 15,000 walkers published in 2013 found that runners were significantly less likely to develop arthritis than the walkers – the risk was actually roughly half. Paul Williams, the author of the study, suggested that running lowers BMI more than walking, and that lower body weight is the key to preventing arthritis. Further, his study showed that the greater the weekly mileage of the runner, the lower their risk rate dropped. Again, this could be related to a lower body weight: the single-largest risk factor for knee osteoarthritis is obesity.
There is, he concludes, “no evidence that running increases the risk of osteoarthritis, including participation in marathons.”

Of course, if you have a family history of, or susceptibility to, arthritis, then this is not to suggest that taking up running is a good idea. As a study published last year in the British Journal of Sports Medicine says: “Much remains unknown and the running research base to inform clinical decision-making is thin” – this applies particularly to those who already have a diagnosis of joint pain or osteoarthritis.

What remains likely, however, is that for those in general good health, and with no risk factors, the benefits of running would outweigh any potential risk to the joints.

Stretching is vital

Popular wisdom has it that if you don’t stretch before, or after – or both – every run, you’ll be susceptible to injuries, not recover as quickly and be hobbling painfully for days. Not necessarily so. A review by the Cochrane research network looked into the effects of stretching on muscle soreness and found consistent results across 12 relevant, randomised controlled studies. Eleven, admittedly, were pretty small (10-30 people), while one was very large (2,337 people, around half in the “stretching” v control groups). But while some of the studies were of better quality than others, the consistent results were the same: that stretching had little or no effect in reducing soreness.

Advertisement

So what about injury prevention? There is precious little evidence here, too – though the issue is also very hard to study, as the variables are so great. Most studies look simply at groups who stretch, groups who don’t, and then count the injuries in each. It’s not the best method but, for what it’s worth, it shows no correlation between stretching and injury prevention. A review in the Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine concluded that “the basic scientific literature supports the epidemiological evidence that stretching before exercise does not reduce the risk of injury”. In another review, the same author concluded: “Studies suggesting that stretching before exercise is not beneficial should be weighted as stronger.”

There is even some suggestion that stretching (particularly of the static kind) could be actively bad for you, though this seems to apply more to sprinters than endurance runners. What is now universally agreed, however, is that functional movement is more important than static stretching. If you really want to stretch before running, make it “active” rather than static. Or just start at a really, really easy pace.
Heel-striking bad, midfoot good, barefoot is best

For many years, the vogue in recreational running has been to be as “natural” as possible. The theory goes that you are less likely to be injured if you run in the way that “nature intended” – though nature presumably didn’t intend concrete, tarmac, broken glass, sedentary lifestyles and expensive running shoes.

The problem is that much of the impetus for this idea – aside fromChristopher McDougall’s Born to Run book, about the literally barefootTarahumara Native Americans in Mexico – comes from the observation that elite athletes don’t heel strike, that is, landing on the heel first, but instead run on the forefoot. There are several problems here. First, sometimes they do heel strike and, second, when they don’t, it’s largely a result of the simple mechanics of running that fast. Try sprinting and heel striking at the same time: it just isn’t physically possible. However, if you run at a less godlike pace – as 99.9% of us do – it may actually be more efficient to heel strike: researchers at the University of Massachusetts demonstrated in a computer-simulated study that at a 7:36-minute-a-mile pace, heel striking was approximately 6% more efficient than mid or forefoot striking. Other research suggests that the “threshold” where the economy levels out between mid and heel strikers is 6:25 mile pace.

study from 2012 of 52 athletes at a US college did show that the forefoot strikers had fewer injuries than heel strikers, but this proved little – the numbers are too small, the variables are too many. More to the point, these runners were “natural” forefoot strikers, not those who had chosen to make a deliberate change to their style.

This, really, is the point for most runners: if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Forums online are full of people asking how they can “transition” to a more “natural” style, then claiming (anecdotal) evidence of how brilliant it is. The reality is that the transition involves starting again from scratch: a process that would fix most injuries, regardless of what style you start running in.

Monday, July 18, 2016





By Jehan Perera- 

The international community appears to be accepting the Sri Lankan government’s position that international judges will not sit in judgment regarding the alleged war crimes during the course of the country’s civil war. The UN Human Rights Council resolution of October 2015 which the government co-sponsored left the situation ambiguous. It stated that there would be international participation of foreign and Commonwealth judges but did not specify in what form that participation would be.

Initially this clause in the UNHRC resolution was interpreted in the light of the report of the expert panel commissioned by the UN Human Rights Commissioner. This report recommended a hybrid court, which would have both Sri Lankan and international judges. The international community, and Tamil leaders in particular interpreted the UNHRC resolution to mean that international judges would be participating as sitting judges who would deliver judgments as to whether war crimes took place or not.

At an early meeting not long after the co-sponsoring of the UNHRC resolution by the government, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe addressed civil society activists and explained to them that Sri Lankan judges sat on international tribunals and there was nothing new in international judges taking part in Sri Lankan investigations. This has occurred when Prime Minister SWRD Bandaranaike was assassinated in 1958 and also again in 2007 when President Mahinda Rajapaksa invited an eminent group of international experts to advise a presidential commission into serious human rights violations.

However, the joint opposition’s success in mobilizing large numbers of people to its rallies, and its use of the UNHRC resolution to whip up doubts about jeopardising of the country’s sovereignty under the current government catalysed a rethinking of government strategy with regard to the accountability issue. President Maithripala Sirisena began to publicly state that no foreign judges would sit in judgment on war related human rights violations, and this was followed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe assuring the military on similar lines. Now the international community that pushed for the UNHRC resolutions appears to be taking the same stance. In quick succession representatives of the United States and the European Union have made public pronouncements on the issue.

SIMILAR STANCE

Speaking to journalists while in Sri Lanka last week visiting US assistant secretary Tom Malinowski said that the Sri Lankan government would determine the structure of the domestic mechanism and the international community will respect decisions taken by the current government. He has been quoted as saying, "These are complicated issues and there needs to be a process of consultation with all in order to ensure these things are done in a way that earns confidence of the people." He said the U.N. resolution respected Sri Lanka's sovereignty. "Under the resolution, the government of Sri Lanka will determine the structure and the composition of the court," he said, noting that Sri Lanka had made a commitment to include some international participation in the investigation.

Acting EU Head of mission in Colombo Paul Godfrey was similarly reported as saying that the European Union did not insist on foreign judges on the judicial mechanism to probe alleged war crimes to assure an element of credibility, instead they would wait and see what the government comes up on its own. He added that the EU will push for international judges to the proposed special court in Sri Lanka's transitional justice mechanism only if the indigenous system lacks credibility and independence.

In 2009 when the United States first sponsored a draft resolution to compel Sri Lanka to subscribe to international standards of accountability for war crimes, the situation in both Sri Lanka and the world was different to what it is today. At that time the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa was dismissive of human rights violations and rejected them even going to the extent of declaring that there were zero civilian casualties. It is unfortunate that due to this cavalier attitude Sri Lanka became a test case of whether the international community could or could not rein in its member states on issues of respect for human rights.

In addition the Rajapaksa government also sought to export the Sri Lankan model of ending ethnic conflicts through a military solution. The first visit of President Rajapaksa to a foreign country was to Myanmar where met with the Chairman of the State Peace and Development Council of the Union of Myanmar, Senior General Than Shwe and with Prime Minister General Thein Sein. Myanmar has been involved in combating ethnic insurgencies for decades in virtually all of its states, with 17 ethnic armed organisations in operation at this time.

However, the adverse international fallout that came to Sri Lanka due to the successive UNHRC resolutions against it would have served as a warning to other countries not to emulate Sri Lanka on account of the high political and human costs. Instead of President Rajapaksa’s offer to provide Myanmar with Sri Lanka’s experience in combating ethnic insurgency, Myanmar has been following a different policy of ensuring democratization by means of ceasefires with the ethnic armed organizations and has also a nationwide ceasefire agreement which includes a framework for political dialogue that includes a pledge of federalism as a political solution.

SHARING EXPERIENCES

Today Sri Lanka has different and more positive messages to offer countries such as Myanmar which are grappling with problems that Sri Lanka has dealt with and overcome in some cases. Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera has stated that the government is coming up is a unique Sri Lankan model and expressed his confidence that it would be a blueprint for transitional justice mechanisms of the future in other parts of the world. An example is the ongoing peace process in Myanmar. Myanmar will need to have transitional justice processes in place even as it reaches accommodation with the ethnic armed organizations due to the serious violations of human rights that have taken place due to the long years of insurgency and military rule.

Sri Lanka is seen as a fraternal Buddhist majority country, with which Myanmar has longstanding Buddhist ties dating from the time of King Vijayabahu 1 in the 11th century to the restoration of Buddhism in Sri Lanka in the 18th century with the help of Buddhist monks from Amarapura and Ramanna. How Sri Lanka handles its transitional justice process and deals with the past, and with the issue of accountability, can influence the direction that Myanmar takes.

The change of government that took place in Sri Lanka in 2015 and the cooperative attitude of the new government in regard to meeting international standards whether in war time accountability or fishing practices have reduced the need for international pressure. It has also oriented the international community to restore to Sri Lanka some of the privileges it enjoyed in the past including access to their markets and to tariff concessions.

From the perspective of the international community, Sri Lanka has taken concrete steps forward in its reform, democratization, and reconciliation agenda, including through the bill to establish an Office of Missing Persons, ratifying the convention on disappearances, additional land releases by the military and through the President’s directive on arrests under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and progress in work on the constitution. In the present context the international community is giving priority to help stabilize the government rather than to provide its political opponents with the opportunity to derail it and thereby negate the positive steps it is taking towards constitutional reform and to long term solutions.

Will Sri Lanka Learn From Birth Place Of Buddha?


Colombo Telegraph
By Veluppillai Thangavelu
 –July 18, 2016
Veluppillai Thangavelu
Veluppillai Thangavelu
What is a constitution and what is its purpose? Stated simply, a country’s constitution is the fundamental laws and principles of a country or state on which all other laws are based.
All permanent organization of individuals, whether public or private, must have basic rules or laws for its establishment and for the conduct of its activities. A country normally has a centre and local governmental systems of government and both rests on constitutions.
In a democracy, sovereignty rests with the people and the enactment of a constitution is a function of the legislature composed of elected representatives.
A constitution, to be successful, must be both stable and flexible. There is no model or single constitution similar to one another since the history, geography and diversity of people and countries differ from one another. Every country has its own unique blend of history and people. There are parliamentary and presidential systems of government which we are familiar with through direct experience. There are also con-federal, federal, quasi federal and unitary constitutions.
As opposed to an authoritarian form of government, there are common characteristics found in constitutional democracy like separation of powers, checks and balances, rule of law, democratic elections, peaceful transfer of power, independent press, free and competent judiciary, freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of religion, freedom of association, respect for fundamental human rights etc. This list is by no means exhaustive, but gives the fundamental features of a good constitution that will stand the test of time. The methods of amending or replacing the constitution are also provided by the constitution itself.Nepal
Sri Lanka is in the process of enacting its fourth constitution since the country gained independence in 1948. The republican constitution enacted in 1972 and the presidential system of constitution adopted in 1978 has failed to produce stability and peace in the country. Both these constitutions laid the foundation for a bloody civil war that lasted for 25 years. They imposed the will of the 75% majority Sinhalese on the 25% national minorities, especially the Thamils. They ignored completely the language rights of the Thamil people by installing Sinhala as the sole official language. In a constitutional democracy all citizens must be treated equally if the country is to progress towards political stability and economic prosperity.

Deepening Militarization in Sri Lanka?


The Huffington Post

Taylor Dibbert-07/15/2016

Sri Lanka’s cabinet has recently approved the creation of a development organization which is to be comprised of both civilians and members of the military. The announcement was made by cabinet spokesperson Gayantha Karunathilake in Colombo.

How significant might this news be?

According to Kusal Perera, a journalist based in Colombo, this development illustrates that Sri Lanka’s new government “is far worse than the [Mahinda] Rajapaksa regime in playing against reconciliation and war crimes probes.”

This news would also appear to directly contradict recent remarks from Mangala Samaraweera, the foreign minister. During a press conference in Colombo earlier this month, Samaraweera indicated that Sri Lanka would “complete the demilitarization process” by 2018. That’s a pretty bold plan. After all, demilitarization has not even begun. Samaraweera’s already dubious assertion looks even less credible now.

Militarization in Sri Lanka is nothing new. For the past several years, military personnel have been engaged in a host of civilian commercial and social activity, especially in the Tamil-majority Northern and Eastern Provinces. This includes tourism and agriculture. Their strong presence has also contributed to significant social problems for civilians.

Perera believes that President Maithripala Sirisena would like to present himself as “more Sinhala-Buddhist than [the] Rajapaksas and that he even accommodates the military.”

As the international community continues to praise Colombo, militarization is something to watch closely. Frankly, the country’s continued militarization would all but ensure that the island nation’s transitional justice process is built upon a very flimsy foundation.