Colombo, Diplomacy, Elections, Peace and Conflict, Politics and Governance, Post-War

Standing the world on its head!

I can’t understand this, so will someone explain it –please.

It is being reported in the local press and local electronic media that the Rajapakses have gained popularity among Sinhala voters in recent days because the UN Special Reporter Philip Alston, the UN Secretary General, and the Western press, have reinforced their accusations of human rights violations and war crimes against the Rajapakse regime. UN and other agencies and officials, and the press, in many countries, now say that the Channel-4 execution video is authentic, and that it conforms to a larger pattern of violations.

The accusers are not LTTE extremists and only the mentally retarded will suggest that these parties and persons are in the pay of the LTTE, or that they are motivated and impelled by the Tamil diaspora.

I just don’t get it! The world seems to be standing on its head! How do you become more popular when criminal accusations against you are reinforced? Shouldn’t it be the other way round? Shouldn’t decent people become cautious, if not sickened, and demand investigation?

Indeed this goes for Fonseka too, if investigations reveal an involvement; and of course it goes for the LTTE leaders as well. This was my reaction upon reading the UTHR(J)’s recent report about the horrors the LTTE committed in the closing months of the war.

There are two possible explanations for this weird display of public sentiments.

These reports of enhanced popularity of alleged war criminals are false; actually people are sickened, but a biased media paints a false picture.

Alternatively, this is a psycho-pathological phenomenon, a case of mass neurosis, what Freud called the madness of mobs, sweeping across sections of our society. Germany in the 1930s during the rise of fascism was a previous example. I hope the former explanantion is truer; otherwise my confusion will need to turn to dismay

  • niranjan

    Kumar David,

    Interesting article.

    “There are two possible explanations for this weird display of public sentiments.”

    “These reports of enhanced popularity of alleged war criminals are false; actually people are sickened, but a biased media paints a false picture.”

    “Alternatively, this is a psycho-pathological phenomenon, a case of mass neurosis, what Freud called the madness of mobs, sweeping across sections of our society. Germany in the 1930s during the rise of fascism was a previous example.”- This is the likely explanation. The media does not paint a false picture all the time.

  • niranjan

    Kumar David,

    “How do you become more popular when criminal accusations against you are reinforced?”- Interesting. Accusations only go to strengthen the Governments case that the international community is trying to get rid of it. It seems to be the case that the majority of Sri Lankans at least in the Sinhala community are not worried about criminal accusations directed by foreign Governments, NGO’s etc. For a majority of Sinhalese winning the war at any cost was what mattered. They will vote for Mahinda Rajapakse on that basis in the upcoming Presidential election. The fact is that Mahinda Rajapakse won the war. Sanath Jayasuriya supporting Mahinda Rajapakse in Matara is a case in point. He says that winning the war gives him the opportunity to travel about without fear which was not the case before 19 May 2009. He does not seem to be worried about criminal accusations even if such accusations are true.
    Sri Lankan society has been criminalised to such an extent over the years that the majority of people see nothing wrong in criminal behaviour. That is why Governments become more popular when criminal accusations against them are reinforced. It will take years to change peoples attitudes in this country perhaps never.

  • Travelling Academic

    But have we not seen this psycho-pathological phenomenon closer to home, in the form of support for VP from large sections of the Tamil community?

    The funny thing (and the explanation for your puzzle) is that while VP is gone for the Tamils, he is very much here for the Sinhalese — listen to Sinhala radio in the mornings and count the number of times the man is mentioned per minute!!

  • Observer

    It was Fonseka’s blurb that lead to Channel 4, UN and Alston getting all hyped up again. Especially when he accepted it wasn’t true. Which lead people to believe malicious intent. Which is causing a headache and bringing in a bad name for the war heroes. Are you surprised people aren’t happy about that fact?

    MR on the other side is hell bent on making sure the forces aren’t put in an awkward situation. And that has a certain appeal to some people. While I’m annoyed at Alston for being a jerk. I will credit him and Janzs when MR wins. MR almost had a tight rope not for those 2.

    Just imagine a retired US general accusing Marines of wrong doing in Iraq. True as it maybe the public will be one pissed lot. They even white washed gitmo with a slapping on the wrist of low level soldiers when it had been endorsed from clearly higher up. Not only that they even save private contractors like Black Water when they murder civilians in cold blood! By conveniently bungling up prosecutions.

    Is the world still upside down for you Kumar David? Don’t worry it was always like that…

  • Shaad

    It’s a very simple. The west which stood against the decapitation of the tigers during the final stages of the war, have given the common man in Sri Lanka the perception that the majority of the western states are against the government. We, the common peoples of Sri Lanka witnessed how Milliband, Kouchner, Clinton, Karunanidhi, Canadian MP’s, biased international media reporting etc. tried everything they could in order to scuttle the war effort. The decapitation, eradication and elimination of Tiger terrorists from the country is looked upon favorably by the overwhelming majority of it’s countrymen.
    When president Rajapaksa, a leader of a tiny and poor country, didn’t budge from his stance of giving any lifeline to the terrorists and stood defiantly against international pressure, Sri Lankans began to look up to their leader as a man with courage and strong character. Hence, any allegation brought forth by international institutions against the government will only reinforce this belief. The common Sri Lankan looks upon any international accusation or allegation with suspicion and doubt. The immediate reaction of the common man is, “there they go again… they can’t take the fact that Sri Lanka had achieved what they haven’t come even close to achieving……., eradicating terrorism… hence all these countries (including the UN) have to prove that we achieved it through fighting dirty..” (or sum such explanation as that)
    Hence, the more allegations the international community levels against President Rajapaksa, the more attractive he seems to the common man. There is no doubt in the minds of the common Sri Lankan that the way the war was handled by the Sri Lanka army was much better than how other powerful countries have conducted theirs. The peoples of Sri Lanka see International bodies having double standards in dealing with little Sri Lanka as opposed to more powerful nations, hence, reinforcing the perception that the Rajapaksa regime provides strong and patriotic leadership against these perceived international threats and conspiracies.
    I hope this provides a satisfactory answer to your question..

  • Bardo

    The Secretary-General has seemingly distanced himself from Alston’s report. The Channel4 video being authentic or otherwise is irrelevant. Most Sri Lankans believe that those killed were LTTE combatants, not civilians. Such summary executions of captured terrorists are perfectly acceptable in a war like this. If anything, many of us are disappointed that they weren’t sufficiently tortured before being killed. I’m sure that the American public wouldn’t be horrified if it was revealed that the US Army had captured and killed Al-Qaeda fighters.

    The British or the American media have absolutely no right to say anything about Sri Lanka after what they’ve done in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre

  • Groundtruth

    Th reasons are self-explanatory as some of the comments clearly show. After all anything goes, even mass crimes against humanity. Law abiding citizens have to wait for a better day.

  • Shamed Lankan

    Why all this psychoanalyses? Really. People who blindly support Mahinda Rajapakse are just too stupid. And they deserve the backward Third World nation they get. (By the way, I am not a Fonseka supporter, either, because I am not sure he is the right answer for that country. I am just someone utterly flummoxed that the Rajapakses manage to hoodwink so many people.)

  • Shaad

    well shamed lankan, its hard to provide a satisfactory answer to the author’s question without the so called “psychoanalysis”. I also think the author was being unfair in his/her assessments by providing only two explanations. Hence he/she has already made the assumption that its either this or that. In this case it’s neither of them.
    Furthermore shamed lankan, whilst respecting your opinion, (supporting anyone or anything blindly is dangerous) but I must take exception to your perception that those supporting president rajapaksa are just plain stupid. the reality is that no previous executive president (mind you we’ve had five of them) have been able to accomplish what this man has in 4 short years. He is far from a Ghandian or Mandela type of a personality.. but he is the most successful executive president we have had.

  • Dhiraj

    Well Kumar David, you know how the Tamil population at large were more vocal in their support and more happy with the LTTE the more brutal it got? How they screamed in anger when people pointed out that the LTTE was using child soldiers? Perhaps it’s the same thing happening here…

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Dear Kumar, Shaad, Niranjan

    I think Shaad’s comment is spot on.

    Niranjan’s views on desensitization to violence may also be somewhat true I feel. All the better that the LTTE was terminated when it was, instead of letting that cancerous rot continue to eat away the fabric of society for decades more (if the folks in the rest of the country are so desensitized, imagine what the Vanni folk were experiencing). The presence of the LTTE justified all sorts of excesses, including the PTA and what not. Those excesses may not disappear overnight, but at least, the excuse for justifying them is no longer present.

    Kumar, to understand the mindset of a third world nation, you need to picture what it’s like to have lived continuously in an environment of violence. When people were being regularly blown to smithereens while attending to their most mundane affairs, an extra-judicial killing during a war isn’t something that most people are going to be writhing in anguish over. As Shaad has mentioned, it’s more likely to be viewed as an LTTE supporter fueled attempt to punish Sri Lanka.

    Dear Shamed Lankan

    There may be some who have blind party loyalties, but those people aside, when it comes to the election, you’ll be forced to choose from the appalling choices available won’t you (as always)?

  • wijayapala

    Dhiraj,

    Well Kumar David, you know how the Tamil population at large were more vocal in their support and more happy with the LTTE the more brutal it got?

    Are you just referring to the LTTE supporters in the diaspora or are you including those Tamils in the Wanni whose children had been taken for use as cannon fodder? The evidence we have shows that the latter victimized group overwhelmingly bore hatred towards the LTTE and not the govt after the war finished.

  • Observer

    SomewhatDisgusted, you brought froward a very good point in your last post.

    Kumar, to understand the mindset of a third world nation, you need to picture what it’s like to have lived continuously in an environment of violence. When people were being regularly blown to smithereens while attending to their most mundane affairs, an extra-judicial killing during a war isn’t something that most people are going to be writhing in anguish over. As Shaad has mentioned, it’s more likely to be viewed as an LTTE supporter fueled attempt to punish Sri Lanka.

    While the west has a terrorist problem, it’s not affecting the civilians in their home soil as much as it affected every day Sri Lankans going about their daily business. Even then just consider the agencies US created (US homeland security), laws passed (famous Patriot Act) and extreme air security measures (humiliating body scanners) that was implemented post 9/11. On top of it who can forget the colour coded threat levels that induced mass paranoia into civil society?

    Now consider Sri Lanka which was subjected to much, much more violence. Are you surprised SL has PTAs when US has Patriot Acts after one terror attack? This is why the ground situation in SL cannot be compared to critisised by the West. It is natural given the threat level we had, the measure were going to be more draconian!

  • Kumari

    Kumar David writes “Shouldn’t decent people become cautious, if not sickened, and demand investigation?”. Seriously, are you looking for DECENT PEOPLE in Sri Lanka???

  • Heshan

    Wijayapala:

    “The evidence we have shows that the latter victimized group overwhelmingly bore hatred towards the LTTE and not the govt after the war finished.”

    How about hearing it from the latter victimized group itself… you know, the kind that was locked away in barbed wire camps & hidden from any media. Would have been nice to see a few folks open up about their feelings.

  • Heshan

    “On top of it who can forget the colour coded threat levels that induced mass paranoia into civil society?”

    Sorry, I have been in the States for quite a while but was never witness to this “mass paranoia” you speak of. Driving to work, I never had to go through checkpoints. I never had to show any kind of id to anyone (other than a license to a police officer), or if I’m in a bank.

    Sri Lanka is a failed state. As much as you want to bring the USA down along with it, you’ll never succeed. Whether its your conspiracy theories about Hiroshima and Nagasaki (when in fact the Japanese killed 23 million Chinese), Aghanistan (when in fact there are 12 other countries besides the US there), or the Patriot Act (when in fact, the Patriot Act affects less than 0.5% of the US population).

  • Observer

    awww, I hurt your feelings again! of course they don’t have to stop you because your details, your associations, your communications that may have contained “alert words” are all indexed and stored by the government. in fact they have a detailed profile of you.
    what you write in these forums w/o you even realising are being parsed through their surveillance supercomputers and being analysed automatically for threat detection.

    US has enough money to put in apparatus that will prevent attacks without the need for low level prevention techniques like check points. so i agree with you.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/

    Lol higher the threat level, higher the chance the average Joe & Jane looked at the Brown man with caution. That’s the sort of paranoia I was talking about. Not run around hysterically. You always misunderstand what I say and maybe I need to improve my communication style.

    I’m not trying to bring US down with SL. That’s a silly statement. In fact they will shape their own destiny and it’s none of my business. I know they do all sorts of unfair, dirty, immoral things to keep their top status, otherwise 75% of the world wouldn’t look at US with utter disgust. Me personally, I couldn’t care less. However I do have an issue when you try to compare the 2 unfairly and I usually have something to say about that. So do not try to impose your standards upon us! We don’t respect most of those standards. Thank you.

  • Observer

    End of the day your freedom & liberty (your most valued thing) comes by trampling on other’s freedom & liberty. When you stand under the flag and touch your heart to the tune of your anthem, there are innocent people in places like Iraq, Afghanistan shedding blood for that “perceived” freedom. Please do not advocate US of A as a model for SL to follow. We will do things our way!

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Kumar David,

    When Double Standards are used the underdog rebels

    Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur is a disgrace to the UN.

    First he dismissed the SL Govts’ Technical response without undertaking an impartial analysis himself.

    Read the reasons given by him for that rejection in a statement issued in 17 Sept 2009
    “However, he could not conclude that they were “thorough” or “impartial,” he stated, noting that two of the experts are members of the Sri Lankan Army, the body whose actions have been called into question. Another expert has previously acted on behalf of the Government, and the basis on which the fourth was chosen as an expert remains unclear.”

    Now look at Alston’s behaviour on PROVEN cases of extra judicial executions done by UK police and USA agents during his watch

    A UN report issued under his Chairmanship states

    In 2005 a number of “shoot-to-kill” policies authorizing the use of lethal force against
    suspected suicide bombers came to light. Following the July 22, 2005 killing of Jean Charles de Menezes, a Brazilian electrician who London police mistook for a suicide bomber, the United Kingdom (U.K.) revealed the existence of a national “shoot-to-kill” policy named Operation Kratos.

    Also in 2005, reports surfaced that the U.S. Capitol Police had become the first police department in the U.S. to adopt a “shoot-to-kill” policy for dealing with suspected suicide bombers. Other U.S. law enforcement agencies are considering following suit. In late 2005 the U.S. National Bomb Squad Commanders Advisory Board issued and distributed the first national protocol on suicide bomber response.

    The Victim in USA was Rigoberto Alpizar, a 44-yearold U.S. citizen of Costa Rican descent who was shot on December 7, 2005,

    Both of these Acts took place and the evidence is available.
    Both US and UK Govts endorsed shooting to kill on SUSPICION.

    Compare Alston’s pro activeness taking ALL THREE cases together.

    In contrast to the US and UK Govt policies of SHOOT TO KILL ON SUSPICION,
    SL Govt did not employ such draconian action though it had ample justification to do so. This resulted in MANY in the Security forces and ordinary civilians sacrificing their lives to suicide bomb attacks

    What pressures did Alston bring for the past 4.5 years to force UK or USA to submit to “Independent International Scrutiny” for their actions under the “War on Terror”?

    What drives him to soft pedal when powerful countries are involved in PROVEN CASES and to push hard to embroil a small country to submit to “Independent International Scrutiny” when the available evidence is itself suspect?

    Protecting his position?
    Revenge for a damaged ego?
    Money?
    or all three?

    Alston’s Channel 4 inquiry is biased and does not dispassionately investigate ALL aspects of the video in question.

    Whimpering when dealing with powerful countries and growling when dealing with weaker countries is not the way to go if he wants to be taken seriously. Now he projects himself as the class BULLY.

    For more information read this thread on GV http://www.groundviews.org/2009/08/29/a-video-of-shame-and-outrage-responses-positions-and-clarifications/

  • Kumari

    Observer said “We will do things our way”. “Our” way meaning keeping civil war alive for 30 years and then land up in jail for war crimes while the country is reduced to a pariah state?? LOL! Surely you have a UNIQUE way. Keep it up.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff

    “In 2005 a number of “shoot-to-kill” policies authorizing the use of lethal force against
    suspected suicide bombers came to light.”

    Can you suggest a better method for dealing with a suicide bomber? If the suicide bomber walks into an airport or subway, shall the coppers give him 5-star treatment?

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Neither Menezes nor Alpizar were Suicide Bombers. They were INNOCENT civilians who were shot and murdered on SUSPICION. This is known as an EXTRA JUDICIAL EXECUTION.

    Are you suggesting that the Govt Agencies should Shoot and Kill innocent people just because someone thinks she/he is a terrorist?

    Both men were in CUSTODY WHEN SHOT AND KILLED.

    Just goes to prove your mindset and my point.

    Its FINE when it happens in the so called Developed Democracies and Human Rights be damned even when irrefutable proof is available.

    But cry foul incessantly and embroil a poor country in an HR controversy even without an IOTA of DEFINITE proof

    This is exactly why Philip Alston is a DISGRACE to the UN.

    For your country’s sake, I hope people who think like you are an insignificant minority where ever you are living.

    This in response to your post of January 16, 2010 @ 8:13 pm

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Kumari,

    What Observer meant by “We will do things our way” is very clear if you can read and understand what he wrote in his posts. Apparently you can’t.

    [Edited out. Please attack the issue, not the person. Thank you.]

    If SL followed the US and UK examples and adopted Training Key 582, the Terrorist would not have lasted even a year.

    (ref your posts of January 16, 2010 @ 7:14 pm and January 16, 2010 @ 6:02 am)

  • Cengal

    Dear Off the Cuff:

    You said:

    “They were INNOCENT civilians who were shot and murdered on SUSPICION. This is known as an EXTRA JUDICIAL EXECUTION.”

    You have not explained properly the behaviour of these two individuals. This Alpizar was a bipolar fellow who run towards the cockpit making vague threats. He was told to get down but did not listen. Only then was he shot. This guy was given fair warning in a high security environment.

    “After returning from customs, while the plane was finishing boarding and all 114 passengers were seated [1], Alpizar was having an argument with his wife [2]. He got up from his seat saying “I have to get off the plane” [3] and ran for the door which the flight crew had not yet closed. His wife chased after him yelling “He’s sick.” She was followed by an undercover air marshal. Two air marshals confronted him near the cockpit when, according to James E. Bauer, Alpizar “uttered threatening words that included a sentence to the effect that he had a bomb.” Homeland Security spokesperson Brian Doyle later claimed that he “threatened that he had a bomb in his backpack” and “made a move toward the backpack”[4]. Alpizar was told to stop but continued off of the plane and was confronted again in the jetway and told to get on the ground. When Alpizar didn’t comply, he allegedly reached for his bag and was shot. Conflicting reports put the number of shots between 3 and 6.”

    http://en.allexperts.com/e/r/ri/rigoberto_alpizar.htm

    Menezes shooting was a case of mistaken identity. This was the day after the London train bombing and the police were on high alert for some of the perpetrators.

    “On the day of the shooting, the police were hunting four men believed to be involved in the failed bombing the day before. Intelligence had linked the men to a block of flats in Tulse Hill, south London, the same building Menezes was living in. Police put the communal entrance under surveillance, and on the morning of the shooting, saw Menezes leave the building. Plain clothes officers, armed with pistols for self-defence only, followed him as he took a bus to Brixton tube station, before boarding another to Stockwell tube station because the tube station at Brixton was closed. Specialist firearms officers were called to Stockwell. Just after Menezes entered a train, one of the unnamed officers shot him dead. The train was still at the platform with its doors open.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

    They really thought Menezes was going to blow up the train. In other words, they were sure Menezes was an immediate danger to public safety.

    Please explain how the above cases bear any resemblance to the execution of the Tamil prisoners who had no weapons.

  • SeeingPastTheSmoke

    I guess one way to get out of the Channel 4 video mess is to blow a lot of smoke about Phillip Alston and his alleged bias. Another strategy is to make unjustified comparisons between dissimilar events happening in the UK and USA vs Sri Lanka.

    Why are we comparing US and UK ‘shoot to kill’ policies regarding suspected suicide bombers with the Channel 4 video, which purportedly seems to show soldiers killing civilians? Even if they were terrorists, the video does not show them being shot in the heat of action, which is what ‘shoot to kill’ policies are about. How are legitimate ‘shoot to kill’ policies for suspected suicide bombers, enacted by governments with the intent of protecting citizens (even if executed in error) to be considered “arbitary executions” and to be equated with a video allegedly showing soldiers arbitrarily executing their own citizens without even proper army authority? Isn’t this arbitrariness that which Alston wants to investigate?

    The claim that Menezes and Alpizar were shot while in police custody is a deliberate lie. I say that because Off the Cuff seems to know a lot of even minor details about the two cases. Surely then he knows the most basic facts: that Menezes was shot at the Stockwell tube station and that Alpizar was shot at the Miami International Airport. Why the need to lie? So that killing people while in police custody, which we know has happened in Sri Lanka, can be passed off as ‘normal’, as something that happens in developed countries too? Nice try, but the facts don’t bear you out in this case.

    How was Alston deficient in pursuing the British and American cases, anyway? As Special Rapporteur, he is tasked to obtain information on suspected arbitrary executions. He did that. Does the UN have the power to force a country to change its legally instituted security policies? Of course not. Which was why Alston could go no further than revealing the facts. He was nevertheless instrumental in bringing public notice to these countries’ use of ‘shoot to kill’ policies. It’s up to British and American citizens to act on that info, to clamour against such policies if they disagree with them.

    The UN however is empowered in principle to investigate and prosecute war crimes. Which was why Alston was able to make recommendations of investigation for war crimes in Sri Lanka’s case. It is also not true that Alston did not carry out his own independent investigations on the video. He did, and declared it to be authentic. One may not agree with his findings, but to say that he did not even bother to do his own investigations before coming to a conclusion is patently false.

    But since some people do want to compare these cases, it is pertinent to observe that the British and American governments cooperated with Alston’s inquiries, and also conducted their own independent investigations. Nobody tried to hide the fact that the two men were not genuine suicide bombers, that they should not have been shot, that the security forces had made a terrible mistake. That’s called rule of law. Alston’s findings were clearly against the interests of the US and UK governments–yet these went through. He did not soft pedal anything. How different from the SL government, which offers government and army lackeys to conduct an ‘independent’ inquiry. Their so-called inquiry did not even identify the people who appeared on the video.

    What I don’t see from these people who defend the SL government’s actions: any concern at all for the welfare of SL citizens, especially their right to live. Does it really matter what US and UK are doing? Isn’t it more urgent to find out if such arbitrary executions took place in SL? Or is it the SL government to whom you owe your patriotism, not to fellow-citizens?

    “In contrast to the US and UK Govt policies of SHOOT TO KILL ON SUSPICION,
    SL Govt did not employ such draconian action though it had ample justification to do so.”

    Wow, I’m impressed! How morally superior SL government is compared to UK and US! This same government that shot and killed men, women and children who came to them waving white flags of surrender. And let’s not even talk of the state’s goons going around breaking the arms and legs of innocent Tamil civilians in northern villages from the time Rajapakse came into power in 2005. I know because I saw it happen. If SL government didn’t shoot to kill suspected suicide bombers, it was due to ineptness and failures in intelligence gathering, not some benevolent intention to spare people’s lives.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal / SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    I sure seem to have hit a Soft Spot with my comments regarding Alston’s apparent bias when dealing with the West on the one hand and Poor Countries on the other.

    The most basic Human Right is the Right to Life and shooting a SUSPECT violates that right. Please correct me if you think I am wrong. I would like to learn the WESTERN definition of that.

    I hope you won’t argue that the JUDICIAL SYSTEM is redundant and murdering people based on behavioral profiling (Training Key 582 has more elaborate profiling) is the order of the day in the West.

    Cenegal accuses me thus, “You have not explained properly the behaviour of these two individuals”. Sorry Madam/Sir, I never thought the Western view of the “Right to Life” depends on the “behaviour” of an individual.”

    I remain ENLIGHTENED, thank you.

    See extracts from Alston’s report below to see where Menezes was when he was murdered.

    Let me quote from the report issued by the committee Chaired by Alston

    “…The leaked results of an official investigation revealed that the police’s initial claims were not true. De Menezes was in fact wearing a light denim jacket and used his travel card to gain entry into the station. He was not running away from the police and was reportedly unaware that he was being followed. Once inside the train he was pinned down by police officers and shot in the head at close range multiple times. Police officers reportedly mistook de Menezes for a suspect in the failed July 21 bombings, in part because he had “Mongolian eyes.”

    Let’s look at it in detail
    1. “police’s initial claims were not true”.- This is diplomatic language for LYING

    2. “he was pinned down by police officers” – This means he was in Police Custody. Police custody begins from the moment a person is overpowered by the Police. This guy Menezez was “pinned down”….. that means he was immobile. The phrase “ by Police Officers” … means more than ONE officer.

    3. “……and shot in the head at close range multiple times.” – Means he was SHOT AFTER he was SUBDUED. Hence he was SHOT AND KILLED WHILE IN POLICE CUSTODY. Can you dispute it now?

    By the way how many times do you have to shoot a human in the head to kill him? The Policeman shot him MULTIPLE times.

    Now please read the UK papers describing that event in more graphic detail (I have refrained from quoting them and has limited myself to Alston’s report). You will observe many different versions from the Govt, Police and Witnesses reported in them. These reports, together with the ADMISSION of POLICE LYING, WARRANTS an independent an impartial investigation does it not? If not, why not?

    This WAS an EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING and there is INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF THE FACT and that of SUBSEQUENT ATTEMPTS AT A COVER UP.

    The Menezes case covers Alston’s mandate on several fronts
    It is an EXTRAJUDICIAL execution
    It is a SUMMARY execution
    It is an ARBITRARY execution
    An importantly, it is an ESTABLISHED case not an ALLEGED one.

    Hence IF Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions is IMPARTIAL he needs to apply his mandate with an EVEN HAND.

    He failed to INSIST on an IMPARTIAL INVESTIGATION in the above PROVEN case in the UK with the same vigor that he does in an ALLEGED case in SL

    He failed to INSIST on an INTERNATIONAL inquiry in the above PROVEN case in the UK with the same vigor that he does in an ALLEGED case in SL

    The UK case is 4.5 years old and the attempted cover up has been OFFICIALLY admitted. CAN YOU PROVE that he went after the UK Govt with the SAME VIGOR that he is going after the SL Govt?

    “SeeingPastTheSmoke” Accuses me of deliberate lying. He states “The claim that Menezes and Alpizar were shot while in police custody is a deliberate lie.”

    When a person is overpowered by the Police, custody of that person is WITH the Police. Did you think that the person has to be in a Police Cell for him to be in Police custody?

    Here is what Alston’s report says about Alpizar
    After Air Marshals became involved and began to escort Alpizar off the plane, his wife ran after them yelling that her husband, who suffered from bi-polar disorder, was ill and off his medication. After being removed from the plane, Alpizar was shot and killed on the jetway, allegedly as he was reaching for his bag.10 There are no witness accounts confirming that Alpizar claimed that he had a bomb, as was stated by the Air Marshals involved in the shooting.

    Let’s look at it in detail

    1. “After Air Marshals became involved and began to escort Alpizar off the plane” – This means he was in CUSTODY

    2. “After being removed from the plane, Alpizar was shot and killed on the jetway” – So this man was also MURDERED while in Custody

    3. “There are no witness accounts confirming that Alpizar claimed that he had a bomb, as was stated by the Air Marshals involved in the shooting”. – This means that OTHER THAN THE WORDS OF THE MEN WHO SHOT Alpizar, there is no other CONFIRMATION of the BOMB CLAIM by any independent witness and there were OTHER PASSENGERS in that plane.

    This murder too falls SQUARELY within Alston’s ambit as
    It is an EXTRAJUDICIAL execution
    It is a SUMMARY execution
    It is an ARBITRARY execution
    An importantly, it is also an ESTABLISHED case not an ALLEGED one.

    This MURDER carried out by US Air Marshals in December 2005 has all the ingredients of an official cover up.

    In view of the Cover Up attempts of TWO FACTUAL events can you please enlighten us as to why an Independent, International, Investigation should not be undertaken to get at the TRUE FACTS?

    Alston’s report contains the following damning observation

    “Both Alpizar and de Menezes were also dark-skinned men who superficially matched what has become the generally accepted profile of the “terrorist”; namely, young Muslim men of Middle Eastern or South Asian origin. The scope for all of the behavioral indicators contained in the Training Keys to be read in non-neutral ways is heightened by the widespread acceptance of
    this profile, and by the discriminatory targeting of Muslims, Arabs, and South Asians in a variety of post-September 11, 2001 counter-terrorism measures.”

    So why has not Alston succeeded in getting one started for over 4 years? Is it because he is manipulated by a powerful Govt or some other inexplicable reason?

    The USA case is 4 years old and is established as fact. CAN YOU PROVE that he went after the US Govt with the SAME VIGOR that he is going after the SL Govt in a case where the ALLEGED crime itself is suspect?

    If either of you can’t prove that Alston acted in ALL these three cases equally then my contention that Alston is biased stands.

    Cengal you ask me the following question
    “Please explain how the above cases bear any resemblance to the execution of the Tamil prisoners who had no weapons”

    I have shown above that the UK and USA cases are both
    EXTRA JUDICIAL EXECUTIONS.
    Both VICTIMS were UNARMED and this is ESTABLISHED FACT.

    In contrast this video CANNOT establish anything.
    If true it is an Extra Judicial Killing
    If STAGED it proves nothing
    The Incident is ALLEGED (UK and USA Incidents are FACT)
    The VICTIMS can be Sinhalese / Muslims / Tamil
    The perpetrators can be LTTE or SLA or any other Armed group

    The INVESTIGATORS seem to have fallen victim to the obvious outrage and sympathy that the video arouses. Evidence of this is seen in the Speculative Comments in Spivac’s Technical report that is intended to belittle an UNEXPLAINABLE detail in the Meta Data which is the Date and Time.

    My estimate is +/- 2 hours of NOON SL time (08:30 UTC) with a cursory examination. A more detailed examination may put it smack on the Meta Data time. Why was it omitted?

    Now that you have seen past the smoke screen please tell me which statement of mine above is not justified and why.

  • SeeingPastTheSmoke

    Off the Cuff,
    I am glad you note that Alston’s reports made some “damning” observations. So how are you arguing for bias on his part? He did not kowtow to American and British governments. You keep asking why Alston did not call for an independent investigation. But wasn’t that what his report was based on? Are you saying he should demand an independent investigation after having done an independent investigation?

    Neither have you given any evidence to suggest that the American and British governments did not take action, judicial or otherwise, against the officers involved in these actions. In fact, they did conduct independent inquiries, and in the British case, the police chief acknowledged responsibility for the error.

    As for claiming that these UK and US incidents are FACT, whereas the extrajudicial killing in the SL video is ALLEGED–excuse me, the reason it is merely ALLEGED is because the government won’t allow an independent investigation. The UK and US did not resist fact-finding, unlike your government. That is why all accusations of war crimes are merely ALLEGED, and not FACT–because the government won’t allow an investigation. What does it have to hide? That is the question you should be looking at if you have any real interest in standing up against human rights abuses.

    And, yes, you have hit a soft soft by claiming that the UN is biased against poor countries and supporting the wealthier countries. Because what you are essentially doing is justifying war crimes and summary executions in poor countries. Why do you care what happens in the rich countries? Aren’t you interested in standing up against possible human rights abuses against your own fellow-citizens?

  • Off the Cuff

    SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    There are some aspects of your post that were not answered in my earlier common comment addressed to you and Cengal.

    You say “It is also not true that Alston did not carry out his own independent investigations on the video. He did,”

    WHEN ?

    Then you follow up with another statement

    “but to say that he did not even bother to do his own investigations before coming to a conclusion is patently false”

    You need to make sure you have understood what was written before making such accusations. Read again the post to which you responded to.
    Was it BEFORE his statement issued in 17 Sept 2009 ?

    I hope you can show he did the investigation before he shot his mouth off on 17 Sept 2009, in which case, I will be wrong and would apologize ELSE you are the LIAR and for the second time in the same post.

    Who are these INDEPENDENT investigators of UK and USA that you are talking about? Anybody in the employ of either Govt? Should I use your own word “Lackey” just because they are employed by the UK or USA Govts?

    You state
    “What I don’t see from these people who defend the SL government’s actions: any concern at all for the welfare of SL citizens, especially their right to live. Does it really matter what US and UK are doing? Isn’t it more urgent to find out if such arbitrary executions took place in SL? Or is it the SL government to whom you owe your patriotism, not to fellow-citizens?”
    Unquote

    What we defend is “Our Right to Live” without OUTSIDE interference using DOUBLE STANDARDS. That’s why the USA and UK behavior matters.

    Use an even handed approach then you will find corporation.
    Adopt a “Holier than Thou” approach you will get nowhere.

    Our country may be small but we are your EQUAL not the peasants of a former colony and cannot be treated as such.
    You found that out very embarrassingly at the UNHRC.

    I gave Three examples of restraint by the SL Police as evidence of the non adoption of a “Shoot to Kill on suspicion” policy

    Typically, the Holier than Thou attitude was adopted by you in trying to be sarcastic about it. Read again the relevant post.

    All three suicide bombers were suspected as such, BEFORE they were subjected to a body search. They could have been shot and killed if SL adopted the Training Key 582 recommendations followed by USA and UK and the body search dispensed with completely. Subsequently the suspicion would have been proven to be true (in these three cases).

    The problem is that MANY other innocent people would have died given the shear volume of suicide attacks this country suffered and the tendency for the Security personnel to err on the side of Suspicion than on actual proof. That is the reason for not adopting a Shoot to Kill on Suspicion policy, not ineptness as you charge.

    The results of Such policies and the propensity to ERR in favour of suspicion was seen in the two examples I quoted from UK and USA

    You post innuendo not fact. Surrender was called for months in advance. It never happened. there were two 48 hour stoppages of the war to allow civilians to escape and surrendees to come forward without success.

    What happened was that the LTTE started to shoot and AMPUTATE limbs of dissident civilians in a desperate attempt to hold them within a Human Shield. Anna Marie Loos of Medicine Sans Frontiers has testified to that.

    How the Tamil civilians poured out when the SLA breached the LTTE earthen defenses was seen live by SL citizens and Foreign Diplomats including the UK an US Diplomats.

  • Off the Cuff

    SeeingPastTheSmoke ,

    Ref yours of January 17, 2010 @ 4:33 pm

    I saw this post of yours only after I replied your earlier one

    Will be responding to the contents of this one when I have the time.

  • wijayapala

    SeeingPastTheSmoke and Cengal,

    In another thread I pointed out that Alston’s claims of “authenticity” do not prove at all who the killers or the victims were. They presented no evidence that Sri Lankan armed forces were involved. The only purpose of Alston’s investigation were to show that the video was not altered and that it showed people being killed.

    I asked some questions to another person highly concerned about the alleged execution, but got no answers. I am hoping that you can shed some light for me.

    1. How can anyone even begin an investigation into the killing without any information on the location, date, time of killing, or units involved? The videotape doesn’t even show anyone’s faces. Why is JDS wimping out on the details?

    2. Why is Alston focusing on this videotape when there are other cases far more worthy of being investigated, such as Trinco 5 or the ACF killing, where we do have solid information (and in the case of Trinco 5, eyewitnesses) to begin an investigation?

    Thank you.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    Of course Alston’s report has Damning observations. The report itself is much more detailed; it contains 72 A4 pages in fact. That was not the point. Was he as VIGOROUS in following up FACTUAL extra judicial killings as he is in going after questionable ones? Pushing out a report does not prove that.

    I also note that you have accepted that both Alpizar and de Menezes were in POLICE CUSTODY when they were shot

    You state
    Neither have you given any evidence to suggest that the American and British governments did not take action, judicial or otherwise, against the officers involved in these actions.
    Unquote

    We are not discussing superficial action meant for eye wash. The question is was Justice meted out in comparison to the Crime?

    You state
    “As for claiming that these UK and US incidents are FACT, whereas the extrajudicial killing in the SL video is ALLEGED–excuse me, the reason it is merely ALLEGED is because the government won’t allow an independent investigation. The UK and US did not resist fact-finding, unlike your government.”
    Unquote

    Sorry Madam/ Sir wrong again.

    The UK and USA incidents are fact as they occurred in full view of the Public. This means there is AMPLE Eye Witness Evidence to establish the FACT.

    Where are the Eye Witnesses to this video?
    Any proof of the location?
    Can you refute it IF we claim it was Filmed in Tamil Nadu?
    Even the Philips phone on which it was shot was unavailable for tests
    The Testers while claiming the phone was a Philips used a Nokia for tests
    Why was the analyzed video not available as an annex to the reports?

    Do you accept that this video could have been shot around 2 P.M?

    I note that you have not refuted the alternate possibilities that I have enumerated

    The UK govt tried it’s best to cover up but failed. I am not sure what the USA govt did as I based my comment on Alston’s report.

    If you want to call this video a war crime without establishing it’s authenticity beyond reasonable doubt (read the Link given in an earlier post for a detailed discussion of this video on this same website). Then we can use war crimes for comparison instead of those in Alston’s report on INTERNAL extra judicial killings and see how Alston performs under such conditions.

    Did he press for INTERNATIONAL and INDEPENDENT investigations of such killings in Iraq? Assuming he did, was he as persistent as he is now? May be there were no such killings in Iraq or Palestine or Pakistan or Afghanistan or even in Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and Diego Garcia for all we know?
    No secrecy?
    No resistance to investigations?
    Everything is an open book right?

    You ask
    “Why do you care what happens in the rich countries? Aren’t you interested in standing up against possible human rights abuses against your own fellow-citizens?”

    I have answered your first question already in the previous post

    About the second question.
    The answer is of course we do care when what happens is real and not fabricated. You can see evidence of that, when you read the posts on GV.

    BUT we won’t BROOK Interference from whatever source IF such interference is as a result of Double Standards. We will accept criticism when the standards used are Global and not selective.

    Don’t try to mess about with our National Independence or try to push us around the way Alston has been trying. We may be a small country but as I stated before we are your Peers.

    (this is a re yours of January 17, 2010 @ 4:33 pm )

  • SeeingPastTheSmoke

    Off the Cuff,
    “What we defend is “Our Right to Live” without OUTSIDE interference using DOUBLE STANDARDS. That’s why the USA and UK behavior matters.”

    Then, stop depending on the rest of the world for your living. A country with more natural resources than most countries in the world, and all it can offer its people is poverty and violence, and the begging bowl. And then talk of protecting their soveriegnty!

    I still remember the day I heard about the tsunami. Lots of countries were affected, but almost before the words were out of SL’s mouth about being hit by the tsunami, it was begging for international aid–and then refusing to let UN people in to check that the aid was going to the right quarters. If you want to be a member of the UN, you play by its rules. If you don’t want the rest of the world hounding you for human rights abuses, then behave in an honourable way.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    Ran out of LOGIC to contest the core issues that we were discussing?

    Another phrase for that is “Intellectual Bankruptcy”

    Before you accuse us of begging, turn your thoughts to PLUNDERING.

    We were a net Exporter of Food.

    That was before the PLUNDER started

    Re yours of January 17, 2010 @ 9:05 pm

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    I repeat what I said earlier. Alpizar ran towards the cockpit (strange behaviour) and reached for his bag when officers told him to get down. If you are in a high security environment and you reach for your bag when you are told by security personnel to get down, you will definitely be shot. 99 out of 100 people understand that, and will not reach for their bag The Menezes murder was based on faulty intelligence. The British Government has acknowledged the mistake. Menezes family was offered almost £500,000 compensation. The London Metropolitan Police, after an investigation was found guilty of the above and fined £175,000, with £385,000 legal costs.

    The point is, in any investigation, you have to evaluate the motivations of the accused. While no one denies that Alpizar and Menezes were innocent, there was a high degree of probable cause for believing they posed an immediate danger to those in their vicinity.

    In any event, the Alpizar and Menezes cases are closed. You want to compare it with the Sri Lankan case, but there is no comparison:

    (I) Sri Lanka Government won’t even acknowledge the authenticity of the execution video

    (II) No unbiased review of the execution tape

    (III) No compensation to the families of the victims

    The difference is obvious… the British and Americans are way past the investigation stage, they are at the point where they make compensation to the families of the victims. The Sri Lankans have not even acknowledged a horrible crime took place!

  • Cengal

    To clarify an earlier point, yes, Alpizar was running towards the cockpit. He was not shot on the plane. He was shot on the tarmac when officers told him to get down. If you behave strangely on the plane, you can expect to be questioned when it lands. If you reach for your bag when officers have guns pointed at you, expect to be shot. Usually they shoot the person in the leg; that is the mistake they made here, when they didn’t shoot him in the leg. All of these points are reinforced in the context of the high security environment, the airport.

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    “In another thread I pointed out that Alston’s claims of “authenticity” do not prove at all who the killers or the victims were. They presented no evidence that Sri Lankan armed forces were involved. The only purpose of Alston’s investigation were to show that the video was not altered and that it showed people being killed.”

    So you accept that the video was not altered? If you accept that the video was not altered, then you are automatically accepting that the so-called “investigation” carried out by the Sri Lankan Government was an utter and total failure. On the other hand, if you accept that the video was not altered, the evidence seems to indicate that the SLA is the guilty culprit. The fact that Sinhala can be heard on the video, the fact that the video was made on a mobile phone, and the fact that the prisoners were stripped naked. There is another mobile phone video I have seen of a Sinhala soldier abusing the dead naked body of a female LTTE soldier. In that video also, the soldiers speaks in Sinhala.That video is much more graphic.

    As I said, in this execution video the prisoners were stripped naked. Have you forgotten about the Anuradhapura airbase attack? The bodies of the LTTE attackers were stripped naked, piled on a truck, and driven through the town. I guess old habits die hard.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    You say
    “I repeat what I said earlier. Alpizar ran towards the cockpit (strange behaviour) and reached for his bag when officers told him to get down.”
    Unquote

    So what you are actually saying is that Alston is a LIAR because I quoted from Alston’s report and I explicitly said so.

    All what you say about the Alpizar incident is CONTRADICTED by Alston.

    Who do you want us to believe, you or Alston?

    Read the posts Madam/Sir, read it with care before you jump in at the deep end.

    You say
    “In any event, the Alpizar and Menezes cases are closed. You want to compare it with the Sri Lankan case, but there is no comparison:”
    Unquote

    Why do you say closed? It was not subject to an International Independent Inquiry was it? That’s what Alston is demanding of Sri Lanka. Apply the same yardstick before you declare it closed.

    To kill a man only a single head shot is required. The guy who shot Menezes is reported to have EMPTIED his pistol at point blank range to the head. Shows Hate. Was he jailed for Life? This is the NORMAL punishment for a Hate Murder is it not?

    It’s true there is no comparison and the reason is that the UK and USA killings are FACTS and what Alston and others like you are trying to attribute to SL is not.

    It may even be an event in Tamil Nadu ANY proof that it is not?

    You say
    “(I) Sri Lanka Government won’t even acknowledge the authenticity of the execution video”
    Unquote

    How can it ? Is it not the responsibility of the people who started this CHARADE to prove it’s authenticity by producing a witness? There are at least three who have FIRST hand knowledge.

    You state
    “(II) No unbiased review of the execution tape”
    Unquote

    By whom ? Alston or SL Govt?
    We don’t even know what tape CH4 edited for broadcast
    Alston’s report does not contain the examined video
    Both of them have done their own versions
    I acquired a video with a similar name as mentioned by Spivac from a pro LTTE Tamil website and have shown the bias in Alston’s conclusions.

    What do you mean by “UNBIASED” was the UK and USA cases subject to this same “UNBIASED” scrutiny?

    You state
    “(III) No compensation to the families of the victims”
    Unquote

    What has gone wrong with your logic?

    The tape is not established as authentic
    The place is not known (could even be Tamil Nadu)
    The bodies are not available for identification
    Non of the “Victims” can be Identified by the tape
    This tape would have been viewed by EVERY Tamil in and outside Sri Lanka.
    It was posted on the web by CH4 on 25 August 2009 and I assume the broadcast took place on the same day.
    So why no claiments for so long?

    (this is re your two posts January 17, 2010 @ 11:16 pm and January 17, 2010 @ 11:21 pm)

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Sir, you are distorting the facts here. The following extract is NOT from Alston’s report:

    After Air Marshals became involved and began to escort Alpizar off the plane, his wife ran after them yelling that her husband, who suffered from bi-polar disorder, was ill and off his medication. After being removed from the plane, Alpizar was shot and killed on the jetway, allegedly as he was reaching for his bag.10 There are no witness accounts confirming that Alpizar claimed that he had a bomb, as was stated by the Air Marshals involved in the shooting.”

    The above extract can be found here, at number 12: http://www.chrgj.org/docs/HRC%20Shoot%20to%20Kill%20Submission%20June%202006.pdf

    The references given, 23-27, are from BBC News, CNN, ABC, Curt Anderson, and Katherine Fernandez Rundle.

    You have also added a non-existent line to the report… “there are no witness accounts…” In fact, this is what the report says:

    “Different accounts exist as to whether Alpizar claimed
    he had a bomb.26 On 23 May 2006, the staffing/review team investigating events at the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office determined that “the shooting officers were legally justified in their use of force and no criminal charges will be filed.”

    Sir, I understand you are angry at Philip Alston, but no need to put words into his mouth which he never spoke.

  • Cengal

    From what I can tell, Philip Alston has never personally commented on either the Alpizar or Menezez case.

    Just because he was (or is) the Chairman of the “Center for Human Rights and Global Justice” does not mean he is personally responsible for or agrees with everything that that institution publishes.

  • wijayapala

    Cengal,

    The fact that Sinhala can be heard on the video, the fact that the video was made on a mobile phone, and the fact that the prisoners were stripped naked. There is another mobile phone video I have seen of a Sinhala soldier abusing the dead naked body of a female LTTE soldier. In that video also, the soldiers speaks in Sinhala.

    Sorry, but speaking Sinhala does not establish one as a Sinhala more or less SLA. Were you aware that the LTTE had Sinhala language facilities to train its suicide bombers?

    The above sort of statement of yours leads me to question whether you know anything about the LTTE or how it operated.

  • Kumari

    Dear “Off the Cuff”, what I wrote in my previous posts is very clear and true , if you can understand. Apparently you can’t and apparently you are unable to face the truth about your country. So you attack me. “If SL followed US and UK examples, Terrorists would not have lasted a year”. REALLY? If SL followed US and UK examples in everything, “terrorists” would never have been there. I hope you understand at least this. Or you can come back and pretend that I can’t read. It is your wish. But one day you got to face the unpleasant truth about your “Paradise” .

  • SeeingPastTheSmoke

    Off the Cuff,
    I’ll leave it to others to decide if my posts lack logic–or whether yours do.

    As for all the questions you have posed about the video, sorry, I can’t answer them. That’s why people want and NEED an investigation, right? When a government has refused to allow an independent investigation, it can’t then go on to make claims about the truth of the incident. You can’t have it both ways. That’s what you’re trying to do–in the face of a lack of investigation, you’re trying to claim you have the handle on the truth. Now that is ILLOGICAL. And DISHONEST. You ask others for proof while defending not conducting an investigation. If people had proof, they wouldn’t call for an investigation.

    And tell me, if nobody’s face can be seen and there are no details on the video, i.e. the truth cannot be found out, why then does your government refuse an independent investigation? Wouldn’t it be good international PR to allow the investigation, especially considering that your country is a UN member? What exactly does UN membership mean to your country–the opportunity to beg for aid, without having to bear any responsibilities towards the international community?

    You said:
    “Our country may be small but we are your EQUAL not the peasants of a former colony and cannot be treated as such.
    You found that out very embarrassingly at the UNHRC.”

    Actually, my country is far smaller than your country. But I don’t accept Sri Lanka as its equal–SL has never since independence conducted itself with any honour. Its conduct at the UNHRC was yet another example of that. What is honourable about evading war crimes investigations by hiding behind all the rogue countries of the world–precisely those who have their own war crimes to hide? You are like someone jeering at others for allowing you to get away with murder.

    You also said:
    “Before you accuse us of begging, turn your thoughts to PLUNDERING.
    We were a net Exporter of Food.
    That was before the PLUNDER started”

    That’s really pathetic. Lots of countries with only a fraction of SL natural resources have been able to dust off the colonial plundering, and join the ranks of the civilized world. The world has gone into a post-postcolonial era, and you’re still crying about colonialism. Don’t embarass yourself. It’s high time you looked at the PLUNDERING your own governments have done.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Kumari,

    You just took the word “our” from a sentence and redefined it. Hatred was written all over the new definition. So there was no pretense.

    Training Key 582 is a Recommendation to shoot to kill on SUSPICION if a person is suspected of being a suicide bomber. That’s why Menezes (he had Mongolian looking eyes) an innocent person died in the UK underground. Be careful of your own movements lest you come under suspicion like Menezes and end up like him.

    If this was adopted in SL your SUICIDE Bombers would not have had half a chance to create what it did in the South and MANY lives would have been saved. However along with the actual suicide cadres a lot of innocent Tamils would have also lost their lives. That’s why it was not adopted in SL.

    My country has FINISHED the LTTE scourge for good that’s the truth. Keep on dreaming of Eelam from where ever you are and continue with your propaganda. However unlike before when you had an undefended goal to kick at, now it is defended.

    Let’s hope that you will not outlive your welcome in your new place of abode. If that happens, you are welcome back in SL but without the divisive Baggage. There wont be any Traditional Tamil Homelands for you, just ONE Sri Lanka where anyone can live anywhere they please.

  • Observer

    REALLY? If SL followed US and UK examples in everything, “terrorists” would never have been there. I hope you understand at least this. Or you can come back and pretend that I can’t read. It is your wish. But one day you got to face the unpleasant truth about your “Paradise” .

    HAHAHA oh dear….

    Following the UK example

    Queen: Sir Humphrey, I am quite dissatisfied with the gold I have in my trunk.

    Sir Humphrey: Forgive me your highness! I shall make amends to this grievous mistake.
    Alright chaps, you heard our majesty! Get your ships and guns ready, we’re going on a trip around the world, have a few jolly good slaughter sessions and steal all their stuff!

    Edward: What a marvelous idea, Indeed sir, let me just finish my cup of tea first.

    Sir Humphrey: Now that’s the spirit!

    ——

    Following the US example

    Cheny: Sir, we must do something about Bin Laden!

    Bush: Crazy talk! Bin Laden’s my dad’s best friend leave him alone. Saudi Sheikh’s my dad’s business partnet for god sake! Stop uttering blasphemous words. You’re gonna rock the boat.

    Cheny: But Sir, we must respond! We cannot look weak! What would the Russians think???? Screw Russia, CHINAAAAAA!!!!

    Bush: Yes, Dicky! You’re absolutely right! We ought to let some guns lose. Otherwise I aint a red blooded Texan! I always wanted to press this red button in my drawer. Ahh the red button, it’s quite fascinating don’t you think?

    Cheny: Stay focused Sir! This is not the time to get mesmerized by the red button.

    Bush: You’re quite right. Let me think… Geez my head’s hurting! Cheny you know how I hate to think. Why do you put me in these situations? How’s our oil supply?

    Cheny: Declining fast Sir! We might have to support renewable energy.

    Bush: Don’t be crazy son! How’s my daddy going to make money in renewablahblah whatever energy you speak of? He’s 100% invested in the sweet black gold!
    I know Cheny! Let’s get that smelly Sadam. The guy had the nerve to sleazy on to my beautiful Laura at the last OPEC shin dig!

    Cheny: What were you doing there Sir?

    Bush: Stop questioning me! Send Sadam, some of that sweet shock and awe we talked about.

    Cheny: I have a bad feeling about this Sir!

    Bush: That’s why it’s genius! hehehhehehe

    ——

    Kumari, I love my imperfect paradise no matter what the faults are.

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    Thanks for “enlightening” us about Sinhala-language facilities used by the LTTE. Although I fail to understand why (or how), when they are facing imminent defeat, the LTTE would make use of such facilities to broadcast a low-quality execution video. Furthermore, why such a video was released AFTER the war, and not during the heat of battle. Also, you did not comment on the similarity between naked bodies of dead LTTE being driven through the town for the villagers to see after the Anuradhapura attack, and the prisoners in the execution video being stripped naked. Let me refresh your memory:

    http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0ecW1Zt0qS01E/610x.jpg

  • Kumari

    Dear OfftheScuff, Thanks for “enlightening” me about Training 582. But my point still holds true. I am writing it again in BOLD LETTERS so that you can understand it atleast this time. IF SL FOLLOWED US AND UK EXAMPLES IN EVERYTHING,”TERRORISTS” WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THERE . IT MEANS THE RIOTERS OF 1955 , 1978 AND ALL THE VARIOUS SINGALA THUGS ROAMING ABOUT YOUR BELOVED PARADISE ISLE WOULD HAVE BEEN EXECUTED IN DUE TIME, not giving a chance for VP to form LTTE. “

    Have you ever heard of a former Al-Quaida leader taking up a minister’s post in Washington, just because he decided to abandon Al-Quaida?? No way. But it can happen in Colombo. (Karuna). Where is the US/UK example in this?? Oh right, you do things your own way!

    Btw, I am not a Sri Lankan , to COME BACK there! That is another one of your assumptions , JUST LIKE a lot of things you write here. Time to revisit your assumptions and correct them.

  • Heshan

    Observer,

    “Kumari, I love my imperfect paradise no matter what the faults are.”

    Reminds me of the marriage line, “till death do us part.” If it was as simple as that, Judge Judy would be jobless. : )

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Kumari,

    Apparently you have a Terrorist mindset and a very short memory. First you isolate the word “OUR” from a post to give it a new meaning.

    Then you INTRODUCE a new word “EVERYTHING” into a post as you don’t seem to have counter arguments.

    No, we don’t ape the WEST in “Everything” as you seem to be hell bent on doing. We wash ourselves with soap and water and don’t use toilet paper to keep ourselves clean. Probably you have lost that habit ….. hey?

    Yes IF SL adopted the UK policies, the North would be like Diego Garcia. Ask the Chagos Islanders what happened to them or you can READ about the Court cases filed and won by the Chagos Islanders and how the Highest Court in the Land was subverted using the “Crown Prerogative”.

    No we don’t APE the West in “EVERYTHING”.
    If we did, the Terrorist Problem in SL would have been over before it even had a chance to get off the ground.

    There are no Traditional Homelands in Sri Lanka, she is home to every citizen. They can live where ever they please. SL is over 80% Singhalese just as UK is overwhelmingly European. There is nothing that UK or SL can do abut that.

    If you adopt the same attitudes in the WEST that you did in SL, You sure will live to regret it

    You should learn a bit more of world history before you start writing about Karuna whose defection was the start of your LTTE’s downfall. You can ask Adelle B who is living over there, if you don’t believe me.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Kumari,

    Sorry I missed your comment about assumptions in my above reply to you.

    The Only assumption that I made is that you have Tamil Blood in you (not in a derogatory sense).

    If that is the case (which you indicate by your spelling), irrespective of your current citizenship, let’s hope that you will not outlive your welcome in your new place of abode.

    If that happens, you are welcome back in SL but without the divisive Baggage.

    BTW here at GV, we can and will take on Terrorist Propaganda, unlike the Times on line in the UK, GV does not block either yours or ours when we attack issues. That is another aspect where we differ from UK.

    You state
    “JUST LIKE a lot of things you write here”
    Unquote

    If you can, take me on and challenge what I write.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    Both you and I and all others on GV are not writing personal notes to each other on a public forum. We leave the judgement of logic to others who read GV. They have diverse views so some will agree and some would disagree.

    In your case you jump from discussing “Extra Judicial Killings” to a completely unrelated topic “Begging”.

    Your intent was to draw a “Red Herring” as Logical argument about the subject matter had deserted you. Anyone who reads your post of January 17, 2010 @ 9:05 pm in reply to mine will see that.

    Since we are discussing without an even playing field as you know that I am from Sri Lanka and is a Sinhalese and I don’t know any similar details of you.

    In order for me to give you a comprehensive reply, would you be willing to disclose your details to even the playing field before we discuss Colonial Plunder and Begging?

    (Re yours of January 18, 2010 @ 1:54 pm)

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    The report I refered to found on the UN’s OHCHR web site in Page 2 of 72 states as follows http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/ngos/chrgj.pdf

    Philip Alston is the Center’s Faculty Chair; Smita Narula and Meg Satterthwaite are Faculty Co-Directors; and Jayne Huckerby is Research Director.

    This report should be cited as: Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, Irreversible Consequences: Racial Profiling and Lethal Force in the “War on Terror” (New York: NYU School of Law, 2006).

    This is why I referred to it as Alston’s report.

    Page 9 of 72 has the following paragraph

    The Training Keys also include factors such as “mumbling,” “pacing back and forth,” and “being overly protective of one’s baggage” that could lead to the erroneous targeting of the mentally ill, as was demonstrated when an airline passenger with bi-polar disorder was shot and killed by Federal Air Marshals in Miami. On December 7, 2005, Rigoberto Alpizar, a 44-yearold U.S. citizen of Costa Rican descent, and his wife boarded a flight in Miami headed to
    Orlando. Following an argument with his wife, Alpizar, who was visibly agitated and clutching his bag, ran to the front of the airline declaring that he had to get off the plane. After Air Marshals became involved and began to escort Alpizar off the plane, his wife ran after them yelling that her husband, who suffered from bi-polar disorder, was ill and off his medication.
    After being removed from the plane, Alpizar was shot and killed on the jetway, allegedly as he was reaching for his bag. There are no witness accounts confirming that Alpizar claimed that he had a bomb, as was stated by the Air Marshals involved in the shooting.

    May be you and I are reading different reports as the “LINE” that you claim that I introduced is very plainly visible in that paragraph.

    According to the report “After being removed from the plane, Alpizar was shot and killed on the jetway, allegedly as he was reaching for his bag. There are no witness accounts confirming that Alpizar claimed that he
    had a bomb, as was stated by the Air Marshals involved in the shooting.”

    Meaning that the Air Marshals COULD be lying to save their necks just like the UK police did in the Menezes case.

    I may make a mistake as I am not infallible BUT I wont deliberately LIE as you seem to imply.

    I am not angry at Alston, I loathe him for his lack of impartiality, misuse of official status and use of Double Standards.

    I don’t have any need to misrepresent him by introducing anything, he is doing an admirable job all by himself.

    This is re your posts of January 18, 2010 @ 2:56 am January 18, 2010 @ 3:07 am

  • Observer

    Reminds me of the marriage line, “till death do us part.” If it was as simple as that, Judge Judy would be jobless. : )

    Well Heshan, in that case you haven’t truly loved yet… Hopefully you will understand one day…

    I have to make a correction, it’s not even the “semi” paradise isle that I love, it’s the people who can’t defend or stand up for them selves. People who get taken for a ride by “those that think they know better” from many oceans away.

    Anyway half the Judge Judy cases are acting I reckon, just like Jerry Springer!

  • SeeingPastTheSmoke

    Off the Cuff,
    You said:
    “In your case you jump from discussing “Extra Judicial Killings” to a completely unrelated topic ‘Begging’.
    Your intent was to draw a ‘Red Herring’ as Logical argument about the subject matter had deserted you. Anyone who reads your post of January 17, 2010 @ 9:05 pm in reply to mine will see that.”

    We were talking about bias in Alston’s treatment of suspected cases of extra judicial killing. I have all along maintained there was no such bias. That is surely relevant to the issue. I spoke about SL’s begging from UN because that relates to SL’s responsibilities to the UN. As a member of an organisation, it is not ethical to reap all the benefits of that membership while whinging about following its rules. That too is relevant to the issue of refusing to comply with UN demands.

    What is really a “red herring” is raising the issue of double standards, and keeping on raising it when it is clear from available facts that the US and UK governments freely complied with UN requests for independent investigation, whereas SL refuses. As you say, the US and UK cases are based on fact–facts that were established precisely by inquiries. The SL case is merely ALLEGED only because investigation is being denied. That does not mean that it is untrue. If the UK and US incidents had happened in SL, the government would have denied it ever happened, and refused investigations because it never happened! I look forward to the day when we can know what happened as facts—whatever those facts may be.

    You also said:
    “Since we are discussing without an even playing field as you know that I am from Sri Lanka and is a Sinhalese and I don’t know any similar details of you.
    In order for me to give you a comprehensive reply, would you be willing to disclose your details to even the playing field before we discuss Colonial Plunder and Begging?”

    I did not realise that truth and credibility in argument depends on who one is. Perhaps those are the rules where you come from! As far as I can see, we are on level playing fields. Don’t play the victim here.

    Whether you are Sri Lankan or come from Timbuktu, you are trying to blow a lot of smoke around the pertinent issues.

    I won’t reveal my identity just so that you can use that as yet another red herring, and go off on another tangent, and blow yet more smoke. Suffice to say, I do not come from the Big Bad West, that I come from a brown-skinned ex-colony that is even smaller than SL, and certainly thousands of times less blessed with natural resources than SL, and yet, against all the odds, doing immeasurably better. That is all that is relevant to my ridiculing your claim that SL is poor because of all that colonial plundering.

    No doubt, you will use my refusal to reveal my identity as yet another red herring, to distract from the issue. I can’t wait to see you try.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    You say
    I won’t reveal my identity just so that you can use that as yet another red herring, and go off on another tangent, and blow yet more smoke. Suffice to say, I do not come from the Big Bad West, that I come from a brown-skinned ex-colony that is even smaller than SL, and certainly thousands of times less blessed with natural resources than SL, and yet, against all the odds, doing immeasurably better.
    Unquote

    Just your word no proof, NOTHING other than EMPTY, UNVERIFIABLE, WORDS ….

    For all the hide and seek you could be from a country that has HR violations to hide ….. like the rest of it no proof just empty words.

    When faced with evidence that blows your preconceived ideas sky high try another track make a dig at begging …… ignore all the evident double standards.

    Just like Dyan J said at the UN, we are open for any investigation “IF and ONLY IF” those who ask for it, open themselves for similar investigations and then start it off in chronological order…….. But there were no takers then and there are no takers now. NOT A SINGLE ONE.

    Putting out Cooked up Videos such as CH4 or Cooked up Stories like the Times of London, will not be able to FORCE one on SL. If they are so righteous, let them accept what SL offered at the UN. Across the Board Investigations starting from the beginning.

    Let us know why the CRUCIAL Meta Data of Date and time not investigated and why Alston’s technical report contains speculative excuses to explain away the discrepancy.

  • Sunny

    Kumar David,
    Yes, this is a psycho-pathological phenomenon. You can see how the neurosis works in the arguments of some people here. As a psychoanalytical concept, a neurosis, as I understand it, is about a stalling in meaning, the inability to conceptualise or approach certain ideas, and the twisted way in which people will evade having to deal with those ideas.

    The dishonesty of the current regime is one such idea that cannot be faced by the people (or at least by large swathes of them). Why not? Because the terrible war, the killing of thousands of innocent Tamil civilians, the incarceration of a quarter million civilians laid bare to the people what it is they really had wanted–the terrible destruction and humiliation of a community that was just like them in its humanity. To admit to the regime’s inhumanity is to accept the inhumanity of their own desires, their own evil culpability. Hence, the fierce denial that there was anything inhumane or unjust about the war or the treatment of Tamil civilians thereafter. Hence, too, the determination not to know the truth. In strangling the press, Rajapaksa helped the people turn away from the truth, exactly what the people wanted. Hence, lack of press freedom does not bother them. One notes the lack of popular will in finding out what happened in the war.

    In defending the regime, the people’s neurotic argument goes something like this: it is precisely because the West accuses SL of war crimes, that SL is innocent! Rajapaksa’s and their own guilt has been conveniently displaced and projected onto the West. Hence, the more the West accuses SL, the more convinced they are by the regime’s innocence! Note the dishonest fury with which they attack the West, the obsessive attention they give to ferreting out details about alleged Western misbehaviour. Doing so affords them some guilty fetishistic pleasure–because, in addressing Western guilt, they are secretly (unbeknown even to themselves) tackling their own guilt.

    The mythologization of the President as some divine being is also necessary to this need to disavow their own guilt. The more they deify the President, the better they are able to detach from their own guilt.

  • wijayapala

    Dear Cengal,

    Thanks for “enlightening” us about Sinhala-language facilities used by the LTTE.

    Your very welcome. I am glad you have learned something new, but unfortunately it seems you have a bit more to learn about the LTTE…

    Although I fail to understand why (or how), when they are facing imminent defeat, the LTTE would make use of such facilities to broadcast a low-quality execution video.

    To tarnish the govt and encourage external intervention (which could have saved the LTTE from extinction)… why not??

    Furthermore, why such a video was released AFTER the war, and not during the heat of battle.

    Good question- why don’t you ask Philip Alston? He insists that the video was made BEFORE the LTTE’s defeat despite the date and time on the video. He would be on more solid ground if he had alleged that the SLA executed LTTE surrenderees and/or Tamil civilians AFTER the defeat of the LTTE! (I guess the UN doesn’t require a minimum intelligence quotient to appoint one as a Special Rapporteur…).

    Also, you did not comment on the similarity between naked bodies of dead LTTE being driven through the town for the villagers to see after the Anuradhapura attack, and the prisoners in the execution video being stripped naked.

    Perhaps because this similarity is irrelevant. Do you see it as a groundbreaking revelation that the victims in the video and the LTTE attackers at Anuradhapura have the same skin color?

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Thanks for clarifying. It is interesting that the two reports, from the same institution, would be different by exactly one line: in regards to whether or not Menezes was armed. In any case, if you do a little further research, you will find that one of the flight attendants initially claimed to have heard Menezes say he has a bomb. But this flight attendant later retracted his statement:

    “A spokesman for the Association of Professional Flight Attendants has been quoted as saying that a flight attendant who confronted Alpizar as he tried to leave the plane claimed Alpizar said “I have a bomb,” though this assertion has not been repeated, and this flight attendant has not come forward.”

    http://en.allexperts.com/e/r/ri/rigoberto_alpizar.htm

    This would explain a lot. When a flight attendant tells a police officer that a passenger has a bomb, all hell will break loose. You would expect the police officers to react quickly and swiftly, which is exactly what they did.

    Anyway, I fail to see the “double standards” that you speak of. Internal investigations were conducted, into both the Menezes and Alpizar cases. In the Alpizar case, the police were found guilty and paid a heavy fine. I am not sure what else you want. The Menezes case was handled quite well. You cannot DENY that Menezes was given fair warning before he was shot. When you are in an airport, you may be singled out for random checks (not torture); that is a FACT which you accept these days. If Menezes got down as he was instructed, he would be alive today. On the other hand, how does this compare to the execution of the Tamil prisoners? They were randomly executed. If they had been tried for a crime and found guilty of some kind of crime, and executed (with their clothes on), no one, not even Alston, would be complaining. Did you see Alston complain about Kumaran Pathmanathan? These double standards that you speak of are non-existent, or at least do not apply to this case.

  • Cengal

    Clarification: the flight attendant did not retract his statement as such, he never came forward to back it up.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Apologies, I am getting the names mixed up here.

    Alpizar case was handled quite, fine was paid in the Menezes case. Internal investigations carried out in both instances.

  • SeeingPastTheS

    Off the Cuff,
    “Just your word no proof, NOTHING other than EMPTY, UNVERIFIABLE, WORDS ….”

    Every bit as unverifiable as YOUR words. Here’s someone using a pseudonym and claiming that s/he has revealed his/her identity!

    “For all the hide and seek you could be from a country that has HR violations to hide ….. like the rest of it no proof just empty words.”

    No doubt. And for all I know, you could be Rajapakse himself, or one of his goons.

    “When faced with evidence that blows your preconceived ideas sky high try another track make a dig at begging …… ignore all the evident double standards.”

    You keep making incredible claims for your own so-called evidence and argument. Why not leave it to others to decide the quality of your evidence and argument?

    “Just like Dyan J said at the UN, we are open for any investigation “IF and ONLY IF” those who ask for it, open themselves for similar investigations and then start it off in chronological order…….. But there were no takers then and there are no takers now. NOT A SINGLE ONE.”

    I didn’t realise that were the UN protocols—that a country being suspected of war crimes could ask the accusers to go first. Hmmm, is that why many of the countries that lined up on SL’s sides are also under suspicion for war crimes?

    Also, I did not realise that the failure of other countries to open themselves up for war crimes investigations indicates that SL is innocent of war crimes!

    War is a crime. I have no doubt that every single country engaged in war outside its borders has committed war crimes. That’s why they say that all’s fair in love and war. But there is one major and highly significant difference between the West and SL’s case—the war in the latter case was against its own people, an internal war. Leaving aside the breaking of the state’s contract to protect the people (all of them), the government was able to use sovereignty claims to keep out the international and independent media. You can’t do that in an international war theatre. Hence, although the West has been able to avoid war crimes investigations, THE WHOLE WORLD KNOWS they committed war crimes. Despite lack of official admission, such knowledge provides leeway for negotiation and compensation for injured parties (even if it is dressed up as charity, everybody knows why they’re giving). SL is able to avoid all that by citing sovereignty, and using their barring of media to make the impossible demand that they must provide evidence for allegations to justify investigation! Who’s going to tell on them–the rogue countries that took part in the war? No way!

    So that is the ethics of the situation–that a country can get away completely with committing war crimes, including having to make any sort of compensation (unofficial or otherwise) for what they did. So please drop the halo around your head. Whereas the rest of the world (including the Western powers) answers to its war crimes in one way or another, you guys have evaded all responsibility. That’s not something I’d be proud of.

    One can’t answer for the motivations of all at the UN, but there are certainly some parties who are pushing for war crimes investigations out of concern for Tamil civilians and wanting to negotiate just treatment and constitutional rights for them.

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Dear Sunny,

    Interesting analysis, but while I agree with some of the elements in it, such as the “fierce denial that there was anything inhumane or unjust about the war or the treatment of Tamil civilians thereafter”, I think overall, it’s not entirely correct. Human beings will invariably build up an elaborate rationalization to justify the negative aspects of their actions, I agree with that. However, I also believe that in this instance, there is no feeling of guilt for what happened. Instead, there’s a feeling of self-righteousness. It is seen as an act of self-defense, a “reaction” if you will, against terrorism and everything that happened in the interim is seen as regrettable collateral.

    Now, a close parallel to this is the denial and self-righteousness displayed by LTTE apologists. If you talk to any of them, you’ll notice that they too will defend the violence perpetrated by the LTTE as a “reaction” to the injustice and brutality inflicted upon them, and at no point will concede any wrong-doing on their part.

    So there really is nothing new about this mentality.

    In my own case, I fully acknowledge the horror of this war. At the same time, my own rationalization is built on consequentialist moral philosophy. I believe that the outcome we see today has justified the war. I disagree with those who insist on a deontological approach here for the simple reason that, it has consistently failed us despite earnest efforts. It has therefore disproved itself as a pragmatic approach.

    I believe that had a quasi peace-time stalemate continued indefinitely, generations more would have grown up under a despot with no hope of a future, innocent civilians would have continued to be blown up resulting in untold deaths, the moral fabric of our society would further deteriorate as a result of continuous exposure to violence, governance would fail due to continuously using terrorism as an excuse for justifying all sorts of excesses and so on.

    Therefore, I believe a fairly convincing case can be built up to justify this war as well as prove that, as an overall strategy, it has proven itself correct through its final outcome. This is amply evidenced by the gradual normalization of the situation in the north and the political space that has opened up in the whole country. Note how the politicians are falling over themselves in this latest election to woo the Tamil voter. Note that the IDPs are being resettled and now have a genuine opportunity to achieve something in life, rather than merely exist to fullfil the dreams of despots and their supporters using them to achieve their own racial destinies. At the very least, there is an absence of violence, which in itself I see as a good thing.

    But again, I fully realize that this outcome has entailed tremendous death and destruction. That in itself, does not make the war unjust. But the violence it entailed is something we must all acknowledge and live with and I don’t see much point in all this denial either. Rather, it should galvanize us to never let things sink to this level again.

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    The point is not when the video was made, it is when it is released. If Tamilnet has a piece of propaganda, they will release it immediately; they will not wait until all of the leaders of the LTTE have left Planet Earth. The timing of the release of this video suggests that it was leaked by a Sri Lankan Army soldier. As for the stripping of the bodies of the combatants at Anuradhapura and the stripping of the executed prisoners, there is indeed a connection: it establishes a pattern of abuse. The world has proof in one instance that the Sri Lanka Army will strip its enemy in broad daylight; therefore the world should not find it difficult to believe the Sri Lanka Army will do the same thing (and probably much worse) in secret. But in fact, as I have said before, there is a second video (which I am sure many Tamils have seen) of Sri Lanka Army abusing a dead body of a female LTTE soldier. Unfortunately it is a graphic video so I will not post a link. In any case, we have two established instances (in my case three instances) of foul play, all two (or three) of which bear striking similarities. For myself, I will rule out the possibility of coincidence and international conspiracy and even internal conspiracy. In the other video which I mentioned, there is mortar shelling going on in the background, while they abuse the body of the dead female cadre. A rather unusual setting for “acting” out an execution.

  • Cengal

    *A rather unusual setting for “acting” out abuse of a dead body.

  • Sunny

    Somewhat Disgusted,
    Thank you for giving me more samples of neurotic text that I can work with if I ever decide to turn an academic paper out of this. I take note of your strategies.

    1. Denying guilt by claiming self-righteousness:
    Self-righteousness is the other face of guilt–it is the contrary pathological response to the latter. Just cast your memory back to the most self-righteous people you know: are they not the ones most plagued by guilt? My life experience tells me so.

    2. Escaping guilt by claiming that everyone is guilty:
    What LTTE apologists claim is within the purview of the verifiable. So they talk of the injustices and brutality inflicted on their community—but isn’t there ample historical evidence of this in the SL archives? They are not working with fabricated claims, are they? Also, there is sufficient evidence of LTTE brutality to disable any such neurotic denials. Not so with the Sinhalese side, thanks to government control of information. Here there is a free flow of fictionality. Anything can be imagined. Pathology/neurosis involves working with lies, with what is imagined. So, no, the two are not parallels.

    3. Avoiding guilt by re-defining what is moral, what is just:
    Ah, you prefer “consequentialist” theories of morality to “deontological” ones! What’s with that? Reasoning not good enough with you, you must resort to intellectualising? Long words can be so distracting! Oh, is this another strategy? Must note that!

    So according to your morality theory, a war “outcome [that] has entailed tremendous death and destruction…in itself, does not make the war unjust”. Such violence is JUST then if “it should galvanize us to never let things sink to this level again”. It’s all in the consequences.

    Well, one may say genocide in any country plagued by two antagonistic communities is justified then—get rid of one race, and all can live in peace thereafter cos surely there won’t be a need for such antagonism again!

    As for your description of the benign consequences of the SL war, may I say that reports to the contrary have been filed from your country, and not from the Tamil side either? It seems that violence continues apace—elections violence, white van killings, etc. Are these people lying with regard to your claim of an “absence of violence”? Or does “absence of violence” merely mean to you that the Tamils are not fighting, and ergo, there is no violence?

    As for the political space that has opened up in the whole country, it doesn’t strike you as odd that the two leading contenders in the presidential race are both linked to the war? You would think in this period of consequential ‘peace’, that there would be room for other types of political actors and interests, for eg, those promising economic reform, or greater democracy, etc. Is there any real difference in the platform of the two leading contenders?

    The IDPs are being re-settled and can look forward to a “genuine opportunity to achieve something in life rather than merely exist to fullfil the dreams of despots and their supporters using them to achieve their own racial destinies”? Did the displaced Tamils tell you that or have you pulled this out of thin air? You really think a people who have resisted sharing power with a minority community since independence are now ready to give them decent rights now when, more than ever, they have no earthly reason to do so since they have vanquished the community?

    So, no more despots around, eh? Funny. From where I look, I see one despot being replaced by another, not just for Tamils but for other SL communities too. I hope I am wrong, but the evidence thus far doesn’t suggest anything else. If your President was a well-meaning leader, he would have used the remaining years of his Presidency to do good for the people. He is certainly in a prime position to do so. Instead, he wants to maximise use of his popularity by going to the polls and seeking another six years. I see that as a lack of intention in doing good. Perhaps he did his sums thus—settle for merely six years of plundering for him and his family and then be thrown out after; or after four years, seek another six years, for a total 10 years of plundering? And who knows, after 10 years, perhaps his grip on power would be unshakeable by then and last for the rest of his natural life.

    Oh, and by the way, you mean terrorism is still not being used in your country today to justify all sorts of excesses? What’s the Western conspiracy theory about then? Not about the West apparently wanting to bring back the Tigers in again, and oh, that’s why we must never allow the West to do any investigations, not of war crimes, nor even of occasional videos of barbarism? And this, after the war? Seems like one can get rid of the terrorists and still allow imagined terrorists to continue the deterioriation of the society’s moral fabric, no?

  • SomewhatDisgusted

    Good heavens Sunny!

    That’s quite a “self-righteous” (and venomous) response!

    Ironically enough, you may have proven my point.

    While your defense of the LTTE is admirable and displays the very kind of thinking I mentioned, your simultaneous dismissal of the rest of the country’s right to defend itself against terrorism, is laughable at best. It may help you to know that I’ve never said that people who supported the LTTE, at least at the initial stages, were wrong. I’ve mentioned in other posts that I might have done the same. However, I strongly believe that those who continued to support them, despite the self-evidently destructive, racist and unreasonable direction they were heading, were wrong and the utter failure of their 30 year enterprise to produce a single positive result has proven that point.

    Far greater gains were made within a political space, such as the nationalization of the Tamil language, abolishment of ethnic quotas and the reasonably peaceful (again, no need to wallow in doom and gloom, it’s not perfect, granted) multi-cultural environment prevailing in Colombo for example.

    In any case, what I presented was my own rationalization. That may be debatable in itself, but quite frankly, I won’t get into arguments with people who feel inclined to make the most extreme interpretation possible of another individual’s stance. You are ranting about points I never made. Who said there was a complete absence of violence? Why are you off on a tangential diatribe about election violence? My point was that the Tamil people in the north or the Sinhalese people in the south are no longer being killed on account of terrorism or anti-terrorism. So where is the acknowledgment of facts in your rebuttal? From previous discussions here, I’ve found it unwise to expect moderation from people who argue this way.

    And out of curiosity, which utopian country are you launching your arguments from? This is Sri Lanka, it’s not perfect, get used to it! We have to make do with incremental changes for the better, on account of this being a primitive, third world country inhabited by tribal Sinhala and Tamil nationalists plagued by identity crises. Harping on the glaringly obvious shortcomings that remain is cute, but in no way negates the fact that the timely decimation of the LTTE was a long overdue blessing on this country.

    Good luck!

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cenegal,

    Note the source from which I downloaded my copy of the report.
    It’s the OFFICIAL website of a UN agency.
    The Agency that Alston belongs to, the OHCHR

    Now that you have acknowledged that I did not LIE about the statement, you must ask yourself how a report from a University found it’s way in to the Official web site of the OHCHR?

    Is it because this report has exceptional research embedded within it that no other external source has?
    Does Alston being the Chair of the faculty concerned have anything to do with it?

    Let’s look at the source you gave me

    “To date, no independent evidence has emerged verifying that Alpizar said he had a bomb. Several passengers on the flight have contradicted the government’s claim, saying that they never heard Alpizar say anything about a bomb.”

    Note the statements
    “no independent evidence has emerged verifying that Alpizar said he had a bomb”
    “Several passengers on the flight have contradicted the government’s claim”

    Two eye-witnesses says,
    John McAlhany, “I never heard the word ‘bomb’ on the plane,” “I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb.”
    Mary Gardner, “I did not hear him say that he had a bomb.”

    A spokesman for the Association of Professional Flight Attendants has been quoted as saying that a flight attendant who confronted Alpizar as he tried to leave the plane claimed Alpizar said “I have a bomb,” though this assertion has not been repeated, and this flight attendant has not come forward.

    Many witnesses including two named witnesses says they never heard the word “Bomb” on the plane.

    A spokesman says a (un named) flight attendant said she heard Alpizar saying “I have a Bomb” while INSIDE the plane which is contradicted by all the witnesses and most strangely they cant produce this Flight Attendant

    Hence this Flight Attendant NEVER told the Marshals ANYTHING about a Bomb it is the spokesman who says so, not the Marshal and the witnesses say the word “BOMB” was never uttered INSIDE the plane.

    So what can you conclude from the above when there is overwhelming eye witness evidence stating that there was no mention of a BOMB?

    To me it has all the ingredients of an attempted OFFICIAL COVER UP.

    Here is why I consider Alston partial and prone to use Double Standards

    What is Alston’s Mandate?
    Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions

    Extra Judicial Executions means any Execution that is not “JUDICIALLY” sanctioned.
    Hence ANY execution carried out WITHOUT the due process of the law and without a Death Sentence handed down by a Court of Law falls within his mandate.

    Summery or Arbitrary adds a wider scope even to the above

    The two cases of Menezes and Alpizar fall within Alston’s mandate as much as what happened in Iraq, Gitmo, Afganistan, Pakistan, Palestine and Sri Lanka is (many more countries can be included but these will suffice for now).

    Hence he cannot apply one yardstick to one country or one incident and refrain from applying the SAME yardstick to another country or another incident. If he does, then he is using Double Standards.

    Answers to the following questions and comparing them to Alston’s behaviour will prove my point.

    Who conducted the inquiries into the above two cases of UK and USA ?
    Who conducted inquiries into proven / suspected executions that have been perpetrated during legal or illegal wars?
    Were ALL these inquiries International or Internal?
    What basis was used to deem those inquiries Independent or Impartial?
    Has these criteria been used by Alston universally?

    Note: I noticed your subsequent post making some corrections but will post this anyway as it would take time to alter mine.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    Wow what an illuminating analysis about the use of Pseudonyms on a Public forum.

    I could have used a name such as Lee Kuan Yew and you would have not known ANYTHING about me.
    Nationality
    Ethnicity
    Domicile
    Chinese? Singaporean? Malaysian?
    The name is a real name and probably closer to home but still it is a pseudonym and only I would be privy to that.
    You can’t call it a pseudonym without making a fool of yourself.
    Most of all you could not attack my views based on my country.
    And if I used something like R. Raghavan I could have even been a Tamil living anywhere in the world.
    But adopting something like that would be dishonest and my conscience would not allow that. Hence I adopt a pseudonym that conveys it’s a pseudonym but I had no qualms about disclosing my Nationality and my ethnicity.

    You wanted to change the subject under discussion to “Begging” which was patently a Derogatory attack and is country specific. I only wanted to know your country and your ethnicity after confirming mine as I was at a disadvantage replying to a country specific attack without knowing those details of my detractor.

    As I said before your Logic is great and I defer to that greatness.

    Just like Dyan J said at the UN, we are open for any investigation “IF and ONLY IF” those who ask for it, open themselves for similar investigations and then start it off in chronological order…….. But there were no takers then and there are no takers now. NOT A SINGLE ONE.

    Putting out Cooked up Videos such as CH4 or Cooked up Stories like the Times of London, will not be able to FORCE one on SL. If they are so righteous, let them accept what SL offered at the UN. Across the Board Investigations starting from the beginning.

    The above two statements of mine which restated the stand taken by SL at the UN is nothing to do with PROTOCOL but it has EVERYTHING to do with JUSTICE.

    What happened to the concept of EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW?
    Is it unknown in your part of the world?
    Is that not part and parcel of Democracy?
    That is what SL fought for at the UN.

    Let the Righteous amongst the conglomerate who tried to Lynch SL at the UN step forward and take up the Gauntlet thrown at them by this small, poor country. So far, none have been brave enough to do so.

    The rest of your post making a feeble attempt at excusing the atrocities performed by the accuser just exposes your mindset.

    I also notice that you avoided answering the following question posed before

    Let us know why the CRUCIAL Meta Data of Date and time was not scientifically investigated and why Alston’s technical report contains speculative excuses to explain away the discrepancy.

    To me it is an attempt to interpret the results of his so called Independent investigation to fit his preconceived conclusion.

    (Re you post of January 20, 2010 @ 8:37 am)

  • SeeingPastTheSmoke

    Off the Cuff,

    You said:
    “I also notice that you avoided answering the following question posed before
    Let us know why the CRUCIAL Meta Data of Date and time was not scientifically investigated and why Alston’s technical report contains speculative excuses to explain away the discrepancy.”

    You’re kidding, right? You never engage with the most crucial aspects of my argument, but yet you expect me to answer each and every one of your questions? Good luck with your overblown sense of your own importance.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    Such as?
    Pseudonyms?

    Remember Madam/Sir, you challenged my views, not I yours.
    Hence it’s incumbent on you to meet the points raised first.

    My discussion about the Ch4 video on this thread started with this post to Kumar David on January 16, 2010 @ 2:26 pm.

    Amongst others it stated thus

    “Alston’s Channel 4 inquiry is biased and does not dispassionately investigate ALL aspects of the video in question. ……….. For more information read this thread on GV http://www.groundviews.org/2009/08/29/a-video-of-shame-and-outrage-responses-positions-and-clarifications/

    That link was to a thread that directly discusses the CH4 Video here on Groundviews and contains many entries by me and others. At that point of time it contained more details than on this thread and using a link was to avoid repetition.

    If you cared to read the link provided you would have noted that The Meta Data was a key aspect that I have commented on and hence is also a Key factor in the post you decided to challenge.

    Hence Madam/Sir you should look back and assess your own writing and see whether the Cap you try to put on me has a better FIT on you.

    Your latest post puts Houdini to shame

    Good Luck

  • SeeingPastTheSmoke

    Off the Cuff,
    I just checked the occurrence of the term “Meta Data” in this thread. It was frequently mentioned, but never by anybody else but you! Could it be, do you think, that you are the only person interested in that issue?

    Just a thought.

    I challenged your claim that Alston did not investigate the UK and US cases you mentioned with equal commitment as he did the SL video. Cengal challenged it too. We both did so successfully. I also challenged your claim that the UN is unethical in going after SL with such ferocity, while not prosecuting the West for its international war crimes. I believe I showed that SL is getting away with much more lack of accountability than most other countries are able to. Those are the only two aspects of your debate that I am interested in pursuing. I am no technical expert in examining videos and won’t pretend to be one.

    You are free to marry your Meta Data.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    You still have not presented a solid argument as to why the Alpizar case was not handled correctly. Regardless of whether or not Alpizar made a bomb threat, his UNUSUAL behaviour gave the right to the Air Marshals to SEARCH him. Maybe you have never been in an airport, but in an airport, or on an airplane, the police have a RIGHT to search you. IF you refuse,they will use FORCE. They have to first INFORM you that they are going to SHOOT you if you don’t get DOWN on the GROUND. The POLICE followed procedure in the Alpizar case. Whether or not he made a bomb threat, he advanced towards the MARSHALS saying “shoot me shoot me”, WITH A HAND IN HIS BAG, and when they TOLD him to get his hand out of the bag, he refused.

    Let me repeat: they SHOT him because he was making THREATS with his hand in a bag on an airplane. An airplane/airport is NOT a democracy. You have RIGHTS, but they are the most MINIMAL of rights. It is a HIGH SECURITY environment.

    —-

    Miami-Dade state attorney’s office report

    A final report[11] was released by the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office on May 23, 2006. The report found that “the shooting officers were legally justified in their use of force and no criminal charges will be filed.[11] The report notes as a key fact that Alpizar’s wife said that her husband “threatened” that he had a bomb in his backpack, although this is not elaborated on further i.e. precisely when Alpizar said this, to whom, how she heard this, and in what language the alleged statement was made.

    Both federal air marshals (ages 30 and 31) claimed that Alpizar repeatedly stated that he had a bomb and would detonate it (one marshal said these threats were made in Spanish, the other marshal did not indicate a language), while advancing towards them and refusing commands to stop. The report indicates that the first air marshal was fluent in Spanish. Both said they issued commands in both English and Spanish. The second air marshal said that Alpizar said, “I’m going to blow up this bomb. I’m going to blow up this bomb. I’m going to show you.[11]

    The first officer (age 49) of the plane stood directly behind the air marshals, and said that English was spoken. The pilot said that Alpizar indicated he had a bomb, and continued advancing despite a warning that “If you don’t take your hands out of the bag, we’re going to have to shoot you.” The pilot said Alpizar responded with, “Shoot me! Shoot me!” while repeating several times that he had a bomb, despite a further warning of “We’re going to have to shoot you if you don’t stop.[11] The captain (age 50) of the plane was in a position to see both Alpizar’s wife coming down the aisle and Alpizar in the jetway. The captain said that Alpizar was at the far end of the jetway, and turned around and advanced toward the plane, ignoring commands to stop. The captain said Alpizar defiantly yelled, “Shoot me! Shoot me!”, and observed that Alpizar appeared serious and considered him a threat.[11] The captain said that the air marshals repeatedly said they would shoot, but Alpizar advanced anyway.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigoberto_Alpizar

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff,

    READ AGAIN.

    The captain said that the air marshals repeatedly said they would shoot, but Alpizar advanced anyway.”

    They GAVE him ADEQUATE WARNING. If you are a security officer, that is the ONLY obligation you have towards a suspect before you use FORCE.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear SeeingPastTheSmoke,

    Unfortunately for you it is in Alston’s report and because he can’t fit that contradictory evidence into his PRECONCEIVED conclusion by technical means, he tries to put it aside with speculative means. Speculation has no place in a TECHNICAL report.

    You see, the Meta Data is already married to Alston and he may find that divorcing her would be difficult, so marriage would be out of the question.

    You don’t need to be a TECHNICAL EXPERT to notice that the SUN is shining brightly and that the SHADOWS are VERY SHORT.

    Now use your common sense to estimate the TIME.
    Don’t tell me that you can’t use the Sun to estimate the time, even a 10 year old child with average intelligence can.

    Even a CASUAL inspection shows that it is about +/- 2 hours of MID DAY.
    That puts the TIME very close to that ENCODED in the video.

    A work back assuming the date is correct has a strong probability of placing the TIME smack on the ENCODED TIME of the VIDEO.

    Now how do you explain that in order to maintain authenticity?

    The reason ALL of you want to DISMISS the Meta Data is because you are not interested in the TRUTH, just like Alston. The Meta Data has become the Achilles’s heel of this COOKED up Video.

    Don’t delude yourself into thinking that you or Cenegal disproved Alston’s bias. If you want to do that you need to answer the questions that I posed in my post of January 20, 2010 @ 3:44 pm to Cenegal and PROVE that Alston APPLIES the same STANDARDS in ALL cases discussed (don’t over look Black Water in Iraq and Gitmo).

    You state
    I also challenged your claim that the UN is unethical in going after SL with such ferocity, while not prosecuting the West for its international war crimes.
    Unquote

    What was that challenge? The talk about Protocol?
    You seem to have overlooked my reply which I repeat below

    “…..is nothing to do with PROTOCOL but it has EVERYTHING to do with JUSTICE.
    What happened to the concept of EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW?
    Is it unknown in your part of the world?
    Is that not part and parcel of Democracy?
    That is what SL fought for at the UN.”

    The REAL people who have got away with war crimes is the WEST. They never expected my country to throw a challenge at them that exposes their underbelly.

    The official stand taken by SL at the UN is that She will allow ANY investigation PROVIDED that investigations are done across the board without fear or favor, commencing in CHRONOLOGICAL order.

    Why is the WEST afraid to do that?
    What do they have to hide?

    Read this thread BEFORE you write your next comment. It’s a thread on GV that SPECIFICALLY discusses the CH4 Video http://www.groundviews.org/2009/08/29/a-video-of-shame-and-outrage-responses-positions-and-clarifications/

    BTW you did not limit yourself to the areas of interest you profess now but went on a fishing trip and I responded appropriately.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Don’t lose focus.
    This is about Extra Judicial Killing and subsequent COVER UP attempts.
    The reason the inquiry should be Independent, Impartial and International IF you apply the UN special Rapporteur’s rules UNIVERSALLY and not selectively.

    I quoted Alston’s report and you quoted allexperts.com

    According to Alston’s report
    “After being removed from the plane, Alpizar was shot and killed on the jetway, allegedly as he was reaching for his bag. There are no witness accounts confirming that Alpizar claimed that he had a bomb, as was stated by the Air Marshals involved in the shooting.”

    According to YOUR OWN source
    1. To date, no independent evidence has emerged verifying that Alpizar said he had a bomb
    2. Several passengers on the flight have contradicted the government’s claim, saying that they never heard Alpizar say anything about a bomb
    3. Two eye-witnesses says,
    John McAlhany, “I never heard the word ‘bomb’ on the plane,” “I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb.”
    Mary Gardner, “I did not hear him say that he had a bomb.

    To state that I have not “presented a solid argument” in view of Alston’s report and your OWN source you need to
    1. Reject Alston’s report
    2. Reject YOUR OWN source

    Are you ACCUSING both, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and your own source of LYING?

    Now let me REPEAT

    ARE YOU ACCUSING BOTH, THE UN SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON EXTRAJUDICIAL, SUMMARY OR ARBITRARY EXECUTIONS AND YOUR OWN SOURCE OF LYING?

    BTW Cengal, be careful when you ride the High Horse, your fall is bound to be hard.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Alston’s report does not matter. When extra-judicial killings occur, the perpetrators do not ask themselves, “is Alston going to make a report?”

    Like I said, Alpizar was WARNED before he was shot. Do you DENY that Alpizar was warned before he was shot? Answer with a Yes or No.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    “Alston’s report does not matter.” !!!!!

    Are you really serious here?

    OK No objection whatsoever, but remember you have thrown your OWN baby with the bath water too.

    Out goes Alston and Out goes CH4 courtesy Cengal.

    You stated
    Like I said, Alpizar was WARNED before he was shot. Do you DENY that Alpizar was warned before he was shot? Answer with a Yes or No.
    Unquote

    No one KNOWS do they?

    That’s the reason why an Independent, Impartial and International inquiry is needed.

    POOR ATTEMPT AT JUSTIFYING THE DOUBLE STANDARDS OF ALSTON

  • wijayapala

    Cengal,

    You have a lot of concern for LTTE combatants, who based on what I’ve read in UTHR-J reports murdered many Tamil civilians in cold blood for attempting to escape the battle area. Did you have similar concern for the many victims of the LTTE’s pistol gangs during the CFA?

    If Tamilnet has a piece of propaganda, they will release it immediately; they will not wait until all of the leaders of the LTTE have left Planet Earth.

    And what if Tamilnet does not receive the piece of propaganda until after an LTTE member who created it escapes from SL, or finds a way to transmit it to the outside world?

    The timing of the release of this video suggests that it was leaked by a Sri Lankan Army soldier.

    Unless of course the video is fake and was both created and distributed by Eelamists after May 2009.

    As long as you speculate without providing any more facts about the alleged killing in the videotape, skeptics like myself can provide alternative speculations based on an equal lack of evidence.

    As for the stripping of the bodies of the combatants at Anuradhapura and the stripping of the executed prisoners, there is indeed a connection: it establishes a pattern of abuse. The world has proof in one instance that the Sri Lanka Army will strip its enemy in broad daylight; therefore the world should not find it difficult to believe the Sri Lanka Army will do the same thing (and probably much worse) in secret.

    You’re missing the key point that the SLA stripped the already-dead Anuradhapura attackers for public consumption (which is not a war crime, I’m afraid). Why would they strip living prisoners who could not be showcased in a similar manner.

    Conversely, Eelamist fabricators of this video could have arrived at your very conclusion, leading them to incorporate nudity in their production.

    But in fact, as I have said before, there is a second video (which I am sure many Tamils have seen) of Sri Lanka Army abusing a dead body of a female LTTE soldier.

    And much like the Ch.4 video, we have no solid evidence to implicate the SLA in that one either- it could also have been fabricated. Please find a more credible data point.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Like I said, Alpizar was WARNED before he was shot. Do you DENY that Alpizar was warned before he was shot? Answer with a Yes or No.
    Unquote

    No one KNOWS do they?

    —-

    Actually they DO know. The point that is in dispute is whether or not Alpizar claimed he had a bomb. What is NOT in dispute is that the officers warned Alpizar multiple times to get down before they shot him. What is NOT in dispute is that if Alpizar had got down on the ground, he would be ALIVE today. What is NOT in dispute, REGARDLESS of what Alpizar said or did not say, is that Alpizar walked towards the officers with a hand in his bag. Unfortunately, the above totally contradicts your allegation that this was an extra-judicial killing. Have a nice day.

    P.S: For your reading pleasure (and understanding) the premise in the above argument is that Alpizar was warned before he was shot. Everything follows from this. So if you want to disprove the argument, you will have to show that Alpizar was in fact NOT warned, which is not the case here. And you will note that the bomb threat and the shooting threat are mutually exclusive events. Please draw two non-intersecting circles with the appropriate labels “B” and “S” if you need to remind yourself of the fact.

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    I don’t deny that the LTTE killed many civilians in cold blood. However, that is entirely irrelevant to the case at hand, which concerns the videotape. Unless you are trying to suggest that all the combatants who were executed were also guilty of killing many civilians in cold blood, then you might have a point. However, that is for the Courts to decide. In any event, even if the Courts had decided execution (by firing squad) is a suitable punishment, that does not justify the stripping of the prisoners. All of these leads to the conclusion that the LTTE killing many civilians in cold blood is entirely irrelevant to the crux of the argument. Thanks.

    Now your next point:

    “And what if Tamilnet does not receive the piece of propaganda until after an LTTE member who created it escapes from SL, or finds a way to transmit it to the outside world?”

    Again, you are missing the forest for the trees. The execution video has little value after the entire LTTE leadership is gone. It would have had much more value when, say, the LTTE leaders were trying to negotiate a surrender, with third-party involvement, for themselves. A finer point: it is unlikely that an LTTE member would have made the video… LTTE members did not carry cell phones. If the LTTE made such a video, it would have been the propaganda committee/media unit, with orders from the top, that did it. But if the propaganda committee/media unit did it, then it would have had to have been made well before the war was over. But it was made well before the war was over, and the LTTE made it, then it is unlikely they would have held on to it for months. All of this again suggests that the video was leaked by an SLA soldier.

    “You’re missing the key point that the SLA stripped the already-dead Anuradhapura attackers for public consumption (which is not a war crime, I’m afraid).”

    And you’re missing the point that the fact that the SLA stripped the bodies for public consumption (which no civilized army does these days) implies a high LIKELIHOOD that they would do such things, in fact FAR worse things, behind closed doors.

    “And much like the Ch.4 video, we have no solid evidence to implicate the SLA in that one either”

    The fact that there are multiple videos, the credibility of which cannot be easily dismissed, actually suggests makes the likelihood of fabrication. Take the C4 video, for example. There is no smoking gun that can be found to dismiss it. If there was, Alston would have not bothered with his three experts and we would most likely not be having this conversation. What does this say… that LTTE propaganda has reached amazing new standards? Or simply that some Sinhalese patriots find the truth rather hard to swallow?

  • Cengal

    *actually suggests the likelihood of fabrication is very small

  • wijayapala

    Cengal,

    I don’t deny that the LTTE killed many civilians in cold blood. However, that is entirely irrelevant to the case at hand, which concerns the videotape.

    It’s not irrelevant to the burning question why this case, which I’ve demonstrated to lack sufficient information to even begin an investigation, deserves more attention than others.” Earlier I asked why Philip Alston is not digging into Trinco 5 and ACF 17, where UTHR has uncovered plenty of information for an investigation, and got no response from you.

    Again, you are missing the forest for the trees….But it was made well before the war was over, and the LTTE made it, then it is unlikely they would have held on to it for months.

    And again, you are missing both the forest and the trees. I pointed out that the LTTE could have made such a tape but was unable to disseminate it (given its difficulties at the time).

    The more likely scenario, though, is that LTTE sympathizers outside Sri Lanka put this tape together with their own resources. “LTTE supporters don’t have this expertise” you may respond. Well how do you explain this??

    http://www.operation-ellalan.com/
    (you’ll be happy to know that this flick is intended to celebrate the Anuradhapura attack)

    Oh, so you want something already produced?
    No Blood For Panties Urges Boycott Of Products Made In Sri Lanka
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lWfe9I733A&feature=related

    The third alternative is that the execution was carried about by the SLA AFTER the war ended. Interesting that neither you nor Alston want to consider that possibility, even though it would explain the date.

    implies a high LIKELIHOOD that they would do such things, in fact FAR worse things, behind closed doors.

    Enlighten me- what would the SLA gain from stripping prisoners in this scenario?

    There is no smoking gun that can be found to dismiss it.

    We don’t need a smoking gun if there is no supplementary information to begin an investigation.

    Let’s say the West conquered Sri Lanka and arrested every single member of the government and security forces, and nobody escaped or got killed (since you’ve wonderfully established that only the SLA kills people). The West assigns you Cengal to be in charge of investigating the execution videotape. What would be the first thing you do?

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    The OBJECTIVE of my discussion is to PROVE that the UN Special Rapporteur is acting Partially in exercising his UN mandate and that he uses DOUBLE STANDARDS and selective application of Codes of Conduct and Law when dealing with a WEAK and poor country as against his handling of Extra Judicial Killings reported from a POWERFUL and rich country

    The following statement is from Alston’s report on OHCHR website http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/ngos/chrgj.pdf)

    “Under international law, States have both a right and a duty to protect individuals within their borders; this includes protecting individuals from acts of terrorism. Measures taken in fulfilment of this duty, however, must also respect the rule of law, human rights, and fundamental freedoms. To date, few States have been able to effectively reconcile this dual obligation to protect national security while respecting human rights. A recent example of this failure is the adoption of “shoot-to-kill” policies to deal with suspected terrorists”.

    Two examples of shoot to kill policies were given to you from the same report
    1. Shooting of Brazilian Electrician Menezes by British Police
    2. Shooting of US citizen Alpizar by US Federal officers

    BOTH SHOOTINGS ARE RECOGNIZED AS EXTRA JUDICIAL KILLINGS by Alston, so if you want to contest that, you need to do it with Alston.

    I note that you have conveniently IGNORED the Menezes case and is going on a FISHING trip with the Alpizar case

    In BOTH cases of Menezes and Alpizar the SHOOTING is a PROVEN fact which occurred in front of MANY eye witnesses
    The shooting shown on CH4 is NOT a proven FACT and there are no witnesses

    In both the Menezes and Alpizar cases there is an ATTEMPTED OFFICIAL COVER UP of an ESTABLISHED shooting.
    In the CH4 case there is NO ESTABLISHED shooting, hence NO FACT to be covered up.

    CH4 Video involves a weak and poor country whereas the other two cases involve powerful and rich countries.

    So what prevented Alston from insisting for
    INTERNATIONAL, IMPARTIAL, INDEPENDENT Inquiries for Menezes and Alpizar cases where BOTH, EXECUTION and COVER UP are ESTABLISHED FACTS?

    Why is he selective in applying Rules?

    Protecting his position?
    Revenge for a damaged ego?
    Money?
    or all three?

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    Looks like you’ve dug a hole, which (I) you don’t quite know the depth of, or (II) blissfully ignore.

    “It’s not irrelevant to the burning question why this case, which I’ve demonstrated to lack sufficient information to even begin an investigation, deserves more attention than others.”

    Regardless of whatever “sufficient information” you have demonstrated that the Sri Lankan Army is innocent of the charges being leveled against it in the tape. The three world renowned experts who compiled the report for Alston demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that the incident took place. If the incident took place, there are only two culprits: (I) the Sri Lankan Army or (II) the LTTE. The stripping behavior, as I have indicated, implicates the Sri Lankan Armed Forces. In general, Sri Lankan security personnel, are well known for this kind of behavior:

    (I) Video showing dead LTTE women being stripped and abused by Sinhalese Army soldiers

    (II) Sinhalese woman stopped at a roadblock, suspected of being a suicide bomber, and stripped naked in broad daylight, by police personnel in Colombo

    (III) Dead bodies of LTTE attackers at Anuradhapura stripped and paraded through the town for the people to look at

    (IV) Young boy stripped at checkpoint in Colombo and forced to strip for police personnel

    (V) Prisoners in custody stripped by Sri Lankan Army and shot/executed

    All of these incidents reflect a PATTERN OF ABUSE. In a COURT of LAW, a pattern of abuse is used to categorize a REPEAT OFFENDER. The REPEAT OFFENDER is considered likely to STRIKE again, and therefore is given a harsher sentence than he was during his first sentencing. The pattern of behavior I have mentioned, stripping a prisoner, is unique to the SRI LANKAN ARMY/POLICE, not the LTTE.

    You mention Trinco 5 and ACF 17. According to UTHR, the Sri Lankan Army is responsible for both incidents. Scotland Yard forensics was called in to do investigations in the Trinco 5 case. According to UTHR, the Sri Lankan Government did quite a cover-up in hiding/distorting the conclusions. Sri Lanka does not have the experts to carry out proper forensic investigations. Even after the Premadasa assassination, Scotland Yard was called in. Even in the context of this latest execution video, the Sri Lankan Government hired a Sinhalese guy from Australia, as one of its two “experts” to “investigate” the tape. Of course, if two of the “experts” had held high positions in the Army, and another expert was an ardent supporter, one cannot call it an unbiased investigation. That is why Alston was justified in hiring his own investigators.

    “The more likely scenario, though, is that LTTE sympathizers outside Sri Lanka put this tape together with their own resources. “LTTE supporters don’t have this expertise” you may respond. Well how do you explain this??”

    That is a flash animation video. It is not difficult to do using “Flash”; however, to make that kind of video on a cell phone is much harder, if not impossible. The three world-renowned experts hired by Alston concluded that the incident did indeed occur. In other words, it was not staged. In simple terms, that actual people died. So I am not sure what relevance a flash video has. You can find teenagers on Youtube putting together similar things.

  • Cengal

    **Regardless of whatever “sufficient information” you have shown, you have NOT demonstrated that the Sri Lankan Army is innocent of the charges being leveled against it in the tape.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    I don’t think you understand the meaning of “extrajudicial.” Extrajudicial does not refer to incidents where law enforcement personnel shoot people who they have reasonable suspicion to believe is armed and dangerous and poses an immediate threat to officers, the public, or both the public and officers.

    Definition of extrajudicial: “Extrajudicial punishment is punishment by the state or some other official authority without the permission of a court or legal authority.”

    The officers who shot Alpizar, and the officers who shot Menezes both had permission to shoot Alpizar and Menezes. I do not see the word “extrajudicial” in the extract that you quote from Alston’s report. Why? Because it was not extrajudicial in the first place. Therefore, Alston cannot be accused of double standards since his job is to investigate “extrajudicial” killings.

  • Agnos

    Cengal,

    I stopped by to check some election news and saw this; I think you are on the right track here, but I would like to add some comments.

    >>If the incident took place, there are only two culprits: (I) the Sri Lankan Army or (II) the LTTE. The stripping behavior, as I have indicated, implicates the Sri Lankan Armed Forces. In general, Sri Lankan security personnel, are well known for this kind of behavior:>>

    While I agree that the high likelihood is that the SLA committed it, for an investigation, an open mind is required. Let us say the LTTE might have committed it as well; but that still means there should be an investigation. What are the GoSL and its supporters here afraid of? If, as they say, the LTTE committed it, why can’t they have an investigation to prove it conclusively. That will be the end of the matter.

  • Cengal

    Agnos,

    I agree with you. The first point is not to find the culprit. It is to determine whether the video is, in fact, real. I believe Alston’s three highly qualified experts have affirmed that the video is real. What is interesting is that the “experts” hired by the Sri Lankan Government reached the opposite conclusion. At this stage, the question is who do you believe? By any yardstick, if we lay down the credentials of Alston’s experts and the Sri Lankan experts side-by-side, it is evident that Alston’s experts are far more qualified. We can reasonably infer that Alston’s experts have access to more sophisticated technology, are more competent in their fields (if we just go by the number of publications) and have no connections to either GOSL, LTTE, or the United Nations. From this we can conclude that the Sri Lankan experts reached a different conclusion because (I) they are less competent, (II) they intentionally lied, (III) there was no concrete investigation. Regardless of the reason, we can safely conclude the Sri Lankan experts reached an erroneous conclusion. Therefore, it remains for them to accept the findings of Alston’s experts, and in doing so, conduct a proper investigation, as you have said here. Because, as I have stated earlier, in the absence of a smoking gun that renders the video counterfeit, the Sri Lankan Army is a possible suspect. Also, as a member state of the United Nations, Sri Lanka is in fact signatory to the Geneva Conventions, and such behavior on its part, as portrayed in the video, is a gross violation of its obligations.

  • Observer

    “Cengal said,
    January 26, 2010 @ 5:39 am

    **Regardless of whatever “sufficient information” you have shown, you have NOT demonstrated that the Sri Lankan Army is innocent of the charges being leveled against it in the tape.”

    If you look at the other thread in “a video of shock and outrage, comments and responses” or whatever the title, can’t be arsed linking it…

    You will see that you can not accuse someone loosely (without credible evidence) and then expect them to prove their innocence. If that was universal in justice systems, we will have a 90% conviction rate. Onus is upon the accuser! Using the previous example, Cenegal, “demonstrate” to me that you don’t frequent brothels. Not that easy is it? Should I assume that you do then?

    Anyway, for starters the video proves Jack about the soldiers being SLA. It could be anyone pretending to be SLA soldiers! Innocence should ALWAYS be maintained until such time that their guilt is proven beyond doubt!

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Having problems with memory?
    I stated the meaning of” Extra Judicial” for your information on January 20, 2010 @ 3:44 pm. Is it any different to what you write now on January 26, one week later?

    Both cases of Menezes and Alpizar are mentioned as examples of “Shoot to Kill” policies in Alston’s report itself.

    You CONSISTENTLY kept ignoring the Menezes case as he was shot in the head without warning. Now you say the Police had permission to shoot Menezes. By whom? Was there a court order? According to reports that guy was not even warned.

    In Alpizar’s case there is doubt, as there are conflicts between official and independent versions. Hence both require an Inquiry that meets the SAME standards that Alston applies to ANY inquiry that he may make at any time.

    Here is what Alston’s report say about a Shoot to Kill policy (p18 of 72)

    In a “shoot-to-kill” context, this precept often has two elements.
    1. The first seeks to diminish the significance of human right law by shifting questions about “shoot-to-kill” policies from a law enforcement framework to an international humanitarian law framework.
    2. The second is to undermine the utility of human rights law by setting up a false conflict between “the human right not to be blown up by terrorists and the human right not to be arbitrarily shot by the police.”

    The report goes on to say “the duty of States to protect persons against terrorist attacks, while also setting out requirements of non-discrimination and protection against arbitrary deprivation of life”

    In including both cases of Menezes and Alpizar in the report, Alston was aware that BOTH cases came under his UN mandate as the Special Rapporteur. See below for the relevant section of his mandate

    The rules under which he must call for an Independent, Impartial and International inquiry cannot be flexible or selective when applied to TWO known cases where the FACTS are established and to a third case where the FACTS are in DOUBT and we have not even CONSIDERED the Extra Judicial Killings, war crimes etc carried out during the Iraq war, Afghanistan war, Gitmo, Abu Ghraib etc to name just a few recent cases without going as far as WW2.

    If the rules are not the same, Alston is BIASED, period.

    You state
    I do not see the word “extrajudicial” in the extract that you quote from Alston’s report. Why? Because it was not extrajudicial in the first place.
    Unquote

    Great piece of detective work, congratulations.
    Do you see the words “permission of a court or legal authority” in it either?
    That by the way is a part of your own definition. Without that it becomes “Extra Judicial”

    You would not have been this LIBERAL and flexible in your definitions IF the SL Security forces went around shooting Tamils who went about carrying parcels, bags or back packs just because THEY LOOKED SUSPICIOUS.

    The resistance to Identity checks which is “non lethal” is a case in point.

    Also remember that ALL LONDON Public Transport has Security Cameras installed in them. Hence the Menezes MURDER will be on Video tape.
    .
    .

    Special Rapporteur’s Mandate

    The Human Rights Council, in its resolution 8/3, requested the Special Rapporteur, in carrying out his mandate:

    (a) To continue to examine situations of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions in all circumstances and for whatever reason, and to submit his or her findings on an annual basis, together with conclusions and recommendations, to the Council and the General Assembly, and to draw the attention of the Council to serious situations of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions that warrant immediate attention or where early action might prevent further deterioration;

    (b) To continue to draw the attention of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to serious situations of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions that warrant immediate attention or where early action might prevent further deterioration;

    (c) To respond effectively to information which comes before him or her, in particular when an extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary execution is imminent or threatened or when such an execution has occurred;

    (d) To enhance further his or her dialogue with Governments, as well as to follow up on recommendations made in reports after visits to particular countries;

    (e) To continue monitoring the implementation of existing international standards on safeguards and restrictions relating to the imposition of capital punishment, bearing in mind the comments made by the Human Rights Committee in its interpretation of article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the Second Optional Protocol thereto;

    (f) To apply a gender perspective in his or her work.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    You stated
    “We can reasonably infer that Alston’s experts have access to more sophisticated technology, are more competent in their fields”
    Unquote (from your comment to Agnos on January 26, 2010 @ 8:25 am)

    So COMPETENT in fact, that they could not even INVESTIGATE the TIME & DATE which according to the same report is CRUCIAL (see quote from report below)

    The EVIDENCE of TIME is plainly visible as there is BRIGHT sunlight and SHORT SHADOWS.

    FAILURE TO INVESTIGATE WHEN EVIDENCE IS AVAILABLE IN PLAIN SIGHT POINTS TO A PRECONCEIVED CONCLUSION.

    .
    Quoted from Alston’s Expert Report P 9 of 24

    According to the metadata retrieved from the file submitted for analysis, encoded dates and tagged dates for both video and audio components indicate the recording was made on July 17, 2009 at 09:06:47 UTC (Universal Time Coordinated), also known as GMT (Greenwich Mean Time) or Zulu
    Time. This time, if correct, would be 14:36:47 local time in Sri Lanka based on the standard offset of GMT + 5.5 hours (Daylight Saving Time is not observed in Sri Lanka). The encoded date is well after the alleged date of the incident and, if accurate, WOULD TEND TO DISCREDIT THE RECORDING’S AUTHENTICITY

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Agnos,

    You state
    What are the GoSL and its supporters here afraid of?
    Unquote

    GOSL does not seem to be afraid, judging by the speech below, but there appears to be a dearth of takers who are prepared to accept the conditions laid down by SL which is a restatement of the principle of EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW.

    What are they and their supporters’ AFRAID of?

    INTERNATIONAL, INDEPENDENT INQUIRES !!!

    Video of Speech delivered at UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on 5th June 2009
    http://www.youtube.com/user/NoEalamInSL#p/search/39/-1IanNK1uwM

    Text of speech

    Mr. President,

    Sri Lanka noted with some degree of amusement that the EU, the United Kingdom, Ireland and France were all cheering on the notion of an International Inquiry into allegations of human rights violations conducted by all sides, as they put it, to the Sri Lankan conflict.

    So here is the deal. Sri Lanka will be prepared, I think, to regard this a little more charitably if we start from the human rights situations that precede the Sri Lankan conflict.

    Let France institute an impartial independent inquiry into the millions of deaths in so called French Indo-China, and then in Algeria, including those who were submitted to electro-shock during the battle of Algiers! Let it also have an independent inquiry into the disappearance of Mehdi Ben Barka from the streets of Paris, and possible complicity of all sorts of personalities in that disappearance.

    Let Great Britain and Ireland have an international inquiry into the events of Bloody Sunday in 1972 in London Derry, where there was no fog of war unlike in the closing stages of the Sri Lankan conflict, but dead civilians were strewn on the streets of Londonderry. After two commissions of inquiry, the only result has been the promotion of every single soldier who was there on that day, and the commanding officer being given some sort of honour by her Majesty the Queen!

    Now, if these countries set an example to Sri Lanka and submit their own conduct to so-called impartial or independent international inquiries of the sort that they have commended us, Sri Lanka would be ready to regard their suggestion with somewhat less contempt than it does at the moment.

    Thank you.

  • Observer

    My concern is how many “experts” Alston may have approached until he reached “experts” that agreed with his assessment. We will never know. Since the UN claims Alston’s actions are of his own, there is no mechanism in place to assert his independence on this matter. There will always be doubts about the extent of his involvement, influence or persuasions as such that may have occurred during the analysis. Once he made intial contact, did Alston maintain regular communications with the experts? What were his remarks when the videos were given to them or during the investigation? Did he suggest any assumptions that may have biased the outcome? Did the experts ever receive anything from Alston? Going by the logic of some of the commenters here, Alston should demonstrate that he made no inappropriate propositions nor offerings to the experts, affecting their judgement. Since the conclusions reached are highly circumstantial this is a serious consideration. The primary source of evidence is not verified. The source does not acknowledge it’s authenticity. The most disturbing aspect is that, should an independent investigator’s credibility be at stake if the outcome of what he is investigating was to be different? He cannot pursue an investigation after making certain claims about his personal views on the matter. Given all this, there is insufficient grounds to even consider an investigation.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    “Here is what Alston’s report”

    It is not Alston’s report, it is a report submitted by group of which Alston is the chairman. And this group does not have any affiliation to the United Nations.

    Menezes Case:

    Menezes case has already been investigated by the London police and they have admitted it was a mistake. 500,000 pounds was given to the victim’s family and the London police apologized. Alston does not investigate cases where the accused admit their guilt and make payment. If the Sri Lankan Government admitted CH4 video was a mistake, Alston would not investigate any further.

    Alpizar Case:

    Once again, the officers had probable cause to believe Alpizar was armed. Because they told Alpizar to get down on the ground and he did not, they shot him, it cannot be considered an extrajudicial killing. As this was a high security environment, the officers have a right to search anyone (this is true anywhere in the world). In extrajudicial killings, the victims are not offered a chance to live.

  • Cengal

    Observer:

    “You will see that you can not accuse someone loosely (without credible evidence) and then expect them to prove their innocence. ”

    What matters in a court of law is probable cause. Obviously, there is not always a smoking gun to link the accused to the scene of the crime. Now the thing to do is draw a conclusion based on what you DO have. In the case of the CH4 video, this is not hard to do:

    (1) The video is real (this is what we get from Alston’s experts)

    (2) If the video is real, then the guilty party is either the LTTE or the SLA

    (3) Who is known for stripping dead bodies or stripping people at checkpoints in broad daylight? Answer: SLA and Sri Lanka Police

    (4) Who is more likely to carry a cell phone around? SLA or LTTE? Answer: SLA.

    (3) and (4) indirectly implicate the Sri Lankan Army. The inability of the Sri Lankan Government to carry out an unbiased investigation further backs up this point. It suggests a cover-up, which is probably why Alston got involved in the first place.

  • Cengal

    Observer:

    “My concern is how many “experts” Alston may have approached until he reached “experts” that agreed with his assessment.”

    If that was the case, then all you have to do is find experts who refute the claims of Alston’s experts. If you don’t do that, then it means Alston’s experts are correct. So far no expert has come forward to refute the claims of Alston’s experts. See how easy this is?

    P.S: When I say expert, I am not referring to armchair analysts of the likes of Off the Cuff. If armchair analysts were able to decipher and deconstruct complex technicalities, if they had access to the firing range to test muzzle velocities, for example, then I might concede. But I am quite positive that is not the case.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cenegal,

    If Alston does not subscribe to the views expressed in that report, HOW did it find it’s way into the UN’s OFFICIAL OHCHR website, the same place Alston has published his investigation reports on the CH4 Video? http://www2.ohchr.org/

    VERY STRANGE IS IT NOT?

    The above is in response to your statement
    It is not Alston’s report, it is a report submitted by group of which Alston is the chairman. And this group does not have any affiliation to the United Nations.
    Unquote

    you state
    Menezes case has already been investigated by the London police
    Unquote

    That is absolutely True, but that is the SAME ORGANIZATION that is accused of the MURDER.

    If the SL Experts are DISQUALIFIED by reason of being Sri Lankan and having connections to the SL Govt, which by the way are the reasons given by Alston when he FIRST rejected the SL Govts Tech Report in September last year, how can an investigation by the British and an Organisation that perpetrated the crime which in addition is connected to the British Govt be ACCEPTABLE?

    UNLESS OF COURSE A DIFFERENT YARDSTICK AND DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE EMPLOYED?

    You state
    Once again, the officers had probable cause to believe Alpizar was armed……
    they shot him, it cannot be considered an extrajudicial killing
    Unquote

    Replace the WORD Alpizar by the phrase “the Tamil person” and apply it to SL. Would you support the SL security forces if they went around shooting every Tamil that carries a parcel/Bag/backpack JUST BECAUSE the Officer concerned had ” probable cause to believe” that the Tamil person was armed?

    Not very easy to justify when things are closer to home is it?

    Such a policy would have certainly saved many civilian lives (Tamils, Sinhalese, Muslims, other races, Children, Women, Pregnant women, Men etc) and made it extremely difficult for the LTTE to operate in the SOUTH but would have resulted in many deaths like Alpizar’s amongst Tamils (some of whom would be suicide bombers and others innocent Tamil civilians).

    Try to understand why Alston’s report INCLUDED the Alpizar case as an example of the ADVERSE RESULTS of a shoot to kill policy without making excuses that you would not make if Tamils in SL were involved, instead of someone unconnected to you, like Alpizar.

    Once Alston accepts those policies enumerated in his report and puts it on a Official web site of the UN, you cannot dispute that those views are not the rules that Alston lives by. But as shown above Alston’s rules change depending on who the accused are.

    In plain language Alston uses DOUBLE STANDARDS.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    The problem that so called EXPERTS have with arm chair critics is that simple questions that are OVERLOOKED by them in their belief of infallibility stymie them as much as it has stymied you.

    This happens when an EXPERT tries to fit the available evidence to a PRECONCEIVED conclusion.

    If you read actual case histories of law, you will note that this is not the FIRST time such things have happened. Even US case law will be full of that. Many an EXPERT has had his/her cloak of so called AUTHORITY stripped by lawyers and people with common sense while under cross examination.

    Checking “TIME” with the use of the SUN is not NEWFANGLED science. It has existed for millennia. It is not difficult if you know your Trigonometry.

    If an EXPERT faced with a question about “TIME” and does not use available evidence to estimate “TIME” and instead provide speculative excuses to “WATER DOWN” the crucial importance of what he himself acknowledges about the TIME factor, he cannot be called IMPARTIAL.

    His EXPERT report states… The encoded date is well after the alleged date of the incident and, if accurate, WOULD TEND TO DISCREDIT THE RECORDING’S AUTHENTICITY.

    Your Rant about muzzle velocities blah blah blah wont get you, Alston or Spivac out of that. The complexity of Muzzle velocities has nothing to do with estimating Time from the sun.

    So whether you concede or not, “TIME” remains a nagging thorn in the CH4 proponents when the bright SUN has cast SHORT SHADOWS.

    I hope you try to challenge me on my observations about the Sun and the shadows.

    I expected a fair argument from you with questions directed about my posts to me, instead of hitting below the belt in a post addressed to another which I just happened to see.

    BTW, you don’t have an inkling about the facilities I have access to. So don’t assume too much. As I mentioned before, when you ride the High Horse your fall is bound to be hard.

    This is a response to your statement to Observer
    P.S: When I say expert, I am not referring to armchair analysts of the likes of Off the Cuff. If armchair analysts were able to decipher and deconstruct complex technicalities, if they had access to the firing range to test muzzle velocities, for example, then I might concede. But I am quite positive that is not the case.
    Unquote

  • Agnos

    Off the Cuff,

    I hesitate to get into arguments with you since it will be never ending with you; let me just make some points on Dayan Jayatilleka’s speech at the UNHRC however.

    Suppose a rapist is arraigned in court. Can he argue that some other rapist got scot-free and therefore he should, too? Does the fact that in some other similar case a rapist got away matter to the victim’s case for justice? This kind of ridiculous drivel may pass muster at the UNHRC, but won’t fly anywhere else.

    The people who are calling for an international investigation are Sri Lanka’s own citizens (in my case, an ex citizen who still has many family ties). The EU, UN, and others are merely supporting the call by these people,–and human rights groups that help them–because left to themselves, the victims lack the means or power to get justice.

  • wijayapala

    Dear Cengal,

    Looks like you’ve dug a hole, which (I) you don’t quite know the depth of, or (II) blissfully ignore.

    You “blissfully ignored” my last question which exposes the hole you’re standing in:

    Let’s say the West conquered Sri Lanka and arrested every single member of the government and security forces, and nobody escaped or got killed (since you’ve wonderfully established that only the SLA kills people). The West assigns you Cengal to be in charge of investigating the execution videotape. ***What would be the first thing you do?*** (in case you didn’t see the question the first time)

    I asked this question to Agnos and he quietly excused himself from the conversation. I’m glad he’s back- maybe he can answer the question if you can’t. By failing to answer the question, you guys tacitly acknowledge that calls for an investigation have no merit because the investigation cannot be without sufficient initial information.

    Regardless of whatever “sufficient information” you have shown, you have NOT demonstrated that the Sri Lankan Army is innocent of the charges being leveled against it in the tape.

    You seem to like writing in CAPS like another of my friends here. To oblige you, in a COURT of LAW, the DEFENDANT is INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY. The BURDEN of PROOF rests on the ACCUSER, NOT the ACCUSED.

    The pattern of behavior I have mentioned, stripping a prisoner, is unique to the SRI LANKAN ARMY/POLICE, not the LTTE.

    And how do you know that the LTTE did not strip prisoners? Were you an employee at one of their infamous torture chambers?

    You mention Trinco 5 and ACF 17. According to UTHR, the Sri Lankan Army is responsible for both incidents.

    UTHR named the STF as the Trinco 5 killers and a non-Sinhala home guard as murdering the ACF 17. It did NOT state that the SLA was responsible for either incident. The only accusation that UTHR lays is that the SLA did not stop either massacre, which is quite a different statement (in case you were thinking to claim that there is no difference).

  • Agnos

    wijayapala,

    My answer to your question was implied in my many previous notes– that the UN or somebody else has to first conduct a preliminary investigation that will determine whether there are sufficient details to go ahead with a case. A preliminary investigation does not need all the details you have been asking.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Agnos,

    I agree with your statement which I quote below but with one proviso.

    If the Earlier rapist was discharged by a court and went “Scott-free” for some legal reason and your hypothetical second rapist can also establish that the same reason applies to his case too, then he can definitely cite the earlier case as the previous “Court Decision” is already case law.

    If the court agrees that the second offender’s argument is valid, the Second Offender would also go Scott-Free as you put it.

    What you saw above is the “Principle of Equality Before The Law” in Action.

    quote
    Suppose a rapist is arraigned in court. Can he argue that some other rapist got scot-free and therefore he should, too?
    Unquote

    Also keep in mind that when you deal with a rapist or a murderer or a thief by legal means it is done within a Legal System that is already established and recognizes the principle of “Equality Before The Law”.

    The above example of yours works within a legal environment which is internal to a country.

    Please let me know with clear reasons if you find my argument on the above matter to be erroneous as I would like to learn from your experience.

    —————

    Now lets look at a similar situation where instead of a person an Independent country is tried in an “International Legal Environment” for alleged misdimanours and judged by its PEERS who are also members of the same International organization.

    As in the legal system internal to a country, in this “New International Legal Environment” the “Principle of Equality Before The Law must reign Supreme”.

    This is a Democratic principle that ensures that NO MEMEBER IS ABOVE THE LAW AND THAT THE LAW IS APPLIED EQUALY TO ALL (Big or Small, Weak or strong)

    This is the KEY premise on which I have based my argument.
    I believe that my premise UPHOLDS Democratic Principles of Governance.

    If you have any reason whatsoever with which you can reasonably argue that the Key premise on which I build my argument is wrong or unjust please give me reasons as to why it is undemocratic or unjust so that we can discuss it and meet on common ground before we proceed further.

    I have limited myself to answering your first question and placing before you the Key premise of my argument so that we can arrive at answers quickly and directly.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    I never said Alston did not subscribe to such views as were found in the report. I merely said Alston did not compile the report by himself. In the CH4 case, it is different; Alston got personally involved.

    “That is absolutely True, but that is the SAME ORGANIZATION that is accused of the MURDER.”

    The difference is that the “same organization that is accused of the murder” has pleaded guilty to the crime. What is the point of asking a third-party agency to conduct an investigation if the murderer turns himself in? And also, it was an INTERNAL investigation.

    “If the SL Experts are DISQUALIFIED by reason of being Sri Lankan and having connections to the SL Govt,”

    Only one “expert” had any expertise to begin with. And this expert who had “expertise” had close connections to GOSL. And all of the “experts” were handpicked by GOSL. There was not an unbiased internal investigation because all the “experts” were picked by GOSL. When Alpizar was killed, the American government did not handpick investigators to look into it. When Menezes was killed, the British government did not handpick investigators to look into it.

    “…which by the way are the reasons given by Alston when he FIRST rejected the SL Govts Tech Report in September last year, how can an investigation by the
    “British and an Organisation that perpetrated the crime which in addition is connected to the British Govt be ACCEPTABLE?”

    Once again, because the British police admitted they had a mistake and payed 500,000 pounds to the victims family. You seem to conveniently miss this point. Once the British police/Government admit they make a mistake and pay all that money, there is nothing that Alston’s family can do. Do you have any idea, btw, why 500,000 pounds was paid? It was most likely a private settlement between the London Metro Police and Menezes’ family to avoid a lawsuit. You have forgotten that Menezes’ family has the option of suing, in which case the Court would decide the settlement. Another reason for Alston not to get involved in the Menezes case; if the victims are not satisfied, they can go to the Courts.

    “Replace the WORD Alpizar by the phrase “the Tamil person” and apply it to SL. Would you support the SL security forces if they went around shooting every Tamil that carries a parcel/Bag/backpack.”

    If it was an airport or airplane and some Tamil guy refused to get down when told by SL police officers, then I have no issue with that guy getting shot. This is the central issue that you are missing altogether. You don’t have the same rights in an airport/airplane that you have on the street. You cannot refuse to go through the scanners, you can’t carry whatever you want in your hand luggage, you have to wear the seat belt when the flight attendants tell you, and if some security guy wants to search you, you better do what he says, you better not reach into your bag.

    “Such a policy would have certainly saved many civilian lives (Tamils, Sinhalese, Muslims, other races, Children, Women, Pregnant women, Men etc) and made it extremely difficult for the LTTE to operate in the SOUTH but would have resulted in many deaths like Alpizar’s amongst Tamils (some of whom would be suicide bombers and others innocent Tamil civilians).”

    How many of these people were shot on airplanes or in airports? Let’s see you name a single one.

    “Try to understand why Alston’s report INCLUDED the Alpizar case as an example of the ADVERSE RESULTS of a shoot to kill policy without making excuses that you would not make if Tamils in SL were involved, instead of someone unconnected to you, like Alpizar.”

    LOL. Where does Alston say that shoot to kill equals extrajudicial. Do you see the word “judicial” next to extra? If shoot to kill is official policy, then it is not extrajudicial.

    “Once Alston accepts those policies enumerated in his report and puts it on a Official web site of the UN, you cannot dispute that those views are not the rules that Alston lives by. But as shown above Alston’s rules change depending on who the accused are.”

    Alston does not decide what patterns airport security should follow. In fact, the only thing Alston says is that shoot-to-kill policies should be used with extreme care. With any policy, there is the possibility that it can go wrong. This is the whole point of Alston’s report. He is warning the world about what can go wrong with such policies.

    “In plain language Alston uses DOUBLE STANDARDS.”

    I will agree with you if you agree with me on the following points:

    (I) The police would have shot Alpizar even if he got on the ground. The police warning Alpizar multiple times to get on the ground makes no difference

    (II) It does not make any difference that the London police did not shoot Menezes as soon as he left his house (pretty strange for an extrajudicial killing). They waited for him to board a train before shooting, for what reason? Maybe they wanted to enjoy some coffee before the extrajudicial fun began. 🙂

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff,

    “This happens when an EXPERT tries to fit the available evidence to a PRECONCEIVED conclusion.

    If you read actual case histories of law, you will note that this is not the FIRST time such things have happened. Even US case law will be full of that. Many an EXPERT has had his/her cloak of so called AUTHORITY stripped by lawyers and people with common sense while under cross examination.”

    Sorry man, that’s not how the law works. When you want to present your case in a Court of Law (not on the CTB bus riding through Maradana), the Court will only accept expert testimony. That is why I am not bothered with your amateur analysis. If it was a Court of Law, the Courts would choose Alston’s experts over you (and even me) anyday. These guys have been evaluating forensic evidence for 20-30 years on a daily basis; they can see patterns right away that you or I would not guess.

    And also, witnesses do not rebuff the testimony of experts in a Court of Law; that is because witnesses are not allowed to cross-examine experts in the first place! Only the defense attorney and prosecutor can cross-examine experts.

    Alston’s report already addresses the issue of time. If time was the smoking gun that you claim here, we would not be having this discussion. As I said earlier, there is no smoking gun; the issues involved are subtle and deserve careful analysis by those qualified in the field, as opposed to speculation from the likes of amateurs such as yourself.

  • Cengal

    *the Court will only accept expert testimony.

    The above applies when the matter involves some technical issue or some psychiatric evaluation. Eye-witnesses and witnesses to the scene of the crime are acceptable, of course, but they are not allowed to give testimony in regards to the nature of physical evidence, e.g. forensic evidence. In the CH4 case, the Court would not allow some amateur armchair analyst to testify about why he thinks the time stamp on the video renders the latter irrelevant.

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:


    Let’s say the West conquered Sri Lanka and arrested every single member of the government and security forces, and nobody escaped or got killed (since you’ve wonderfully established that only the SLA kills people). The West assigns you Cengal to be in charge of investigating the execution videotape. ***What would be the first thing you do?*** (in case you didn’t see the question the first time)”

    I’m not sure what the point of the above question is? As far as the execution videotape goes, I would conduct an internal investigation – the perpetrators would be arrested by the military police, court-martialed, and sentenced in a military court (the military has their own judicial system). This is what happened after the Abu Grahib scandal broke out. Those involved in the Abu Grahib incident were arrested and are sitting in jail today (not one or two years, but 10-20). If you wish, I can provide all the names.

    ” By failing to answer the question, you guys tacitly acknowledge that calls for an investigation have no merit because the investigation cannot be without sufficient initial information.”

    There is no investigation being conducted because GOSL is engaged in a cover-up. GOSL personally handpicked three people to conduct a sham investigation. What should have occurred is that the Army should have conducted an internal investigation. When the Government gets personally involved, that is very suspicious.


    You seem to like writing in CAPS like another of my friends here. To oblige you, in a COURT of LAW, the DEFENDANT is INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY. The BURDEN of PROOF rests on the ACCUSER, NOT the ACCUSED.”

    In a COURT of LAW, the JUDGE, JURY, and EXECUTIONER are not ONE and the SAME.


    And how do you know that the LTTE did not strip prisoners? Were you an employee at one of their infamous torture chambers?”

    In the absence of evidence, neither you nor I can claim the LTTE engaged in such behavior. The fact that the Sri Lanka Army/ police COMMONLY engage in such behavior speaks volumes. In criminology terms, this is called “profiling.” For example, if a bomb goes off in New York City, the police are not going to search 85 year old grandmothers. 85 year old grandmothers have very little motive to set off such bombs. On the other hand, THOSE WHO HAVE SET OFF BOMBS before will be on the TOP of the list.

    “You mention Trinco 5 and ACF 17. According to UTHR, the Sri Lankan Army is responsible for both incidents.”

    “UTHR named the STF as the Trinco 5 killers and a non-Sinhala home guard as murdering the ACF 17. It did NOT state that the SLA was responsible for either incident. The only accusation that UTHR lays is that the SLA did not stop either massacre, which is quite a different statement (in case you were thinking to claim that there is no difference).”

    LOL. The STF plays a crucial role in military operations. The fact that they are responsible for the incident is not very different from saying the SLA is involved. I know you are fan of semantics, so let me state the point exactly: SL ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL were responsible for the Trinco 5 murders. Why don’t you mention the cover-up by GOSL that UTHR describes in detail? Can we not infer that GOSL HAS A PROVEN TRACK RECORD of COVERING UP CRIMES COMMITTED BY THE ARMED FORCES? Your friend UTHR certainly agrees in the affirmative.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    JUDICIAL. Belonging, or emanating from a judge (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary)

    JUDICIAL Definition: Pertaining or appropriate to courts of justice, or to a judge; practiced or conformed to in the administration of justice; sanctioned or ordered by a court; as, judicial power; judicial proceedings; a judicial sale

    JUDICIAL review is the doctrine in democratic theory under which legislative and executive action is subject to invalidation by the judiciary. Specific courts with judicial review power must annul the acts of the state when it finds them incompatible with a higher authority, such as the terms of a written constitution.

    JUDICIARY (also known as the judicial system or judicature) is the system of courts which interprets and applies the law in the name of the sovereign or state.

    Even if you write a book and stand on your head, the word EXTRA preceding the word JUDICIAL means only one thing. It signifies everything that is EXTERNAL to Judicial.

    Unless of course, you are “qualified” to redefine the English Language as well.

    You state “I never said Alston did not subscribe to such views as were found in the report. I merely said Alston did not compile the report by himself. In the CH4 case, it is different; Alston got personally involved.”

    People at the top don’t compile reports, they only approve

    You are quite right about the personal involvement.
    The question is why?
    Why this unique behaviour?
    Did he similarly get personally involved in the many other HR violations and extra judicial acts that PRECEDED the fake CH4 video?

    You can’t get out of the DOUBLE STANDARDS finger pointing at Alston

    Were there any pecuniary reasons?
    As to profiling LTTE behaviour, there are Judicial statements about bribery.
    The FBI states that even US congressmen were not spared.
    Alston and Siva Pasupati are domiciled in the same country aren’t they?

    Again just another reminder to be careful when you ride the High Horse.

  • Cengal

    Dear Off the Cuff:

    You have not explained why Alston should investigate people who have admitted they are guilty. What is the logic in that? I am referring to the Menezes case.

    In the Alpizar case, you have not explained why Alpizar did not get down on the ground, even though he was told to multiple times. When you say “no witnesses” you are confusing the bomb threat with everything else. In fact, the report does not say there were no witnesses who heard the officers telling Alpizar to get down on the ground.

    Without addressing these two points, your argument of “double standards” lacks any substance.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Also, you did not explain why officers tried to question Alpizar. You have tried to make a case that they shot him for no reason, but that is not the truth.

    ———-
    Mary Gardner, a passenger aboard the Orlando-bound flight, told WTVJ-TV in Miami that the man ran down the aisle from the rear of the plane. “He was frantic, his arms flailing in the air,” she said. She said a woman followed, shouting, “My husband! My husband!”

    Mike Irizarry, a passenger shown on CNN, added that Alpizar “just kept saying, `I got to get off, I got to get off’ and then he ran off the plane.” ———-

    http://pm54.com/

    Off the Cuff, do you consider running like mad on a plane to be erratic behavior? Perhaps you should consult with Philip Alston, since you seem to rely on his reports so much. In fact, maybe you should wait till Alston writes a report about running on a plane, before you reply.

    P.S: Note that none of the above witnesses talks about a BOMB. All they talk about is Alpizar running like a mad bugger on the plane. Which BY ITSELF provides enough justification for the police officers to question Alpizar.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Now that you have finally understood what Extra Judicial means I hope you understand the full scope of Alston’s mandate too.

    You can’t get out of the DOUBLE STANDARDS finger pointing at Alston

    I have only used two incidents that Alston accepts as Illegal. There are many more that I have not touched on that has been perpetrated by the Rich and Powerful. These come within Alston mandate but Alston is scared to touch any of them.

    To understand the behavior of the Rich and Powerful just have a look at this video (I wont blame Alston for this though).
    Its a Documentary and has eye witness accounts from the victims. Their own country sold them up the river.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    As I said here, the killing of Alpizar was NOT extrajudicial. Police officers are LEGALLY sanctioned to shoot a suspect in the USA if they believe the suspect poses a danger to them. As you stated earlier, when Alipizar REACHED into his bag, he was shot. Of course, you did not explain WHY Alpizar reached into his bag. And you also did not bother to mention that Alpizar reached into his bag after police officers told him to get down. Let me state this ONCE and ONLY ONCE: if a police officer tells you to get down and you reach into your bag, the officer has a RIGHT to shoot you. And this is NOT extrajudicial because the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES said its OKAY for the COPPERS to shoot.

    “The Supreme Court established the constitutional limits on the use of deadly force by law enforcement officials in Tennessee v. Garner.18 In that case, the Court held that the use of deadly force is a seizure subject to the reasonableness standards of the Fourth Amendment. The Court allowed that where an officer has probable cause to believe that a suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. The Court further explained that “if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given.”19

    ————-

    Please read the above paragraph MULTIPLE times and if there is any gray matter in your brain, don’t come back here and try to make absurd arguments about why Alpizar (a mentally ill man running up and down on a plane) was shot for no reason, when even YOU have admitted he reached into his bag before being shot.

    P.S: I am glad you have given up on the Menezes case. Asking Alston to investigate cases that have already been investigated is the epitome of foolishness.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    When you are at the losing end of an argument you seem to be resorting to dishonesty to win at any cost. If you accuse me of anything about what I have supposed to have stated you should in all decency, refer to the specific comment and the specific statement.

    My objective is to prove that Alston is prone to apply Double Standards and that under such a background he loses credibility just as the report on CH4 video has lost credibility due to attempts to include SPECULATIVE excuses in order to WATER DOWN the importance of unexplainable facts.

    Alston’s report on Racial Profiling and Lethal Force in the “War on Terror” in Page 9 of 72 has the following paragraphs

    Extract
    The Training Keys also include factors such as “mumbling,” “pacing back and forth,” and “being overly protective of one’s baggage” that could lead to the erroneous targeting of the mentally ill, as was demonstrated when an airline passenger with bi-polar disorder was shot and killed by Federal Air Marshals in Miami.

    Following an argument with his wife, Alpizar, who was visibly agitated and clutching his bag, ran to the front of the airline declaring that he had to get off the plane. After Air Marshals became involved and began to escort Alpizar off the plane, his wife ran after them yelling that her husband, who suffered from bi-polar disorder, was ill and off his medication.

    After being removed from the plane, Alpizar was shot and killed on the Jetway, allegedly as he was reaching for his bag. There are no witness accounts confirming that Alpizar claimed that he had a bomb, as was stated by the Air Marshals involved in the shooting.

    End Extract

    The facts emerging from the above report are
    1. Profiling advocated by the IACP for a Terrorist includes Mumbling, Pacing back and fourth and being overly protective of one’s baggage as indicators of Terrorist behaviour
    2. The same characteristics are unfortunately common to the “Mentally ill”
    3. The possibility of the Mentally Sick being targeted is recognised by Alston’s report
    4. Alpizar was Mentally ill and had Bipolar illness and was visibly agitated
    5. He ran to the front (exit?) of the plane saying that he wants to get off the plane
    6. His wife ran after him SHOUTING that he was mentally ill and off his medication
    7. Alpizar was CLUTCHING his bag
    8. Air Marshals became involved at this point and escorted Alpizar off the plane
    9. After being removed from the plane, Alpizar was shot and killed on the Jetway
    10. ALLEGEDLY as he was reaching for his bag
    11. Air Marshals involved in the shooting said that Alpizar claimed that he had a bomb
    12. There are NO WITNESS accounts confirming that Alpizar claimed that he had a bomb

    ALL the above statements EMANATE from Alston’s report and I assume that Alston and his Faculty went through ALL AVAILABLE EVIDENCE in reaching THEIR observations as included in the report which I have been using.

    PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE ARE NOT MY OBSERVATIONS BUT ALSTON’S

    Also note that the Law Enforcement has been TRAINED to interpret characteristics of the MENTALLY SICK as terrorist behaviour and that they have been TRAINED in a Shoot to Kill policy based on such profiling.

    According to Cengal’s own source http://en.allexperts.com/e/r/ri/rigoberto_alpizar.htm
    1. To date, no independent evidence has emerged verifying that Alpizar said he had a bomb
    2. Several passengers on the flight have contradicted the government’s claim, saying that they never heard Alpizar say anything about a bomb
    3. Two eye-witnesses says, John McAlhany, “I never heard the word ‘bomb’ on the plane,” “I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb.” Mary Gardner, “I did not hear him say that he had a bomb.

    Both these sources CONTRADICT all or some aspects of the Official Version

    The US Supreme Court Decision is discussed below

    The use Lethal Force by Law Enforcement has been LIMITED by the Fourth Amendment from its previous BROAD use, by the following decision in the case of TENNESSEE v. GARNER, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)

    “This case requires us to determine the constitutionality of the use of deadly force to prevent the escape of an apparently unarmed suspected felon. We conclude that such force may not be used unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”

    Hence it is not strange to find the Law Enforcement trying to seek refuge in this LIMITED use of deadly force allowed by the Supreme Court when such an incident happens, as they have no other defense.

    The Facts as deduced from Alston’s Report and your OWN source point to an OFFICIAL COVER UP as other than OFFICIAL sources Alston report concludes that there are NO INDEPENDENT WITNESSES supporting the official claim.

    In the face of a cover up the UN Special Rapporteur needs to investigate, not withstanding any internal investigation, as such investigation may also be part of a cover up, as seen by similar investigations that meted out a slap on the wrist on junior officer’s in order to protect the people higher up in the command structure.

    You have Quoted IACP the Proponent and Originator of the “Training Keys” of using Lethal Force against terrorist suspects which also includes the behavioural pattern of the Mentally Sick as that of a Suicide Terrorist. (http://policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=1264&issue_id=92007)

    While the Profiling TRAINS Law Enforcement to recognize and shoot to kill a Suicide Terrorist it DOES NOT train them to DISTINGUISH between the Mentally Sick and a Suicide Terrorist. They act on their training, irrespective of the consequences. In the Alpizar case, Law Enforcement was TOLD by Alpizar’s wife that he was mentally ill and off his medication LONG BEFORE Alpizar was shot.

    Cengal, you have a penchant to ride the High Horse. Where did I say that I have given up on the Menezes case? I don’t have to, because I based my argument on Alston’s report and I don’t see him repudiating it anywhere (including the web). If you can see any REPUDIATION from Alston I sure would like you to point that out. This is the SECOND instance in the same post that you seem to be Hallucinating.

  • wijayapala

    Dear Cengal,

    As far as the execution videotape goes, I would conduct an internal investigation – the perpetrators would be arrested by the military police, court-martialed, and sentenced in a military court (the military has their own judicial system). This is what happened after the Abu Grahib scandal broke out.

    For Abu Ghraib, the investigators had 1) photos of the perpetrators’ faces to allow identification 2) the location of the abuses and 3) the time frame within which the abuses took place.

    Unfortunately, you have none of the above information as far as the execution is concerned, so ***how would you identify the perpetrators to be arrested???***

    The fact that the Sri Lanka Army/ police COMMONLY engage in such behavior speaks volumes. In criminology terms, this is called “profiling.”

    I was not aware that you support racial profiling. Does that mean you support Gotabhaya’s deportation of hundreds of Tamils from Colombo, because all suicide bombers in Sri Lanka were Tamil?

    Did the police strip Tissainayagam when he was incarcerated?

    The STF plays a crucial role in military operations.

    That was the case in the 1980s and early 1990s, but since then the STF has been relegated to guarding government areas. In other words, the STF could not have carried out atrocities in the Wanni war zone because it was not present there. Try again.

    The fact that they are responsible for the incident is not very different from saying the SLA is involved.

    If you really want to identify the perpetrators, and not simply bleat rhetoric (as I suspect you are doing), **you have to identify which service they belonged to.** This is what would have to be established in any COURT OF LAW, which would not tolerate your sloppy attention to facts, I’m afraid.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    The report you give has a mistake. Officers never escorted Alpizar off the plane.
    This is what happened:

    ——–

    On the flight from Quito to Miami, Alpizar appeared stressed. Ellen Sutliff, who sat behind him, observed what she considered odd behavior. He repeatedly hit the call button, annoying the flight attendants, and prior to landing he refused to relinquish his drink. “I need that now,” an attendant told him. “It’s the law.” When Alpizar still resisted, the attendant added: “Sir, do you know what a law is?” After the exchange, Sutliff observed Buechner turn away and wipe tears from her eyes. Later, in the Miami airport, Sutliff happened to walk behind the couple on the way to a connecting flight. “Soon we’ll be home and everything will be all right,” Sutliff overheard Buechner say. “Please, please help me get through this.” Just before boarding the Orlando-bound plane, Alpizar looked “agitated” and began singing a line from the spiritual “Go Down Moses,” says passenger Alan Tirpak.

    Once onboard, Alpizar quickly reached a breaking point. After arguing with Buechner in the plane’s rear, says passenger John McAlhany, Alpizar charged up the aisle, clutching his backpack close to his chest. “I’ve got to get off the plane,” he said. Buechner raced after Alpizar, announcing that he was “sick,” but then doubled back to retrieve a bag. By the time she made her way back up, it was too late. Two air marshals seated in first class chased after Alpizar, who had entered the jetway. According to an Air Marshal Service account, the two shouted “Police!” and commanded Alpizar to lie on the ground. He said he had a bomb and began reaching into his backpack. Again, they yelled “Police!” and ordered him down. When he continued to reach into the backpack, the marshals pulled out their .357 SIG Sauer pistols and shot him a half-dozen times, according to several passengers. Buechner, who was restrained by a flight attendant, pleaded to see Alpizar, saying he was bipolar and hadn’t taken his medication. “He didn’t want to get on the flight,” she said, according to passenger Michael Beshears. “I convinced him to get on.”

    ————

    So, let’s summarize what really happened:

    1. Alpizar was singing songs on the plane

    2. Alpizar appeared clearly agitated while on the plane

    3. Alpizar RAN to the front of the plane

    4. Alpizar got off the plane before it ever took off, even though officers told him to stay on board

    5. Officers chased after Alpizar

    6. Officers told Alpizar to get on the ground

    7. Alpizar reached into his bag

    8. Alpizar was shot

    Whether or not Alpizar claimed he had a bomb is IRRELEVANT. On the other hand, it is a FACT that Alpizar disobeyed officers TWICE. Whatever source you have quoted from is wrong when they say Air Marshals escorted Alpizar off the plane. Even the Wikipedia version backs up what I said:

    “The shooting took place on a jetway after Alpizar ran away from the aircraft. Ignoring requests to stop, Alpizar continued to exit the plane and was soon confronted in the jetway, just outside the aircraft. After being ordered to the ground, Alpizar allegedly did not comply, instead reaching for the bag he had been carrying. The two air marshals pulled out their .357 SIG Sauer pistols, and opened fire, killing Alpizar. Conflicting reports put the number of shots between three and nine.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigoberto_Alpizar

    Now, the question that you have to answer is whether or not Alpizar ran away from the aircraft when he was ordered to stop. I have given multiple sources to back up my version, in which he RAN AWAY from the airplane despite being ordered to STOP. The key words are RAN AWAY. Not WALKING away. If you know anything about the police, they will SHOOT a suspect who tries to run away. Especially in an AIRPORT, this is FULLY justified. It does not matter whether the suspect is MENTALLY ill or has a SKATEBOARD. So once again, let’s see if you can answer this question:

    DID ALPIZAR RUN AWAY FROM THE PLANE?

  • Cengal

    — Unfortunately, you have none of the above information as far as the execution is concerned, so ***how would you identify the perpetrators to be arrested???*** —

    Well, lets see. If the Sri Lankan Army has records of POW’S, it should be easy to see when 14 prisoners suddenly disappeared simultaneously. And from this, it should be easy to see where these prisoners were housed, who was in charge of them, etc. It’s called a “paper trail.”

    ” Does that mean you support Gotabhaya’s deportation of hundreds of Tamils from Colombo, because all suicide bombers in Sri Lanka were Tamil?”

    That is not the kind of “profiling” I am talking about. What I am talking about is when a guy murders 12 people, a behavioral profile is essential to catch him. It’s called narrowing down the pool of suspects.

    “Did the police strip Tissainayagam when he was incarcerated?”

    Did I claim that the police strip all suspects? Do you know how probability works? If event A happens all the time, there is no need for probability. I believe I clearly used the word “likelihood” in my last post. If you missed that word, I suggest investing in some reading glasses.

    “That was the case in the 1980s and early 1990s, but since then the STF has been relegated to guarding government areas. In other words, the STF could not have carried out atrocities in the Wanni war zone because it was not present there. Try again.”

    No, you try again:

    Here is a video of the STF in Wanni:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjY__oiee8Q&feature=related

    “If you really want to identify the perpetrators, and not simply bleat rhetoric (as I suspect you are doing), **you have to identify which service they belonged to.** This is what would have to be established in any COURT OF LAW, which would not tolerate your sloppy attention to facts, I’m afraid.”

    In a COURT OF LAW, the police would have to first produce a SUSPECT. Before producing a SUSPECT, they have to CATCH the SUSPECT. Before CATCHING the SUSPECT, they would have to NARROW down the suspect pool. Forming a BEHAVIORAL profile is a key element in that process. The BEHAVIORAL profile is most likely to implicate those who have ENGAGED in a SIMILAR behavior before. So if the POLICE did their work, Sri Lankan Army soldiers would most likely end up in the COURT OF LAW, considering they are the ones who best fit the PROFILE.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    You look like a Snake that has started swallowing its own tail.

    Now you say Alston and his Faculty is LYING

    Ref your statement quoted below
    “The report you give has a mistake. Officers never escorted Alpizar off the plane. This is what happened:”
    unqoute

    My interest is Proving that Alston is Unreliable.
    You have now done an admirable job of doing it for me.
    You have stated that not only Alston but his WHOLE FACULTY is unreliable.

    As you yourself state Alston is UNRELIABLE, so why are we arguing about Alston’s CH4 video report?

    What a tangled web you weave, when you start to deceive. Now you are truly entangled in it, without hope of any escape

  • wijayapala

    Dear Cengal,

    If the Sri Lankan Army has records of POW’S, it should be easy to see when 14 prisoners suddenly disappeared simultaneously. And from this, it should be easy to see where these prisoners were housed, who was in charge of them, etc. It’s called a “paper trail.”

    The video doesn’t show 14 prisoners being executed. There are only 2- a far smaller, less unique, and more common number that cannot be reliably used. Try again.

    What I am talking about is when a guy murders 12 people, a behavioral profile is essential to catch him.

    Alas, there is quite a bit of difference between profiling an individual and entire institutions, like the Armed Forces (or entire ethnic groups). Try again.

    Did I claim that the police strip all suspects?

    Nope, you claimed that stripping suspects was “common,” but you could only present a few isolated cases which hardly demonstrate a pattern. Unless you’re arguing that Trinco 5 and ACF 17 had also been stripped?

    Here is a video of the STF in Wanni:

    I watched the entire video. NONE of it was filmed anywhere near the Wanni; it seems that the upload had been mislabeled and you made an assumption without actually checking what took place (once again!). Everything was filmed at the STF’s training facilities in Kalutara. There was no actual combat and no actual terrorists- suspected or real- in the clip.

    Thank you for the clip. The host described the STF as “one of the most dedicated and disciplined police forces in the world.” And I didn’t see any stripped prisoners! 😉

    Try again!

    So if the POLICE did their work, Sri Lankan Army soldiers would most likely end up in the COURT OF LAW, considering they are the ones who best fit the PROFILE.

    But how will the POLICE ***identify*** which SLA soldiers had committed the alleged killings? That is the fundamental question that you’ve been dancing around and avoiding. That is why I asked WHAT WOULD BE THE FIRST THING YOU WOULD DO IF PLACED IN CHARGE OF AN IDEAL INVESTIGATION.

    The answer to that question is NOT- “The first thing I’d do is conduct an investigation.” You need to provide more details as to **what evidence you could draw from the execution videotape to identify possible perpetrators**.

    There are 200,000 soldiers in the SLA, so you’d better have some clue of what you’re doing to find out who was responsible.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Quote from you,
    “Well, lets see. If the Sri Lankan Army has records of POW’S, it should be easy to see when 14 prisoners suddenly disappeared simultaneously. And from this, it should be easy to see where these prisoners were housed, who was in charge of them, etc. It’s called a “paper trail.”
    unquote

    That sounds like the song “There’s a Hole in the Bucket dear Liza …” by Harry Bella Fonte

    The SL Army has records of P.O.W.s as a Govt is required to do so.
    Hence there is no “IF” about that statement.
    But they wont have a record of 14 prisoners “Suddenly disappearing” as no such thing has ever happened.

    So where does that leave you?

    Holding a bucket with a HOLE and trying to fetch water in it.

    Brilliant Mr. Sherlock, Brilliant

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    “My interest is Proving that Alston is Unreliable.
    You have now done an admirable job of doing it for me.
    You have stated that not only Alston but his WHOLE FACULTY is unreliable.”

    MY interest is in proving that the two killings (Menezes and Alpizar) were not extrajudicial. Since you have just admitted that, then we are finished. Thanks for your input.

    P.S: The CH4 execution report was not compiled by Alston, it was compiled by three experts. Alston simply hired the experts. So you are assuming that because of single factual error in a report compiled by an organization of which he is the chair, all the experts he hires to write other reports are also incompetent? In logical terms, this is called a “hasty generalization.”

    P.P.S: I am also glad that you admit that Alpizar and Menezes were not the victims of extrajudicial killings. Perhaps if you had not relied on just Alston’s report, but did some other research into the incidents, you would have seen what I was saying all along. Like I have explained to Wijyapala, the Sri Lankan Armed forces have a longggg history of stripping people. If that video was real, then the guilty party is definitely the Sri Lankan Army. Of course, you have to accept that the video is real, which is what Alston’s experts did.

    —-

    Fallacy: Hasty Generalization

    Also Known as: Fallacy of Insufficient Statistics, Fallacy of Insufficient Sample, Leaping to A Conclusion, Hasty Induction.
    Description of Hasty Generalization

    This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough. It has the following form:

    1. Sample S, which is too small, is taken from population P.
    2. Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S.

    http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/hasty-generalization.html

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Several times during this discussion you have tried to attribute your assumptions to me. Just goes to prove your dishonesty. I mentioned this before in my post of January 31, 2010 @ 2:14 pm.

    You now go in circles and say that
    “P.S: The CH4 execution report was not compiled by Alston,”
    Unquote

    Looks like you have been in a STUPOR all this time. No wonder you logic has lost coherence. Do you really KNOW the meaning of COMPILE?

    This is the HEADING for the report

    Technical Note prepared by the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Mr. Philip Alston, in relation to the authenticity of the “Channel 4 videotape”

    Hope you can at least read English.

    You ride your High Horse and become the authority who decides which reference should be admitted in a discussion and which should be rejected. Alston and his WHOLE FACULTY of academics says Menezes and Alpizar killings were Extra Judicial. All the References quoted (EVEN BY YOU) point to a discrepancy between OFFICIAL versions and those of Independent Witnesses which again points to an Official Cover up. I am glad that you have looked up the word Fallacy. Hope it will stand you in good stead.

    Alston uses Double Standards and Alston cannot be trusted to produce a report FREE OF FACTUAL ERRORS even with the backing of a whole heap of academics as you yourself state. He has omitted to investigate the date and time recorded in the video even though evidence is available in plain sight. He has tried to water down the significance of date and time which his own expert says will destroy the authenticity of the Video by using SPECULATIVE excuses. This again points to Alston’s bias and an attempt to write a report to FIT a PRECONCEIVED conclusion.

    The CH4 video remains a fabrication until such time more reliable evidence is presented.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Dishonesty? LOL. You are the one who has been desperately trying to frame Alston. The funny thing is, you have been trying to use a report compiled by his group to prove that two “extrajudicial” killings occurred in the West… but now you have done a 360 and admitted there is a major mistake in the report! In other words, you are suddenly unsure that the two “extrajudicial” killings occurred. Meaning you have no basis to claim Alston used double standards! Because if the report was wrong, then extrajudicial killings did not occur, and you have no basis for comparison with which to claim double standards.

    As far as the technical report goes, Alston’s only contribution is a SUMMARY of what the experts found:

    ————–

    11. The detailed report below provides a summary of the background to this issue, as well as a detailed summary of: (i) evaluations undertaken in September 2009 at the request of the Sri Lankan Government; (ii) evaluations undertaken by two other sources unrelated to either the Government or the Special Rapporteur; and (iii) evaluations prepared by the three independent experts commissioned by the Special Rapporteur. In addition, the full text of the latter three reports are reproduced as a separate Appendix to this Technical Note.

    ——————–

    Alston does not have the technical background to evaluate the video. All he can do is claim it is real BASED UPON THE FINDINGS OF THE THREE EXPERTS.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Are you really fleeing from a cuckoo’s nest.

    You need to get out of your ‘whatever induced’ STUPOR before you write comments so that you will be able to make coherent arguments.

    What follows are two comments you posted within a space of 24 hours

    In the first one YOU claim that Alston’s report has a mistake. In the second, you attribute YOUR claim to me.

    If that is not DISHONESTY I don’t know what is.

    Cengal said,
    January 31, 2010 @ 10:13 pm
    Off the Cuff:
    The report you give has a mistake. Officers never escorted Alpizar off the plane.
    This is what happened:

    Cengal said,
    February 1, 2010 @ 5:44 pm
    Off the Cuff:
    ….… but now you have done a 360 and admitted there is a major mistake in the report!

    ——————————–

    You have got into a predicament in trying to defend the CH4 video as the Main Actor in your drama, Mr Alston has been caught being partial. The fact that I am using his own reports to show his partiality has got you into a bigger predicament. You have literally got your knickers in a twist.

    In view of Alston’s Declaration that
    “there shall be thorough, prompt and impartial investigation of all suspected
    cases of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions, including cases where complaints by relatives or other reliable reports suggest unnatural death in the above circumstances”.
    His inaction in the cases of Menezes and Alpizar that He and his Faculty recognize as Extra Judicial, goes to prove his use of Double Standards. There are many more events that I could have used subsequent to 9/11, but the above two cases were sufficient to prove my point.

    Your position has been changing with time, so much so that you even threw out Alston’s report in one of your comments (January 23, 2010 @ 3:27 am …Alston’s report does not matter…you said).

    I note that you have completely avoided the issues that I raised about
    a) Why Alston tries to Water Down the importance of Date and Time embedded within the Video when his OWN experts say that if the time is proved to be correct, it will NEGATE the validity of the Video
    b) Why he uses SPECULATIVE opinions to explain away this apparent grave error done by those who were involved in the CH4 fiasco
    c) Why the so called EXPERTS did not observe the effects of the Sun and the Shadows that are visible in the video which provides irrefutable data in estimating the Time

    You said Alston did not “COMPILE”, when I show you that he did (please look it up in a Dictionary) you back paddle with lame excuses. We understand what you write by the English that you write. Don’t blame others for your failings.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Nice try, but the fact is, I have never changed my position in regard to the Alpizar and Menezes case. That is because I was not relying on the Alston report to reach my conclusion. On the other hand, you spent TWO WEEKS using Alston’s report to try to prove Alpizar and Menezes were killed extrajudicially. Now you are trying to divert attention from your worthless arguments by making the following statements: “There are many more events that I could have used subsequent to 9/11,…” LOL!

    The fact of the matter is, you did not even recognize the mistake in the UNHCR report until I pointed out. Also, you continue to make the BASELESS claim that Alston considers the cases of Menezes and Alpizar to be extrajudicial, when in fact THE WORD EXTRAJUDICIAL IS NOT MENTIONED AT ALL IN THE UNCHR REPORT. Alston DOES NOT CONSIDER Menezes/Alpizar to be extrajudicial BECAUSE SHOOT TO KILL IS NOT EXTRAJUDICIAL…

    SHOOT TO KILL IS A POWER THAT IS GIVEN TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND WHICH INVARIABLY MUST RELY AT LEAST PARTIALLY ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE OFFICERS.

    If you want to argue this point:

    SHOW ME EXACTLY WHERE THE UNCHR REPORT SAYS THE MENEZES/ALPIZAR KILLINGS WERE EXTRAJUDICIAL. SHOW THE USE OF THE WORD EXTRAJUDICIAL OR SOME SYNONYMS, INSTEAD OF BARKING YOUR SPECULATIVE NONSENSE HERE.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    “Your position has been changing with time.”

    My position has never changed with time. You are a coward who cannot answer simple questions upfront. Here is a question which totally shatters your entire NONSENSE theory about Alpizar being blindly shot:

    1. Did Alpizar run away from the plane?

    Answer the above question with ONE LINE. Let’s see how many PARAGRAPHS you use to avoid the question.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Oh sure so you did not write those comments of January 31, 2010 @ 10:13 pm and February 1, 2010 @ 5:44 pm. They just appeared on its own on GV …he he he!!!

    Sure I agree, you did not change your views. GV did it for you. How convenient. ….ha ha ha !!! Cuckoo is not the word for it.

    Here is another Gem from you (January 27, 2010 @ 11:27 pm)
    “If shoot to kill is official policy, then it is not extrajudicial”
    Ha ha ….Hitler’s OFFICIAL policy was also similar “Exterminate the Jews”. So by your definition that was also not “EXTRA JUDICIAL” and justified!!!!!

    That is the type of logic you posses, preserve it for posterity.

    This is what JUDICIAL is
    Belonging, or emanating from a judge (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary).
    Anything that does not meet the above criteria is EXTRA Judicial. It does not require the word EXTRA as an appendage. You can read more definitions in my comment of January 28, 2010 @ 9:13 am

    Hope you have assimilated that one!!!

    Remember Cengal, you challenged my views, not I yours.
    Hence it’s incumbent on you to meet the points I raised first and you have failed to do that. Specifically the Non Investigation of Date and Time. The use of Speculation and the Apparent Double Standards.

    My discussion about the Ch4 video on this thread started with this post to Kumar David on January 16, 2010 @ 2:26 pm. Amongst others it stated thus. “Alston’s Channel 4 inquiry is biased and does not dispassionately investigate ALL aspects of the video in question. ……….. For more information read this thread on GV http://www.groundviews.org/2009/08/29/a-video-of-shame-and-outrage-responses-positions-and-clarifications/

    My OBJECTIVE had been clear from the start. It is explicit in the above paragraph. It also drew your attention to a thread on GV that discussed the CH4 video in more detail. Hence I won’t allow you to draw a red herring before it.

    As stated in my comment (which you decided to challenge) I have pointed out why Alston is Biased and uses Double Standards.

    Though I reply your comments they are written with the GV readership in mind. You have given me sufficient opportunity to get the UNCOMMITTED reader to think. I know that it does not sit well with LTTE propagandists who had unbridled freedom in the past to spread their venom internationally.

    I hope that Alston would be also reading GV. Probably GV can help by inviting Alston in on the OTHER THREAD that was devoted to the CH4 video.

    You have shied away from the question of Time, why? Are you unable to estimate it by looking at the Sun? The same failing that Alston and his experts also have?

    The CH4 video remains a fabrication until such time more reliable evidence is presented.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Extrajudicial has only relevance from the viewpoint of what the LAW says. Since the LAW said it was OKAY to kill Jews in Nazi Germany, then by the standards of NAZI GERMANY, the killing was JUSTIFIED. Justification from the point of view of the LAW and justification from a MORAL point of view are two different things. Thank you for demonstrating your total ignorance in this manner. Unfortunately, other readers will be familiar with the Nuremberg Laws and other such LAWS targeting Jews.

    Now having TOTALLY failed to demonstrate that Alpizar and Menezes were killed extrajudicially, you are going on and on about the CH4 report in a pathetic attempt to show double standards. Perhaps you missed the part where Alston says the technical analysis is not PERFECT, but that such GAPS are still explainable. Furthermore, despite your desperate attempts to establish a cover-up, Alston’s report DOES not implicate the Sri Lankan Government. As Wijayapala said, it only shows that the video is REAL. So your pathetic arguments to show double standards are based on Alston saying the video is real!!! Hahahaha!

    Now lets get take a trip along memory lane. Your TWO WEEK failure could not resolve the simplest question:

    Did Alpizar run away from the plane????

  • Cengal

    *Extrajudicial only has relevance

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Ah! now no contest about your 360 degree turns? So YOU did write those comments and it did not appear by itself on GV? So much for Integrity and Honesty.

    Have you given up on trying to redefine Extra Judicial or have you accepted the implied definition given in Bouvier’s Law Dictionary?

    At Last, you have Finally arrived at what we have been saying all along. The FACT that you have been trying your best to suppress

    Quote ….Alston’s report DOES NOT implicate the Sri Lankan Government”…Unquote
    (from your post of February 2, 2010 @ 11:10 pm)

    As you CORRECTLY state, the SL Govt is NOT IMPLICATED.

    Then why are the LTTE propagandists like yourself, insisting on an Impartial, Independent, International Inquiry from the SL Govt that has nothing whatsoever to do with it? Pathetic indeed.

    The CH4 Video is a Dead Duck and even Die Hard LTTE propagandists like yourself, unconsciously admit it, as evident from your own comment.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    I can’t help it that government school prodigy’s like you are capable of only worthless arguments. Apparently the definition of extrajudicial you take from Bouvier’s Law Dictionary dates back to 1856 (http://www.dictionary.net/extrajudicial) The law has changed *quite* a bit since then.

    Regarding the CH4 report, just because Alston doesn’t implicate the SLA doesn’t mean the SLA is not guilty. Is that the kind of logic you learned in government school?

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    You LIED and got caught.
    You can’t live down that ignominy as it happened in a public forum in full view of all. You have undressed in Public, though you still try to ride the High Horse. You need to be careful, as you don’t have clothes on. ..Ha ha ha!!!

    Remember what I told you before, you look like a snake that swallows it’s own tail? You are confirming that yet again

    Quotes from your posts

    “Alston’s report DOES NOT implicate the Sri Lankan Government” (February 2, 2010 @ 11:10 pm)

    “…just because Alston doesn’t implicate the SLA doesn’t mean the SLA is not guilty”. (February 3, 2010 @ 6:42 pm)

    Using this type of Logic the following statements can also be coined
    Alston does not implicate the Indian Govt … does not mean Indian forces are not guilty
    Alston does not implicate the US Govt …. does not mean US forces are not guilty
    Alston does not implicate the UK Govt …. does not mean UK forces are not guilty
    Alston does not implicate NATO …. does not mean NATO forces are not guilty

    So where does that leave your arguments, defenestrated or in the trash can?

    BTW the Bouvier’s Law Dictionary is still in use and you cannot denigrate it’s authority by referring to the age.

    Here is the Definition from Merriam Webster
    Extrajudicial
    1. a: not forming a valid part of regular legal proceedings
    b: delivered without legal authority
    2: done in contravention of due process of law

    Please educate us on how the meaning of Judicial and Extrajudicial changed from the 19th century to now.

    You remind me of the proverbial dog in a famous Sinhalese proverb that tried in vain to cover it’s indiscretion.

    The CH4 Video is a Dead Duck and even Die Hard LTTE propagandists like yourself, unconsciously admit it, as evident from your own comments.

  • Cengal

    *prodigies

  • wijayapala

    Cengal,

    I noticed that you did not respond to my post, but you are continuing your dialogue with OTC even though he has more or less called you a liar. Did you miss my response to you?

    Extrajudicial has only relevance from the viewpoint of what the LAW says. Since the LAW said it was OKAY to kill Jews in Nazi Germany, then by the standards of NAZI GERMANY, the killing was JUSTIFIED.

    Actually there was no law in Nazi Germany that legalized the murder of Jews. The “Final Solution” policy was enacted by decree (thanks to the Enabling Act which allowed Hitler to make decrees without legislative process) and did not involve any sort of judicial process.

    I think what you were trying to say is that laws are meaningless if governments can flout them with impunity, like Mahinda did up to the recent election, and that the rule of law has to be reestablished for the Tamils (or anyone else) to expect impartial justice in SL.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Thank you for demonstrating your total incompetence and utter misunderstanding in regards to the law. You make your government school proud… I would be interested to know if you are also one of those standardization recipients? You know, the type who complete Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctoral in 6 months… 🙂

    This is how Bouvier’s Law dictionary defines extrajudicial:

    —- EXTRAJUDICIAL. That which does not belong to the judge or his jurisdiction, notwithstanding which he takes. cognizance of it. Extrajudicial judgments and acts are absolutely void. Vide Coram non judice, and Merl. Repert. mots Exces de Pouvoir. —-

    http://www.constitution.org/bouv/bouvier_e.htm

    —————

    Exactly who is this judge that makes laws? As far as I know, judges do not make laws in the United States; they only interpret them:

    Who makes laws in the United States?

    * The president and congress can.

    * The President can propose laws, but only Congress can make a law.

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_makes_laws_in_the_United_States

    ————-

    As I have pointed out here, shoot-to-kill is a special power given to police personnel… the Supreme Court has ruled that it is legal… but again, the point is that it was legal before the Supreme Court ever ruled on it. It was legal when CONGRESS made it into a law. This is probably difficult for government school prodigies and standardization recipients to understand, but a “law” is legal as soon as the Congress passes it. The “judge” as referred to in Bouvier’s, in the context of American law, can only decide that the law is unconstitutional. Therefore, if extrajudicial refers to an act that is “unlawful”, it would have to be because it is against what CONGRESS, not any Judge, deemed to be inappropriate. In which case BOUVIER’s definition of extrajudicial does not apply to American law.

    Of course, this kind of discrepancy is to be expected when our government school prodigies and standardization recipients use French laws, dating back to 1856, to try to interpret American laws which date to the year 2000. 🙂

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    “I noticed that you did not respond to my post, but you are continuing your dialogue with OTC even though he has more or less called you a liar.”

    Nice work with the semantics there; the ending is a classic. Have you considered a career in law? Anyway, enough people have on this website have called OTC much worse than a liar…. if you want to go by general opinion, OTC doesn’t exactly top the charts… as for your post, I will consider it replying to it at some point.

    “Actually there was no law in Nazi Germany that legalized the murder of Jews.”

    Is this your rather feeble attempt to defend OTC? A word from the wise: there is nothing to defend:

    “The Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring, proclaimed on July 14, 1933, required physicians to register every case of hereditary illness known to them, except in women over forty-five years of age.[7] Physicians could be fined for failing to comply.

    In 1934 the first year of the Law’s operation, nearly 4,000 people appealed against the decisions of sterilization authorities. 3,559 of the appeals failed. By the end of the Nazi regime, over 200 Hereditary Health Courts (Erbgesundheitsgerichten) were created, and under their rulings over 400,000 people were sterilized against their will.[8] ”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_eugenics#Nazi_eugenics_program

    The difference between the West and the East… in the West, there is always accountability. 1/3 of the reason why the Nazis were so successful is due to their organizational skills. The Allies had to literally invade Berlin to bring the war to a close.

    “I think what you were trying to say is that laws are meaningless if governments can flout them with impunity, like Mahinda did up to the recent election, and that the rule of law has to be reestablished for the Tamils (or anyone else) to expect impartial justice in SL.”

    That is not what I was saying. Despots can easily introduce new laws or amend old ones to their liking. They need not flout the law. It all depends on whatever ethical code suits the ruling party of the day.

  • Cengal

    Some of the consequences of the eugenics program:

    Action T4 (German: Aktion T4) was a program, also called Euthanasia Program, in Nazi Germany spanning October 1939 until August 1941, during which physicians killed 70,273 people

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_T4

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Quite an outburst from someone who got caught being dishonest.
    The (high) horse is galloping, you have undressed in public. Sans clothing, you need to take care not to land where it hurts when you are bobbing up and down on the saddle….heh heh heh …. hold tight Cengal hold tight, lest you fall.

    Here is another prize quote from your latest post referring to Bouvier’s Law dictionary
    “….. use French laws, dating back to 1856, to try to interpret American laws which date to the year 2000”
    Unquote

    Unfortunately Cengal you have again got into a similar predicament that the proverbial Dog which defecated on a stone found itself in. The dog could not find any sand to cover it’s indiscretion.

    With the intellect that you believe that you have, why do you walk around leading with your chin?

    To your credit you have got one thing correct this time, Bouvier is indeed French. Unfortunately for you, the French connection ends there.

    He is an US Citizen and practiced law in Philadelphia. The Law dictionary he wrote is specific to USA and is still used by the legal fraternity in the USA….but then you are clueless about that either.

    “He wanted to create a totally new law dictionary that would address the American legal system, so he derived his definitions almost wholly from customs, court decisions, and statutes of the United States” (courtesy Wiki).
    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouvier%27s_Law_Dictionary)

    Why are you trying so hard to castrate yourself?

    Another quote from your latest
    Exactly who is this judge that makes laws?
    Unquote

    What judge are you writing about? Have all your faculties deserted you?

    Now let’s have a look at the word Extra Judicial that you are having difficulty with
    The following are opposites
    Marital means pertaining to marriage>> Extra Marital is the Subset lying outside marriage.
    Judicial pertaining to the legal court system >> Extra Judicial is the Subset that lies outside the judicial system.
    I used Boolean as you tried to teach me about it once

    Now you can look up Merriam Webster for Judicial and Extra Judicial and try to assimilate what they say.

    BTW you have forgotten to educate us on how the meaning of Judicial and Extrajudicial changed from the 19th century to now.

    The MAIN point of all this is that the CH4 Video is a dead duck
    Alston is biased and has lost his credibility.
    His technical report has HOLES in it and he attempted to plug those holes with Speculative excuses.
    Even a staunch LTTE propagandist like yourself has admitted that the SL Govt is not implicated.

    Bottom Line, the LTTE propagandists have no hope in hell in using CH4 to bring war crime investigations to SL. It has gone the same way that the following stories went http://www.groundviews.org/2009/09/28/doing-the-right-thing-freedom-for-vanni-idps/#comment-9618

    1. Times photographs expose Sri Lanka’s lie on civilian deaths at beach
    By Catherine Philp and Michael Evans datelined May 29, 2009

    2. The hidden massacre: Sri Lanka’s final offensive against Tamil Tigers
    By Catherine Philp in Colombo, date lined May 29, 2009

    3. Slaughter in Sri Lanka – Evidence gathered by The Times has revealed that at least 20,000 Tamils were killed on the beach by shelling as the army closed in on the Tigers Date lined May 29, 2009

    So best that you guys get busy creating another

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    The problem with government school prodigies like you is that your learning curve is limited to what you can memorize. If someone gives you a definition, your capability is limited to memorizing it and nothing more. Since you are a fan of dogs and defecation, it is like the dog defecating over and over again – whether the question is asked in a new form or placed in a new context, you merely repeat what your government school teachers taught you.

    Now, this is written by a person who is an expert in the law:

    “As a legal researcher, I receive many inquiries in the area of law, especially pertaining to so-called “sovereignty.”

    Lastly, don’t go to court with Bouvier Law Dictionary arguing with the judge and/or prosecuting attorney that Bouvier is the legal or law dictionary of sovereign individuals (as some individuals do) because this is a ghost legal dictionary of America’s once great past.

    Whether you purchase Black’s Law or Bouvier, or both, purchase yourself a law or legal dictionary and be like Malcolm X (who read the dictionary from A to Z while imprisoned) and read and study it from A to Z. ”

    ———————-

    Now, for the benefit of our Sinhala-Buddhist government school prodigies and standardization cheaters, why does the legal researcher say Bouvier’s is not ENOUGH to interpret the law? Could it be because many of the definitions are OUTDATED? Could it be because, for example, Bouvier’s says SLAVERY is OKAY (not against the law) and abortion is not okay???

    “But they may want to have it both ways, for within the Lexicon, they do not mark even the definitions that are obviously out of date. For example, in this (BOUVIER’S) Lexicon, abortion is criminal and slavery is not.”

    http://books.google.com/books?id=SZ67f9XUWQsC&pg=PA107&lpg=PA107&dq=is+bouvier%27s+outdated&source=bl&ots=xIkCbLjaCH&sig=RmkqPbk1TOTpa62EywLJEfXWgCY&hl=en&ei=mxFrS7z8HYbOngfw4JX9BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CA8Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=is%20bouvier%27s%20outdated&f=false

  • Cengal

    God forbid when our Sinhala-Buddhist “law experts” go to Court, armed with only a copy of Bouvier’s, and they have to concede that slavery is okay!

    Maybe Bouvier’s is an international conspiracy! Double standards!

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    he he he Cengal does it hurt?
    Don’t attend Court in the state you are now, at least get dressed !!!!
    And be extremely careful of what you say,
    Perjury is a punishable offense
    Ha ha ha

  • Cengal

    OTC:

    What about slavery? Hehehehe!

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Perjury is punishable.
    Belladonna is good for pain.
    Rest in peace
    Till we meet again

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Thanks for admitting your defeat. The difference between you and Alston is Alston does not say who the culprit is in the video. On the other hand, you cannot even admit the video is real. In a court of law, Alston would easily win.

  • Cengal

    Your argument that Alston does not investigate abuses in the UK and the US would be thrown out as circumstantial evidence.

  • Off the Cuff

    Cengal,

    For a guy who LIES without shame you hallucinate quite a lot if you think you have made lucid arguments.

    Learn about Law and circumstantial evidence before you open your mouth (or write) about it.

    What ever you do, you cannot prove ANYTHING with your CH4 fabrication (just like the Times of London fabrication before that), even if you pay Alston to produce another report leaving out the innuendo.

    As you yourself wrote Alston could not implicate the SL Govt
    Neither could he produce the ORIGINAL mobile phone to substantiate his tests (he claims it was a Philips and does his tests with a Nokia)
    You can’t prove the LOCATION it can be India, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia or a marsh in UK / USA / Norway.

    So get your propaganda machine into overdrive, bribe someone who can be a better witness (FBI claims you guys bribed even US Congressmen so People in the Media and people like Alston should be peanuts to your organization).

    SO hurry up and get cracking on your next project to bring down the SL Govt and haul it before the ICJ. The last few were utter failures. Make sure you can identify the LOCATION next time.

    BTW if it is any relief to your wounded ego you can believe that you have won. It does not bother me in the least but the reader would know who tried to LIE through his teeth as someone commented a while ago.

    Good Luck spin doctor

  • wijayapala

    Dear Cengal,

    as for your post, I will consider it replying to it at some point.

    Thanks for admitting your defeat. I had a feeling that your learning curve is limited to what you can memorize.

    With Agnos out of the debate, you’re the 2nd one whom I’ve effectively silenced. Who’s next? 😉

    Have you considered a career in law?

    I take that as a compliment, since none of your own statements would pass muster in a COURT OF LAW. Unless you can answer the very simple question how you would begin an investigation of the CH4 video.

    The Allies had to literally invade Berlin to bring the war to a close.

    Just like how the Rajapakses brought this 30-year war to a close? You’re sounding just like one of the Sinhala ‘warmongers’ here! lol

  • Tim Tim

    The video may be real but which version?

    Associated Press says the one with Tamil audio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDn3iSKD-Pc

    I doubt the army speaks Tamil.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Thank you again for admitting defeat. Please remember, for the rest of your life:

    (1) Alpizar ran away from the plane

    (2) Alston was not part of the CH4 video – he was neither in the video nor did he attempt to fabricate the video – therefore, trying to disprove the video on the basis of Alston’s personal motivations can be considered irrelevant to the proceedings of the case

    (3) Whatever happened in the UK and US has nothing to do with the CH4 video

    Now, whether or not your government-school brain can process the above info is the question of the day….

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    I noticed that as soon as I mentioned UTHR’s references to the long pattern of abuses by the Sri Lankan Army, you stopped quoting from UTHR. Very interesting. Unfortunately, your friend UTHR does not agree with you about a “few isolated incidents.” Try several thousand. Also, do you have anything to say about the Sri Lankan Army/Government’s long pattern of covering up abuses against Tamils, e.g. rape, murder, kidnapping, etc.? I would be happy to quote from your friend (ex-friend?) UTHR. You can start with the Trinco 5 case. Why was forensic evidence tampered with??

    As far as the CH4 case goes, you bring up a good point about starting an investigation. As far as forensics goes, Sri Lanka cannot conduct an investigation entirely on its own because it doesn’t have the expertise. Every high-profile murder case has involved bringing in foreigners, e.g. Scotland Yard. In fact, Sri Lanka doesn’t even experts capable of performing a high-quality digital analysis… whether or not GOSL admits this openly, it has admitted it unwillingly having hired a Sri Lankan in Australia to be on its three-man man. What is the conclusion? That the Government’s claim about any investigation being part of a foreign conspiracy is rather baseless.

    As for how to actually start an investigation, what does every investigation of this nature rely upon? Witnesses. If the Government acknowledged that the video was real, witnesses might come forward. Secondly, as I have noted, there should be a paper trail in regards to missing POW’S. If there is no paper trail in regards to POW’s, that is a war crime in itself. A paper trail would lead to potential suspects. Potential suspects leads to interrogations and (ideally) witnesses coming forward. There are also the people who provided the video. If the Government could guarantee their safety, they might be more forthcoming with valuable details.

    Of course, all of the above is incumbent upon their being an acknowledgment of wrong-doing having taken place. The Government is yet to acknowledge that the video is real. The findings of the three Government experts have been totally disproved by Alston’s experts. This is a significant development. It leaves open the possibility that the Government is complicit in war crimes. The fact that such war crimes could occur and no investigation take place is an extremely troubling development. Unfortunately, according to your friend UTHR, Sri Lanka is the ideal breeding ground for such phenomena. Lack of an independent judiciary, draconian search and detain powers bestowed on police and military personnel, virtual immunity for the police and military personnel, Emergency Regulations, etc. I suggest you read the UTHR report on Krishanthy Kumaraswamy… Sri Lankan Army soldiers raping a teenage girl, then killing her mother, brother, and neighbor who came to search for her… and then the jewelry of the women later confiscated from one soldier’s family in the South. There are many existential questions here, about the kind of environment that spawns such behavior, as such behavior, in the context of the military setting, does not occur in isolation but implicates individuals from top to bottom, as per the chain of command. IMO, that is why Alston got personally involved – to emphasize that even within an environment such as that found in S. Lanka, – it is important to investigate war crimes without recourse to bias and partiality.

  • Cengal

    ~ doesn’t even have experts

  • Off the Cuff

    Cengal,

    its three-man man. ???

    Gobbledygook as usual ….ha ha ha

    Secondly, as I have noted, there should be a paper trail in regards to missing POW’S

    Guy is in his second childhood ……. must be remembering childhood treasure hunts …..ha ha

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    Off the cuff…..

    Seriously!”
    “The CH4 Video is a Dead Duck and even Die Hard LTTE propagandists like yourself, unconsciously admit it, as evident from your own comments.

    No the video is not about a dead duck. Its about naked tamil men, bound hand and foot being shot in the head by Sinhalese soldiers. As is usually the case with you people.. it “Alston is a liar” or “Lying LTTE Propagandists” etc etc etc….. Obviously, I don’t expect some one with blood on their hands (even indirectly) like you to admit their crimes.

    You are like the man who closes the windows of his house and tells his family that its night time all the time. You may believe it, your family may believe it, but the whole world knows. that its not nighttime.

    And that’s what matters not your anecdotes, and denials and nit pickings.

    There is a saying….– Lasers shed light on injustice and inequality. Losers stand by and let things happen–

    I am afraid, I have to break the sad news to you… Cengal is a Laser and you are the other type!

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    For those people who quote the UTHR selectively. I am trying to help you by providing a link to more UTHR publications, David Blacker’s blog. http://blacklightarrow.wordpress.com/

    I expect averyone who quoted UTHR to continue to quote their reports after reading their latest report.

    Otherwise it would be like the devil quoting Scripture for his own ends. And we know that you dont want to be compared to the devil do you?

    Oh, what is the Sinhala word for Devil? Yakka? You don’t want to be Yakkas do you?

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    “Tim Tim said,

    February 8, 2010 @ 9:52 am

    The video may be real but which version?

    Associated Press says the one with Tamil audio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDn3iSKD-Pc

    I doubt the army speaks Tamil.”

    Have you forgotten that Muslims speak Tamil? And they are in the army? or they not Sri Lankan as well?
    And this is a dubbed video that appeared way way after the first video. Even the Sri Lankan Government studied the first video but not the dubbed version. And even if it was in Tamil, could Tamil speaking soldiers committed the murders?

    Or do you deny that there were muslim soldiers in SL army?

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    “Tim Tim said,

    “Associated Press says the one with Tamil audio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDn3iSKD-Pc

    Where does AP say the video had Tamil audio? At least get your story straight my friend?

    –Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive —

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    Dear Off the Cuff, I asked you at least once before the think before you write instead of living up to your name.
    I know you have been deeply wounded by the deaths of Jean Charles de Menezes and Rigoberto Alpizar. I suggest that you read the following links
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigoberto_Alpizar
    Of course their deaths were tragic and unwarranted. There was no justification And I know what I know and you know what you know about these men and their deaths because they were widely reported and there were lengthy investigations. Your knowledge and my knowledge comes from these published reports, because we were not there.

    Now please follow my logic as I am going to try to clearly state it as much as I can. The principle behind my question to you is based on the old saying “whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander”. Google it you still don’t understand.

    Both these unfortunate deaths were extensively investigated by the British and American authorities and I say it again, that’s how you were able to argue with Cengal about their deaths.

    Dont you think those men in the Channel 4 video deserve to have their deaths investigated? Or are they lesser human beings because they were brown/dravidan/tamil/hindu/christian?

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Jaffna Tamil,

    Its about naked tamil men, bound hand and foot being shot in the head by Sinhalese soldiers. so you say.

    How did you identify the Tamil men?
    Any DISTINCTLY Tamil marks or characteristics visible on the Naked bodies?
    If so, what are they?
    How did you Identify the Sinhalese soldiers?

    Remove your prejudiced glasses and give logical explanations other than from your imagination.

    Why cant the following be possible?

    Its about naked Sinhalese soldiers, bound hand and foot being shot in the head by Tamil Terrorists wearing the uniforms they removed from the now naked soldiers.

    Or This

    Its about naked Sinhalese and Muslim peasants, bound hand and foot being shot in the head by Tamil Terrorists wearing uniforms similar to SLA uniforms.

    Let’s see how logical you can be.

    I don’t expect some one with blood on their hands (even indirectly) like you to admit their crimes. so you said. Unfortunately, with the second and third scenarios the same applies to you wont it?

    The atrocity was carried out in order to obtain propaganda mileage. Earlier they pulled a similar stunt when they published pictures of Tamil Civilians purportedly running from SLA shelling. Remember the pictures that revealed the staging?

    Everything you have stated boomerangs at you.

  • Jaffna Tamil

    Off the cuff,
    –Everything you have stated boomerangs at you.–

    Maybe so, maybe not! But you didn’t reply to my question? Didn’t the SL Army have Tamil Speaking soldiers?

    It could be one of three scenarios—

    a) Its about naked tamil men, bound hand and foot being shot in the head by Sinhalese soldiers.

    b) Its about naked Sinhalese soldiers, bound hand and foot being shot in the head by Tamil Terrorists wearing the uniforms they removed from the now naked soldiers.
    c) Its about naked Sinhalese and Muslim peasants, bound hand and foot being shot in the head by Tamil Terrorists wearing uniforms similar to SLA uniforms.

    Shouldn’t we investigate? I support an independent and impartial investigation to get to the truth. Whats good for Jean Charles de Menezes and Rigoberto Alpizar, should be good enough for those poor unarmed naked brown men?

    Are you with me Brother?

  • wijayapala

    Dear Cengal,

    As for how to actually start an investigation, what does every investigation of this nature rely upon? Witnesses.

    Actually you could start with testimony. If direct eyewitnesses are not willing to step forward, others who indirectly obtained information could point you in the right direction. That is how UTHR came up with the names of SSP Kapila Jayasekera and Home Guard Jehangir for the Trinco and Mutur killings respectively.

    If the Government acknowledged that the video was real, witnesses might come forward.

    Unfortunately, the Government doesn’t seem too keen on doing all the work to incriminate itself for you. And UTHR was able to find the Trinco 5 and ACF 17 killers without the Government’s help.

    Unfortunately, your friend UTHR does not agree with you about a “few isolated incidents.” Try several thousand.

    Could you please show the several thousand cases of **prisoners stripped naked** documented by UTHR? The question was whether the SLA strips prisoners on a normal basis– which in any case would not prove in a COURT OF LAW that the video was really showing SLA soldiers killing Tamil prisoners (regardless how much you think it would).

    There are also the people who provided the video. If the Government could guarantee their safety, they might be more forthcoming with valuable details.

    JDS which provided the video is based out of Germany, so they shouldn’t have any problem naming the SLA units responsible. Unless of course, the SLA wasn’t involved, in which case you’d think JDS would at least attempt to lie to back up their story!

    I noticed that as soon as I mentioned UTHR’s references to the long pattern of abuses by the Sri Lankan Army, you stopped quoting from UTHR. Very interesting.

    Since you’re making a big deal out of this, here you go:

    http://www.uthr.org/bulletins/Bul47.htm
    “The wife of the deceased who died at the waters’ edge (6.3.1) had said some-thing that was touching. As they reached the front-line of the military, they had been received courteously and given a meal and drinks. Since the civilians had been in fear and hunger for long they had delved into the food and in the end there was not enough food. One older military officer, who was announcing in crude Tamil over the speakers tied high up on the palmyrah trees, gave his own food parcel to a refugee and went without a meal him-self. This particular officer was shown on television (Eye Channel) making the announcement over the speakers, and the lady pointed him out as a very good and kindly man and related this story.

    “There are many grateful testimonies from IDPs of how military personnel put them-selves at great risk in checking and taking them in as they came in groups to the front-lines and surrendered to the military. There are reports of many instances where when the checking process had begun, a group of militants had appeared, and taking cover behind the trees, started shooting, and often killing some military personnel. The military have, by all reports, invariably taken cover, but avoided retaliating in order to protect the civilians from getting minced in the cross fire. Invariably in all such instances the civilians had felt desperately sure that even if they survived the cross fire, they would become victims to angry revenge killings. After the shooting subsided and the militants withdrew, they had invariably been received well. In one particular instance in early February 2009, a female suicide bomber had arrived at the front-line with a group of refugees and exploded her-self while being checked in, killing about four military personnel.”

  • Cengal

    Wijyapala:

    “That is how UTHR came up with the names of SSP Kapila Jayasekera and Home Guard Jehangir for the Trinco and Mutur killings respectively.”

    UTHR is not a detective. The Sri Lankan Government has never investigated a murder because of UTHR. In *civilized* countries, witnesses to a murder are protected under a witness protection clause. No such thing exists in SL.

    “And UTHR was able to find the Trinco 5 and ACF 17 killers without the Government’s help.”

    You still have not commented on why the Government covered up the Trinco 5 murders. Why did Dr. Manhoran, father of one of the victims, have to flee from the country and testify by live video conference from a foreign country? How many arrests were made in the case? What initiative was undertaken by the Sri Lankan Government to initiate action in this case? Why was Scotland Yard allowed to do forensic work in this case, but the CH4 video suddenly became an international conspiracy?

    “Could you please show the several thousand cases of **prisoners stripped naked** documented by UTHR? The question was whether the SLA strips prisoners on a normal basis- which in any case would not prove in a COURT OF LAW that the video was really showing SLA soldiers killing Tamil prisoners (regardless how much you think it would).”

    A Court of Law is concerned with probable cause beyond a reasonable shadow of a doubt. Most cases lack a smoking gun altogether as far as the resolution of a case goes. A smoking gun in this case would be a past record of the SLA stripping several hundred prisoners. On the other hand, while it is difficult to collect empirical evidence for the latter over a short-term period, it is very easy to establish that the Sri Lankan Army and all other Sri Lankan Armed forces personnel acted (and continue to act) under a climate of judicial immunity (e.g. no fear of repercussions from the law). The court of law would consider it extremely significant that such a climate of impunity existed, because it is exactly such a climate of impunity that leads one to draw the inference that a given suspect is guilty of a pattern of abuses. A pattern of abuses then allows one to eliminate certain suspects, when investigating particular crimes. The pattern of abuse – stripping prisoners – is behavior that can be positively associated with the Sri Lankan Army, not the LTTE. This is not to imply that the LTTE is guilty of certain abuses. What is relevant is this particular form of criminal behavior – it is virtually unique to the Sri Lankan Army/armed forces security personnel – a PATTERN of abuse can be positively identified.

    “Since you’re making a big deal out of this, here you go:”

    Actually here you go:

    “This would give a base figure of 700 extra-judicial killings in Jaffna by the security forces inclusive of disappearances.”

    http://www.uthr.org/SpecialReports/spreport28.htm#_Toc184477099

    And that is only a base figure, a very conservative one at that.

    “The 700 we have estimated for extra-judicial killings by the security forces is a very conservative figure. It leaves out unidentified cases and unsorted missing persons.”

    So, if 700 extrajudicial killings were committed by the SLA, at the very least, can one NOT logically attribute the CH4 murders to them too, at least leave open the possibility? Here is the pattern of abuses, the climate of abuses… after all how many of those 700 cases have been resolved? How many Sri Lankan Armed forces personnel have been convicted? Answer: very, very few.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Jaffna Tamil,

    Completely agree with you on the following regarding the deaths of Jean Charles de Menezes and Rigoberto Alpizar

    ” Of course their deaths were tragic and unwarranted. There was no justification And I know what I know and you know what you know about these men and their deaths because they were widely reported and there were lengthy investigations. Your knowledge and my knowledge comes from these published reports, because we were not there.”

    The reason that those deaths had to be investigated was the presence of overwhelming evidence about them. They happened in FULL public view. Even in the face of such evidence the authorities tried to cover them up.

    In the case of the CH4 video, the two shootings are horrendous and looks real and could be real but there is no evidence to point the finger at anyone. and as you now agree no one knows who the victims are and who the perpetrators are or the place where it was committed or the country where it was committed.

    As against this, there is an established case of over 600 Sinhalese & Muslim Policemen executed in similar style, by Tamil Terrorist, AFTER they SURRENDERED to the LTTE on the orders of the then President of SL, while simultaneously, Peace talks were in progress at the Hilton Hotel, Colombo, where the Big Guns of the LTTE were provided with Luxury and TOTAL security by the SL Govt.

    The World remained Silent when that happened.

    The opposition you see to the CH4 video is due to the obvious manipulation, that the proponents of the CH4 are involved in, to SINGLE OUT a small country and humiliate it, without even an IOTA of solid evidence, when there are degrading and worse crimes perpetrated by the Rich and the Powerful where Solid Evidence is readily available.

    The offer of an investigation has been on the Table for a long time now but there are non brave enough to accept the Principal that Sri Lanka wants upheld before such an investigation is allowed. The Principle of Equality before the Law.

    I too support investigations as long as SL is not Singled out and the International Legal Environment for such investigations Recognizes and upholds the basic principle of Law. Equality for All. Modern day Justitia is supposed to be blind folded an holds an even scale in one hand and a sword on the other.

    My reply of February 10, 2010 @ 1:49 am was in response to yours of February 9, 2010 @ 11:31 pm. For some reason Your other post of February 10, 2010 @ 12:20 am was not accessible on GV when I replied you.

    So here is my answer to your Question Didn’t the SL Army have Tamil Speaking soldiers?

    Yes they had. Not just Tamil speaking Soldiers but Ethnic Tamil Soldiers as well. The Deputy Commander of Jaffna when SF was the Jaffna Commander, was an Ethnic TAMIL. He was a Major General and at the time he was the Deputy commander of Jaffna he was a Brigadier and was labeled a TRAITOR by the LTTE.

    Now a question to you, Didn’t the LTTE Terrorists have Sinhala Speaking Cadres? Besides LTTE Police Chief Nadesan’s wife who was Sinhalese.

    They had a special unit that trained their operatives to speak Very Fluent Sinhalese, without even a trace of a Tamil accent. They even had National ID cards with Sinhala and Muslim names on them. That’s how most of those operatives were able to operate without suspicion in the South.

  • Jaffna Tamil

    Come on, Off the Cuff,
    Stop being disingenous. I asked you a staight forward question, Dont the naked handcuffed and blindfolded brown men deserve an investigation on how they were murdered by those uniformed thugs?
    I dont care if those men were tamil, sinhalese or muslim? Their murder needs to be investigaed.Instead of giving a staright yes or no, you are talking about stuff that are totally irrelevent to this case.

    Who said there were no sinhalese in the LTTE? I dont know enough about the LTTE to accept or deny that. They very well may have been. What has that got tro do with the investigation. If those uniformed thugss were LTTE murderers, lets find out.

    And if those poor naked, blindfolded and handcuffed blind men were from the SL army, woulnt an investigation be able to identify those sinhalese soliders? Or muslim men? I have accepted that they could be sinhalese or muslim? Or Tamil?

    Whats wrong with an impartial investigation?

    Your adamant oppistion to an impartial investigation is astounding? Dont you want to know the names of those poor men?

  • Jaffna Tamil

    —Off the Cuff said,
    February 10, 2010 @ 12:24 pm —
    On So here is my answer to your Question Didn’t the SL Army have Tamil Speaking soldiers?
    Yes they had. —
    –Tim Tim said,
    February 8, 2010 @ 9:52 am
    The video may be real but which version?
    Associated Press says the one with Tamil audio: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDn3iSKD-Pc
    I doubt the army speaks Tamil–

    I wish OTC and Tiny Tim would make up their collective minds and get their stories straight. You are making each other look like fools.

  • Jaffna Tamil

    Brother Wijepala,

    What is your beef about the investigation? Dont you want to know if those naked brown men were Tamil or Sinhalese? And if they were Sinhalese soldiers, I am sure a proper investigation would be able to match the faces of those dead men with the soliders who are considered missing in action.

    And when it suits you inflate UTHR’s role. And when it doesnt suit you diminish it.
    Come on Brother, Make up your mind!

  • Cengal

    Thanks Jaffna Tamil. I am not sure what the difficulty is here. If GOSL/SLA is innocent an impartial investigation will bear that out. No one can keep accusing after an impartial investigation. It is much easier to have an impartial investigation than to keep denying. Denial leads to speculation. In the absence of any investigation, not only is such speculation inevitable, but its also justified. On the other hand, like you said, everyone *knows* who is behind the CH4 incident. The pattern of abuses going back over three decades or even more (we could start with the 1956 riots, if we wanted today, or in the Muslim case, the 1915 riots by the Sinhala-Buddhists). That is just the way with SL; the criminal behavior of GOSL is always predictable. It has reached a point where no action is even taken to apprehend the culprits.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Jaffna Tamil,

    We see two murders being committed (if it’s conceded that this is not staged)

    We don’t know the perpetrators
    We don’t know the Victims
    We don’t know the place it happened
    We don’t know the country where it was committed
    We don’t have a murder weapon
    We don’t have even one dead body
    We have no witnesses

    Strangely, when millions of Tamils would have viewed this video, NO ONE has come forward claiming that they recognize a single victim.

    The only thing we know is the colour of the victims and that of the perpetrators

    The proponents of this video says the SLA is involved but that is an assumption without a base on fact

    If the SL Govt says that this is not even in Sri Lanka then there is no way to prove otherwise, unless the proponents produce a witness. If they can’t the situation is checkmated.

    The point to remember is that SL, as a country and a PEER member of the UN has put on the table an offer of an investigation provided that the legal environment created for an investigation applies EQUALLY to every member of the UN (means no veto powers).

    Hence the FIRST step towards an investigation requires the setting up of a legal environment that recognizes and guarantees the basic principle of ANY JUSTICE SYSTEM which is “Equality Before the Law”

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Jaffna Tamil,

    Does any of my posts provide you a base to ask the following question?
    “Who said there were no sinhalese in the LTTE? “

    ref your post of February 10, 2010 @ 6:11 pm

  • Cengal

    Cuff,

    Is this another international conspiracy?

    Bodies of 2 Jaffna University students recovered from a pond in Jaffna

    [TamilNet, Wednesday, 10 February 2010, 02:26 GMT]
    Koappaay police recovered the bodies of a male and a female first year students of Management Faculty of Jaffna University which were found floating in Eriyaku’lam pond in Irupaalai by local residents, sources in Jaffna said. The two students had rejoined the university after being held in Vavuniyaa Sri Lanka Army (SLA) detention centre along with the Vannni IDPs. Fear and tension prevail among the students of Jaffna University.

    The male student was identified as Victor Aruldas, 21, originally from Kaangkeasanthu’rai who had later gone to Vanni.

    The female student was identified as Velautham Thiruvili, 21, a native of Batticaloa.

    A mobile phone which was found lying in the area by the local people had led them to discover the two bodies floating in the pond located in a deserted area.

    Koapaay police handed over the bodies to Jaffna Teaching Hospital mortuary Tuesday evening.

  • Cengal

    The unfortunate thing is that while Cuff tries his best tries his best to deny 2 murders that occurred months, bodies of Tamils are being found elsewhere on a near daily basis, elsewhere in the Jaffna Peninsula. Ultimately, while Cuff and his Sinhala-Buddhist comrades might *successfully* get away with 2 murders, they will have to answer to the 700 figure put out by UTHR and others.

  • wijayapala

    Brother Jaffna Tamil

    What is your beef about the investigation? Dont you want to know if those naked brown men were Tamil or Sinhalese?

    I do want to know, but there is no indication at all from the videotape who exactly the naked brown men were, and the people who released the video have not revealed any details that would allow an investigation to begin.

  • wijayapala

    Brother Cengal,

    UTHR is not a detective.

    Which makes their uncovering of what happened over the last 20 years all the more amazing.

    The Sri Lankan Government has never investigated a murder because of UTHR.

    Irrelevant- the government CAN begin an investigation for Trinco 5 and ACF 17, but CANNOT for CH4. That is precisely why **I** (not you) brought up those former two cases as examples of what CAN be investigated.

    Instead of admitting that there is absolutely nothing to glean from the videotape to implicate the SLA (unless JDS or somebody else spills some details), you’re deflecting the discussion by saying that the government wouldn’t launch an investigation anyway. IF the topic of the discussion was Trinco 5, then I would agree with you. BUT, the topic is CH4 where you’re standing on much shakier ground.

    The very fact that I brought up Trinco 5 and ACF 17 demonstrates that I’m no fan of the govt’s human rights record (which the recent Fonseka arrest is only a symptom of). So you’ll have to try harder if you want to pin me as a Rajapaksa lackey.

    A Court of Law is concerned with probable cause beyond a reasonable shadow of a doubt. Most cases lack a smoking gun altogether as far as the resolution of a case goes. A smoking gun in this case would be a past record of the SLA stripping several hundred prisoners. On the other hand, while it is difficult to collect empirical evidence for the latter over a short-term period…

    Translation- there is insufficient evidence to establish that the SLA systematically strips prisoners, thus demolishing the already-weak notion that the stripped prisoners in the video PROVES SLA involvement.

    A COURT OF LAW is primarily concerned with innocent until PROVEN guilty. What we need from you is EVIDENCE. Otherwise, all you’re doing is drawing attention away from more worthy (though less sensational) cases like Trinco 5, which Mr Alston curiously is NOT publicizing.

  • Jaffna Tamil

    Off the Cuff said,

    February 11, 2010 @ 12:52 am

    Dear Jaffna Tamil,

    Does any of my posts provide you a base to ask the following question?
    “Who said there were no sinhalese in the LTTE? “

    ref your post of February 10, 2010 @ 6:11 pm——

    My Dear OTC,
    here is the basis for my question, please read your own posts carefully…

    —Off the Cuff said,
    February 10, 2010 @ 12:24 pm
    Now a question to you, Didn’t the LTTE Terrorists have Sinhala Speaking Cadres? Besides LTTE Police Chief Nadesan’s wife who was Sinhalese.—

    I hope you are now clear.

  • Jaffna Tamil

    Dear OTC,
    I am beginning to thing that you have two thought processes, like two parallel railway tracks, both always shifting. going in opposite directions, both never meeting!

    I am not sure how to respond to you as your arguments other than to cut through the Gordian Knot. (I think you know what that means).

    As cengal says, there were no credible investigations of the 58, 77 or 83 riots. Hell, the Sri Lanka Government cant find Lasantha Wickremetunge’s murderers who committed their dastardly act in broad daylight with eyewitnesses. And that puts a hole in your argument the excuses about investigations conducted on the de Menezes and Alpizar murders because they were conducted in broad daylight.

    If the Sri Lankan Government cant be held to YOUR OWN STANDARDS regarding murders being committed in public, forgive us Tamils for keeping our historical and well deserved distrust of the Sri Lanka Government..

    As for the millions of Tamils who saw the videos being unable were able to identify the dead men, perhaps if an investigation was conducted among the IDPS or the arrested LTTE cadres (and I concede that those men could have been LTTE), we might get the answer. But as you well know, the IDPs are held incommunicado and the 12000 or so suspected LTTE cadres are held in secret places. Perhaps, if an independent commission was to interview them we might get the answer.

    The reason I am positve that they are not Sinhalese soldiers, is because I have confidence in the efficiency of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces and their record keeping abilities about their own. Are you telling me that they keep sloppy records?

    Does that answer you question?

  • Cengal

    “Which makes their uncovering of what happened over the last 20 years all the more amazing.

    When you have to rely on UTHR to find out the truth, the inefficiency of the Sri Lankan Court judicial system, as well as all the numerous “tasks forces” appointed by the Government becomes all the glaringly obvious.


    Irrelevant- the government CAN begin an investigation for Trinco 5 and ACF 17, ”

    But the fact that the Government has not begun any unbiased investigation into Trinco 5 and ACF (not a single arrest has been made) sets a very bad precedent… precedent is very, very important from a judicial point of view. It is what law students (aspiring lawyers) spend most of their time studying.

    “but CANNOT for CH4. That is precisely why **I** (not you) brought up those former two cases as examples of what CAN be investigated.”

    Then you are implying that there is no paper trail of the two prisoners who disappeared. This is a war crime in itself that merits investigation. There should be a database of all POW’s that should be PUBLICLY accessible. If the Government is indeed innocent, then all it has to do is reveal the numbers in this database, the date that each POW was processed, and provide some kind of proof that every POW is still accounted for. If I am not mistaken, it is required by international law to disclose such numbers to the Red Cross. The fact that is refuses to do so? Well, that speaks volumes in and of itself.

    “Instead of admitting that there is absolutely nothing to glean from the videotape to implicate the SLA (unless JDS or somebody else spills some details), you’re deflecting the discussion by saying that the government wouldn’t launch an investigation anyway. IF the topic of the discussion was Trinco 5, then I would agree with you. BUT, the topic is CH4 where you’re standing on much shakier ground.”

    Let’s say someone killed 25 people and hid all the evidence. Is it not logical to assume that they will try to hide the evidence for the murders of the next two people? Let’s change that into 25000 by factoring all the JVP youth murdered extrajudicially as well as the 700 mentioned by the UTHR report as well as the 1000’s of other Tamils murdered extrajudicially over the past 30 years.

    “The very fact that I brought up Trinco 5 and ACF 17 demonstrates that I’m no fan of the govt’s human rights record (which the recent Fonseka arrest is only a symptom of). So you’ll have to try harder if you want to pin me as a Rajapaksa lackey.”

    The very fact that you cannot admit the Government has a history of trying to fabricate evidence when pinned in the corner is quite evident.


    Translation- there is insufficient evidence to establish that the SLA systematically strips prisoners, thus demolishing the already-weak notion that the stripped prisoners in the video PROVES SLA involvement. ”

    Here is evidence that they do, right before your eyes:

    http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0ecW1Zt0qS01E/610x.jpg

    http://www.uktamilnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/thuvaraka11.jpg

    http://media.nowpublic.net/images//50/8/508d9af8ad0ffc46aff7eb1a4ed7e102.jpg

    http://theync.com/thumbs/7899-naked-and-very-dead-ltte.JPG

    Beginning to see the pattern, Brother Wijayapala? 🙂

    It only goes on and on and on…………….

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    -Brother wijayapala said,

    February 11, 2010 @ 6:51 am

    Brother Cengal,

    “UTHR is not a detective.”

    Which makes their uncovering of what happened over the last 20 years all the more amazing.

    “The Sri Lankan Government has never investigated a murder because of UTHR.”

    Irrelevant- the government CAN begin an investigation for Trinco 5 and ACF 17, but CANNOT for CH4. That is precisely why **I** (not you) brought up those former two cases as examples of what CAN be investigated.–

    Please read my responses to OTC.

    I also wish to add the following
    Yes, it is amazing what UTHR has been able to do the past 20 years. It ahd been and is peopled by very brave men and women, including Daypala Thiranagama’s late wife, Ranjini who was killed by the LTTE. Howver it is a self and meagerly funded organization which has no investigative or subpoena powers, just the pwoer to repeat what they hear. They go in to tough areas at risk to life and limb. So yes, it is amazing what they have been able to achieve. I could consider them among the bravest of the brave in Sri Lanka.

    You say…
    –Irrelevant- the government CAN begin an investigation for Trinco 5 and ACF 17, but CANNOT for CH4. That is precisely why **I** (not you) brought up those former two cases as examples of what CAN be investigated.–

    I wish to make a couple of points here. Yes, the SL Gov CAN, but wont, so its irrelevant to say that they can. They cant even investigate Lasatha Wickremesinge’s murder which happened in broad day light in front of eyewitnesses. So your point is moot.

    As for why they cannot investigate CH4, that is your determination, not based on any substance. Of course it can be investigated. As willie sutton, a bank robber was asked why he robbed banks, he replied “Because that’s where the money was”. Similarly, if one wants to investigate, investigate not in Colombo or Geneva or New York, but where murders actually happened, the war zone, ask the IDPs and the ex LTTE cadres who are locked up. I think there is a sinhalese saying.. “if you want water, you must go to the well”. Agree?

    I know that you will agree with me, that a Government that was unable, unwilling or incapable of investigating the murder of Lasantha Wickretunge or the disappearance of Prageeth Ekneliyagoda are capable of investigating these murders. We have a saying in Tamil, its like giving a garland to a monkey, when it comes to giving the power of investigation to the Sri Lankan Government

    You agree?

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Jaffna Tamil,

    You asked the following question from me on February 10, 2010 @ 4:38 am.
    The wording conveyed the impression that you have asked it from me earlier which you had not

    Maybe so, maybe not! But you didn’t reply to my question? Didn’t the SL Army have Tamil Speaking soldiers?

    I replied you on February 10, 2010 @ 12:24 pm as follows though what relevance it had to CH4, I had no idea

    This was my answer
    Yes they had. Not just Tamil speaking Soldiers but Ethnic Tamil Soldiers as well. The Deputy Commander of Jaffna when SF was the Jaffna Commander, was an Ethnic TAMIL. He was a Major General and at the time he was the Deputy commander of Jaffna he was a Brigadier and was labelled a TRAITOR by the LTTE.

    In the same post I posed a counter question to you
    Now a question to you, Didn’t the LTTE Terrorists have Sinhala Speaking Cadres? Besides LTTE Police Chief Nadesan’s wife who was Sinhalese.
    They had a special unit that trained their operatives to speak Very Fluent Sinhalese, without even a trace of a Tamil accent. They even had National ID cards with Sinhala and Muslim names on them. That’s how most of those operatives were able to operate without suspicion in the South.

    On February 10, 2010 @ 6:11 pm you pose another question
    Who said there were no Sinhalese in the LTTE?
    This is not a question that I asked hence I asked you to clarify

    You come back with an astounding clarification pointing back to my previous post wherein I posed a question to you about Sinhala speaking Tamils (see above)

    The meaning I tried to convey to you is that other than Nadesan’s wife who spoke Sinhala as she was a Sinhalese (the ONLY Sinhalese within the LTTE) there were Tamils in the LTTE who spoke fluent Sinhala without even a Tamil accent due to the Language training they received from the LTTE.

    This has relevance to the CH4 video as Tamil LTTE Cadres could then be the shooters speaking Sinhala.

    The use of Sinhala does not prove the ethnicity of the shooters

  • Off the Cuff

    Cengal,

    CH4 is an LTTE conspiracy (don’t flatter yourself by calling it International) and it won’t succeed because….

    We don’t know the perpetrators
    We don’t know the Victims
    We don’t know the place it happened
    We don’t know the country where it was committed
    We don’t have a murder weapon
    We don’t have even one dead body
    We have no witnesses

    And some members of the LTTE speak Fluent Sinhala without a Tamil accent so get busy with your next project

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    —Off the Cuff said,

    February 11, 2010 @ 11:43 pm

    Cengal,

    CH4 is an LTTE conspiracy (don’t flatter yourself by calling it International) and it won’t succeed because….

    We don’t know the perpetrators
    We don’t know the Victims
    We don’t know the place it happened
    We don’t know the country where it was committed
    We don’t have a murder weapon
    We don’t have even one dead body
    We have no witnesses

    And some members of the LTTE speak Fluent Sinhala without a Tamil accent so get busy with your next project—

    So OTC, now you have given up logic when discussing the need for an investigation and gone back to blank denial. You flatly claim that that the video is a fake. Any proof of that. People better equipped than you in forensics (including an FBI expert) have called it genuine.

    Lets have an investigation and let the chips fall where it may.

    I dont want to hurt your feelings again as you seem the sensitive type, unable to take any pain, (You must be thanking thank god you were not born a Tamil), but you remind me of three monkeys (the ones that saw evil, hear no evil and speak no evil, only one like one of the monkeys, you are ready to spew evil at the tamils at every given chance.

    Your thought process is a study in neurosis.

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    OTC, OTC OTC,

    —This has relevance to the CH4 video as Tamil LTTE Cadres could then be the shooters speaking Sinhala. -The use of Sinhala does not prove the ethnicity of the shooters–

    Maybe , maybe not, so that is why we need an investigation.

    One moment you say —CH4 is an LTTE conspiracy (don’t flatter yourself by calling it International) and it won’t succeed because…–
    AND THE NEXT moment you say –This has relevance to the CH4 video as Tamil LTTE Cadres could then be the shooters speaking Sinhala–

    Make up your mind, is it LTTE conspiracy? or were they Sinhala speaking LTTE cadres?

    Tell me are there two of you or just one person having blackouts? Multiple personalities?

    And as for your Mrs. Nadesan/Sinhala/LTTE Cadre controversy, you need to settle your argument with yourself. I can help you my friend, I am just a bystander.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Jaffna Tamil,

    CH4 Video genuine? There are unexplained and un-investigated characteristics that casts doubt. Hence as you say, may be, may be not.

    Who are the perpetrators?
    Who are the the Victims?
    Where did it take place?
    Where is the murder weapon/s?
    Where are the dead bodies?
    Who are the witnesses?
    In which country were the murders committed? was it Tamil Nadu in India? Was it Thailand / Indonesia / USA / where? All these are possibilities. There is no rational way to disprove it.

    The ONLY thing that is being used to point to SL is the language spoken by the perpetrators. The LTTE had people fluent in Sinhala. Hence even the Language cannot be used to point to SL .

    Without establishing the country, SL cannot even be asked to inquire.
    If anyone wants SL to inquire, they have to prove that the incidents took place in SL. No one has done that.

    But for an International inquiry the International framework must be established. SL’s offer is still on the Table. No one is willing to take it up

  • Cengal

    OTC:

    I am not out to get the SLA/GOSL. Like I said, if an impartial investigation proves the innocence of the SLA, no one is going to dispute the findings. The real problem here is the climate of impunity and the pattern of abuse. Neither issue can be addressed without investigations into incidents like this one. The pattern of abuse can certainly be verified. There are many more pictures like these; in fact, there is another video (not the CH4 one) showing SLA soldiers abusing dead bodies of female LTTE. Can you deny all of these pictures and two videos??? If its just the CH4 video, you might have a point, but how do you explain all of this?

    http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0ecW1Zt0qS01E/610x.jpg

    http://www.uktamilnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/thuvaraka11.jpg

    http://media.nowpublic.net/images//50/8/508d9af8ad0ffc46aff7eb1a4ed7e102.jpg

    http://theync.com/thumbs/7899-naked-and-very-dead-ltte.JPG

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    OTC,
    here we go again…..
    you say
    —The ONLY thing that is being used to point to SL is the language spoken by the perpetrators. The LTTE had people fluent in Sinhala. Hence even the Language cannot be used to point to SL .
    Without establishing the country, SL cannot even be asked to inquire.
    If anyone wants SL to inquire, they have to prove that the incidents took place in SL. No one has done that.
    But for an International inquiry the International framework must be established. SL’s offer is still on the Table. No one is willing to take it up—-

    There is a Saying, I belive in Sinhalese, that if you want water, you need to go to the well. If you want to find out about the video, No one is accusing the murders were committed in Tamil Nadu,, Thailand, Indonesia or USA . Why do you have to keep on deflecting the argument?

    Let an impartial commission investigate. There is a model, a very successful model. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa. . (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_and_Reconciliation_Commission_%28South_Africa%29)

    I have no problem if the investigators if the commission consists of Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims and Burgers. But only that the appointees should be non political, strong and prominent enough so that the could withstand pressure from the Government, they should be given subpoena powers, investigative powers including forensic expertise, authority to compel the police and army to testify. Only thing I would strongly oppose is the Sri Lankan Government to conduct the investigation. I may change my mind if we ever find out who killed Lasantha Wickremesinge, who kidnapped (and hopefully not killed) Prageeth Ekneliyagoda , Taraki Sivaram etc.

    No doubt we will find out about the LTTE atrocities as well. I welcome that as I don’t know what they did in my name.

    Bit to keep on repeating that . “SL’s offer is still on the Table. No one is willing to take it up”, is nonsense. You know that and I know that.

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    Cengal , there is no point in appealing to the better nature of some ( but not all)of these posters by showing them photos of atrocities on Tamils. Like the three monkeys, who saw no evil, heard no evil and speak no evil, some of these posters do do not accept any wrong on the part of the sinhalese

  • Cengal

    Correct, Jaffna Tamil. I have a feeling that even if you held them by the hand, and took them to see the bodies, they would still (publicly) deny what they saw. In one sense, it is a reflection of the antipathy they hold towards Tamils – an antipathy that is blind towards any modicum of reason. On the other hand, one must wonder what the Sri Lankan press/media in the South was doing these past 30/40 years. The censorship, intimidation, and harassment of journalists and the Press seems have to succeeded splendidly beyond all reckoning. The one-track mindset – of people I don’t need to name – is so narrow that even given the opportunity to easily access alternative viewpoints, e.g. internet, they do not so, but rabidly defend the grossly distorted version of events put out by their masters in Temple Trees. This is a society that desperately needs reform; there is a desperate need for people to internalize and accept the truth that is staring them in the face. They need to draw their own conclusions, independent of all external agents – that is the whole beauty of being a citizen of the 21st century. The truth shall set you free – from Mahavamsa and Daily Noise (News?)! Let it be the new slogan of S. Lanka.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    You state “Correct, Jaffna Tamil. I have a feeling that even if you held them by the hand, and took them to see the bodies,”

    Just produce the bodies that’s what we have been saying all along. Produce hard evidence …. no need to hold hands for that.

    We can hold hands in friendship (unconnected to the CH4 video)

  • wijayapala

    Brother Cengal,

    The very fact that you cannot admit the Government has a history of trying to fabricate evidence when pinned in the corner is quite evident.

    Alas, you still haven’t figured it out- with regard to the CH4 video (ie the topic of discussion), it makes no shred of difference whether or not the Government has a history of trying to fabricate evidence or not.

    The point I was making is that even putting YOU in charge of an investigation with all the resources of the Western World will avail you nothing, because you have NOTHING to follow up on. Your “paper trail” idea won’t work if the SLA had executed recently-captured Tigers on the fly without properly documenting it. Of course, you wouldn’t be able to PROVE that the SLA had done this, so you’re caught in a real mobius. You won’t find the names of Trinco 5 in any SLA prisoner list, nor those of ACF 17.

    CREDIBILITY indeed is at the center of this issue, which is why I questioned Alston’s motivations in highlighting CH4 and not far more credible cases. You seem to have side-stepped this point. You see, the majority of Sri Lankans believe that the “human rights” industry is a Western conspiracy to weaken and divide Sri Lanka. This belief is grounded in the rhetoric used by western HR activists, such as Anne Neistat of Human Rights Watch who painted a West (good guys) vs East (bad guys) picture to argue for punitive Western action (as opposed to supporting indigenous human rights actors- the JVP couldn’t have done a better job scripting her lines). This “Western-superiority” approach has actually strengthened the Rajapakses position and credibility among Sri Lankans, while accomplishing absolutely nothing for the victims of HR abuses.

    I hope I don’t have to remind you that the British justified their conquest of SL in 1815 on “human rights” grounds, while having no compunctions against slaughtering thousands of Sri Lankan peasants barely two years later in the Uva-Wellassa uprising.

  • wijayapala

    Brother JT,

    Lets have an investigation and let the chips fall where it may.

    But why isn’t Alston calling for investigating the Trincomalee or Mutur killings, where we have **names of suspects involved**??

    Here is an article for you and Brother Cengal to read:

    Tonge: Investigate IDF stealing organs in Haiti
    http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/27070/tonge-investigate-idf-stealing-organs-haiti

    Let me ask both of you a question: is Baroness Tonge correct to call for an investigation of the Israel Defense Force? If so, then why are her fellow partisans saying “We do not believe there is a need for an investigation and we understand why the idea would be offensive to the Jewish community?”

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff,

    You are asking for bodies to be produced when the Ministry of Defense denies permission for journalists and others to travel freely to the war zone (now ex war zone). I am sure that if “permission” was given, not only these two bodies, but many ten thousands would easily be found. Remember what Ban said when he flew over the scene in a helicopter (even Ban was not allowed direct access). There is a saying in English, “You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” Kidnapping, torturing, raping, murdering – that is what the Sri Lanka Army does best. Maybe you have forgotten what a Sri Lankan soldier by the name of Rajapakse once said in the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka:

    “” We did not kill anyone. We only buried bodies that were sent to us by our superior officers.” “We can show you where 300 to 400 bodies have been buried at Chemmani.”

    No need for Alston, Ban, etc. to conduct investigations; when the Sri Lankan dog barks, we know in an instant who it is. Same dog, old tricks.

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    “, it makes no shred of difference whether or not the Government has a history of trying to fabricate evidence or not. ”

    Actually it does make a difference. It’s the reason why Alston doesn’t go after the USA/UK… when incidents like this happen, the victims/families of victims have full, 100% access to the Courts, and the various institutions responsible for the incident cannot pressure the Government to cover up the atrocities.

    “The point I was making is that even putting YOU in charge of an investigation with all the resources of the Western World will avail you nothing, because you have NOTHING to follow up on.”

    That is not necessarily true. As I mentioned earlier, if the Government were to offer some kind of protection to the people who were given the CH4 tape in the first place, they might be willing to provide more information. We can assume a hypothetical situation in which this video was real… in which case, it exists (or existed) on the cell phones of an arbitrary number of Sri Lankan Army soldiers. One does not need bodies, like Cuff is insinuating here; all that needs to be done is to track down a soldier with that tape on his cell phone. Given the notorious nature of the tape, this is not an impossible task.

    “Your “paper trail” idea won’t work if the SLA had executed recently-captured Tigers on the fly without properly documenting it.”

    That is only one possibility. Without examining the relevant documents, you cannot draw that conclusion.

    ” Of course, you wouldn’t be able to PROVE that the SLA had done this, so you’re caught in a real mobius. You won’t find the names of Trinco 5 in any SLA prisoner list, nor those of ACF 17. ”

    The victims of Trinco 5 and ACF 17 were not prisoners.

    ” CREDIBILITY indeed is at the center of this issue, which is why I questioned Alston’s motivations in highlighting CH4 and not far more credible cases. You seem to have side-stepped this point. You see, the majority of Sri Lankans believe that the “human rights” industry is a Western conspiracy to weaken and divide Sri Lanka. ”

    Then Sri Lanka should leave the United Nations. When you join the United Nations, you have certain obligations.

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    “Let me ask both of you a question: is Baroness Tonge correct to call for an investigation of the Israel Defense Force?”

    Let me ask you, has the Israeli Defense Forces engaged in such behavior before? Has the Israeli Government done everything it could to cover up such scandals? If the answer is yes, then of course an investigation should be carried out.

  • wijayapala

    Brother Cengal,

    As I mentioned earlier, if the Government were to offer some kind of protection to the people who were given the CH4 tape in the first place, they might be willing to provide more information.

    And as I mentioned earlier, the CH4 tape was provided by JDS based out of Germany and is not limited from providing information.

    The victims of Trinco 5 and ACF 17 were not prisoners.

    And how do you know that the people in the CH4 tape were?

    If the answer is yes, then of course an investigation should be carried out.

    You didn’t answer why the other Liberal politicians oppose this move.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    “I am sure that if “permission” was given, not only these two bodies, but many ten thousands would easily be found.” says you

    Of course you will find many dead bodies buried there …. several thousand died there…… It was a war zone.

    Claiming that you can find the CH4 victims and identify them from the bone remains when you cant identify a single one looking at the CH4 is incredulous to say the least.

    You say “Remember what Ban said when he flew over the scene in a helicopter” I can’t why did you stop short of quoting?

    However I remember the cooked up stories that the Times of London journalist printed on the Times in UK and on their website after being flown along with Ban. Here is what they said if you can’t remember them

    http://www.groundviews.org/2009/09/28/doing-the-right-thing-freedom-for-vanni-idps/#comment-9618

    The CH4 is a similar cooked up attempt ….You guys tried once too often to frame SL. Hence everything you bring up that is without SOLID evidence is viewed as cooked up

    Just like the child who shouted “Tiger” too often

    BTW please give references when you bring up something from the past and expect us to remember

  • jaffna tamil

    Off the Cuff said,

    February 14, 2010 @ 8:05 pm
    Brothers Wijepala and Yapa
    -Dear Cengal,
    You state “Correct, Jaffna Tamil. I have a feeling that even if you held them by the hand, and took them to see the bodies,”
    Just produce the bodies that’s what we have been saying all along. Produce hard evidence …. no need to hold hands for that.
    We can hold hands in friendship (unconnected to the CH4 video)-

    I have said it a number of times before and wil say it again. I am sure you have heard the question, “which came before? The chicken or the egg?” And that is what you seem to be saying!

    “Produce the bodies, prove it is in Sri Lanka and then we are ready to investigate!”

    I know you will agree that the only people who could help the investigations and prove or DISPROVE the allegations are the IDP and the 12000 or so incarcerated alleged LTTE cadres and unfettered access to the lands in the North and East. You know as well as I know that the Sri Lankan government has blocked access to all the components that would help to prove or DISPROVE the investigations.
    So how can anyone prove or disprove the allegation? How can anyone produce the body?

    If the standards you use. “produce the bodies before we can investigate” was a legal standard, then, Lieutenant A. Wijesuriya, a Volunteer member of the Ceylon Army, attached to the 3rd Gemunu Watch, and Amaradasa Ratnayake member of the Volunteer Force would still be walking the streets of Colombo and we would not have known what happened to Premawathie Manamperi, the beauty queen from kathragama. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premawathie_Manamperi).

    And Brother Wijeyapala, why are we talking about the Israelis and Baroness Tonge? That is not our concern. The Arabs and the Israelis have their own advocates. Could we please stick to the subject at hand?

  • Cengal

    Wijayapala:

    “And as I mentioned earlier, the CH4 tape was provided by JDS based out of Germany and is not limited from providing information.”

    You do not know on what conditions the tape was given to JDS. The original source could have been a Sri Lankan Army soldier who wishes to remain anonymous.

    “And how do you know that the people in the CH4 tape were?”

    Equally valid: and how do you know that the people in the CH4 tape were not??

    “You didn’t answer why the other Liberal politicians oppose this move.”

    First answer my question about whether the IDF has done this before.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    “The original source could have been a Sri Lankan Army soldier who wishes to remain anonymous. you wrote.

    There were at least THREE people at the scene of the crime.
    One of them was the cameraman.
    The other two are the Killers.
    With such a lot of publicity on the CH4, it would be very strange if the video has not been viewed by the Killers.
    The killers KNOW who were present at the scene of the crime
    If the killers are from the SLA as alleged, the identity of the cameraman would be already known to the Killers by interrogation.

    The Cameraman has ratted on his own colleagues on a CAPITAL punishment charge. On top of that the War Crime charges will implicate ALL the men who were present.

    How safe then is the Cameraman?
    How can the JDS shielding the Cameraman provide him safety?
    Anonymous the Cameraman can never hope to be.
    Safe?
    Only if he is already out of the country.
    So why the BLUFF?

  • Off the Cuff

    Hello JT,

    Welcome back after the Valentine fun.

    My response was to Cengal’s addressed to you in which he was writing about a Hypothetical Situation of He (and you) producing the bodies and leading us to it be hand.

    Wasn’t this incident supposed to have happened over an year ago?

  • Alpha

    “There were at least THREE people at the scene of the crime.
    One of them was the cameraman.
    The other two are the Killers.”

    Correct.

    “With such a lot of publicity on the CH4, it would be very strange if the video has not been viewed by the Killers.”

    Correct again.

    The killers KNOW who were present at the scene of the crime.”

    Obviously.

    “If the killers are from the SLA as alleged, the identity of the cameraman would be already known to the Killers by interrogation.”

    By interrogation? As far as I know, no interrogations of SL Army personnel have occurred in regards to the CH4 incident.

    “The Cameraman has ratted on his own colleagues on a CAPITAL punishment charge. On top of that the War Crime charges will implicate ALL the men who were present.”

    Now this is the flaw in your logic. You are implicitly assuming it is the cameraman who passed on the video. In fact, it could be the case that any number of soldiers are in possession of the video. Which makes each of those soldiers a candidate for passing the video on. In other words, it need not be the case that whoever passed the video on to JDS was physically present at the scene of the crime.

    “How safe then is the Cameraman?”

    Again, it need not be the cameraman who passed the video on.

    “How can the JDS shielding the Cameraman provide him safety?
    Anonymous the Cameraman can never hope to be.
    Safe?
    Only if he is already out of the country.
    So why the BLUFF? ”

    Irrelevant.

  • Alpha

    Above post is addressed to Mr. Off the Cuff.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dar Cengal,

    Of course you have no alternative other than defend Alston’s apparent bias as was evident before and is evident again in what you say below

    “Actually it does make a difference. It’s the reason why Alston doesn’t go after the USA/UK … when incidents like this happen, the victims/families of victims have full, 100% access to the Courts, and the various institutions responsible for the incident cannot pressure the Government to cover up the atrocities.

    Have a good read of what follows (more are available if you need) and tell us why Alston is afraid to touch the atrocities mentioned but goes after weak countries with venom.

    How about Independent, International, Impartial investigations

    Military commanders and courts have systematically referred to Haditha and other massacres as isolated cases. But the large number of such incidents suggests that the atrocities are systemic and have arisen from a broad culture of excessive violence, often condoned by commanders.

    Haditha is the best-known case. On November 19, 2005 , a squad of US marines went on a rampage after a roadside bomb killed one of their group. The squad’s leader initially killed five unarmed young men who happened onto the scene in a taxi. The marines then raided nearby houses, firing freely and killing civilians, including women and children. Twenty-four Iraqis died in the incident, including ten women and children and an elderly man in a wheelchair. The marines involved claimed that they were under a concerted attack by insurgents and their lawyers argued that their action was a “justifiable use of lethal force.” But most evidence and court testimony suggests that the civilians were unarmed and that the marines shot the Iraqis in cold blood and then tried to eliminate damaging evidence, including a headquarters log and video from an aerial drone. Like Abu Ghraib , US officials first described the Haditha massacre as an isolated case of misconduct. But the incident led to other revelations about atrocities, showing that it was part of a pattern of extreme and unrestrained violence that was more common among Coalition troops than anyone had realized.

    Richard Engel, “What Happened in Haditha” NBC News ( May 30, 2006 )
    David S. Cloud, “Marines Have Excised Evidence on 24 Iraqi Deaths” New York Times ( August 18, 2006 )

    Mahmoudiya was another massacre. On March 12, 2006 , four army soldiers stationed at a checkpoint south of Baghdad had a drinking bout. They then changed into civilian clothes and walked to a close-by Iraqi home inhabited by the al-Janabi family. Leaving one soldier outside to guard the door, the others entered and killed the two parents and a five year old daughter. Two of the soldiers then raped a 14-year-old Iraqi girl, Abeer Qassim al-Janabi, and then murdered her. The girl’s body was found naked and partly burned, evidently in order to destroy the evidence. According to a FBI affidavit filed in the case, the men made advances towards the young woman for a week before the attack. One of the cases, involving Specialist James Barker, has already come to trial and the defendant has pleaded guilty and been sentenced to 90 years in prison. Barker told the court: “To live there, to survive there, I became angry and mean. I loved my friends, my fellow soldiers and my leaders, but I began to hate everyone else in Iraq .”

    Tim Whitmire “Ex-Soldier Charged with Rape, Murder” Associated Press ( July 3, 2006 )
    Rick Jervis & Andrea Stone, “Four More Soldiers Accused of Rape, Murder in Iraq ” USA Today ( July 9, 2007 )
    As quoted in “Iraq Rape Soldiers given Life Sentence” Guardian ( November 17, 2006 )

    Ishhaqi followed Mahmoudiya just three days later, on March 15, 2006 . US marines attacked a farmhouse, eight miles north of the city of Balad , evidently because of intelligence that an insurgent was inside. Helicopter gunships fired on the house in support of the attackers. Some accounts say that fire was returned from the house, which US forces eventually captured. According to a report by the Iraqi police’s Joint Coordination Center , based on a report filed after a local police investigation, US forces entered the house, “gathered the family members in one room and executed 11 persons, including five children, four women and two men. Then they bombed the house, burned three vehicles and killed their animals.” Among those who died were a 75 year old woman and a six month old child.

    Mathew Schofield, “Iraqi Policy Report Details Civilians’ Deaths and Hands of US Troops” Knight Ridder (McClatchy) ( March 19, 2006 )

    Hamdaniya is similarly disturbing. On April 26, 2006 , a squad of seven US marines and one navy sailor apparently dragged an innocent, unarmed and disabled Iraqi, Hashim Ibrahim Awad, from his home, bound his hands and feet, and repeatedly shot him at point blank range. The squad had been lying in ambush for someone else and when that person did not appear they devised a plan to kill any Iraqi instead. The men entered Awad’s home, dragged him out, shot him repeatedly in the head and chest, and then staged the scene to make it look like Awad had been an insurgent. The men were charged on June 21, 2006 with premeditated murder, kidnapping, conspiracy and making false statements to investigators. One participant, Petty Officer Nelson Bacos, who testified against the others in an early trial, said: “I didn’t believe they would carry out a plan like that … there was no justification I knew what we were doing was wrong.”

    Josh White and Sonya Geis, “8 Troops Charged In Death Of Iraqi” Washington Post (June 22, 2006)
    Carolyn Marshall, “Corpsman Who Failed to Halt Killing of Iraqi Receives Prison Sentence” New York Times ( October 7, 2006 )

    Cover-Ups

    In most cases of serious misconduct and murder, soldiers directly involved have tried to cover up the crimes. Also, commanders have often ignored evidence, failed to pursue actively even the most serious cases and made exculpatory public statements. In the case of Haditha , the Marine Corps issued a press release the next day claiming that many of the Iraqis had died from the blast of an insurgent bomb, a version contested by witnesses. In spite of the many Iraqi casualties, the company commander did not inspect the site, choosing to rely on the report of the soldiers involved. Subsequently, investigators found that pages were missing from a company logbook and a video tape from a drone flying overhead had disappeared. Apparently, the perpetrators or those in collusion with them had destroyed or withheld evidence. Those involved in the incident apparently also made misleading statements to investigators. A marine inquiry determined that “some officers gave false information to their superiors” in the initial follow-up to the case. In a later report, Major General Eldon A. Bargewell found “willful negligence” among Marine officers and ” attempts to hide criminal conduct. ” Senior officers, he concluded, “exhibited a determination to ignore indications of serious misconduct, perhaps to avoid conducting an inquiry that could prove adverse to themselves or their Marines .”

    Another marine, John Jodka III, after a plea bargain, was found guilty on a reduced charge and sentenced to 18 months in jail on November 16, 2006 (see “Marine Sentenced Over Iraq Civilian Killing” Guardian (November 16, 2006)
    David S. Cloud, “Inquiry Suggests Marines Excised Files on Killings” New York Times ( August 18, 2006 )
    Thomas E. Ricks, ” Probe Into Iraq Deaths Finds False Reports” Washington Post ( June 1, 2006 )
    “‘Simple Failures’ and ËœDisastrous Results’: Excerpts from Army Maj. Gen. Eldon A. Bargewell’s report” Washington Post ( April 21, 2007 )

    As in Mahmudiya where soldiers tried to conceal evidence of the rape and killing of the teenage girl and her family, or in Hamdaniya where the soldiers put an AK-47 automatic rifle next to the man they had murdered, those involved in the Ishaqi murders called in air support to blow up the house. It appears that they hoped that the crime would disappear beneath the rubble. The US command first exonerated the soldiers, saying that three civilians died due to the exchange of fire in a military operation and also due to the collapse of the house which occurred during the combat. The civilian deaths were determined to be “unintentional,” and US forces involved in the incident were said to have “followed the rules of engagement.” But neighbors and local leaders complained to Iraqi police that the soldiers entered the house while it was still standing. The police opened an inquiry, using a US-trained criminal investigation team that literally dug up the facts from the collapsed house. After examining the bodies, hands bound, all in one room with execution-style bullet holes to the head and spent US cartridges nearby, the investigators concluded that the people had been murdered in cold blood. Eleven, not three, bodies were found in the rubble. Autopsies at Tikrit Hospital confirmed that all the victims had bullet wounds to the head. The BBC has shown a video from an Associated Press cameraman, taken afterwards on the scene, that provides strong evidence of the atrocity. But the US military has refused to open a case or to investigate further.

    In the case of the death of Italian intelligence agent Nicola Calipari too, an Italian government report issued on May 3, 2005 criticized the way that evidence of the shooting disappeared. The scene of the incident was not preserved for investigation and the logs of the military unit on the day in question were later destroyed. At the very least, this was sloppy procedure. Quite possibly, it was obstruction of justice and the covering up of a crime.

    A Pentagon mental health survey of troops in Iraq found that “less than half of Soldiers and Marines would report a team member for unethical behavior,” such as not following general orders, violating the rules of engagement, and mistreating or killing civilians. US military authorities, embarrassed by a rash of atrocities, have chosen to back up the official version of the facts, insisting that victims died as collateral damage in military operations. Such cover-ups have kept some cases from public view entirely, and they have diminished the strength of the evidence against the perpetrators of the prosecuted crimes. They have contributed to the dismissal of cases and the very weak sentences that are usually handed down.

    “US Military Trial Ordered in Iraq Murder Cases” Reuters ( October 19, 2006 )
    Sonya Geis, “Hearings Begin for Marines Accused of Killing Iraqi” Washington Post ( August 31, 2006 )
    Mathew Schofield, Iraqi Policy Report Details Civilians’ Deaths and Hands of US Troops, Knight Ridder Newspapers (McClatchy) ( March 19, 2006 )
    Will Dunham, “Troops Cleared in Iraqi Deaths in Ishaqi” Reuters ( June 2, 2006 )
    Ziad Khalaf, “Raid Kills 11, Mostly Women and Children” Associated Press/Army Times (March 15, 2006)
    “New ‘ Iraq Massacre’ Tape Emerges” BBC ( June 2, 2006 )
    Fitzroy Sterling, “Still Seeking Answers in US Checkpoint Killing” Inter Press Service ( June 24, 2006 )
    Multinational Force in Iraq and US Army Medical Command, Final Report : Mental Health Advisory Team IV Operation Iraqi Freedom 05-07 ( November 17, 2006 ) p.42

    Impunity

    The military justice system has acted very rarely to punish cases of murder and atrocities. Most such cases have never reached the point of a formal charge. Even when a charge has been handed down, the cases have usually been dismissed at the preliminary administrative tribunal stage or at the later court martial phase. Or they have been settled at either stage with a very mild rebuke or punishment. Very few charges have included premeditated murder, even in such egregious incidents as Haditha.

    In late August 2006, the Washington Post reviewed military cases during the period June 2003 to February 2006. The Post report found that while thousands of Iraqis had been killed by US soldiers under questionable circumstances, the military justice system prosecuted only a “small portion of the incidents.” No homicide prosecutions at all have arisen from shootings at checkpoints and very few high-ranking officers have been charged.

    Commanders – who must make the decision to start a criminal investigation against their subordinates – have often failed to investigate Iraqi civilian deaths. They have preferred to consider them as unintended consequence of combat operations and ordered administrative or non-judicial punishments instead. “I think there are a number of cases that never make it to the reporting stage, and [for those that do] there has been a reluctance to pursue them vigorously,” said Gary Solis, a former Marine prosecutor. “There have been fewer prosecutions in Iraq than one might expect.” An army major quoted by the Washington Post concurred: “I think there were many other engagements that should have been investigated, definitely. But no one wanted to look at them or report them high It was just the way things worked.”

    Josh White, Charles Lane and Julie Tate, “Homicide Charges Rare In Iraq War” Washington Post ( August 28, 2006 )
    Convictions in US Cases Rare in Iraq ” United Press International ( August 28, 2006 )

    The killing of civilians by US troops has raised anger and outrage among the Iraqi population and has sparked strong statements from Iraqi officials. Asked to comment on the events in Haditha, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki called them “totally unacceptable” and qualified US violence against civilians as a “daily phenomenon” in Iraq . He said bluntly that Coalition troops do not “respect the Iraqi people.” After the announcement that a US investigation had cleared troops in the Ishaqi case, the Iraqi government reacted strongly. Adnan al-Kazimi, an aide to Prime Minister al-Maliki, said the government would demand an apology from the US and compensation for the victims in several cases.

    The small number of convictions has pushed the Iraqi government to question the immunity given to members of Coalition forces since June 2004. Al-Maliki publicly said he believed immunity from Iraqi courts “encouraged [troops] to commit crimes in cold blood.” Iraq Human Rights Minister Wigdan Michael concurred, that the US failure to hold soldiers accountable for their crimes had fostered a climate of impunity among troops: “One of the reasons for this is the UN resolution, which gives the multinational force soldiers immunity. Without punishment, you get violations. This happens when there is no punishment.” Michael also raised the possibility that Iraq would demand a review of the Multinational Forces’ immunity by the UN Security Council.

    Brian Brady “Furious Iraq Demands Apology as US Troops Are Cleared of Massacre” Scotland on Sunday (June 4, 2006)
    Cited in Aaron Glantz, “GIs in Iraq Could Be Stripped of Immunity After Rape –Murder Allegations” OneWorld ( July 12, 2006 )
    Mariam Karouny, ” Iraq to Ask UN to End US Immunity after Rape Case” Reuters ( July 2, 2006 )
    Cited in Josh White, “Report On Haditha Condemns Marines” Washington Post ( April 21, 2007 )

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    What I wrote
    If the killers are from the SLA as alleged, the identity of the cameraman would be already known to the Killers by interrogation.”

    Your response
    “By interrogation? As far as I know, no interrogations of SL Army personnel have occurred in regards to the CH4 incident.”

    Interrogation means questioning. I did not mean an Official one but questioning by the Killers who are the ones threatened.

    Sorry if I conveyed the wrong impression.

    BTW without the Cameraman to confirm that he took the video it would not become evidence.

    After it became public, the possession of the video by any number of soldiers is irrelevant. By now everyone in the forces with Internet access may posses it. Even I possess the video and so does many others. Its available for download on a Tamil website.

    The secrecy by JDS is required ONLY to protect the Cameraman no one else.

    If the incident is true and SLA is involved as alleged, the identity of the Cameraman is already known to the Killers. How safe would he be then ?
    Not unless he is already abroad.

    Hence the talk of protecting the source is just BLUFF.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    I find lots of contradictions in the above. For example, in reference to the Mahmudiya incident:

    “One of the cases, involving Specialist James Barker, has already come to trial and the defendant has pleaded guilty and been sentenced to 90 years in prison.”

    “But the US military has refused to open a case or to investigate further.”

    According to Wikipedia, however:

    “Green was arrested as a civilian, and convicted by a civilian court, the U.S. District Court in Paducah, Kentucky.[27] The other four, all active-duty soldiers, were convicted through courts-martial.”

    Obviously, if the other four soldiers were convicted through military court-martial, the military has nothing more to investigate. 🙂

    “The military justice system has acted very rarely to punish cases of murder and atrocities.”

    Then why does this report talk about James Barker getting 90 years in prison? Why was the Abu Grahib incident investigated? Why did even President Bush apologize? Why does this report say, “Another marine, John Jodka III, after a plea bargain, was found guilty on a reduced charge and sentenced to 18 months in jail on November 16, 2006″….

    If the military justice system acts very rarely to punish cases of murder and atrocities, this report should not try to uses incidents where the military has punished soldiers!

    “One of the reasons for this is the UN resolution, which gives the multinational force soldiers immunity.”

    LOL. Then why was BRIAN Greene, a US soldier, sentenced to death? Is that immunity?

    This report is good for morons and people who never learned to count from 1-10.

    Conclusion: there is nothing for Alston to investigate.

  • Jaffna Tamil

    Dear OTC,
    in the previous post, you have cited the following….
    –“US Military Trial Ordered in Iraq Murder Cases” Reuters ( October 19, 2006 )
    Sonya Geis, “Hearings Begin for Marines Accused of Killing Iraqi” Washington Post ( August 31, 2006 )
    Mathew Schofield, Iraqi Policy Report Details Civilians’ Deaths and Hands of US Troops, Knight Ridder Newspapers (McClatchy) ( March 19, 2006 )
    Will Dunham, “Troops Cleared in Iraqi Deaths in Ishaqi” Reuters ( June 2, 2006 )
    Ziad Khalaf, “Raid Kills 11, Mostly Women and Children” Associated Press/Army Times (March 15, 2006)
    “New ‘ Iraq Massacre’ Tape Emerges” BBC ( June 2, 2006 )
    Fitzroy Sterling, “Still Seeking Answers in US Checkpoint Killing” Inter Press Service ( June 24, 2006 )
    Multinational Force in Iraq and US Army Medical Command, Final Report : Mental Health Advisory Team IV Operation Iraqi Freedom 05-07 ( November 17, 2006 ) p.420–

    Unless you can tell me that you can vouch for this first hand, your knowledge comes from reading published materials.

    ANd that can only happen because the US has a free press and reporters and human rights and relief organizations like the Red Cross (red crecent in Iraq) have unfettered access.

    In Sri Lanka, as you well, know Sri Lanka Government sealed the war zone tighter than a mosquito’s backside. So there is no way to know what happened, as the Sri Lankan Government has no interest in investigating itself and the press is beaten and cowed. Brave souls who tried to report like Taraki and Richard de zoysa were killed or chase dout of the counrty like Iqbal Athas and DBS Jeyaraj.

    That is why Alston is intersted in investigating Sri Lanka. Becuase in the US’ atleast there is some attempt to self police and the press is vigilant.

    I hope you can understand why Alston should investigate Sri Lanka more than he should investigate the US. Israel was investigated by Sir RichardGoldstone, hiself a south african jew.

  • Off the Cuff

    Hi Cengal/ Alpha,

    My post of February 16, 2010 @ 1:58 am is a response to Alpha’s comments re my previous post to Cengal

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal / J Tamil

    Cengal, Do you really think I posted this report with ALL its references without noticing the 90 year sentence? In fact the references were at the end but I inserted them under the correct story. I could have left them out altogether and selectively inserted them, which I did not do.

    However I notice that you chose what you want and ignore what is unpalatable, why?

    Here is the story of Janabi

    Cortez and another soldier described how they changed into black silk underwear and masks so they would look like insurgents and headed for the house of a girl they had seen walking through the village.

    They testified that Green took Janabi’s parents and sister into another room and shot them while two of the other soldiers raped her. Then Green took his turn with the sobbing girl before putting a pillow on her face and shooting her dead.

    The soldiers set the house on fire by tossing a lighter onto a Kerosene-soaked blanket covering her naked body. Then they went back to their checkpoint about 200 meters away and grilled chicken wings.

    Green soon confessed to a sergeant investigating the March 12, 2006 atrocity.

    But the involvement of US soldiers did not come to light until a few months later when stress counselors talked to the squad after an incident in which two soldiers were abducted at a checkpoint and later brutally murdered.

    All I ever did was what they told me to do,” Green said, adding that the group’s ranking soldier – former Specialist Paul Cortez – “ordered all of this.”

    The criminal investigation began on 24 June 2006.
    End extract

    Notice that this atrocity was suppressed by the US Sergent who knew about it months earlier. It came out only when soldiers involved in another two murders at a checkpoint was referred for Psychological treatment

    Did they deserve the death penalty or just a life sentence?

    I will be discussing the other cases as time permits

  • Jaffna Tamil…

    OTC,
    I am really getting tired with your obfuscations and misdirections. I thought that I could get in to a honest discussion with people like you, but it has been a total waste of time. I tried to start a constructive discussion about moving forward, but with backward facing people like you, it doest seem to work. This has been my experience with most Sinhalese. And that is why Sri Lanka is a basket case, the sick man of Asia! Lee Kwan Yu

    Either you have very little knowledge of the Iraq situation or are willfully dishonest about it and either way, I dont have time to waste with people like you. You google and google and google and get references which have been published in reputed journals but are unwilling to accept that there reason why you are able to do so is because of the access the press and the relief and human rights organizations have in Iraq, which is not allowed in Sri Lanka. What the hell has what happened in Iraq got to do with Sri Lanka?

    You talk of ancient irrigation and the engineering powerless etc etc etc, but are willfully blind to the complete breakdown in Sri Lankan infrastructure and the total neglect of the Tamil areas except for a few examples like the Jaffna and Batticaloa Universities.

    Its people like you and your kind that have brought Sri Lanka to its knees.

    You may have time to waste on writing pointless nonsense, but I don’t.

    Good Luck to you and your friends.

    Let me leave with some words of advice from a very smart man….who calls Sri Lanka a FAILED STATE and most of the world agrees with him!
    His name is LEE KWAN Yew!

    ——
    Earlier this month a retired Thai diplomat, Sompong Sucharitkul, said Singapore opposed the entry of Sri Lanka to Asean when it was founded in 1967 because the country was viewed as unstable.

    In 1967 the Sri Lanka was run by Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake in a shaky coalition with the Federal Party. His attempts to solve the ethnic question failed when proposals to devolve power was withdrawn amidst opposition.

    Sompong said a discussion was held on August 06 and two ministers from Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) were in an adjacent room.

    `I remember one was an economics minister. He waited there anxiously for a signal to join the discussion but it never came,` Sompong told Thailand`s The Nation newspaper.
    http://www.lankanewspapers.com/news/2007/8/18860_space.html

    We saw Sri Lanka: Lee Kwan Yew says it again
    http://sundaytimes.lk/070902/International/i516.html

    So enjoy your FAILED STATE! May God give you people WISDOM!

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    You say there are lots of contradiction and refers to the Mahmudiya incident.

    You are confused that’s why you see an apparent confusion. You are reading TWO different incidents thinking that its one and the same.

    The 90 year sentence is for the Mahmudiya Gang Rape – Murder case of a 14 year old.

    The Request for further investigation is for the “Ishaqi murders” where The US command first exonerated the soldiers, saying that three civilians died due to the exchange of fire in a military operation. ………But neighbors and local leaders complained to Iraqi police that the soldiers entered the house while it was still standing. The police opened an inquiry, using a US-trained criminal investigation team that literally dug up the facts from the collapsed house. After examining the bodies, hands bound, all in one room with execution-style bullet holes to the head and spent US cartridges nearby, the investigators concluded that the people had been murdered in cold blood. Eleven, not three, bodies were found in the rubble. Autopsies at Tikrit Hospital confirmed that all the victims had bullet wounds to the head. The BBC has shown a video from an Associated Press cameraman, taken afterwards on the scene, that provides strong evidence of the atrocity. But the US military has refused to open a case or to investigate further.

    Twin of the CH4 incident but in this case hard evidence is available unlike CH4. Yet USA refuses an investigation.
    Over to you Mr. Alston

    I see that you are usually prone to confusion but that’s ok
    When you try sarcasm, take extra care, otherwise the joke will be on you, as it has happened now.

    Reproduce below is what you wrote
    “I find lots of contradictions in the above. For example, in reference to the Mahmudiya incident:
    “One of the cases, involving Specialist James Barker, has already come to trial and the defendant has pleaded guilty and been sentenced to 90 years in prison.”
    “But the US military has refused to open a case or to investigate further.”
    According to Wikipedia, however:
    “Green was arrested as a civilian, and convicted by a civilian court, the U.S. District Court in Paducah, Kentucky.[27] The other four, all active-duty soldiers, were convicted through courts-martial.”
    Obviously, if the other four soldiers were convicted through military court-martial, the military has nothing more to investigate”

  • Cengal

    “ANd that can only happen because the US has a free press and reporters and human rights and relief organizations like the Red Cross (red crecent in Iraq) have unfettered access.”

    Exactly, Jaffna Tamil. Anyone can go to Iraq and talk to any civilian. There are no restrictions on journalists. You and I can go and carry out whatever investigation we want any day of the week, any time of the year. In fact, there was a 16 year old boy from Florida (USA) who flew to Iraq without his parents permission (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10643329/). If the USA wanted to hide stuff, they would not let people do that.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    As I said before, your government school way of thinking does not allow you to critically evaluate arguments in any logically consistent manner. Everything is either black or white, terrorist or hero, East or West, etc.

    ———-

    Iraqi police investigating the deaths of 11 people in the town of Ishaqi after a U.S. military raid last week reported that each of the bodies bore multiple wounds, according to a preliminary report reviewed by Knight Ridder News Service.

    The report contradicted an Iraqi police commander’s contention Sunday that each of the dead had been shot once in the head…

    According to the preliminary report, none of the bodies bore only a single gunshot wound, contradicting one Iraqi police officer’s account that each had been shot once in the head.

    One body had two gunshot wounds to the head. Five others showed signs of entrance and exit wounds to the head caused by “flying projectiles,” which the report noted could be “consistent with either bullets or shrapnel.” Four others showed signs of entrance and exit wounds to the chest or abdomen, also attributed to flying projectiles.

    The 11th person had “crushing of the head and neck,” the cause of which was undetermined.

    The Marines involved in the Ishaqi incident were also cleared by military investigation — and btw, there was an Al Quada operative hiding behind civilians in the Ishaqi house.

    http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/nation/14155053.htm

    Off the Cuff, now your job is to explain why the gunshot wound theory is not consistent with the autopsy. And why an Al Q’uida guy was hiding behind curtains in the family home. Let me make it clear again that the gunshot wounds to the head cannot be established beyond a shadow of a doubt. This is what Wikipedia (another independent source with no connection to the US military, has to say:

    “The photographic evidence, while extremely graphic, do not corroborate the single gun-shot wound to the head accusation. ”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishaqi_incident

    Looks like we are back to square. Since the killings do not equate to anything extrajudicial, it is beyond the mandate of Alston.

    Tata, Mr. Alston. Choose another vacation spot; Iraq has no need of your services. 🙂

  • Cengal

    “Let me make it clear again that the gunshot wounds to the head cannot be established beyond a shadow of a doubt.”

    – One body: two gunshot wounds to head

    – Five bodies: wounds could be caused by either shrapnel or bullets

    – Four bodies: again, indeterminate

    – One body: death due to crushing of head and neck

    Now, this is a rather *unusual* way to carry out an extrajudicial killing. Why the special treatment for the different victims? Especially that last fellow, seems he was treated to an extra special cuisine courtesy of the House. What is also interesting… that they would spend so much time torturing the victims (e.g. handcuffing, blindfolding) like the Iraqi’s claim, yet they knew they were going to call in air support to level the place anyway?

    Let us look at the American version of events:

    “What happened, the U.S. military says, is that American forces were fired on during a raid on a building believed to house an al-Qaida suspect. The troops are said to have returned fire and called in an air strike, which destroyed the building and killed the suspect – and resulted in up to nine other deaths. U.S. commanders say the troops acted in accordance with established rules of engagement.”

    This is more consistent with the results of the autopsy. The person with the definitive gunshot wounds was probably killed in the return fire. Nine others died due to shrapnel wounds from the airstrike. The last fellow probably died when the roof fell on him.

    Case closed.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Answer the question Cengal

    Why can’t you distinguish between TWO incidents?
    Why are you in an eternal state of Confusion?

    If you make a mistake be honourable and admit it unless it was not a mistake and was a cunning attempt to deceive.

    Ranting wont cover up for Idiocy.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    You are correct that Mahmoudiya was investigated. You did not put the heading from the original report, which says “Cover-Ups.”

    But you have not responded to the other contradictions which I found:

    “Then why does this report talk about James Barker getting 90 years in prison? Why was the Abu Grahib incident investigated? Why did even President Bush apologize? Why does this report say, “Another marine, John Jodka III, after a plea bargain, was found guilty on a reduced charge and sentenced to 18 months in jail on November 16, 2006″….”

    The report very clearly states that very few cases have been investigated by the US military. On the other hand, every incident that the report mentions has been investigated. And secondly, the report mentions many incidents, which contradicts what it says earlier: that very few cases have been investigated. 🙂

    And the other contradiction I found: the report says that US soldiers enjoy immunity. That is a real joke… the report forgot to mention that Stephen Green was sentenced to DEATH, and all of the Abu Grahib perpetrators were given jail terms. What kind of immunity is that?

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear GV,

    Below is a Link to a BBC Video of the Ishaq Massacre by US soldiers in Iraq. On the Right hand Pane there are TWO other links to Two other BBC videos. One of them is a commentary by BBC’s John Simpson on the Ishaqi Massacre and the other gives the background of the Haditha Massacre

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5040000/newsid_5042700/5042762.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=2&ms_javascript=true&bbcws=2

    You would have read the arguments put forward by CH4 supporters on this thread and on a previous thread dedicated to the CH4

    You would have noticed the Flip Flopping logic of commentators trying to justify Mr Alston’s Double Standards on being silent about Ishaq and Haditha Massacres (amongst many others) and his STRIDENT voice in dealing with CH4.

    Please note how the US forces attempt to justify these indiscriminate Massacres of Civilians. Would similar excuses from SL forces be accepted?

    I hope this will generate a comparative discussion of events depicted in the videos and conditions under which a subsequent inquiry should be undertaken.

    If an inquiry is undertaken what should be the procedure adopted?
    What processes should be in place to ensure such an inquiry into Universal Human Rights Law is applied to EVERY country with an even hand?
    How to ensure that a Rich and Powerful Country and a Poor and Weak Country are treated EQUALLY?

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    There are two things to note here. The first is that any in military, there will be soldiers who commit criminal acts. The second thing to note is that no judicial system is perfect. There will always be a few cases where the perpetrators are not adequately punished.

    On the other hand, what is even more important than the soldiers committing criminal acts are the measures in place to punish them. In the case of the USA , all of these measures exist. As I said, no judicial system is perfect, but we can say that, in the case of the USA, 95% of all cases are properly investigated and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

    In the SL case, however, the judicial system is so flawed that even the few measures in place that exist to punish the perpetrators barely amount to anything in practice. Why is the judicial system so flawed? The first reason, as you know, has to do with political interference. Political interference threatens the independence of the judiciary. The second reason has to do with many of the laws themselves. These laws are often “draconian” meaning they leave way too much room for abuse. For example, according to the Prevention of Terrorism Act, anyone can be arrested and detained without a search warrant, on the basis of “suspicion”, where suspicion is left to the discretion of the person doing the arrest. The same Prevention of Terrorism Act, however, specifies that a Minister, at his own discretion, can release anyone being detained under the PTA. What this law does is make the ministers more powerful than even the Police and Courts. That is why, when many Tamils disappeared in Colombo, people complained to Mano Ganeshan before they even went to the police. In the USA, when someone disappears like that, you do not complain to a minister. His influence will have zero impact on the release or continued detention of the suspect in question. You complain to the police, and if the police need help, the case goes to the FBI. There is no political interference at all.

    I would say, this is the real reason why Alston goes after some third-world countries. It is because the judicial systems are so flawed that the victims cannot expect adequate justice. Menezes family and Alpizar’s family can file lawsuits… they can go to the Courts and find a resolution to the conflict. Can a Tamil person do that in SL? Look at what happened to Sarath Fonseka, a man with great influence. He threatened to speak about war crimes, and now he is locked away somewhere. If a 5-star General cannot speak out about injustice, what chance does the man on the street have?

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Also provide a link to the autopsy report for the Ishaqiya Incident, so we can be sure it was a “massacre.”

    Also, the GV readers might be asking themselves, why does the US military carry out so many investigations against its own soldiers but we never hear about an investigation into crimes committed by SL soldiers

    Perhaps Off the Cuff can provide a link to a documentary that answers the above question

    Otherwise it might be necessary for Philip Alston to get involved

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    It appears you are having a hard time contesting the three videos from the BBC.

    What I noticed is how you are squirming to underplay the accusations of “Cover Up” that are being leveled. Not by me, but by the people who were directly affected by the behaviour of the Armed Forces of the USA. Just like that US Military spokesman on the video.

    Sure Alston should get involved but he is Afraid to do so as he is sure to get the boot ASAP. Whose interests is he supposed to protect?

    You being sure it’s a Massacre is of no consequence to the Justice that the victims’ relatives are clamoring for. The demand should be made by Alston from the Iraqi Govt and the USA Govt who are the main actors. He is the one who should be concerned.

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Which one is more credible? The autopsy which explains how the victims died or a BBC documentary?

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Cengal,

    Which one is more credible? The autopsy which explains how the victims died or a BBC documentary? You ask

    Hence as I stated in my previous post, Alston should demand for the relevant reports, In order to make sure. He is the guy with the Mandate. He is the Crusader.

    In these cases, the BBC has more verifiable info and Witnesses than the CH4 ever had

    This is what I stated in my previous post
    ” The demand should be made by Alston from the Iraqi Govt and the USA Govt who are the main actors. He is the one who should be concerned.”

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    The autopsy report was made by the Iraqi’s. The BBC documentary interviewed mainly interviewed Iraqis. But the autopsy report contradicts what a lot of Iraqis said.

    You can’t have it both ways… you believe the Iraqi’s and you don’t believe the Iraqis. Which one is it?

    By the way, didn’t GOSL label BBC Radio as an LTTE sympathizer and ban them from broadcasting in SL. But you have no trouble using the BBC to criticize the USA?

    Looks like double standards to me!

  • Off the Cuff

    Cengal,

    Oh sure… BBC interviewed Iraqi’s wearing US army uniforms….!!!

    Iraqis civilians accuse the USA
    Iraqi Govt which is pro American accuses the USA
    USA claims no wrong doing and is involved in an official cover up.
    But Iraqi civilians were massacred and Gang Raped and that’s a fact.

    USA protects her soldiers and even private American contractors (like Blackwater) from being prosecuted by the Law of the land where the Crimes were committed.

    The BBC is posing a question backed with video footage

    The point is, this is straight up the Alley, Alston is treading on CH4, he possesses the mandate to probe for the Truth.

    Why does he ignore BBC’s Three ?

  • Cengal

    Off the Cuff:

    Its all about statistics. In the real world, everything is an approximation – including Alston’s job.

    If the USA investigates 9/9 cases and only 2/9 cases lack a proper investigation, Alston is not going to investigate

    If the Sri Lankan Government/Army investigates 0/9 cases and 9 cases lack any investigation, period, Alston has no choice but to speak out

  • Off the Cuff

    Cengal,

    “If the USA investigates 9/9 cases and only 2/9 cases lack a proper investigation, Alston is not going to investigate” You wrote

    All 9 cases are accused of being cover ups by the Victims’ relatives and even by the Pro American Iraqi Govt and non of them were independent or impartial or unbiased

    ALL perpetrators are provided immunity from the laws of the Land where they were committed. This include Private US Security Contractors

    Alston is required to inquire into such claims IF he is to be considered UNBIASED. Strangely he does not raise a finger to do so.

    Why does he ignore BBC’s Three which surpasses the CH4

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    Looks like you are getting desperate. Was the death sentence passed on Stephen Green a cover-up?

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    I am not the one who is getting desperate.

    The immunity from prosecution under the laws of the Country where the atrocities were committed is provided by the USA Govt not the Pro US Iraqi Govt.

    Alston has the Mandate for bringing it up in the UN and possibly the ICJ but he is tongue tied.

    The requirement in the face of accusations of a cover up is either an inquiry by the Iraqi’s or an Impartial. Independent, International Inquiry not a Face saving one by the Perpetrator’s Govt.

    Why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which surpasses the CH4 ?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    The military always has its own system of laws. So any violation will be prosecuted under US military law. Just as Sarath Fonseka is being tried under SL military law. Military law does not equal immunity.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    US Military Law CANNOT supersede the Law of the Land where the Murders took place. US Military Law can be applied to the US military WITHIN the US or as a SUPPLEMENT to the Law of the Land that is TRANSGRESSED by US Military personnel. It cannot REPLACE the LAW of the LAND where the Transgression took place.

    The US Military Law cannot become the Supreme Law for ANY Atrocity Committed by the US Forces in a Foreign Country. If they commit a criminal act in a Foreign Country, the Laws of THAT country SHOULD have precedence over all others.

    Alston has the Mandate for bringing it up in the UN and possibly the ICJ but he is tongue tied.

    The requirement in the face of accusations of a cover up is either an inquiry by the Iraqi’s or an Impartial. Independent, International Inquiry not a Face saving one by the Perpetrator’s Govt.

    Why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which surpasses CH4 whatever way its looked at?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    Military personnel should be tried in civilian courts? That’s your opinion. But the opinion of most people law is that military law works just fine.

  • Heshan

    But the opinion of most people is that military law works just fine.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    You stated
    “Military personnel should be tried in civilian courts? That’s your opinion. But the opinion of most people law is that military law works just fine”

    The above is your opinion which has a very recognizable bias.

    Just try telling that to the Iraqis and the Japanese etc where the Locals were at the receiving and of US soldiers’ inhuman & carnal behaviour.

    “MOST people” does not seem to include the Population of Iraq and the Pro US Iraqi Govt. It does not seem to include even some Decent Americans (watch the BBC Video). It does not seem to include the BBC reporters that compiled this video.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5040000/newsid_5042700/5042762.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=2&ms_javascript=true&bbcws=2

    US Law’s Military or otherwise Starts and stops within the boundaries of the US. It cannot cross International borders. Its the same for any other country’s Laws. You seem to think that the US has special rights.

    US Military Law CANNOT supersede the Law of the Land where the Murders took place. US Military Law can be applied to the US military WITHIN the US or as a SUPPLEMENT to the Law of the Land that is TRANSGRESSED by US Military personnel. It cannot REPLACE the LAW of the LAND where the Transgression took place. They do not have Diplomatic immunity.

    The US Forces cannot have a BLANK cheque to cover up their own atrocities committed in a Foreign Land.

    The requirement in the face of accusations of a cover up is either an inquiry by the Iraqi’s or an Impartial. Independent, International Inquiry not a Face saving one by the Perpetrator’s Govt.

    Why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which surpasses CH4 whatever way its looked at?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff,

    “US Military Law CANNOT supersede the Law of the Land where the Murders took place. US Military Law can be applied to the US military WITHIN the US or as a SUPPLEMENT to the Law of the Land that is TRANSGRESSED by US Military personnel. It cannot REPLACE the LAW of the LAND where the Transgression took place. They do not have Diplomatic immunity.”

    As I said, this is official policy. When US soldiers are accused of some misdemeanor, they are tried by military courts, not civilian courts. Most of the world, even SL, follows a similar policy in regards to the conduct of their soldiers.

    Now, you call it “diplomatic immunity”, which is a rather absurd argument. A soldier is not a diplomat. A military court does not exist to offer immunity.

    To decide whether or not these military courts serve their purpose, it is necessary to look at the number of convictions. As long as the number of convictions is sufficiently large, the military court has served its purpose.

    It’s pretty obvious why Alston does not go after the US military… it would be a waste of time and money. There may be transgressions that merit further investigation, but his job is not to investigate every possible violation. If 95 – 98% of all cases are investigated without any bias, the system is obviously working.

    In the SL case, less than 1% of all transgressions are investigated. CH4 tape is a prime example.

    Now, if you are Philip Alston, who will you spend more time going after?

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    The Victims are the Iraqi’s
    They are calling for an Investigation
    Their Govt is calling for an Investigation and that Govt is Pro US.
    All of them including Decent American Civilians and the BBC is accusing USA of a cover up

    Watch the BBC Video for evidence of what people think
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5040000/newsid_5042700/5042762.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=2&ms_javascript=true&bbcws=2

    The ONLY time the Law of the Land does not apply is when the alleged perpetrator is covered by Diplomatic immunity and the US Military in a FOREIGN LAND is not covered by it unless the concerned Foreign Govt expressly agree to such immunity. This is not the case here.

    US official policy is of no concern when US military personnel commits HR Violations which included atrocities such as Gang Rape and Massacres in a Foreign Country.

    Official Policy of the USA CANNOT Supersede the Law of a Foreign Land where US troops commit Atrocious HR Violations.

    The US has even protected US CIVILIANS who were involved in Murder and Mayhem in Iraq, Blackwater is a case in point.

    It is obvious why Alston ignores these ATROCIOUS HR Violations even in the face of Overwhelming Verifiable Evidence. He is AFRAID to go after the USA as he is sure to lose his position and any new International appointments that he is eyeballing for which the US has veto powers. His behaviour is shameless.

    The other possibility is that Alston has succumbed to what the FBI claims the LTTE stoops to (It is not merely a claim as LTTE operatives have been convicted by US courts for it).

    In Iraq THE US Govt is involved in a Cover Up and Alston aids and abets in that by his inaction.

    Why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which has AMPLE verifiable Evidence and surpasses CH4 that does not have any comparable evidence, whatever way its looked at?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    “All of them including Decent American Civilians and the BBC is accusing USA of a cover up”

    Now you are making things up . Again, it shows you are very desperate .

    The word cover-up is not used in the documentary even once.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    You need to be a bit more careful when you make emphatic statements

    Video name – US troops cleared of Iraq wrongdoing

    Transcript – …… inquiry is considering criminal charges against US Marines an allegations of a COVER UP ……

    Time – between 1:10 and 1:16

    Desperation seems to be yours Heshan and that desperation has made you DEAF too since you have no answers to give.

    I am repeating the previous post. Lets have some clear answers

    The Victims are the Iraqi’s
    They are calling for an Investigation
    Their Govt is calling for an Investigation and that Govt is Pro US.
    All of them including Decent American Civilians and the BBC is accusing USA of a cover up

    Watch the BBC Video for evidence of what people think
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5040000/newsid_5042700/5042762.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=2&ms_javascript=true&bbcws=2

    The ONLY time the Law of the Land does not apply is when the alleged perpetrator is covered by Diplomatic immunity and the US Military in a FOREIGN LAND is not covered by it unless the concerned Foreign Govt expressly agree to such immunity. This is not the case here.

    US official policy is of no concern when US military personnel commits HR Violations which included atrocities such as Gang Rape and Massacres in a Foreign Country.

    Official Policy of the USA CANNOT Supersede the Law of a Foreign Land where US troops commit Atrocious HR Violations.

    The US has even protected US CIVILIANS who were involved in Murder and Mayhem in Iraq, Blackwater is a case in point.

    It is obvious why Alston ignores these ATROCIOUS HR Violations even in the face of Overwhelming Verifiable Evidence. He is AFRAID to go after the USA as he is sure to lose his position and any new International appointments that he is eyeballing for which the US has veto powers. His behaviour is shameless.

    The other possibility is that Alston has succumbed to what the FBI claims the LTTE stoops to (It is not merely a claim as LTTE operatives have been convicted by US courts for it).

    In Iraq THE US Govt is involved in a Cover Up and Alston aids and abets in that by his inaction.

    Why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which has AMPLE verifiable Evidence and surpasses CH4 that does not have any comparable evidence, whatever way its looked at?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    It does not take six seconds to say the word “cover-up.”

    Once again, The word cover-up is not used in the documentary even once.

    Maybe it is your opinion that a cover-up is going on, but it is not the view of the BBC that a cover-up is going on.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    A vain attempt Heshan a very vain attempt.

    You said you cant hear the words “Cover Up” in the video. I gave you the location. Without counting seconds go and listen.

    Since you say that YOU can’t hear it you have CONFIRMED that you are DEAF as others who watch and listen to the video CAN hear what you deny.

    Iraqi’s, the Iraqi Govt, the BBC who compiled the THREE videos and decent Americans believe there is a cover up. That is their opinion as no Independent inquiry was allowed to be conducted to confirm it.

    Alston is either Afraid of the USA or corrupt to ignore at least nine of these instances (BBC has only three on the video)

    The cover up Heshan is not going on it has already been done and the HR Violators are safely back home.

    Why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which has AMPLE verifiable Evidence and surpasses CH4 that does not have any comparable evidence, whatever way its looked at?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    You are correct that the word cover-up is mentioned once.

    I regret the error.

    On the other hand, the BBC does not accuse the USA of a cover-up. It is merely presenting both sides of the story.

    I don’t think you are used to this type of journalism in SL, so your inability to understand what the documentary is saying is understandable.

    Please not the following three phrases from the documentary:

    “the question is how?”

    “collateral damage or murder, something terrible happened that day”

    “but a new inquiry is considering criminal charges against US marines and a cover-up…”

    Now, who is conducting this new inquiry?

    Unfortunately for you, the US Military is conducting the inquiry

    Therefore, the only question left to answer is whether US soldiers tried to cover up evidence.

    But if the US military is investigating itself, then it follows that the US military cannot be accused of a cover-up. It is impossible to investigate oneself and engage in a cover-up.

    Therefore, Alston has no need to drop by.

  • Observer

    What can we do Off the Cuff. The world operates on 2 sets of laws. One for the rich and one for the poor. Reality sucks but have to deal with it. What pisses me off the most is that these so called human rights activists are also in their pocket. At least do the killing and say yes we kill and there isn’t anything you can do about it – “because we own the world!” I can take that – honesty.

    Alston can’t handle it! He’s on a witch hunt on countries that are easy to vilify without proper evidence having to go to great lengths to just make an argument it “maybe” evidence just to earn his pay packet!

    Anger isn’t good for you. I just take a deep breath and try to forget about this sort of persecution.

  • Heshan

    *please note

  • Heshan

    “The world operates on 2 sets of laws. One for the rich and one for the poor.”ns

    I agree with that… its basic economics. The wealthier you are, the more control you have over the allocation of prime natural resources and, in general, the more influence you have over the distribution process. These G10 nations need oil to drive their economies. It is not like SL where mostly bicycles, cars, and CTB buses go along the road. Here in the US there are superhighways. Millions of trucks move along each of these superhighways everyday. Factor in the trains that reach each end of the country, and this is what keeps big business going. Without the oil, the trucks could not go… if the big businesses collapse, that is the end of the economy, which is why Obama bailed them out.

    I said it before, I’ll say it again: if you want to solve 2/3 of the world’s problems, find a substitute for oil. Oil has more potential for evil than money… after all, money is just paper, it can be printed an infinite amount of times (of course you’ll get inflation). Oil is something else; it is non-renewable, it is the major supplier of energy, and it is the driver of the global economy. The incentive to possess this oil in some form or another is not something most people can resist.

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Observer,

    Agree with your comment 100%.

    When CH4 is held against the BBC three, CH4 becomes insignificant in comparison. CH4 cannot even establish the Country where it was perpetrated let alone when and where. Has absolutely no evidence about the perpetrators. Absolutely no evidence who the victims are. No corpses, No murder weapons etc

    In contrast, evidence is available for everything the US Soldiers committed. These Atrocious Human Rights Violations include gang rape of Children and cold blooded murders.

    People like Heshan who were strident before, start looking like a dog trying to catch it’s own tail when they try to Defend the atrocious Human Rights Violations of the US Military in Iraq and Alston’s complicity in aiding and abetting hiding the truth.

    I am not angered in anyway but hugely enjoy to see those trying to defend the US, bending rules and squirming, in trying to do so while the The intelligent has fallen silent.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    A Cover up is to conduct a SHAM inquiry.

    A cover up is to give a comparatively lower face saving punishment than what the crime deserves.

    Cover up is to shield the perpetrators from the Law of the Land where the Crime is committed. A Muslim country would impose the capital punishment for ALL who aided and abetted in Gang Rape and murder.

    Cover up is to prevent an impartial independent investigation to suppress the truth (what is the US afraid of?).

    Cover up is to protect the people higher in the command structure from censure and punishment.

    The death penalty would have been passed on the perpetrators if the identical crime was perpetrated on US soil on a US Citizen.

    Was the 14 year old female Child who was Gang Raped and allowed to hear the MURDER of her parents taking place, while the Act of Raping went on, less Human than a US child?

    The Crimes depicted in the BBC Video should be investigated by Alston with more zeal than that he has towards CH4.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5040000/newsid_5042700/5042762.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=2&ms_javascript=true&bbcws=2

    The Following Crimes carry the Death Penalty under US FEDERAL LAW

    Murder related to rape or child molestation.
    Murder related to sexual exploitation of children.
    Murder involving torture.
    Murder committed by the use of a firearm during a crime of violence or a drug-trafficking crime.
    Murder with the intent of preventing testimony by a witness, victim, or informant.
    First-degree murder.
    Civil rights offenses resulting in death.

    Why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which has AMPLE verifiable Evidence and surpasses CH4 that does not have any comparable evidence, whatever way its looked at?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    “Was the 14 year old female Child who was Gang Raped and allowed to hear the MURDER of her parents taking place, while the Act of Raping went on, less Human than a US child?”

    This incident was investigated already. US soldiers were sentenced to life in prison. .

    Federal jurors who convicted Green of rape and murder on May 7 told the judge they couldn’t agree on the appropriate sentence after deliberating for more than 10 hours over two days. Their choices were a death sentence or life in prison without parole. Since they could not unanimously agree on either sentence, life in prison had to be the verdict.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    I know about the Green verdict. It was subjected to a SHAM INVESTIGATION and a COVER UP.

    My question was

    “The death penalty would have been passed on the perpetrators if the identical crime was perpetrated on US soil on a US Citizen.

    Was the 14 year old female Child who was Gang Raped and allowed to hear the MURDER of her parents taking place, while the Act of Raping went on, less Human than a US child?”

    The US Federal Law mandates the Death Penalty EVEN for child Molestation let alone Gang Rape, TORTURE & MURDER.

    ALL THE PEOPLE INVOLVED BECOME ACCESSORIES under normal Law
    ALL of them WOULD have been EXECUTED if this was done on US SOIL to a US Citizen. All of them would have been EXECUTED if they were allowed to be TRIED under the Laws of the Land in which the Crimes were committed.

    You keep BENDING HUMAN RIGHTS MORALITY to serve your own self serving interests. If you were a member of that JURY you too would have voted against the Death Penalty. The Jury could not reach a unanimous verdict as it had BIGOTS like you who are prepared to BEND HUMAN RIGHTS MORALITY to safe guard US interests within. That is how some of the JURORS viewed this ATROCITY.

    It was proven beyond doubt that the 14 year old CHILD was GANG RAPED
    It was proven beyond doubt that the CRIME was PREMEDITATED FOR WEEKS.
    It was proven beyond doubt that ALL those who took part were actively involved (including the look out).
    It was proven beyond doubt that the Girl was allowed to hear her parents being SHOT.
    It was proven beyond doubt that the Child was MURDERED after Gang Raping.
    It was proven beyond doubt that She was BURNT in order to eliminate evidence.
    It was proven beyond doubt that ALL her family members were Shot and MURDERED.

    DOES THIS NOT SHAKE YOU TO THE CORE OF MORALITY THAT YOU TRY TO DISPLAY HERE ON GV?

    THIS CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE SUBJECT OF A UN INVESTIGATION NOT A SHAM ONE BY THE US MILITARY. IT SHOULD HAVE GONE TO THE ICJ

    Alston is a spineless puppet in US hands and he proves to be such a puppet in the hands of the LTTE Lobby.

    In the case of the USA, Alston is protecting his own future.
    In the case of the LTTE LOBBY he seems to have succumbed to other forms of pressure.

    Let’s see Alston proving otherwise by investigating the BBC Three allegations with EQUAL zeal as he does with CH4.

    Why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which has AMPLE verifiable Evidence and surpasses CH4 that does not have any comparable evidence, whatever way its looked at?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    “I know about the Green verdict. It was subjected to a SHAM INVESTIGATION and a COVER UP.”

    Death penalty instead life in prison without parole… looks like your desperateness knows no bounds. So now you want Alston to investigate because one fellow got life in prison without parole instead of the death penalty.

    Instead of writing the same thing over and over again, it is better if you discussed the specifics of each individual case. Alston does not investigate because some people in S. Lanka drink too much kasipu and watch BBC documentaries. There has to be a pattern of investigations and a cover-up by the higher-ups. When the BBC can go and interview anyone they want, its hard to accuse them of a cover-up. Common sense (actually stronger than kasipu, at least in the long-term).

  • Heshan

    *There has to be a pattern of abuses

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    Desperation? Look who has resorted to Semantics and struggling to justify the unjustifiable.

    You thought you had a great champion to press ahead with the cooked up CH4 which has ZERO evidence to back it up. When confronted with the DUPLICITOUS nature of your Champion in ignoring WORSE WAR CRIMES and CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY that has overwhelming evidence you find yourself groping for straws.

    These war crimes and Crimes against Humanity is just the tip of the iceberg as far as the US’s war on Terror is concerned.

    A Cover up is when a sham investigation is used to protect those involved in Gang Rape, Murder, Torture and Pre-Meditated War Crimes perpetrated on unsuspecting 14 year old female children.

    Cover up is when even Private Security personnel like Blackwater is protected from prosecution by the Law of the Land where Crimes are committed.

    Cover up is when no less than 9 incidents where Evidence is available of Human Rights Violations are not prosecuted as war crimes.

    11 dead in a single family including a 75 year old Woman, 3 children and a 6 month old baby. Iraqi police confirms the dead has bullet wounds to the head and stomach. BBC commentators says it appears that all of them died from bullet wounds and not at all by being crushed US says they were CRUSHED by falling debris. Americans prevent an Iraqi police inquiry. The US Military inquiry clears US soldiers. A clear case of a cover up.

    Over 24 civilians hounded and Murdered in their homes including 7 women and 3 children in retaliation for a road side landmine explosion which took the life of ONE US soldier.

    The principle Witness is a girl of 12, who feigned death to escape being shot. Many other Witnesses have come forward to give evidence.

    US Soldiers break into a house 200 metres from their check point. They had observed a 14 year old female Child living there for weeks and targeted her for rape. Covering their faces with Black Underwear three US soldiers break into the house while one stands as look out. Takes the parents and the sister of the 14 year old in to the next room and shoots them while two soldiers rape Janabi the 14 year old. A third soldier rapes her then shoots her in the head. They throw a kerosene soaked blanket on her body and sets fire to it. They go back to the check point and eats grilled chicken. The Americans prevent an inquiry and prosecution by Iraqi Police.

    In all these cases Iraqi Police is prevented from prosecuting the criminals.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_5040000/newsid_5042700/5042762.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=2&ms_javascript=true&bbcws=2

    Alston’s behaviour raises questions of impartiality, Integrity and possible pecuniary involvement with the LTTE Lobby.

    To you, Humanity revolves around the Tamils and the West (especially the US).

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    Unfortunately for you, what matters in a court of law is actual objective evidence, not crying and whining from the victims. Unfortunately, the autopsy conducted by Iraqi’s does not establish the gunshot wound theory beyond a shadow of a doubt. Therefore, in a court of law, you lose your case because it is impossible to determine beyond a reasonable shadow of a doubt whether the victims were shot deliberately or the roof fell on them.

    ————-

    Iraqi police investigating the deaths of 11 people in the town of Ishaqi after a U.S. military raid last week reported that each of the bodies bore multiple wounds, according to a preliminary report reviewed by Knight Ridder News Service.

    The report contradicted an Iraqi police commander’s contention Sunday that each of the dead had been shot once in the head…

    According to the preliminary report, none of the bodies bore only a single gunshot wound, contradicting one Iraqi police officer’s account that each had been shot once in the head.

    One body had two gunshot wounds to the head. Five others showed signs of entrance and exit wounds to the head caused by “flying projectiles,” which the report noted could be “consistent with either bullets or shrapnel.” Four others showed signs of entrance and exit wounds to the chest or abdomen, also attributed to flying projectiles.

    The 11th person had “crushing of the head and neck,” the cause of which was undetermined.

    The Marines involved in the Ishaqi incident were also cleared by military investigation — and btw, there was an Al Quada operative hiding behind civilians in the Ishaqi house.

    http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/nation/14155053.htm

    —

    Off the Cuff, now your job is to explain why the gunshot wound theory is not consistent with the autopsy. And why an Al Q’uida guy was hiding behind curtains in the family home. Let me make it clear again that the gunshot wounds to the head cannot be established beyond a shadow of a doubt. This is what Wikipedia (another independent source with no connection to the US military, has to say:

    “The photographic evidence, while extremely graphic, do not corroborate the single gun-shot wound to the head accusation. ”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishaqi_incident

    —————————-

    The BBC documentary does not mention the results from the autopsy. In a court of law, the autopsy evidence would be considered much stronger than any “evidence” laid out by the BBC.

    In fact, the BBC relied on photographic evidence from which it is impossible to state beyond a shadow of a doubt that the victims were killed by gunshot wounds.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    Flexible Morality and Flexible Rules, It is a characteristic trait observable in the defensive writing that you do.

    “what matters in a court of law is actual objective evidence, not crying and whining from the victims.” you said.

    Now can you point out one SINGLE bit of “actual objective evidence” in the CH4 video that even points to Sri Lanka? The same standard of evidence that you are demanding in the case of the US HR Violations and War Crimes in Iraq? Other than the “whining” but this time emanating from you and the Tamil Diaspora who are not even related to the victims there is no “actual objective evidence”.

    Hope you were not “blind” to the following from my previous post

    “The principle Witness is a girl of 12, who feigned death to escape being shot. Many other Witnesses have come forward to give evidence.”

    That is FIRST HAND EVIDENCE that will be accepted by any court of Justice.

    Heshan, the BBC is reporting with Picture Evidence of SHOT civilians. BBC further says that the rest of the Pictures are too HORRIFIC even to show on BBC. How do you propose to contest that with a Fly by “KNIGHT” report?
    That house was BOMBED from the air by US Fighter Jets after the “Killing Spree” was over.

    “In fact, the BBC relied on photographic evidence from which it is impossible to state beyond a shadow of a doubt that the victims were killed by gunshot wounds.”

    So what do you and the vociferous Tamil Diaspora rely on to press for War Crimes investigations citing CH4 “beyond a shadow of a doubt”?

    Does Philip Alston have anything else other than an unsupported video from an unknown source, unknown country, unknown place, unknown time, unknown victims and unknown perpetrators to press for an Independent, International, Impartial War Crimes investigation? Remember your own words “beyond a shadow of a doubt”.

    So why does Alston ignore BBC’s Three, which has AMPLE verifiable Evidence and surpasses CH4 that does not have any comparable evidence, whatever way its looked at?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff,

    I am referring specifically to the Ishaqiya incident. There was no one left alive in the house as it was entirely demolished. I am asking you why the autopsy report conducted by Iraqi’s contradicts what the Iraqi police officer and BBC say.

    Iraqi police investigating the deaths of 11 people in the town of Ishaqi after a U.S. military raid last week reported that each of the bodies bore multiple wounds, according to a preliminary report reviewed by Knight Ridder News Service.

    The report contradicted an Iraqi police commander’s contention Sunday that each of the dead had been shot once in the head…

    According to the preliminary report, none of the bodies bore only a single gunshot wound, contradicting one Iraqi police officer’s account that each had been shot once in the head.

    One body had two gunshot wounds to the head. Five others showed signs of entrance and exit wounds to the head caused by “flying projectiles,” which the report noted could be “consistent with either bullets or shrapnel.” Four others showed signs of entrance and exit wounds to the chest or abdomen, also attributed to flying projectiles.

    The 11th person had “crushing of the head and neck,” the cause of which was undetermined.

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    What is wrong with the following?

    The (autopsy) report contradicted an Iraqi police commander’s contention Sunday that each of the dead had been shot once in the head…

    According to the preliminary report, none of the bodies bore only a single gunshot wound, contradicting one Iraqi police officer’s account that each had been shot once in the head.

    Off the Cuff, can you explain why the Iraqi police commander lied about the people in the Ishaqiya house being shot once in the head?

    In a Court of Law, this is called perjury and any such evidence is non-admissible.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    can you explain why the Iraqi police commander lied about the people in the Ishaqiya house being shot once in the head? “

    Whether he has lied or not is for a court to decide. It’s beyond your capacity to do so.

    In the first place the alleged Crimes Against Humanity should be brought before an Impartial, International, Independent Court.

    That is Alston’s Job because he is trying to bring CH4 which does not have an IOTA of evidence even to place before a court. On the other hand the Human Rights Violations Committed by the US led Coalition forces which are not limited to the 9 incidents stated on this thread about Crimes Against Humanity but also includes Abu Gharib, Guantanamo, Deigo Garcia, Cruise Misile attacks on civilians, depriving civilians of food, water and even Hospital emergency care. Majority of these accusations are supported by Hard Evidence including first hand Eye Witness Reports and Pictures taken by the perpetrators themselves.

    Alston has no excuse to ignore Human Rights Violations about which Hard Evidence is available while pursuing the CH4 accusations about which not an Iota of evidence is available.

    If you can, prove to the readership of GV that CH4 has Hard Evidence to support the following

    1. Country where the purported crime was Committed
    2. Place where the purpoted crime was Commited
    3. Time when the purpoted Crime was Committed
    4. Identity of the Criminals
    5. Identity of the Victims
    6. Bodies of the Victims
    7. Murder weapons
    8. Eye witnesses that have come forward to give evidence

    ALL the above are available in support of the Alleged Criminal Violations of HUMAN RIGHTS committed by the US led Allied forces but NONE are available in support of CH4

    Alston has destroyed any claim for impartiality all by himself.

    He is suspect to have succumbed to monetary enticement from the LTTE Lobby and of sucking up to powerful countries in the expectation of lucrative positions.

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    “Whether he has lied or not is for a court to decide. It’s beyond your capacity to do so.”

    What does the BBC , your favorite source, have to say about this?

    The video tape obtained (from Sunni militants) by the BBC shows a number of dead adults and children at the site with what our world affairs editor John Simpson says were clearly gunshot wounds.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5042036.stm

    Looks like John Simpson forgot to check the autopsy report!

    Looks like the BBC documentary just got thrown out the window, in a Court of Law.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    “Looks like the BBC documentary just got thrown out the window, in a Court of Law.

    Heshan your comment is Hilarious to say the least.

    To be thrown out the window first it must ENTER through the DOOR of an Independent, Impartial, International COURT. That is vehemently opposed by the US and her Allies.

    Have you forgotten that so soon?

    Why? What do they have to FEAR? Why not allow an independent court to be the judge? …… that was one of your arguments about SL was it not?

    CH4 has absolutely no hard evidence remember? But the Atrocities (note the PLURAL) of the US led Allied forces have plenty. Alston ignores US atrocities and has become COMPLICIT in the Cover Up.

    Where are your answers to the 8 questions posed in my post of March 7, 2010 @ 11:11 am ????

  • Heshan

    ” first it must ENTER through the DOOR of an Independent, Impartial, International COURT.”

    If the BBC documentary contradicts the autopsy report, then the BBC documentary will have no relevance in a Court of Law. You don’t need a trial to tell you that… you can predict the outcome of the trial in advance.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    “If the BBC documentary contradicts the autopsy report, then the BBC documentary will have no relevance in a Court of Law. You don’t need a trial to tell you that… you can predict the outcome of the trial in advance.

    Heshan, Is it the practice in the USA to use a TV documentary as evidence in a Court of Law?

    If and when ALL these cases go before an Independent, Impartial, International Court then the Court will decide from the evidence presented to it. These are GROSS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.

    What would be the standing of “Eye Witness Evidence” in a Court of Law?

    In one massacre The principle Witness is a girl of 12, who feigned death to escape being shot. Many other Witnesses have come forward to give evidence.

    If the Americans have not done any wrong why do they Fear an inquiry by an Independent, Impartial, International Court?

    This was your argument about the UNSUPPORTED CH4 video was it not?

    Double Dutch wont help.

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff,

    All of these cases involving the US military have already gone before an independent, impartial Court of Law – its called a military tribunal. There have been instances where the military tribunal has convicted soldiers, and there have been cases where the military tribunal has not convicted soldiers. Your argument seems to be that the military tribunal does not work only because every soldier is not convicted in every case. What you need to do is make a list of all possible cases and next to the list, indicate whether or not there has been a conviction. Let’s see if you are capable of making such a list (I highly doubt you are because it would reveal the flaws in your logic).

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshanm

    “All of these cases involving the US military have already gone before an independent, impartial Court of Law – its called a military tribunal.”

    Heshan, we are not talking of SHAM Courts with SHAM prosecutions and Face Saving Verdicts. That is called a COVER UP.

    These atrocities and Human Rights Violations were committed on Foreign Soil. Normally the Law of the Land applies and Justice is meted out in the Country where the CRIMES were committed.

    Asking a Thieve ‘s Mother to Deliver Justice is not what the VICTIMS want.

    We are talking of independent, impartial, INTERNATIONAL Courts of Law, the same thing that the USA and people like you are trying to impose on SL.

    Why does the US FEAR “Impartial, INTERNATIONAL, Independent Courts of Law”, if it does not have ANYTHING to HIDE?

    Why is Alston hiding from his responsibilities?

    Why does the US prevent Impartial, INTERNATIONAL, Independent investigations and prosecutions?

    What is it HIDING?

    Why? Why? WHY?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    I asked you to make a list.

    Here is an example of a list:

    1. Incident 1 (conviction/no conviction)
    2. Incident 2 (conviction/no conviction)
    3. Incident 3 (conviction/no conviction)
    4. Incident 4 (conviction/no conviction)
    5. Incident 5 (conviction/no conviction)
    6. Incident 6 (conviction/no conviction)
    7. Incident 7 (conviction/no conviction)
    …..n Incident n (conviction/no conviction)

    Can you make a list such as the above? Next to each incident involving the US military, indicate whether or not there has been a conviction. Such a list is called raw data . It is the criteria which Alston uses to decide whether or not a formal investigation is necessary. If you want to prove Alston is guilty of double standards, then you have to show he is manipulating the data. Remember to list enough incidents; otherwise no valid inference can be drawn from the data.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    I don’t intend to allow you to divert attention from the MAIN ISSUE.

    A SHAM Court Martial is no replacement for a trial by an Impartial, INTERNATIONAL, Independent Court of Law

    Why is the USA consistently subverting Justice by not allowing that?

    It’s not only the Military that they are protecting but private companies like BLACKWATER who along with the military went on the rampage in Iraq.

    What is the USA trying to hide?

    If they have done no wrong why do they fear such an Independent International Inquiry?

    Your own arguments have returned to haunt you

    Here is a list I gave you 10 days ago that remains unanswered.

    1. Country where the purported crime was Committed
    2. Place where the purported crime was Committed
    3. Time when the purported Crime was Committed
    4. Identity of the Criminals
    5. Identity of the Victims
    6. Bodies of the Victims
    7. Murder weapons
    8. Eye witnesses that have come forward to give evidence

    ALL the above are available in support of the Alleged Criminal Violations of HUMAN RIGHTS committed by the US led Allied forces but NONE are available in support of CH4, so why does Alston have selective Amnesia?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    Here is another list:

    1. Cat
    2. Mouse
    3. Lemonade
    4. Chocolate cookie
    5. Buddhist monk

    Above list is clearly nonsense. When you throw around allegations from very different sources – allegations which have not been independently verified in a Court of Law or military tribunal – then you also have nonsense. There is a difference between allegations made in a Court of Law/military tribunal and allegations made before a BBC camera crew. Ever seen the TV show, “Star Search”, with Ed McMan? 🙂 I think it applies here.

    Once again, if your contention is that the US military tribunals do not function efficiently, then you will have it to prove it with numbers.

    1. Incident 1 (conviction/no conviction)
    2. Incident 2 (conviction/no conviction)
    3. Incident 3 (conviction/no conviction)
    4. Incident 4 (conviction/no conviction)
    5. Incident 5 (conviction/no conviction)
    6. Incident 6 (conviction/no conviction)
    7. Incident 7 (conviction/no conviction)
    …..n Incident n (conviction/no conviction)

    That’s all you have to do. Find seven or more incidents involving the US military where there have been no convictions. Then I will agree with you that Alston should investigate. To avoid double standards, let it be said that I can find, in half an hour 300 incidents involving the Sri Lankan military that have not been investigated. Give me 24 hours and I can find 3000.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    Your slip is showing Heshan, having difficulty in answering pertinent questions relating to CH4 and the Atrocious crimes of your friends?

    The more you try to defend your friends the more you degenerate intelectually.

    We are talking of JUSTICE dispensed by Either an Iraqi Court where the ABOMINABLE CRIMES were committed or by an INTERNATIONAL, INDEPENDENT, IMPARTIAL Court acceptable to the Iraqi’s who are the VICTIMS.

    Sham trials are no replacement for JUSTICE.

    Without beating about the bush answer the following questions directly in relation to each of the crimes that the US Forces have committed and the crime depicted in the CH4 Video.

    1. What is the Country where the purported crime was Committed?
    2. Where is the Place where the purported crime was Committed?
    3. What was the Time when the purported Crime was Committed?
    4. What is the Identity of the Criminals?
    5. Can you Identity of the Victims?
    6. Can you produce the Bodies of the Victims?
    7. Have the Murder weapons been found?
    8. Are there any Eye witnesses that have come forward to give evidence?

  • Heshan

    Off the Cuff:

    The point has been sufficiently proved: that you cannot find seven incidents involving the US military, spanning a five year period, where there have been no convictions.

    For the record, I have no problems with Alston investigating the USA (or any other country). But if he investigates the USA, he will not find anything new. In other words, a total waste of time.

  • Human

    Well, I could find 300-3000 incidents involving your freedom fighters too.

    Here are several incidents with high casualties involving the U. S. where there were NO investigations:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia (12 specific incidents)

    Civilian casualties
    Human Rights Watch “concludes that as few as 489 and as many as 528 Yugoslav civilians were killed in the ninety separate incidents in Operation Allied Force”. Refugees were among the victims. Between 278 and 317 of the dead, between 56 and 60 percent of the total number of deaths, were in Kosovo. In Serbia, 201 civilians were killed (five in Vojvodina) and eight died in Montenegro. Almost two thirds (303 to 352) of the total registered civilian deaths occurred in twelve incidents where ten or more civilian deaths were confirmed.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Iraq_(December_1998)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

    Iraqi Health Ministry
    The Health Ministry of the Iraqi government estimated 87,215 Iraqi violent deaths between January 1, 2005 and February 28, 2009. The number excludes thousands of people who are missing and civilians who were buried in the chaos of war without official notice. If included, those would raise the number of dead for that period by 10 to 20 percent according to the government official who provided the data to the Associated Press. The data was in the form of a list of yearly totals for death certificates issued for violent deaths by hospitals and morgues between Jan. 1, 2005, and Feb. 28, 2009. The Health ministry does not have figures for the first two years of the war.[5]
    [edit]Associated Press
    The Associated Press stated that more than 110,600 Iraqis had been killed since the start of the war to April 2009. This number is per the Health Ministry tally of 87,215 covering January 1, 2005 to February 28, 2009 combined with counts of casualties for 2003-2004, and after February 29, 2009 from hospital sources and media reports.[5] For more info see farther down at Associated Press and Health Ministry. More information.

    I’m sure there are hundreds of incidents right there now involving the U. S. which have not resulted in any convictions.

  • Off the Cuff

    Heshan,

    Human has given you more than you can chew in the above post.

    Why are you looking for a magic number of Seven? Is it to hide behind?

    Be a man and except the Truth. The USA HAS committed innumerable atrocities and prevents Independent International investigations that should end up in the ICJ at the Hague.

    The murder of 24 Iraqi civilians including women and children happened in 2005. Five years later, the case still drags on. Out of 8 originally charged in the USA 7 have already been freed. This in spite of Eye Witness evidence of a survivor, a 12 year old Girl. This is how a COVER UP works.

    24 civilians died and finally no one would be responsible. Probably the Guns and Grenades fired all by itself.

    Even if there is just ONE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION by them and you have accepted that there are (there are many, the case of the Gang rape and Murder Janabi an Iraqi Child, the Massacre at Haditha etc where a 12 year old girl is an Eye witness etc) the USA should allow Independent, International, Impartial Investigations “IF IT HAS DONE NO WRONG”. What do they have to fear?. Why don’t they allow an International investigation to clear their name? Sounds familiar? Of course those are the very same questions that the HR Pall bearers continue to ask from Lanka but shamefully is unable to ask the USA led Nato forces and its Allies.

    Only a DISHONEST person can argue that such an investigation is unnecessary and in the same breath call for International investigations of the CH4 where you cant even identify Lanka as the country where the crime was committed. You need Flexible Morality and Flexible Rules in order to do so.

    Who can hold such a Morally CORRUPT country as a Model?
    Only a similarly morally Corrupt person can.

    Alston prefers to be blind an inarticulate while you are both Blind and Articulate.

  • Observer

    This is essential viewing for those who think US forces act saintly. Those who believe misguidedly or rather for their own agendas/benefit that US soldiers are better behaved than SL soldiers. This video gives a good insight into “SOME” soldiers all over the world. How they behave, the psychological trauma and what really wars are all about. It is very lengthy but it’s worth sitting through it all if you want to understand nature of wars and its ugly sides.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/woundedplatoon/view/

    The confessions during the 50-60 minute section of the documentary is very chilling and shows how the average civilian in Iraq was just cannon fodder. I partly do feel for these troubled guys but still it’s no excuse. Shocking revelations from soldiers that would have never been heard not for the murder incident they were involved in.

    Above all its astonishing that how many times the military covered up many aspects of their soldiers. They recruited people with criminal back grounds, psychological issues and drug abuse!! It doesn’t take a genius to figure out how many civilian deaths the US military would have covered up to keep their dwindling force levels in the battle, instead of court marshalling them. And once it has become all to much for these mad maxes finally breakdown revealing their trigger happy murderous deployment in Iraq. Transparency in the NATO forces? You can laugh your head off now! If you were naive enough to believe it thus far.

    This is why I still firmly believe sometimes swift, decisive end to wars are the best humanitarian outcome!

    I guess there is plenty of material in this thread and the other thread about the fake execution video of the double standards the West takes when it comes to wars. International probe? Over our sovereign dead body!