Niromi de Soyza’s so-called autobiography, Tamil Tigress, has received extensive coverage in Australia and has traversed the world now because of critical reviews by several personnel and devoted defence from others. It has been described as “part memoir, part compelling reportage, part mea culpa” by Nikki Barrowclough in the Sydney Morning Herald’s weekend magazine.[i] Gordon Weiss, the moral crusader, proclaimed it to be “incredibly moving” and considers it “a story of redemption” (as quoted by Nikki Barrowclough). This may well be one of the motifs that Robert Perinpanayagam, a perceptive commentator, sees as the potential crux of the book in his unelaborated blog comments.

Without denying that dimension of the book if one stretches a point and treats it as a “faction,” that is, a “fictional narrative based on real events,” rather than a historical account, its self-presentation as a memoir[ii] and “true story” renders Tamil Tigress liable at the same time to the charge of deception (a combination stressed in my little-noticed third article on the topic[iii]). Indeed, it is arguable that it could be subject to a legal charge for a misleading advertisement that deceives consumers.[iv]

My initial doubts arose from the back cover advertisement that stated that young Niromi’s platoon found itself under attack from “government forces” during the Christmas season of 1987, a central emphasis because the book was structured to begin with this dramatic account of an “Ambush” in Chapter One. Anyone familiar with Sri Lankan politics over time would be aware that the Sri Lankan army was confined to barracks in August 1987-89 and that the LTTE had been engaged in ground warfare of a guerrilla character against the Indian troops of the IPKF from October 1987.[v] However, most Western readers and new generations of Sri Lankans and/or Lankan migrants may not have been cognizant of this fact. Hence the whiff of deception together with my early doubts as to whether Niromi de Soyza had fought at all.

My reading of the book led me to the conjecture that she may possibly have had a limited spell[vi] in the LTTE ranks and the wild thought that her parents may have purchased her demobilization from the LTTE ranks[vii] – speculative ideas that I did not present in public. In quick time, however, a friend brought my attention to a capsule version of the same tale under the same nom de plume in the Daily Telegraph on 3 May 2009, while one can find a highly abbreviated report in The Australian on 23 May 2009 under the revealing title “Cause remains for Tamil Tiger in Our Midst.”[viii]

It is this juxtaposition that I bring to the debate now. I ask readers to compare the short stories in different newspapers in mid-2009 with the longer book version of 2011. They will discover two Niromis, with both differences and overlaps.

In both the Daily Telegraph essay and book the tale is launched in melodramatic fashion by an account of de Soyza’s first alleged battlefield skirmish, one that is central to the unfolding composition in the autobiographical book because several of her bosom mates and one mentor died in that fiery encounter.[ix] [4] “At dawn that day, Indian soldiers had surrounded our hideout” she says in 2009. Later in this same account she notes that “fighting the Indian soldiers made no sense to me.” This realisation was one factor in her decision to extricate herself from the commitment to fight for Tamil independence under the LTTE.

In contrast, in the opening account in 2011, the enemy are just “soldiers;” while the back cover explicitly proclaims that “two days before Christmas 1987, at the age of 17, Niromi de Soyza found herself in an ambush as part of a small platoon of militant Tamil Tigers fighting the government forces in the bloody civil war that was to engulf Sri Lanka for decades (emphasis mine).”

In short, in 2011 the Indian presence has been obliterated at this critical juncture, though they figure occasionally at other points deeper in the book (pp. 162, 164, 168, 227, 264). The contrast with her initial foray in 2009 is an indication of deception catering to the Western world’s sustained criticism of the Sri Lankan state in 2011 within a backdrop created by the disclosures in Killing Fields and an UN panel report by so-called “experts.”

It is not difficult to conjecture why such a misrepresentation was injected into the new and expanded book-length version of her tale: foregrounding the Indians in the opening chapter would undermine the propaganda pitch as a Tamil patriot which is one dimension of Tamil Tigress. Readers in the West would assume that the soldiers were Sri Lankans because they were not versed in the complexities and temporal shifts attending Sri Lanka’s ethnic wars.

Our detective work is not that simple however. In both her public presentations, in 2009 and 2011, Niromi de Soyza tells the world that the Tigers were engaged in fighting the Indian troops of the IPKF as well as the troops of the Sri Lankan army during her alleged battlefield stint from October 1987 to June 1988. “The war resumed, just as Prabhakaran had predicted, though now we were fighting not only the government troops but the peacekeepers, too” she says in the Daily Telegraph account in 2009. She is consistent on this point. In 2011 she told Margaret Throsby in an ABC interview that “when I joined, the Indian forces had arrived and the Tigers had chosen to fight the Indian forces as well as the Sri Lankan forces.”[x] [5] During her leisurely chat with Nikki Barrowclough in Sydney in July 2011 she said that her unit spent “most of the time … running and hiding from government soldiers.”[xi] [6]

This aspect of her thinking has also been underlined recently by Darshanie Ratnawalli in Lankan newspaper accounts.[xii] Ratnawalli then asks a weighty question: how could any Tiger fighter not be aware of the identity of his/her adversary during the IPKF period of occupation?” This is precisely the issue that initially led me to suggest that Niromi was emulating Helen Demidenko and Norma Kouri.

Such sweeping suspicions are compounded when Niromi tells the world that (a) “during battles we had been trained to fire in the general direction of the enemy, not at individual targets, and I am not sure whether any of my bullets hit anyone;”[xiii] [8] and (b) that during her skirmishes as a guerrilla she may have shot at someone running, but “didn’t ever see a face… I would have frozen if I’d seen a face.”[xiv][9] In the result, Gerard Windsor concluded that “the Tigers were “amateurish” after his read of the book.[xv] As an admirer of the LTTE’s battlefield and organisational capacities over the years,[xvi] I find such a verdict quite mind-boggling. It is not Windsor’s error: it is induced by Niromi de Soyza.[10] Here, then, de Soyza does a disservice to the Tigers as a fighting force, while marking her profound ignorance about warfare.

These failures therefore lead me back towards the strong suspicion that she did not fight for the LTTE at all (though perhaps receiving some training before she extricated herself or was extricated). In these prevarications on my part I underline the several PUZZLES within Tamil Tigress that all readers should address. Together with several fallacious statements in the book which other commentators have noted, they cannot simply be dismissed as errors of memory or acceptable embellishments. In this respect it seems a far cry from the realties expressed by Shobashakti on the one hand and Umeswaran Arunagirinathan’s Allein auf der Flucht on the other – to judge from evaluations sent by Arun Ambalavanar and Maithri Samaradivakara respectively.

If Tamil Tigress had been cast as a novel or even a fact-based fiction its impact as a vehicle for reflection on the human condition and a softening of the perception of the Tigers as “terrorists” of a satanic kind would have remained forceful. When a whiff of deception intrudes, such reflective potential is diluted. Participants in the debate and future readers must ask themselves – in measured manner with analytical rigour of mind rather than emotional force of heart – whether they are being taken for a ride.

[i] Nikki Barrowclough, “Tigress, interrupted,” Good Weekend, 9 July 2011, p. 28.

[ii] A “memoir” and “autobiography” are synonyms at one level (English Thesaurus, 2006, Geddes & Grosset, p.156); but a memoir has a wider range and encompasses “biography.” Both forms are regarded as historical accounts grounded in truth so that a ‘memoir’ is even defined as “an essay on a learned subject specially studied by the writer” (Oxford English Dictionary, p. 905).

[iii] Roberts, “Niromi de Soysa’s Path of Redemption with Deception? or Both?” 27 October 2011,

[iv] Cf. Stephen King, “Deceiving Consumers: impressions count when it comes to misleading consumers,”

[v] Note John Taylor, “India’s Vietnam,” in

[vi] One “ex-Tigress” blogger indicates that a lass named Nirmala died in December 1987 at the same time as “Murali anna and Kanthi anna” (Blog No 58 10 Dec. 2011); while someone writing as “BenJ” (12 Dec. 2012) says both Nirmala and Niromi joined Pirapāharan’s batch of recruits – comments in Jeyaraj “From Shenuka to Niromi: “True Tale of a ‘Tamil Tigress,” 9 December 2011, in http://dbsjeyaraj. com/dbsj/archives/3160.

[vii] Note that this idea is also raised independently by one blogger with the nom de plume, “Puma,” in his/her comment within the article by DBS Jeyaraj: “Many middle class parents ‘bought’ their children back from LTTE in late 80s and early 90s …” (Jeyaraj, “From Shenuka to Niromi: “True Tale of a ‘Tamil Tigress,” 9 December 2011, in http://

[viii] This title was probably created by reporter Drew Warne-Smith, — see news/nation/cause-remains-for-tamil-tiger-in-our-midst/story-e6frg6nf-1225715005848.

[ix] As recounted in “The Last Few Moments of Life,” Chapter 14.

[xi] Good Weekend, 9 July 2011, p. 28.

[xii] Ratnawalli, “And Quietly Ignores Them Hoping They Will Just Go Away,” http://www. Also see

[xiii] “Life as a female Tamil Tiger guerilla relived by one of first female soldiers,” -guerilla-relived-by-one-of-first-female-soldiers.html

[xiv] In Nikki Barrowclough, “Tigress, interrupted,” Good Weekend, 9 July 2011, p. 28.

[xv] Windsor, “Tamil Tigress,”

[xvi] Roberts, “Pragmatic Action and Enchanted Worlds: A Black Tiger Rite of Commemoration,” in Social Analysis, vol. 50/1: Spring 2006, pp. 73-102. See berghahn/socan/2006/00000050/00000001/art00005.

  • Arun

    Dear Michael,

    Yet again, you have proved your bizarre jealousy and bitterness towards Niromi, this time loud and clear. This article is nothing more than re-cycled, personal ambush on Niromi and utter waste of GV’s resources and readership. Given the previous unsuccessful mud-slingings on Niromi, GV readers are now informed enough to make their own judgement and don’t require your biased “expert” advice anymore.

    Anyway thanks for your continued publicity for the book. It is really a shame none of your writings before received such publicity and recognition.

    • Lindsay

      Sigh! At least this time I thought someone would comment answering why an alleged tiger fighter does not (even after 20 + years) know who she fought and didn’t fight. Now that is the bizarre thing. It must be a world record unheard of in the whole history of military memoire genre. What a laugh and how juvenile and hysterical to attribute jealousy to genuine efforts of investigative journalism. I have a gut feeling that Arun is really a female and I can guess her name too.

      • Gnanam Selvaratnam

        lol agree

      • Ken


        You can named as “investigative Journalism” , But every reader read the article knows it was a pure outcome of jealous by Michael Robert and other 3. could not see the success of Niromi De Soyza.

        It was clearly revealed in the following article

        I am yet to read an article justifying the truth and true stories.

        He was critical with any one work for war affected people in Sri Lanka, or against people who talk about Human rights.

        I am sure Ground view can review Michael Robert’s article before the online publication.

        Can Michael Robert say , I am helping the war affected people? rather purely trying hard to get the popularity .

      • Arun


        I had hysterical laugh at your comment. You must have astonishing magic power to convert this “Male Arun” into a “Female” without any sort of evidence and I challenge you to produce evidence.

        For the records, I have to say you are terribly wrong and I sincerely hope your gut feel is not a reflection of your human intelligence.

        Unfortunately, I do not have the same magic power to transform “Lindsay” into “Michael” and I do not want to go to that low level.

        Why don’t Micahel publish the individual names of the soldiers (whoever they are) that Niromi really fought with if his “genius investigative journalism” has invented that information now.

        That information will benefit GV readers more than his un-substantiated allegations and poor guess work.

      • A Jeevan – Melbourne

        The book’s back cover states only “government forces” and does not state “Sri Lankan government forces”.

        The fact is IPKF was also a “government force” that was sent by the then Indian Government.

        Is Michael now claiming the IPKF was only a “private army” of Rajiv Gandhi and not a “government force” and therefore Niromi can’t use the term “Government forces” in the back cover.

        That will be an “investigative invention” deserves highest recognition from Mahinda to Michael!

      • Jeevan, Michael quotes Niromi as saying that the Tigers were fighting not just the government forces but the peacekeepers as well. If indeed she meant that the IPKF were also government forces, why describe them as two entities in one sentence? There’s no logic to your suggestion.

        I haven’t read the book yet, but to accuse critics of jealousy is just plain juvenile.

      • RSV

        Maybe you should read the book; it describes exactly who she was fighting.

        So Michael Roberts’ logic has it that while the Tigers were fighting the IPKF, they were no longer opposed to the SL government. Interesting perspective but probably wrong, I suspect.

      • Hikz

        So “being opposed to the government” = fighting government troops? Interesting perspective but probably wrong, I suspect.

      • The debate isn’t on who the Tigers were opposed to, but who they were fighting. They most certainly weren’t fighting SL government troops. It would be good if you don’t further muddy the waters by introducing words that neither the reviewers nor the books author have used.

  • The LTTE rarely wasted ammunition and the idea of their trainees being told to ‘spray and pray’ is ridiculous. They would’ve been told to ensure that every bullet counted and found its mark. Are there any combat-trained ex-LTTE commenters on GV who could tell us what their weapons training was like? 

    It’s odd that Niromi maintains a facade of anonymity yet shows her face and gives interviews to Western media outlets but doesn’t have time to speak to Lankan media sources and commenters.

  • Lindsay

    Er I don’t know if it’s a good practice to try to explain articles in their comment spaces. Possibly you should go up and read article again? I find the following statement by Arun very odd

    “Why don’t Micahel publish the individual names of the soldiers (whoever they are) that Niromi really fought with if his “genius investigative journalism” has invented that information now.”

    How can Michael publish the names of the soldiers Niromi fought with machang when he is doubting the very fact that she ever fought? However even a bright ten year old from SL will tell you who any tiger fighter fought between 1987 and 1989/90. IPKF, the whole IPKF and nothing but the IPKF no machang.

    The whole crux of the argument machang is that Niromi who claims to have fought during this period simply does not know this and says “we were fighting not only the government troops but the peacekeepers, too”.

    And machang A. Jeevan, do not make me laugh please. Nobody from SL called the IPKF, ‘Government Soldiers’. It’s simple perspective no machang. If you are in SL you will call SL government, ‘The government’ without an adjective and use the relevant adjective for any other government. Example;
    “The war resumed, just as Prabhakaran had predicted, though now we were fighting not only the government troops but the peacekeepers, too.”
    Niromi in 2009 Telegraph.
    What more about “Government” machang. What’s with this government forces fascination?

    And what’s with this telling Margaret Throsby in 2011 “…when I joined, the Indian forces had arrived and the tigers had chosen to fight the Indian forces as well as the Sri Lankan forces”

    And what’s with this telling Nikki in 2011 that “….two decades since the former rebel put down her gun and fled the violence she’d become a part of, unable to deal any longer with the brutality of her fellow Tigers or the viciousness of the Sri Lankan armed forces.”

    And did she really spend much of her time running away from government forces machang? How do you explain all this? Instead of moaning about people’s jealousy you should try to find an explanation for all this.

    Maybe just as she was about to join LTTE a flying saucer came and transported her to a planet where the tigers fought the government forces as well as the peacekeepers. Is that a good explanation machang Jeevan, Arun, eh?

  • Tharsinie Udupiddy

    DBSJ Jeyaraj,

    where is ur second article? Why are u tarnishing ur career by giving up ur integrity? Is niromi worth enough? Is she young enough? DBSJ? I am still waiting the second Part of urs?

  • Tammy

    Michael Robert tried to convinced the readers that Niromi was a fake and counterfeit who was never in the LTTE or was not even a Tamil. All the evidence they had was her mistakes in the book.

    After DBS wrote about her and proved clearly that she was authentic and genuine Now , Michael Robert and Arul Ambalavanar change track and nitpick on her so called mistakes and attribute ulterior motives.

    There is no more evidence needed to reveal the motive of Michael Robert is purely acting on jealous and it is not the genuine efforts of investigative journalism.

    I would not surprised more article from Arun Ambalavanar, Michael Robert and Mutthukrishna Sarvanathan ( so called researcher) writings!

    another possibility is writing under the different name Ratnawalie is really that Natchathiran Sevvinthian ( Arun Ambalavanar )

    Lindsay is Michael Robert

    Mutthukrishna Sarvanathan ( so called researcher) would have tired now.

  • Sharon

    Final nail to the coffin !(article written by Michael Robert) .

  • Vijayaraghavan Sakthivel

    These slips made by Niromi have to be acknowledged. What’s astonishing is that people (venerated journalists included) ever thought they could be covered up and glossed over in this age of easily accessible newsprint and voice broadcast. All these references (consistent over a period between 2009-2011) to having fought (not only) the government forces {as well as} (but also) the peace keepers, having spent most of her time running from government forces and deciding to lay down arms because she was caught between two evil poles (brutality of the tigers Vs the viciousness of the SL armed forces) need not necessarily indicate an ‘ignorance of context’ resulting from lack of fighting experience however. It could well be an act of deception, sort of a marketable misdirection undertaken purely for the benefit of Western audiences. Indeed I’d say such a misdirection/deception was almost necessary given the period of publication. By the time of publication of Tamil Tigress the ‘Government Forces’/Government Troops/Sri Lankan Government Forces(all synonyms in Niromi speak) had become red hot. The forces of commerce would dictate that Niromi secures a significant slice of this extremely sizzling pie and how could she do this if she only spoke of fighting the IPKF? Such a reading of the puzzle (IPKF as well as the government forces) doesn’t flatter Niromi and indeed exposes her as being shallow in intellect and indifferent to notions of honesty and integrity. But at least it would free her from the graver charge of knowing less of the political landscape of ‘her fighting period’ than a ‘bright Sri Lankan ten year old’ presumably because she was never part of that landscape at all.

    I suspect that for Niromi’s more discerning and intelligent defenders it’s a stark choice; whether to admit that their authoress indulged in some market oriented dissembling while affirming that she really fought or admit that the authoress is a wide eyed ingenuine whose apparently dismal general knowledge of ‘her core SL period’ comes more from genuine lack of exposure than from dishonesty. Either way it’s bleak and her contribution to the Tamil cause stands compromised. What I suggest is that we don’t compromise it even further by a blind and leech like adherence to this authoress. But stand aside and review the situation dispassionately because quite frankly the Cause is bigger than someone like her whose want of discretion and prudence is all too clear.

  • Kumaran

    It was interesting to know how Michael Robert initially tried hard in his writing to convince the readers that Author of Tamil tigress Niromi was a fake and counterfeit who was never in the LTTE or was not even a Tamil.

    We need to understand Niromi was a girl who wrote the book in early twenties ( 25 years ago) did not want to recall her painful memory for over 20 years ( it was in the interview ( ) . finally author decided to publish two years ago. The book has minor errors. because of the minor errors , we cannot come to the conclusion that the entire book is a fake.

    We need to understand clearly The book is a memoir (about her life and it is an honest record) .It should not be interpreted as a ultimate solution to the Tamil issue.

    People merely admire the personality and her appearance also lost the essence of the book. It is commendable a LTTE child soldier who turned around her life and wrote a book in English for the first time.

    We have been grown up in a culture (Sri Lanka) , no one openly wrote a book honestly did not live for a long time by the armed groups as well as the Government of Sri Lanka. We never asked questions in the past. We are not trained to think rationally. True journalist disappeared in Sri Lanka or murdered .

    I think if the admirers of the book look at the cover and treated as another thrilling story also dilute the essence of the book.

    On the other hand , if the author of the book Niromi choose the path of a politician or take pride to run for popularity or hidden agenda , definitely she will pay a huge cost for her stupidity.

    i recommend the people to read with the right context. I am leaving here for readers to judge…

    However the deep questions about the voiceless people, children in the war affected Sri Lanka living under the tree, are unheard by many people. Again the book written by Niromi should not be treated as the bible to the solution for the Tamils. It is a memoir , clearly mention by the author.

    I wish Ground view team a merry Christmas and happy new year .

    • Vijayaraghavan Sakthivel

      It’s the statements made by the 40+ woman in 2009 and 2011 respectively that are throwing the authenticity of the memoir of her youth into doubt. The details are not minor. It’s the most major political detail in the IPKF period and the most vital aspect of any fighter’s life (who did I fight?) that the mature Niromi De Soyza has failed to grasp. Is this what all that academic achievement, all that culture and all that poetry described by DBSJ has produced? A 40 something individual, who would go in front of the world and say things about a highly documented period even a kid would be able to prove wrong? Where is the intellectual sophistication, the general knowledge or the good sense education is supposed to produce?

      • Kumaran


        When we read the book with the correct context can understand The book’s back cover states only “government forces” and does not state “Sri Lankan government forces”.

        The fact is IPKF was also a “government force” that was sent by the then Indian Government.

        I would suggest the author to think about the changes , again wrong interpretation was lead only by the readers who skim through the book and determine to find errors. I do not think a kid will do the same.

        Is Michael claiming the IPKF was only a “private army” of Rajiv Gandhi and not a “government force” and therefore Niromi can’t use the term “Government forces” in the back cover.

        It is always good for so called academics write within the specialized area. otherwise they not only mislead the people with false imagination, they also waste the readers time.

  • Rohan

    WOW – we have a saying in Tamil, ‘vilunthaalum meesaiyilE man padavillai’ – i.e., even if I fell, m mustache didn’t hit the dirt. Michael tried Method 1 to discredit the author by saying she was a fake, going along Arun Ambalavanar. Now, he is using Method 2 to nit-pick. Out of all, DBS appears to have the best information. Happy New Year, Michael. Hope you would see the light at least this year!

  • Rankarajan

    What Niromi trying to do is defending her [edited out]. What Michael roberts sarvananthan and Ambalavanar doing is defending the truth.

  • David Saminathan

    The differences between Groundviews and DBSJ’s Tamilweek are many. In Tamilweek DBS Jeyaraj is the sole writer and sole editor and the sole censor of feed backs. In ground views Michael Roberts and Sarvananthan after publishing their articles have no controls over the editing of feedbacks. DBSJ allows only sycophantic comments whereas Sanjana and Nigel following great traditions of Journalism allow every comments. Therefore Roberts and Sarvananthan are demonised and villified in Tamilweek to epical proportions.

  • Many

    I am with you on the first statement you made. All the DBS Jeyarajah’s article lead us and confirmed she is real.

    Do you want another article in GV about whom she was fighting against in December 1987?

    here the answer from Nag A. Nanthi’s comment

    … ” Suppose in her manuscript she wrote: “…Soyza found herself in an ambush as part of a small platoon of militant Tamil Tigers fighting Indian government forces in a bloody civil war…” and an editor deleted the word “Indian” without knowing the significance, everything would be fine, wouldn’t it?”

    Do you want additional article about her names?

    Think about the Niromi who is an average appearance, married with two children, with the wrong mind set proud of living in the North shore ( Nothern Suburb)and proud of herself of isolation from her own community over decade , Why are we giving such an importance to this woman who does not even identify herself with her own community ?
    It is clear Niromi knows how to twist media’s arms by all means to get attention for own sake, which many of the migrants specially people who came to Australia like Niromi under student visa and claimed asylum do not know.

    Karuna and KP can tell more stories including many romantic stories than a woman who was with the LTTE for only one year. with the amount of money they Karuna and KP can write a romantic novel which will be much superior than Niromi de Soyza one.

    LTTE is no more there. Still the minority live naked. lot of things to focus than Niromi.Let’s Talk about LLRC, its recommendations and how they can be implemented as quickly and durably as possible.Other discussions (eg Niromi….) can and must wait…

  • Off the Cuff

    Dear Arun, Ken, A Jeevan- melbourn, RSV, Tammy, Kumaran, Rohan, Many and any others who write in defence of Niromi

    Some of you are trying to defend a Lie by murdering the context of normal English usage.

    The Achilles Heel of Niromi’s book is her claim to have fought “Government troops” at a time The SL Govt troops were confined to Barracks under the Indo Lanka Peace Accord.

    We do have imbecile attempts to portray that when Niromi refers to govt troops she meant Indian Govt troops.

    Both, Niromi herself and her publisher Alan and Unwin contradicts that.

    Niromi the Tamil Tigress says in her Daily Telegraph account in 2009

    “The war resumed, just as Prabhakaran had predicted, though now we were fighting not only the government troops but the peacekeepers, too”

    If you can understand English, there are TWO entities referred to by Niromi

    1. Government Troops
    2. Peacekeepers

    Could you please tell us who these TWO entities are without being irrational?

    Allan and Unwin states,

    A well-educated, middle-class seventeen-year-old, Niromi decided, in a fit of righteous anger and teenage idealism, to defend her rights and the lives of her friends and neighbours. Along with her lifelong friend, Ajanthi, she joined the Tamil Tigers and found herself part of a small platoon of young girls. In 1987, just two days before Christmas, this platoon came under heavy fire in a ruthless ambush by the Sri Lankan Army.

    Who is Lying? Alan and Unwin, Niromi or the imbeciles trying to say that Niromi meant the Indian Govt? Obviously ALL of them are Lying.

    Neither DBS Jayaraj nor God Himself can refute Michael Roberts, without answering how Niromi alias Tamil Tigress fought Sri Lankan Govt Troops that were CONFINED TO BARRACKS under the Indo Lanka Agreement that resulted in Rajiv Gandhi being assaulted by a disillusioned Naval Rating.

    Can you or DBSJ or ANYONE enlighten the GV readership how this miracle was performed?

    There are other imbecile attempts to portray Niromi the Tamil Tigress as a young woman who in her innocence had made an inadvertent mistake.

    Unfortunately for those who take that path, Niromi published the book when in her Forties and she herself claim to be an University Graduate qualifying amongst other things, in Law, in the promotional video by Allen and Unwin the publisher of Tamil Tigress.

    She is neither “Innocent” nor naïve. She is more like a cunning schemer.

    Niromi’s declared objective was to create public sympathy for illegal Tamil immigrants to Australia. This explains the anger of those rushing to defend a proven Liar whose LTTE ideology has not ebbed despite her professed disillusionment.

    That anger is directed at Prof Roberts (and anyone who supports him), who was instrumental in the Public Exposure, of the lies and spoiling the attempted deception of the Australian and World public.

    • Ken

      Dear Off the cuff,

      I do not want to give a detail explanation rather giving you with the reference of the today’s article in one of the web portals address most of the questions posted

      We are not here to defend the author, here the center of attention if the book Tamil tigress written by Niromi De Soyza. when the so called critics shifted from the book to the Author take the readers everywhere even in your article you mention the author of the book is “cunning schemer..etc” which not our focus.

      We readers clearly understand that most of the so called critics fighting for the missing word ” Indian” in the … Government soldiers and continue with all sort of assumptions to support their claims. Interestingly Michael Robert never lived in Jaffna. I lived contemporary to the author of the book Jaffna and understand the entire book with the right context.

      • Off the Cuff

        Dear Ken,

        I have seen all three articles by DBSJ. I respected him for his fearless critique even in the face of LTTE thuggery. But unfortunately, DBSJ is writing spin in defence of Niromi.

        Here is an example.

        Ask yourself the following questions.

        Did DBSJ have First hand knowledge of the interview between Niromi and Thileepan to be able to write first person reports?
        How could he have First Hand Knowledge without being present at the interview?

        In English, Quotation marks are used WHEN YOU QUOTE SOMEONE WORD FOR WORD.

        Did DBSJ HEAR what was discussed?
        How does he make a VERBATIM report without being present?

        Is DBSJ write what he writes with personal knowledge or is he presenting material by reading Niromi’s book and other sources without such personal knowledge?

        It is easy to write spin to convince the gullible.

        Extract from DBSJ

        Persistent efforts to convince Murali finally paid off. Murali was now willing to let her join but wanted her to meet with Political commissar Thileepan before that.So “Sharmila” and Ajanthi went to the SOLT office in Thirunelvely for their historic meeting with Thileepan. The date was May 6th 1987.

        After Thileepan arrived at the SOLT office the “interview” began. Both Murali and Thileepan interrogated the two “Chundikulippettaigal” intensively with many probing questions.Most of the queries were aimed at gauging their level of motivation and sense of commitment to the cause. At one stage Murali seemed convinced but not Thileepan.

        Now Thileepan changed track. He started warning the girls about the difficulties and hardships they would face as LTTE trainees and cadres. He pointed out that both of them were from comparatively privileged upper middle class background and had had a delicate upbringing. “There wont be any servants to look after your needs or take care of you” he said. “You will have to look after yourself” . Speaking further Thileepan said that they wont be able to wear fashionable clothes, wont get to sleep on comfortable beds, not get good well-cooked food, may have to walk barefoot on hard ground etc. They will have to do many things they would not like , said Thileepan. He told them not to romanticize about guerilla life and to be prepared to undergo hardship and suffering.

        End extract

        You say “We are not here to defend the author, here the center of attention if the book Tamil tigress written by Niromi De Soyza. when the so called critics shifted from the book to the Author take the readers everywhere even in your article you mention the author of the book is “cunning schemer..etc” which not our focus”

        The focus has always been about Niromi and her Truthfulness.
        Not about the book as you say.

        Did Niromi Lie?

        That was our question all along.
        The book was irrelevant only its Truthfulness mattered and was questioned.

        How could Niromi fight the SL Army that was confined to Barracks 5 months before her December ambush by an Inter govt agreement? It was IMPOSSIBLE. In that case Niromi was Lying.

        Read this post and listen to an hour long Interview with Niromi herself. She tells us who the “government forces” are in her own voice.


        Her mother is Indian Tamil.
        Half the Tamil population in Lanka are Indian Tamils.
        ALL of them Live in the South amongst the Sinhalese.
        About half the Lanka Tamils live in the South amongst the Sinhalese.

        This means about 75% of the Tamil population of Lanka live in the South with the Sinhalese.

        How then can Niromi claim that in Lanka Tamils predominantly live in the North and East when the opposite is True?

        That is another Proven Lie of Niromi.
        Is she not a Cunning Schemer?
        Can you disprove it?

  • Pingback: Niromi De Soyza’s Message to the Australian, at Adelaide Writers’ Week | Thuppahi's Blog()

  • Pingback: ABC can foul. See Niromi! Hear Niromi! Without a Knox …. No Demidenko | Thuppahi's Blog()