Comments on: General Fonseka and the interview

By: Observer

Observer — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 09:27:09 +0000

Where do you think war crimes agenda starts? Oh dear..

By: aadhavan

aadhavan — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:16:45 +0000

Phillip Alston says in his own words THAT according to United States arguments Sri Lanka will be off the agenda as well! – true, off the HRC Agenda. Not a war crimes agenda. Read further up in the same sentence you quoted.

By: Observer

Observer — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 02:11:12 +0000

myil selvan do keep in mind that this is a man who nearly got blown up into pieces, got sent to singapore to be put together again, possibly still wearing a metal plate on his stomach to cover his internal organs. yet he came back and fearlessly led the armed forces towards a crushing victory. do u still want to question his patriotism? in my view he can get citizenship in mars but facts don’t change.

By: Observer

Observer — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:26:00 +0000

Phillip Alston says in his own words THAT according to United States arguments Sri Lanka will be off the agenda as well! So aadhavan please.. I think I’ll stick to my little bit of dangerous learning.. lol I can take a risky guess here as to who’d be a more qualified person.

By: Observer

Observer — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:21:40 +0000

aadhavan, i don’t think you can be a judge of the extent of my learning. anyway technically he’s not required to answer to the dept. of homeland security.
i believe gen fonseka’s daughters live and study in the us. so is it unfair for the man to make arrangements to be with them when ever he wishes to do so? i think not. far as im concerned most of the passionate tamil diaspora doesn’t fall into the patriotic category either. shouting from overseas. convenient.
It’s about bullying the little people isn’t it? When Russian, Chineese officials visit US they are only too happy to be cordial while at the same time whining about HR issues. Say no to double standards! These are all shenanigans motivated by the Tamil lobbyists. That’s the shame.

By: aadhavan

aadhavan — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:39:43 +0000

Observer, a little learning is a dangerous thing. When the US says conduct of war issues should be off the table as far as the UN HRC is concerned, it doesn’t mean that they think the the laws of war should fall into abeyance. To the contrary, it means that conduct of war issues can be prosecuted through a war crimes probe, just not made the subject of a human rights inquiry. It’s the classical IHL v HR problem. It is, as Alston says, a technical one, and isn’t one that supports a pro-impunity position. Don’t get too excited.

By: myil selvan

myil selvan — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 16:52:26 +0000

General Fonseka is answerable to the U.S!
Why? Simply because he applied for a U.S. Green Card!
The U.S. refusing probing in Afghanistan cannot be compared to Gen.Fonseka issue.
Gen. Fonseka wanted U.S. Green Card, then he must also be answerable to the U.S. government.
When did Gen.Fonseka apply for U.S. Green Card? I believe in 2006.
Gen.Fonseka applied for green card while the war was in progress. Why?
What kind of Army Commander leads his army in a war but at the same time apply for foreign permanent residency?
Is this what you call patriotism??????
Gen. Fonseka answer all questions or don’t go to the U.S.A. Thank you.

By: Observer

Observer — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:58:42 +0000

AMY GOODMAN: And finally, Philip Alston, back on the issue of the drone attacks that you have taken on, what kind of information has the Obama administration given to you? What have you asked for? What’s your dialogue with him?

PHILIP ALSTON: Well, I’ve been having a dialogue both with the Bush and the Obama administrations. The biggest problem that I face, but it’s not one that is of great interest to you, is a technical legal one, where the administration continues to say that these are matters of armed conflict, therefore human rights investigators have no role. In other words, their suggestion is that the UN Human Rights Council should not be looking at what the US is doing in what used to be called the war on terror.

The problem with that is that that would take off the UN Human Rights Council’s agenda about 90 percent of the cases that it’s dealing with. The Gaza report by Goldstone, what’s going on in the Congo, what happened in Sri Lankaâ€”all these issues would be suddenly off the agenda if the US position was accepted. Fortunately, no one has accepted it, but the US continues to insist. And for that reason, they say, “So we’re not going to give you any information.”

AMY GOODMAN: So, you have worked with the Bush administration and the Obama administration. Do you feel a difference?

PHILIP ALSTON: On this particular issue, no.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/10/28/un_special_rapporteur_on_extrajudicial_killings

Yeah so US has to accept the line Sri Lanka tows. Gen Fonseka has nothing to add. Thank you.

By: Observer

Observer — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 09:37:13 +0000

If the State Department won’t question US Tamil citizens who funded LTTE which is implicated in the same report then Gen Fonseka can by all means refuse.

By: vivek

vivek — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:14:58 +0000

On point 3 – shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, George W. Bush created the Department of Homeland Security and merged a bunch of different departments into it, including Citizenship & Immigration Services.