The night John McCain killed the GOP’s health-care fight

 Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on July 28 voted against the Republican “skinny repeal” health-care bill. (U.S. Senate)

By Ed O'Keefe July 28 at 5:44 AM

It was the most dramatic night in the United States Senate in recent history. Just ask the senators who witnessed it.

A seven-year quest to undo the Affordable Care Act collapsed — at least for now — as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) kept his colleagues and the press corps in suspense over a little more than two hours late Thursday into early Friday.

Not since September 2008, when the House of Representatives rejected the Troubled Asset Relief Program — causing the Dow Jones industrial average to plunge nearly 800 points in a single afternoon — had such an unexpected vote caused such a striking twist.

The bold move by the nation’s most famous senator stunned his colleagues and possibly put the Senate on the verge of protracted bipartisan talks that McCain is unlikely to witness as he begins treatment for an aggressive form of brain cancer.

“I’ve stated time and time again that one of the major failures of Obamacare was that it was rammed through Congress by Democrats on a strict party-line basis without a single Republican vote,” he said in a statement explaining his vote. “We should not make the mistakes of the past.”

Senate Republicans attempted to pass a “skinny repeal” bill that would undo some portions of the Affordable Care Act on July 28, but the bill failed after three GOP senators voted against it. (Photo: Melina Mara/The Washington Post)

Rumors swirled late Thursday that the Arizona Republican, who had captured the nation’s sympathy this week after delaying his cancer treatment in order to return to Washington, might vote against the GOP’s “skinny repeal” plan — a watered-down version of earlier Republican proposals to repeal the 2010 health-care law.

McCain warned at a hastily arranged news conference Thursday afternoon that he was leaning against supporting the legislation unless House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) assured GOP senators that the House would not move to quickly approve the bill in its current form. McCain and Sens. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) wanted Ryan to launch broad House-Senate negotiations for a wider rollback of the law. Two hours later, Ryan issued a statement signaling he would launch negotiations, and Graham and Johnson announced their support.
But not McCain.

Reporters spotted him around 11 p.m.

“Have you decided how you’ll vote?” they asked.

“Yes,” McCain replied.

“How?”

“Wait for the show,” he said.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) speaks to journalists during an all-night session to consider the Republican health-care bill on Capitol Hill on July 27. (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)

McCain headed for the stage — the Senate floor — around midnight, emerging from his office in the Russell Senate Office Building for the subway ride to the U.S. Capitol.

When he arrived, he held a brief conversation with Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer ( D-N.Y.), an exchange that left the New Yorker smiling.

“I knew it when he walked on the floor,” Schumer later recounted, explaining that McCain had already called to share his plans.

But few, if any, of his Republican colleagues realized what was about to transpire.

Two votes were called just after midnight. The first was on a Democratic proposal to refer the “skinny repeal” bill back to a committee. The second vote was to pass “skinny repeal,” which would have repealed the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate and rolled back a tax on medical devices.
“Let’s vote against skinny repeal,” Schumer told his colleagues before the votes as he once again derided the rushed nature of the health-care debate.

McCain stood on the Republican side of the room nodding in agreement.

With Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) already planning to vote against the plan, Republicans could not afford to lose McCain. Vice President Pence was already at the Capitol prepared to break a tie. Instead, he launched a last-ditch effort to win McCain’s support.
As the first vote began, McCain took his seat next to Graham, his closest friend in the Senate. The South Carolinian mostly nodded as McCain gesticulated, and signaled — through his body language — that he was likely to vote no. When Murkowski walked over to join the conversation, McCain winked and gave her a thumbs down — signaling his intentions.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) gave Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Ala.) a wink and a thumbs-down after she voted no on the "skinny repeal" bill early on July 28. He later voted no as well. (The Washington Post)

Collins joined the group as another clutch of Republican senators formed in the well of the Senate Chamber. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who operates in McCain’s long shadow, stood next to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), who counts GOP votes, and Pence. Eventually, Flake was dispatched to talk to McCain.

He obliged, walked over to McCain and asked Graham to move over one seat. But McCain did not acknowledge Flake, focusing instead on Murkowski and Collins.

That left Flake, one of the most polite members of the Senate, leaning into the conversation uncomfortably with a pained look on his face, as if he had to tell his father that he had run over the family dog with his car.

Seeing that Flake was not making progress, Pence walked over at 12:44 a.m. McCain smiled, pointed at Collins and Murkowski, said something about “marching orders,” and stood up.

“Mr. Vice President,” he said, greeting Pence. For the next 21 minutes, the vice president cajoled McCain, Collins and Murkowski. Twice during the conversation, a Pence aide came to whisper in the vice president’s ear — other reporters learned it was the White House calling. Pence finally left to take a call, but later returned to speak with McCain.

By then, other senators around the room realized what was happening.

“You could see the body language in the entire chamber change in two hours,” Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) recalled. “One side was kind of ebullient, moving around and talking and the other side was subdued, and all of a sudden it began to change. There was an instinctive reaction that maybe this thing wasn’t going to pass. Nobody knew for sure.”

“It was pretty somber,” added Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).

At 1:10 a.m., McCain crossed the Senate Chamber to talk to Schumer, Klobuchar and other Democrats, including Sens. Richard J. Durbin (Ill.), Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.). As he approached, McCain told them he worried that reporters watching from the gallery above could read his lips. When he realized that the press was indeed watching, he looked up at the ceiling and shouted, “No!” as senators and reporters laughed. Then, Democrats beamed when McCain shared his news. Feinstein gave him a hug.

Walking back to the Republican side of the room, McCain was stopped by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) who also offered a hug.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) crossed the Senate floor early on July 28, to converse with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) about the upcoming health-care vote and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) embraced him. (The Washington Post)

“I love John McCain. He’s one of the great heroes of this country,” Hatch explained later. “Whether we agree or not, I still love the guy.”

The vote on “skinny repeal” began at 1:24 a.m., but McCain was out in the lobby once again conferring with Pence. In his absence, Collins and Murkowski cast their “no” votes along with the 48 members of the Democratic caucus.

McCain returned at 1:29 a.m. without Pence, approached the Senate clerk and gave a thumbs down — the third “no” vote.

Several people gasped. Others applauded. Reporters dashed out to report the news.

McCain returned to his seat, walking past Cornyn and Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who stood grim-faced and despondent. Cassidy rubbed his face several times with his hands. Thune’s face contorted. The color in Cornyn’s face seemed to drain.

“Certainly Senator McCain knows how to improve the drama,” Cassidy recalled later.

The vote concluded, and the results were announced — the bill was voted down, 51 to 49. Just days before, McCain had fired a warning shot with a lengthy floor speech that criticized the rushed, secretive process that led to “skinny repeal.” Early Friday morning, McCain, Collins and Murkowski delivered the fatal blow.

McConnell, humiliated by the results, stood to address his colleagues. The color of his face now matched the pink in his necktie.


“This is clearly a disappointing moment,” he said.

Drinking a few times a week 'reduces diabetes risk'

28 July 2017

People who drink three to four times a week are less likely to develop type 2 diabetes than those who never drink, Danish researchers suggest.

Wine appears to be particularly beneficial, probably as it plays a role in helping to manage blood sugar, the study, published in Diabetologia, says.

They surveyed more than 70,000 people on their alcohol intake - how much and how often they drank.

But experts said this wasn't a "green light" to drink more than recommended.

And Public Health England warned that consuming alcohol contributed to a vast number of other serious diseases, including some cancers, heart and liver disease.

"People should keep this in mind when thinking about how much they drink," a spokeswoman said.

'Better effect'

Prof Janne Tolstrup, from the National Institute of Public Health of the University of Southern Denmark, who led the research, said: "We found that drinking frequency has an independent effect from the amount of alcohol taken.

"We can see it's a better effect to drink the alcohol in four portions rather than all at once."

After around five years, study participants were followed up and a total of 859 men and 887 women group had developed diabetes - either type 1 or the more common type 2.

The researchers concluded that drinking moderately three to four times a week reduced a woman's risk of diabetes by 32% while it lowered a man's by 27%, compared with people drinking on less than one day a week.

GETTY IMAGESImage captionRed wine is thought to help with the management of blood sugar

Image copyrightT

Findings also suggest that not all types of alcohol had the same effect.

Wine appeared to be particularly beneficial because polyphenols, particularly in red wine, play a role in helping to manage blood sugar.

When it came to drinking beer, men having one to six beers a week lowered their risk of diabetes by 21%, compared to men who drank less than one beer a week - but there was no impact on women's risk.

Meanwhile, a high intake of spirits among women seemed to significantly increase their risk of diabetes - but there was no effect in men.

Unlike other studies, this research did not find a link between binge drinking and diabetes.

Prof Tolstrup said this could be down to the small number of participants that reported binge drinking, which was defined as drinking five drinks or more on one occasion.

Dr Emily Burns, head of research communications at Diabetes UK, said people needed to be wary as "the impact of regular alcohol consumption on the risk of type 2 will be different from one person to the next".

While the findings were interesting she said they "wouldn't recommend people see them as a green light to drink in excess of the existing NHS guidelines".

That advice suggests that men and women should drink no more than 14 units of alcohol a week - equivalent to six pints of average strength beer or 10 small glasses of low strength wine - over the course of three days or more, with some days being alcohol-free.

'Not helpful'

Rosanna O'Connor, director of drugs, alcohol and tobacco at Public Health England, said: "It is not helpful to talk about the effect of alcohol consumption on diabetes alone.

"Consuming alcohol contributes to a vast number of other serious diseases, including some cancers, heart disease and liver disease, so people should keep this in mind when thinking about how much they drink."

Prof Tolstrup and her team have used the same survey to research the effect of alcohol on other conditions.

They found that drinking moderately a few times a week was linked to a lower risk of cardiovascular disorders, such as heart attack and stroke.

But consuming any amount of alcohol increased the risk of developing gastrointestinal diseases, such as alcohol liver disease and pancreatitis.

Prof Tolstrup added: "Alcohol is associated with 50 different conditions, so we're not saying 'go ahead and drink alcohol'."

Low bred slut who sleeps with senile judges and AGs seeking to save Navy white Van murderer !

-not enough her villainies to rescue criminal Rajapakses

(Lanka-e-News - 28.July.2017, 11.20AM)  Lanka e news inside information division believes it is imperative  that  it should reveal to the law abiding citizens of Sri Lanka (SL) , among the judges and Attorney Generals suffering from senile decay who are dilly dallying and withholding   the criminal cases against the corrupt and criminal Rajapakses  , is also a shameless villainous slut  in  the Attorney General’s (AG) department who prefers to sleep with those senile  judges and AGs  even on the pavement like stray dogs  and who dreams of  nothing except immoral and  evil activities to the detriment of the country and the nation. It is learnt  this  low bred  slut is indulging in conspiratorial activities to rescue the Navy white Van murderers .

This villainous slimy ‘lowyer’ representing the AG’s department has unlawfully sought to secure bail for the Navy suspects in the white Van ghastly murders when the case was taken up on the 21 st. This slut  of a lawyer is none other than senior state counsel  Lakmini Girihagama. She is a bosom pal of another  state counsel whom we exposed earlier on as one who  left no stone unturned to rescue the cruel Navy  criminal who brutally killed many  students after collecting extortion payments .

Unbelievably , when the CID informed court in the case filed requesting bail for the Navy criminal ,that they object to bail being granted , this ‘lowyer’ had outrageously told court,  the CID has not adequate  grounds to refuse bail.  While it is not possible for the AG’s department to do anything  counter to the request of the CID , which is also another  government Institution , this ‘lowyer’  however has indulged in this villainy unheeding the orders given by the AG in the morning on the same day. The AG has given clear instructions to her not to do or say anything contrary to the CID ‘s requests in court .

In any event the judge who examined the bail application refused to grant bail meaning that he had understood the gravity of the crime though this slut   Lakmini was  frivolous and uncaring about her own onerous legal duties as a State counsel. In the circumstances the AG can  be compelled to take disciplinary action against her over her controversial  and most reprehensible conduct. 

It is well to recall it is  because of this same ‘lowyer’ ,the crooked Gotabaya Rajapakse has been able to evade  the arms  of the law  in connection with the massive fraud involving a whopping sum of Rs. 90 million of public funds siphoned off  by him to erect a monument in memory of his dead  parents. Lakmini with whom the file is,  by pointing out that the signature of Gotabaya is not clear is inordinately delaying action. 

We are reluctantly compelled  to expose the putrid antecedence of Lakmini a notorious slut. We are  reporting  this supported with concrete and cogent  evidence based on her actual  debauched life and lifestyle.  

Lakmini is the daughter of a police sergeant and hails  from an ordinary family . During her period at law College as a student , it was former  AG Palitha Fernando who was her lecturer . She was so greedy for lifting herself up  in her career that she got herself involved with Palitha Fernando a married man and much older. She knew lifting  the saree is the easiest and surest way to reach the top , her  bottom  rotting thereby  notwithstanding. Palitha too saw to it she got an appointment in the AG’s department in order to carry on regardless with his lascivious activities  with her . Being  led by his erections more , and less by  his official directions , she could do nothing proper or right.

During the period of illicit love between the ‘itchy bitchy’ and the ‘AG oldie’ there erupted  an embitterment . Lakmini , in keeping with her low breed began to sneak on  Palitha to  a senior state counsel Eva Wanasundara. She told Eva that Palitha was sexually harassing her , and not allowing her to be in peace . One day Eva told Lakmini , ‘I shall wait at the entrance to Palitha’s office when you go into his room . If he tries to use force , you call me’

When Palitha tried to kiss her , Lakmini had hit and scraped him with her nails, whereupon Eva has rushed into the room and noticed the AG in a shocked state with injuries  due to the scraping.

The two parties nevertheless suppressed the incident in order to safeguard their self respect ( if they had any at all  ! ) and the incident  did not receive  publicity . Now that Eva Wanasundara is a  Supreme Court judge surely she cannot tell a lie in regard to this .

After some time this Palitha – Lakmini  love again sprouted . Palitha then sent her to Fiji Islands at her request to help her to  make some money via  her employment there.   Lakmini’s  favorite sex  lust  hobby took the better of her there too. She got around another old judge. Unfortunately for them , one day when they were travelling their  vehicle met with an accident , as a  result the  cat was out of the bag – their secret immoral aims and activities came to light. The outcome : Lakmini  was sent back home. After returning she re -joined the AG’s department.

Even today she follows the instructions of Palitha Fernando the  ‘naki manamalaya’   her illicit lover ,and not  the instructions issued by the present AG who is in fact her chief. ‘Older the bull harder the horn’ is an old adage , and  Lakmini is a faithful follower of it .  

It is to be noted Palitha Fernando who was a judge advocate of the Navy naturally has motive to rescue the Navy white Van murderers. Lanka e news inside information division  is in receipt of cogent evidence to substantiate the fact that Lakmini acted contrary to  official instructions most brazenly when the bail application case was being heard because she was obeying  Palitha Fernando’s  orders. We also have evidence to prove that she discussed  with Palitha Fernando for several hours via phone just before the case was taken up for hearing .

As a news website that always espouses the cause of truth , justice and fair play  come what may , we deem it is our duty to issue a forewarning to Lakmini Girihagama the slut, if she goes on   disrespecting the laws and respecting  only erections of senile judges  while fattening her  purse with salaries paid  out of public funds. When the enraged public react , none will be able to  predict what explosive proportions the fury of the masses can reach . Lakmini will therefore be well advised if she thinks in the right direction for justice’ sake at least from now on instead of being obsessed with erections  alone.

May we inform the public that we shall reveal every detail including name , address and the past records of all those scoundrels and rascals in the AG’s department who are engaging in villainy and high treason with a view to withhold and delay the criminal cases of the Rajapakses , as well as those of the crooks and corrupt of their nefarious decade. 

---------------------------
by     (2017-07-28 06:14:29)

Husband fired unintentionally, says Jaffna killing suspect’s wife

2017-07-28

My husband, Selavarasa Jayanthan (39) from Jaffna, was never a member of the LTTE. It is a rumour to say that he was a former combatant. My husband fired unintentionally, the wife of the main suspect said.

Two people were arrested in connections with the shooting incident targeting Jaffna High Court Judge, M. Elancheliyan at the Nallur South Road on July 22.

The main suspect surrendered on Tuesday morning and made his statement to the Police.

"After consuming liquor with some people in my house at Nallur on Saturday, we came to the Temple Road Junction on the Point Pedro Road. At that moment my cousin pointed at a Police Officer coming on a motorcycle and challenged me to shoot him, grabbing his pistol if I had the guts. Hearing this I grabbed the pistol at once from the Police Officer which went off accidentally," the suspect said.

Following that, brandishing the pistol, I once again stopped a scooter that was coming in that direction and taking it by force, I went through the Adiyapatham Road to Kalviyankadu area and from there I went to Ariyalai.

After abandoning the scooter behind the Peychchi Amman temple, I went to my maternal aunts' house in Thirunagar.

I told my aunt that I had hit a Police Officer in my drunken state and that the Police were searching for me. I changed my clothes there and went to the Kombayanmanal cemetery, where I spent the night.

I spent the following day at a relative's house in Navanthurai. That night, I went to my uncle's place at Koddady. My uncle who had come to know the incident at Nallur, advised me to surrender to the Police. So I went with my uncle, surrendered to the Police and made my statement,” he said.

The Police, after obtaining the statement from the suspect, took the suspect to his maternal aunt's house at Thirunagar in the Police vehicle with his face covered with a black cloth.

There the Police recovered the clothes worn by the suspect during the shooting.

The suspect was produced before the Jaffna Magistrate at his official residence on Tuesday. He was ordered to be remanded till August 8. (By M.Rosanth)http://www.dailymirror.lk/article/Husband-fired-unintentionally-says-Jaffna-killing-suspect-s-wife-133708.html

The Accord offered the best chance to resolve the Tamil national question but was undermined by successive governments in Colombo

The Accord offered the best chance to resolve the Tamil national question but was undermined by successive governments in Colombo

M.A. Sumanthiran-JULY 27, 2017 

July 29, 1987 was a watershed in Sri Lanka’s history. That was the day Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi signed an accord with Sri Lankan President J.R. Jayewardene in Colombo, in which Sri Lanka promised to share power with the Tamil people. One cannot also forget the attack on the Indian Prime Minister later that day by a Naval Rating at a Guard of Honour. If not for his quick reflexes, the rifle butt that was swung at him would most certainly have cracked his skull. The history of Sri Lanka would have been very different had he not survived that assault, as also the history of the Tamil people in Sri Lanka if Rajiv Gandhi was not assassinated four years later in Tamil Nadu.

The Accord offered the best chance to resolve the Tamil national question but was undermined by successive... by Thavam on Scribd

President’s Counsels Bow At The Cracking Of Presidential Whip!

JULY 27, 2017

Sources in Hulfsdorp expressed amusement at the sight of the recently appointed President’s Counsel being ‘summoned’ to meet the President on July 26th (yesterday.)

According to the President’s official website, this was following a ‘tradition’ for them to meet the President after they were appointed as President’s Counsels.

However a senor lawyer and President’s Counsel of an older generation, speaking to Colombo Telegraph explained that there was no such tradition at all. None of us ever were called to meet either past President JR Jayewardene, past President Ranasinghe Premadasa or even former President Chandrika Kumaratunga.

“These are not state appointments but discretionary ‘honours’ so why are these lawyers being asked to come like this?” he asked. 

Another senior lawyer informed Colombo Telegraph that it was a shame to see President Maithripala Sirisena following in the footsteps of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

“The person who started this was former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. In fact, he got all the PCs appointed by him to come and sit in the Supreme Court like tame puppies when the 18th Amendment was being approved by the Court, also acting under his dictation. Now it seems that President Sirisena also wants to show who is the boss” he said.

The appointments of PCs by President Sirisena a few months ago attracted criticism on the basis that they were given to political favourites. The list also did not include a single female senior lawyerthough Colombo Telegraph understands that several had applied. In addition, heavy public criticism was directed against some of the PCs including activist JC Weliamuna who held extravagant parties at five star hotels to celebrate this appointment despite two hundred flood victims dying on the same day due to the massive floods that swept Sri Lanka at the time and lawyer Saliya Pieris (also appointed a PC on the same list) who defended the holding of the parties. Both Pieris and Weliamuna attended yesterday’s meeting summoned by the President. Peiris also serves as a member of Sri Lanka’s Human Rights Commission.             

State media reports said that the PCs were asked to meet the President so that he could ask them to contribute a greater service to the country through their knowledge and experience in the field. President Sirisena had said that he wished them to carry out their professional work independently.

Read More

PC poll postponement: PAFFREL, CaFFE express concern

2017-07-28 

A number of local election watchdogs yesterday raised concerns over the Cabinet decision to introduce amendments to the Provincial Councils Election Act no. 2 of 1998 enabling elections to all PCs to be conducted on a single day citing the holding of PC polls on a scattered basis was a waste of state funds and the negative effect it had on democracy.

PAFFREL Executive Director Rohana Hettiarachchi said if the government intended to conduct elections to all 9 provinces, the government must disclose the time frame it expects to hold polls to all provinces whether it would be after September / October of 2017 or after October 2018, after April 2019 or October 2019?.

Mr. Hettiarachchi said he was worried as it was possible to postpone the Parliamentary polls also if the PC polls were postponed despite the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled twice that the right of franchise of the people cannot be postponed.

While demanding the government not to deprive the right to vote of the people, Mr. Hettiarachchi further says that suspicion was building up among the people that the government’s decision to conduct PC polls on a single day may be a ruse to postpone all future elections.

If the government has a non political and genuine desire to save government funds and democracy the best thing to do was to discuss the matter with all provincial councils and dissolve PCs with a longer term of office and conduct the PC polls on a single day, Mr. Hettiarachchi stressed.

Meanwhile, the Campaign for Free & Fair Election (CaFFE) said the Cabinet had no legal authority to postpone the elections for the Provincial Councils.

CaFFE Executive Director Keerthi Tennakoon reiterated the election could only be postponed if the government received people’s consent at a referendum.

“Not even a two third majority of Parliament could postpone the PC election. The SLFP has a history of postponing elections unlike the UNP. However, both parties are in unison postponing elections today. Not even the opposition parties including the joint opposition keen on calling for polls,” he said.

Mr. Tennakoon said civil society organisations (CSO) also continue to keep mum over government’s anti-democratic actions in the name of ‘good governance.’

The term of office of 9 provinces is scheduled to expire in four stages and they are Sabaragamuwa, Eastern and North-Central in September/October period, Central, Wayamba and Northern in October 2018, Central, Southern and Western in April 2019 and Uva in October 2019. (Sandun A Jayasekera and Lahiru Pothmulla)

Occasional Stories: About a True Believer

The scene from the roof top was amazing. The whole Campus could be seen from there in the moonlight. It was better than the daylight.

by Laksiri Fernando- Jul 28, 2017

( July 28, 2017, Sydney, Sri Lanka Guardian) I have come across several of them during my university life but this particular person was somewhat exceptional. We all at that time, including myself had this common trait of having somewhat ‘blind faith’ in what we believed in. But he was to the extreme. When I think of him, what I remember is Eric Hoffer’s book titled The True Believer.  Hoffer was talking about the general, and I am talking about a specific person.

Hoffer said, “All of them breed fanaticism, exceptional enthusiasm, fervent hope, hatred and intolerance.”  They are ready to die for what they believe in and also to kill others for the same. For them the life is not sacrosanct, but the cause is.

In this story, I am not using real names except for prominent figures because some of the facts are sensitive and the way I relate the story may create some prejudice against Sirisoma or others. My sole intention is to relate my experiences, as in the case of all other stories, whatever they are worth to understand this complicated world. After all, Sirisoma was a good man, caught up in his own circumstances and driven by some uncontrollable forces, internal and external.

We were at the University of Peradeniya, involved in student politics apart from our studies or in some instances more than our studies. It was in the midst of a police batten charge in December 1965 that I first came across Sirisoma. While many of us took shelter, or cover against the assault, there were few who confronted the police or were unable to retreat. They unfortunately got a severe beating and the most unfortunate was one Wickremaratne who became permanently paralysed. He was completely innocent. Another was Sirisoma who confronted the police with his bare hands and got inflicted with severe wounds all over his body.

Sirisoma was a six-footer, well-built and handsome. He always walked with his head straight. He studied Science in the Sinhala stream and was not known in the student movement previously before his said adventure. After that he was very prominent and was called gut-Siri for his bravery.

The strike was a virtual disaster, except for its experience. We were licking our wounds for a long time. There were several committees formed to look after various matters because the formal student council was suspended; the leaders were virtually expelled and there was a court case against some of them. The general students, including some activists, were extremely demoralized.

This happened or fortunately ‘not happened’ after about six months of the strike, in mid-1966.

A friend of mine from engineering, Amal de Costa, came to see me with Sirisoma one late afternoon.  Amal and I were from the same persuasion of politics at that time, the broke away ‘revolutionary’ wing of the Sama Samaja Party. But we were not aware of Sirisoma’s politics.

“Siri has a plan to resurrect the student movement,” Amal said. Sirisoma was simply called Siri, and that was his nickname.

I was interested in listening because at a recent meeting of our political group I and few others were somewhat asked to look for the ‘ways and means’ of resurrecting the student movement. However, Sirisoma was not talking!

“No, he wanted to show it to us,” Amal became the advocate for Sirisoma.

“Show what?” I asked.

“How it should be done,” Siri said calmly and confidently.

The suggestion was to go to the Akbar Hall to show Siri’s plan. I agreed reluctantly because I had a half a mind of going to the Ramanathan Hall that evening to see my girlfriend. I had to abandon my worldly pleasures for the sake of the political cause. Akbar Hall was completely of the other side of the Campus across the Mahaveli River just next to the Faculty of Engineering. Amal resided there and I was not sure where Sirisoma was living.

On our way, Siri was complete tight lipped as if his plan was a top secret. Allowing Siri to go ahead, I whispered to Amal to know about Siri’s plan. He shrugged his shoulders and said, “he didn’t tell me.” 

By this time, the night gods were spreading their wings over us and it was getting darker and darker, except for the moonlight. Siri wanted to go to the rooftop of the Akbar Hall to ‘reveal the plan’ and Amal had to fetch the key to the area because it was normally out of bounds for anyone for security and other reasons. But as the President of the Hall Committee, Amal perhaps did not have any difficulty in obtaining the key to the rooftop. It was a six-storey huge building with two wings. Hall Committees were the only student bodies functioning at the time. All other student organizations were suspended after the strike.

The scene from the roof top was amazing. The whole Campus could be seen from there in the moonlight. It was better than the daylight. The mammoth Hantana Mountain was encircling the Campus like a sleeping giant from the East and the South. Mahaveli River was flowing across the Campus from the South to the North, opening the whole area to the Kandy Valley. We were not allowed to appreciate the scenic beauty much by Sirisoma, sensing our deviation or distraction from the ‘political cause.’

He pointed out the newly constructed Buddhist Stupa, glowing in white across the Faculty of Arts building. It appeared very near us from this roof top. At the beginning, I couldn’t understand the connection between this Buddhist shrine and his plan to ‘resurrect the student movement.’ But he explained it with a fervent spirit. He pointed out his finger to the platform erected at the top of the Stupa. Yes, it was there for us to see. In two days’ time, the Prime Minister, and that time, Dudley Senanayake, would be coming to ordain a golden pinnacle to this Stupa. That is going to be the opening ceremony of the shrine. The Prime Minister will be standing alone on the platform, during the ceremony, for some good few minutes without any cover of security.

“We should shoot him,” he said almost casually.

“Do you mean to kill him?” I asked. I was alarmed.

“Not really, but shoot.”

Something suddenly went wrong in my stomach. I was feeling nausea. Amal also was equally alarmed. He in fact was stammering. Then I thought it could be a joke, or perhaps it could be considered as a joke. Some sober blood came to my mind or head. I said it is simply not possible; the event would take place day after tomorrow.

First, he tried to argue that it is possible and he could find the right gun for the operation. Then I pointed out that the consequence would be not to resurrect the student movement but to destroy it through severe government repression. He appeared listening to this rationality (or not) to argue against it. I did not realise at that time that Sirisoma was at the ‘edge of terrorism,’ even implicating all of us in the process.

I and Amal had an implicit understanding that we should do our best to dissuade Sirisoma from his ‘assassination’ proclivity. We took him to Amal’s room. We started chatting normal things. Siri was exceptionally talkative now. We of course asked him whether he knows about shooting. He said he has training from an army friend and he is supposed to be an excellent marksman. He had some pride in his face. Most intriguing was when he said that he knows how to hypnotise people.

“Can you actually do it?” Amal asked.

“Of course, I can,” was the answer.

I did not have any time to intervene, Amal instantly volunteered to be the ‘victim.’ I never had any inclination to believe or disbelieve things like hypnotism. I was completely disinterested. But in this case, I had to wait and watch. I also thought that the whole exercise perhaps was a good distraction for Siri’s assassination instinct.

I exactly cannot remember the whole process of hypnotising Amal. But he was asked to sit on a chair, close his eyes and concentrate on what Siri was saying. Siri was basically asking Amal to imagine certain things that he was saying. There were several rounds without any results. Amal opened his eyes saying that he was not hypnotised. We wanted to bring a close to the whole exercise several times but Siri was not heeding to our request.

Now it was almost midnight. We even did not have our dinner yet. The whole evening was exhausting. Then suddenly it worked. Siri was asking Amal to imagine that he was on a beach and holding hands of a girl. First, he gave Amal a towel to hold by the corner. Now Amal was standing. Then he gave Amal a pillow and asked him to make love to the girl. I noticed not Amal’s but Siri’s face turning red. His voice was gentle and mood excited. This was strange because Siri was not a person who ever talked about the other sex.

I pleaded with Siri to conclude the exercise. Then it was all over. Amal appeared bit disoriented. Siri appeared triumphant. We decided to go for dinner. Amal had already arranged with whom we used to call ‘hall servants’ to keep some food for a late dinner, including for two visitors. Because of our politics, we had very good relations with the ‘working class.’ Otherwise the dinner time was already over. Siri did not join us for dinner. He just disappeared.

At dinner, I asked Amal what exactly happened and he laughed. He said he had to pretend that he was hypnotised or otherwise there was no escape from Siri. This is something I initially suspected when Amal was ‘at the beach.’ But Amal played so naturally, I in fact thought he was actually in a trance.

It was late 1970 that I heard the arrest of Sirisoma when he was a science teacher at Haguranketha. That time I was teaching at the Vidyodaya University. He was arrested for making explosive devices, bombs and firearms. He also had enlisted school students for this enterprise. He was apparently making firearms for the JVP, which staged an abortive insurrection in April 1971. As he was arrested well before the main incident, he was not brought before the main court case of the insurrection. Neither was he released. He died in custody. Those who had come across him in prison said that he was completely blind at the last stages of his life. It was sad.

He was apparently kept in a dark room for many many weeks or months. The police and prison authorities found him to be a very stubborn man who resisted questioning and even physically fought with the officers. What comes to my mind is how he fought with the police during the batten charge of students in December 1965 at Peradeniya.

Sirisoma was undoubtedly a true believer who was ‘fanatic’ about what he believed in and ready to undergo hardship or die for what he considered a true cause. He wanted a total revolution to the society. He despised authority and particularly the police. As many other ‘true believers’ of his kind, he did not care about others’ lives either. That was the tragedy.

PURSUERS IN THAJUDEEN MURDER IDENTIFIED – CID

27/07/2017

The CID stated that investigations have commenced in search of the suspects.

Colombo Additional Magistrate Jerome Trotsky informed the CID to forward the images of the suspects to the Government Analyst for further investigations.

The Magistrate also called for a detailed report at the next hearing.

Thajudeen was found dead in the early hours on the 17th of May in 2012 and it was claimed that his vehicle met with an accident down Park Road, Narahenpita resulting in his death.

However the Criminal Investigations Department said Thajudeen was tortured and murdered prompting further investigations.

The Criminal Investigations Department today informed Court that they have identified the individuals who followed national rugby player Wasim Thajudeen in a vehicle on the day he was murdered.

-News Radio

Thieving cops further remanded

Lakmal Sooriyagoda-Friday, July 28, 2017

Five policemen, including former Borella Anti-Vice Squad OIC and another four civilians, alleged to have robbed a stock of lightning conductors and gold jewellery worth Rs. 550,000 were ordered  further remanded till August 11 by Colombo Chief Magistrate Lal Ranasinghe Bandara, today.

The Cinnamon Gardens Police alleged that the robbery occurred while the concerned items belonging to Western Provincial Council Member Royce Fernando were being transported to Colombo by two of his employees, to be sold.

At a previous occasion, Police arrested five policemen, including former Borella Anti-Vice Squad OIC and Borella Police traffic branch OIC.

The court refused to grant bail to the suspects since they were charged under Firearms Act.

Against a culture of ambivalence

2017-07-28

For obvious reasons, the government wants to convince us that its enemies and friends are also the people’s. Obvious, because in equalising the one with the other we are on firm ground. Obvious, because if my enemy is your enemy, the world is easier to simplify, and the decision by an official body is easier to rationalise. Obvious, because if you kill your enemy and he or she happens to be my enemy as well, everything becomes a whole lot easier to sweep under the carpet. That is how totalitarian dictatorships work. And to an extent, that is also how democracies work.

When a movement, an ideology, or an individual is hard to define, harder to oppose or support on the political plane, he or she or it is portrayed rather ambivalently by the government and the opposition. Much of the hype around the SAITM crisis (born of the previous regime), for instance, can be rooted in how we, the people, and those whom we have elected vilify or valorise the student movement. The government is suffering from a headache due to that movement. The Joint Opposition is having a field day. Lahiru Weerasekara is, on that count, a contemporary Rohana Wijeweera to both sides. He is a hero to the State University student population regardless of their politics, a convenience to the JO, and a pain to the government.

If there’s anything that can aggravate a social ill beyond its limits, it’s ambivalence. Ambivalence in negotiation and agreement, in identification and resolution, in diagnosis and prognosis. It was ambivalence which prolonged a conflict which could have been easily done away with to a 30-year war. It was ambivalence which took away 100,000 lives within three years, far greater than the number killed in that civil war. And it was ambivalence which led us to this cul-de-sac between private and public education. Weerasekara is the perfect symbol of all that. He is despised by those who hate him and only mildly liked by those who hate his opponents.
Our political culture has thrived on rhetoric for too long. We are awed by what our leaders say, and then get tired of finding out that what they say isn’t what they do.  
Popular culture has worsened this cul-de-sac. But then that’s to be expected. Popular culture knows how to distort reality to achieve its arbitrary ends. This isn’t something particular to Sri Lanka only, after all even the United States of America suffers from it when it comes to its own president, depicted on the one hand as a harbinger against elitism by the same people who oppose him, and on the other as a populist demagogue who’s hiding that same elitism he rants against (in both instances, he sells). But we are a small country, small enough for even the smallest act of ambiguity to spell out drastic consequences. Which is why, when the ruckus over SAITM is spelt out in vague terms, we should be wary of those consequences.

And it’s not just the SAITM crisis, of course. Just look at how we are handling our PR when it comes to the international community. On the one hand, we have a set of representatives who seem to be conceding to the process of capitulation we are giving into with respect to institutions skewed against us. On the other hand, you have another set of representatives, sometimes even from the same political party, lambasting (mildly or otherwise) those same institutions. Who’s saying what, and what should we believe? Isn’t this just like the war years, when capitulation was described horrendously as negotiation and when negotiation was robbed of its meaning via an unhelpfully vague series of discussions and peace talks?

The biggest thorn on the side of the government is its lack of clarity. The previous regime had a convenient tool at its disposal to make us forget this. Nationalism. Rabble-rousing, populist, irrational nationalism. The current regime doesn’t have that privilege, especially since despite the many representatives who (claim they) are for a unitary state, freedom from external interference etc, we are led by a set of leaders who are more pragmatic than nationalist (whether or not it constitutes actual pragmatism being another debate altogether). In effect, consequently, there’s nothing the government can resort to so as to hide their indefiniteness.

And to top it all, the regime is trying to please everyone without pleasing anyone. It doesn’t take a political scientist to figure out that when federalists, nationalists, and members of that self-labelled intelligentsia which operates in Colombo want a piece of the pie shouting “We voted you in, give us what we want!” there’s bound to be a lack of focus. In this process of trying to give everything to everyone, there are winners and there are losers. The winners are the rent-seekers. The losers are the people. And the moment compelling social problems are swept under the carpet, unresolved and etched in uncertain terms, they lose even more. This we ought to know.

Getting back to my earlier point, the student movement, like Donald Trump, sells whichever way and however positively or negatively you view them. They sell because, as heroes, they are pelted by what Marxists and other ideologues would call a “police state” and, as villains, they themselves pelt those they disagree with. In both cases, there’s publicity involved. Publicity, ladies and gentlemen. The kind that prolongs an issue because, for interested parties, there’s money and popularity to be milked. Clarity can be a wonderful thing. Unfortunately, we lack it in this case.

Our political culture has thrived on rhetoric for too long. We are awed by what our leaders say, and then get tired of finding out that what they say isn’t what they do. A pragmatic government wouldn’t have, for instance, dithered over the Office of Missing Persons with vague declarations. A pragmatic government would have marketed the OMP notwithstanding the hype for and against it. Like the Right to Information Act, the OMP Bill, even with the president’s signature, was born prematurely, disliked even by those who agree with its provisions simply because of the way it was brought through. When vagueness and confusion take over the process of crystallising Acts of Parliament, we can’t really blame those who lambast them.

Rhetoric is one thing, however. Lack of focus is another. When we put the two together, we get what Gunadasa Amarasekara once cogently described as a kavandaya (or headless corpse): borrowing a Sinhala phrase, “eheth naha, meheth naha” (neither here nor there). Making matters worse is the fact that this government is handling the sins of the past. With a serious communications problem, and despite the statements made condemning the preceding regime, we convenient lay that aside and instead condemn this regime. Despite your feelings about the matter, there’s no denying that the ruckus over SAITM, and those development projects and their environmental impact, was born from Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government. But what do we have today? An outfit headed by Mahinda Rajapaksa eating into the government’s popularity (what little of it there is left, anyway) over its handling of the same problems traceable to the time he was in power! Can it get any more absurd than that?

So what’s the solution? First and foremost, to do away this culture of ambivalence that has gripped us for so long. It’s not only the government that has compelled this culture, moreover. It’s also us. The people. Popular culture. The many industries that operate on making money out of social problems. The intellectuals who are cut off from the same people they are supposed to help out in the first place. And of course those outfits which are hell-bent against the government. Given all that, we have a clear choice between us. Either we continue with the vague, indefinite, and non-committal way of looking at social ills, or we identify a problem for what it really is, minus our personal feelings, and get our representatives to solve them (or in the least try solving them for ourselves). Feel-good protest campaigns and vigils won’t do much. Positive, committed action will. It all depends on what we choose. And the drastic consequences which follow our choices, both now and to the future.